Connect with us

News

Revolutionary Guard commanders vow response to Israel attack on Iran

Published

on

Revolutionary Guard commanders vow response to Israel attack on Iran

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

The top commander of Iran’s elite Revolutionary Guards issued a stark warning to Israel on Thursday, vowing that Tehran would deliver a harsh response to last week’s Israeli strikes on the Islamic republic.

Major General Hossein Salami, the head of the guards corps, warned in a speech that Iran’s retaliation would be “unimaginable” as Iranian officials stepped up their rhetoric against Israel.

“Israelis think they can launch a couple of missiles and change history,” he said. “You have not forgotten . . . how Iranian missiles opened up the sky . . . and made you sleepless.”

Advertisement

Separately his deputy, Brigadier General Ali Fadavi, told Al Mayadeen, a Lebanese television channel close to Iran, that a response would be “inevitable”. In more than 40 years, “we have not left any aggression without a response”, he said.

The belligerent comments came as the Islamic regime weighs its options following Israel’s attack on Saturday, during which Israeli war planes launched three waves of strikes at Iranian military installations. The targets included missile factories and air defence systems in three provinces, including Tehran.

Regime insiders told the Financial Times that the options being considered include a possible strike before next week’s US presidential election, or Iran’s leaders could decide to hold off for now.

“The winner of the US election could take an Iranian attack personally and act against Iran. So, if Iran wants to respond to Israel, the best time is before the US election,” one insider said. “The only thing that could change this would be a fair breakthrough in ceasefire talks between [Hizbollah in] Lebanon and Israel which does not seem very likely.”

The US has this week stepped up efforts to broker a deal to end the conflict that has lasted more than a year between Israel and Hizbollah, Iran’s most important proxy.

Advertisement

But there was little optimism of a breakthrough as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu insisted Israel retain the right to unilaterally enforce any agreement that would lead to Hizbollah withdrawing from southern Lebanon.

Another Iranian insider indicated Tehran might opt to maintain psychological pressure on Israel rather than launch a direct assault.

“With Hizbollah launching tens of rockets into Israel daily in a legitimate war, a direct response may not be necessary right now,” the insider said. “What benefits us is not a direct war with Israel. We need to keep the level of people’s stress low so that they can live their lives. This is the top priority.”

But an Iranian analyst said the dilemma for Tehran was “that Israel would take any delay in Iran’s response as a sign of weakness and would feel emboldened”.

Iran’s initial reaction to Israel’s strikes — which were in retaliation for an Iranian missile barrage fired at the Jewish state on October 1 — suggested that Tehran’s response would be measured and not immediate, Iranian analysts said.

Advertisement

Speaking on Sunday, a day after Israel’s attack, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the country’s supreme leader and ultimate decision maker, refrained from vowing to retaliate.

Instead, he said the strikes should neither be “overestimated or underestimated”. Iranian state media played down the impact of the attack, which killed four soldiers and a civilian, saying the damage was limited.

But Tehran has shown a willingness to risk an escalation with Israel as regional hostilities triggered by Hamas’s October 7 2023 attack have spread across the Middle East, thrusting Iran’s years-long shadow war with its regional enemy into the open.

In April, it fired more than 300 drones and missiles at Israel in a clearly telegraphed retaliation for an Israeli strike on the republic’s embassy compound in Syria, which killed several senior guards commanders.

It gave little notice before launching 180 ballistic missiles at Israel on October 1, a more severe attack that was in response to the Israeli assassination of Hassan Nasrallah, Hizbollah’s leader and a close confidant of Khamenei.

Advertisement

“Only a shock can stop Israel from its aggressions and free the region from the current stalemate,” the first regime insider said. “Iran might even go for a big bang and do something totally outside Israelis’ calculations as there is no other way to stop it.”

The US, which has pledged an “ironclad” commitment to the defence of Israel, has warned Iran not to retaliate as western nations have sought to contain the crisis amid heightened fears of all-out war.

“We will not hesitate to act in self defence. Let there be no confusion. The United States does not want to see further escalation,” Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the US ambassador to the UN, said this week.

News

Video: F.A.A. Ignored Safety Concerns Prior to Collision Over Potomac, N.T.S.B. Says

Published

on

Video: F.A.A. Ignored Safety Concerns Prior to Collision Over Potomac, N.T.S.B. Says

new video loaded: F.A.A. Ignored Safety Concerns Prior to Collision Over Potomac, N.T.S.B. Says

transcript

transcript

F.A.A. Ignored Safety Concerns Prior to Collision Over Potomac, N.T.S.B. Says

The National Transportation Safety Board said that a “multitude of errors” led to the collision between a military helicopter and a commercial jet, killing 67 people last January.

“I imagine there will be some difficult moments today for all of us as we try to provide answers to how a multitude of errors led to this tragedy.” “We have an entire tower who took it upon themselves to try to raise concerns over and over and over and over again, only to get squashed by management and everybody above them within F.A.A. Were they set up for failure?” “They were not adequately prepared to do the jobs they were assigned to do.”

Advertisement
The National Transportation Safety Board said that a “multitude of errors” led to the collision between a military helicopter and a commercial jet, killing 67 people last January.

By Meg Felling

January 27, 2026

Continue Reading

News

Families of killed men file first U.S. federal lawsuit over drug boat strikes

Published

on

Families of killed men file first U.S. federal lawsuit over drug boat strikes

President Trump speaks as U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth looks on during a meeting of his Cabinet at the White House in December 2025.

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Relatives of two Trinidadian men killed in an airstrike last October are suing the U.S. government for wrongful death and for carrying out extrajudicial killings.

The case, filed in Massachusetts, is the first lawsuit over the strikes to land in a U.S. federal court since the Trump administration launched a campaign to target vessels off the coast of Venezuela. The American government has carried out three dozen such strikes since September, killing more than 100 people.

Among them are Chad Joseph, 26, and Rishi Samaroo, 41, who relatives say died in what President Trump described as “a lethal kinetic strike” on Oct. 14, 2025. The president posted a short video that day on social media that shows a missile targeting a ship, which erupts in flame.

Advertisement

“This is killing for sport, it’s killing for theater and it’s utterly lawless,” said Baher Azmy, legal director of the Center for Constitutional Rights. “We need a court of law to rein in this administration and provide some accountability to the families.”

The White House and Pentagon justify the strikes as part of a broader push to stop the flow of illegal drugs into the U.S. The Pentagon declined to comment on the lawsuit, saying it doesn’t comment on ongoing litigation.

But the new lawsuit described Joseph and Samaroo as fishermen doing farm work in Venezuela, with no ties to the drug trade. Court papers said they were headed home to family members when the strike occurred and now are presumed dead.

Neither man “presented a concrete, specific, and imminent threat of death or serious physical injury to the United States or anyone at all, and means other than lethal force could have reasonably been employed to neutralize any lesser threat,” according to the lawsuit.

Advertisement

Lenore Burnley, the mother of Chad Joseph, and Sallycar Korasingh, the sister of Rishi Samaroo, are the plaintiffs in the case.

Their court papers allege violations of the Death on the High Seas Act, a 1920 law that makes the U.S. government liable if its agents engage in negligence that results in wrongful death more than 3 miles off American shores. A second claim alleges violations of the Alien Tort Statute, which allows foreign citizens to sue over human rights violations such as deaths that occurred outside an armed conflict, with no judicial process.

The American Civil Liberties Union, the Center for Constitutional Rights, and Jonathan Hafetz at Seton Hall University School of Law are representing the plaintiffs.

“In seeking justice for the senseless killing of their loved ones, our clients are bravely demanding accountability for their devastating losses and standing up against the administration’s assault on the rule of law,” said Brett Max Kaufman, senior counsel at the ACLU.

U.S. lawmakers have raised questions about the legal basis for the strikes for months but the administration has persisted.

Advertisement

—NPR’s Quil Lawrence contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

News

Video: New Video Analysis Reveals Flawed and Fatal Decisions in Shooting of Pretti

Published

on

Video: New Video Analysis Reveals Flawed and Fatal Decisions in Shooting of Pretti

new video loaded: New Video Analysis Reveals Flawed and Fatal Decisions in Shooting of Pretti

A frame-by-frame assessment of actions by Alex Pretti and the two officers who fired 10 times shows how lethal force came to be used against a target who didn’t pose a threat.

By Devon Lum, Haley Willis, Alexander Cardia, Dmitriy Khavin and Ainara Tiefenthäler

January 26, 2026

Continue Reading

Trending