US-Israelische Militär-Intervention im Iran

[theoderich]

Das IRGC hat einen Angriff auf Drohnen (RQ-4, MQ-4) und Infrastruktur am Luftwaffenstützpunkt Prinz Hassan (Jordanien) ...

https://t.me/irna_1313/446953

... und Angriffe auf US-Stützpunkte bei Erbil (Irak) durchgeführt. Dabei sollen eine Wartungseinrichtung und ein Überwachungsballon zerstört worden sein:

https://t.me/irna_1313/446957

In der Nacht auf Dienstag wurden Ziele bei Ahvaz und Aghajan bombardiert:

https://t.me/irna_1313/446971

Die Angriffe auf drei Ziele in der Provinz Chuzestan haben sieben Tote und acht Verletzte gefordert:

https://t.me/irna_1313/446987

[theoderich]

Die Folgen der Bombardierung der Hochzeitsfeier in Kohstak (کوهستک , Provinz Sirik): Zwei Tote und 50 Verletzte.

https://t.me/irna_1313/446932

Inzwischen ist von vier Toten die Rede:

https://t.me/irna_1313/447021






Das IRGC hat die Stützpunkte Sheikh Issa (Bahrain), Al Dhafra (VAE), Al Minhad (VAE) und Ali al-Salem (Kuwait)i mit Drohnen beschossen:

https://t.me/irna_1313/447017

https://t.me/irna_1313/447023

[theoderich]

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrum ... 5733693672

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrum ... 7594983323




Contribution by Qatar - ITU Plenipotentiary Conference (PP-26) - Safety and security risk assessment

https://www.itu.int/md/S26-C26EXT-C-0005/en





In Kohstak sind die Überreste einer Thermalbatterie mit dem CAGE-Code [Commercial and Government Entity Program] der Firma Raytheon (96214) gefunden worden:


https://t.me/irna_1313/447976

https://www.irna.ir/news/86255148/%D8%A ... 8%AA%DA%A9


https://farsnews.ir/Mkhfars/17885912512 ... 8%A7%D8%AA


https://www.ilna.ir/%D8%A8%D8%AE%D8%B4- ... B%8C%D8%B1

• Joint Standoff Weapon (JSOW)
  
  https://www.navair.navy.mil/product/jsow
  
  
  https://www.rtx.com/raytheon/what-we-do ... off-weapon

3. September 2026

Communication from the Permanent Mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the Agency

3 September 2026
INFCIRC/1413

https://www.iaea.org/publications/docum ... -agency-26

[theoderich]

https://t.me/irna_1313/448207

The United States struck three Iranian oil tankers on Saturday, according to the U.S. military, in retaliation for what it said were unprovoked attempts by Iran to attack two U.S. warships.

The reported exchange of fire came days after the two sides engaged in the most intense fighting in weeks. Iran did not immediately acknowledge any attacks on U.S. ships.

Iran’s state media had said earlier on Saturday that U.S. forces had struck an Iranian oil tanker off the coast of the strategically important Kharg Island, and Iranian news outlets had published images of a ship emitting black plumes of smoke.

Kharg Island, in the Persian Gulf, is Iran’s primary hub for oil exports, which have been squeezed for weeks by a U.S. naval blockade of Iranian ports.

U.S. Central Command, which oversees U.S. military operations in the Middle East, said in a statement on Saturday that it had struck three Iranian crude oil carriers. It said it had “permanently disabled” one off the coast of Kharg, and another near the southern port city of Jask. U.S. forces “completely destroyed” a tanker with no oil on it in the Gulf of Oman, after directing the crew to abandon ship, the statement said.

The statement said the three ships were part of a “multibillion-dollar shadow network” that funds Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps and its allied militant groups abroad. It described the strikes as retaliation, after the Guards attempted to hit two U.S. Navy ships with ballistic missiles. It was unclear when those alleged attacks happened.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/05/worl ... ttack.html



https://bsky.app/profile/jjjcameron.bsk ... oik77x222t


Merchant shipping

A merchant ship is a privately owned ship used for the transport of goods and civilian persons. It must not carry out acts of hostility, and may not be attacked.

A merchant ship is, however, subject to visit, to search, and in case of capture to confiscation. If it is the property of the enemy State, it is treated to some extent as a warship and may accordingly be confiscated without formality of any kind.

https://casebook.icrc.org/a_to_z/glossa ... t-shipping


Übereinkommen über die Hohe See

Artikel 22

1. Abgesehen von Fällen, in denen ein Einschreiten auf einer vertraglich eingeräumten Befugnis beruht, darf ein Kriegsschiff, das einem fremden Handelsschiff auf Hoher See begegnet, dieses nur anhalten, wenn ein ernstlicher Grund zur Annahme besteht:
   1. daß das Schiff Seeräuberei betreibt;
   2. daß das Schiff Sklavenhandel betreibt;
   3. daß das Schiff, das eine fremde Flagge führt oder sich weigert, seine Flagge zu setzen, in Wirklichkeit dieselbe Nationalität wie das Kriegsschiff besitzt.
2. In den unter lit. a, b und c vorgesehenen Fällen kann das Kriegsschiff die Berechtigung zur Flaggenführung überprüfen. Zu diesem Zweck kann es ein Boot unter dem Kommando eines Offiziers zu dem verdächtigten Schiff entsenden. Bleibt der Verdacht nach Prüfung der Schiffspapiere bestehen, so kann das Kriegsschiff eine weitere Untersuchung an Bord des Schiffes vornehmen, die so rücksichtsvoll wie möglich durchzuführen ist.
3. Erweist sich der Verdacht als unbegründet und hat das angehaltene Schiff keine den Verdacht rechtfertigende Handlung begangen, so ist ihm jeder Verlust oder Schaden zu ersetzen.

https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/GeltendeFassu ... r=10000550


Übereinkommen zur Bekämpfung widerrechtlicher Handlungen gegen die Sicherheit der Seeschiffahrt sowie Protokoll zur Bekämpfung widerrechtlicher Handlungen gegen die Sicherheit fester Plattformen, die sich auf dem Festlandsockel befinden

Vertragsparteien

[...]

*Iran III 214/2013 Ü, P

Artikel 3

1. Eine Straftat im Sinne dieses Übereinkommens begeht, wer widerrechtlich und vorsätzlich
   
   1. durch Gewalt oder Drohung mit Gewalt oder durch eine andere Form der Einschüchterung ein Schiff in Besitz nimmt oder die Herrschaft darüber ausübt oder
   2. eine gewalttätige Handlung gegen eine Person an Bord eines Schiffes verübt, wenn diese Handlung geeignet ist, die sichere Führung des Schiffes zu gefährden, oder
   3. ein Schiff zerstört oder einem Schiff oder seiner Ladung eine Beschädigung zufügt, die geeignet ist, die sichere Führung des Schiffes zu gefährden, oder
   4. in ein Schiff auf welche Art auch immer eine Vorrichtung oder eine andere Sache bringt oder bringen läßt, die geeignet ist, dieses Schiff zu zerstören oder dem Schiff oder seiner Ladung eine Beschädigung zuzufügen, welche die sichere Führung des Schiffes gefährdet oder zu gefährden geeignet ist, oder

https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/GeltendeFassu ... r=10003057


Römisches Statut des Internationalen Strafgerichtshofs

Artikel 8bis

Verbrechen der Aggression

(1) Im Sinne dieses Statuts bedeutet „Verbrechen der Aggression“ die Planung, Vorbereitung, Einleitung oder Ausführung einer Angriffshandlung, die ihrer Art, ihrer Schwere und ihrem Umfang nach eine offenkundige Verletzung der Charta der Vereinten Nationen darstellt, durch eine Person, die tatsächlich in der Lage ist, das politische oder militärische Handeln eines Staates zu kontrollieren oder zu lenken.

(2) Im Sinne des Absatzes 1 bedeutet „Angriffshandlung“ die gegen die Souveränität, die territoriale Unversehrtheit oder die politische Unabhängigkeit eines Staates gerichtete oder sonst mit der Charta der Vereinten Nationen unvereinbare Anwendung von Waffengewalt durch einen anderen Staat. Unabhängig von dem Vorliegen einer Kriegserklärung gilt in Übereinstimmung mit der Resolution 3314 (XXIX) der Generalversammlung der Vereinten Nationen vom 14. Dezember 1974 jede der folgenden Handlungen als Angriffshandlung:

a) die Invasion des Hoheitsgebiets eines Staates oder der Angriff auf dieses durch die Streitkräfte eines anderen Staates oder jede, wenn auchvorübergehende, militärische Besetzung, die sich auseiner solchen Invasion oder einem solchen Angriff ergibt, oder jede gewaltsame Annexion des Hoheitsgebiets eines anderen Staates oder eines Teiles desselben;

b) die Bombardierung oder Beschießung des Hoheitsgebiets eines Staates durch die Streitkräfte eines anderen Staates oder der Einsatzvon Waffen jeder Art durch einen Staatgegen das Hoheitsgebiet eines anderen Staates;

c) die Blockade der Häfen oder Küsten eines Staates durch die Streitkräfte eines anderen Staates;

d) ein Angriff der Streitkräfte eines Staates auf die Land-, See- oder Luftstreitkräfte oder die See- und Luftflotte eines anderen Staates;

https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/eli/bgbl/iii/ ... OR40173312



Dieser Bericht ist in der medialen Berichterstattung in Europa irgendwie "untergegangen":

https://policy.war.gov/Offices/Civilian ... -Response/

• Department of War
  
  Annual Report on Civilian Casualties in Connection with United States Military Operations in 2025
  
  Submitted pursuant to Section 1057 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91), as amended.
  

  C. U.S. military actions in Iran
  
  On June 22, 2025, USCENTCOM conducted Operation Midnight Hammer, a high precision and joint force strategic strike against three critical Iranian nuclear facilities: Frodo, Natanz, and Isfahan. Following the strikes, USCENTCOM assessed that there were no civilian causalities that occurred as a result of U.S. military operations during Operation Midnight Hammer.

  https://policy.war.gov/Portals/11/Docum ... wKQQ%3d%3d

Sehr "seriös" ...

[theoderich]

Das IRGC hat einen Angriff mit ballistischen Raketen auf einen Flugzeugträger und einen Zerstörer der US Navy bekanntgegeben:

https://t.me/irna_1313/448261

Die Marine des IRGC hat gestern Nacht ein UUV der US-Streitkräfte angegriffen:

https://t.me/irna_1313/448281



Das ist ein ziviler Öltanker:

https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/de ... essel:KYLO

https://www.vesselfinder.com/vessels/details/9189146

[theoderich]

Es soll eine MQ-1 abgeschossen worden sein:

https://t.me/irna_1313/449400

Und die iranische Marine hat ein UUV vom Typ Anduril Dive-LD sufgebracht:

https://t.me/irna_1313/449406

https://t.me/irna_1313/449415

[theoderich]

Vor kurzem sollen die US-Streitkräfte erneut Öltanker im Persischen Golf beschossen haben:

U.S. Strikes Iranian Oil Tankers in Response to Tehran’s Attacks on Navy Ships

The U.S. launched new attacks on Iranian oil tankers on Tuesday in response to a fresh attempt by Tehran to strike U.S. warships in the Middle East, according to a U.S. official.

Iran launched a missile attack against a U.S. Navy ship on Monday after firing ballistic missiles at an aircraft carrier and a guided-missile destroyer over the weekend, according to U.S. officials. The Wall Street Journal earlier reported the Monday attack.

https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/i ... _lead_pos1


Das IRGC hat daraufhin Angriffe auf Öltanker in Bahrain und Kuwait angedroht:

https://t.me/irna_1313/449428

[theoderich]

Die iranischen Streitkräfte haben ballistische Raketen auf Jordanien abgefeuert. Ziel war erneut der Militärflugplatz al-Azraq:

https://t.me/irna_1313/449444

Jordan Armed Forces intercept 18 Iranian ballistic missiles targeting kingdom

https://petra.gov.jo/en/news/jordan-arm ... ng-kingdom

https://t.me/irna_1313/449445

https://t.me/irna_1313/449446

https://t.me/irna_1313/449447

Das IRGC will zwei amerikanische Schiffe (DDG-119, DDG-53) und acht Öltanker angegriffen und schwer beschädigt haben. Außerdem wurden zehn weitere Schiffe beschossen, die die von den USA deklarierte Route durch die Straße von Hormuz genommen haben:

https://t.me/irna_1313/449457

https://t.me/irna_1313/449458

https://t.me/irna_1313/449471

[theoderich]

Der Iran wird erneut bombardiert. Die IRNA berichtet von einem Angriff auf Sirik:

https://t.me/irna_1313/449831

https://t.me/irna_1313/449832

https://t.me/irna_1313/449835

Von Qeshm aus waren Explosionsgeräusche zu hören.

9:43 PM
Several U.S. fighter jets damaged in Iranian strikes on military base in Jordan, sources say


Multiple American military aircraft were damaged in Iranian strikes that occurred overnight Tuesday into Wednesday local time on Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan, people with direct knowledge of the matter told CBS News.

Roughly eight F-15s sustained light damage and were reportedly placed back into service, according to the people familiar with the damage, who spoke to CBS News under the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly.

One A-10 Thunderbolt, known as the Warthog, was struck and was missing a wing, the sources said.

No U.S. deaths have been reported in the strikes on Jordan.

U.S. forces in Jordan launched more than 30 Patriot missiles defending against the Iranian strikes in Jordan, CBS News learned.

https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/ir ... e-2f78365d


‘Surge in construction’ at suspected Iranian nuclear site, analysts say, as US considers ways to strike deep underground

https://edition.cnn.com/2026/09/09/poli ... s-iran-vis

[theoderich]

EXCLUSIVE: US expands intel, targeting support for Saudi campaign against Iranian ally

More than 100 US military advisers are on the ground in Saudi Arabia providing intelligence and targeting support to the Kingdom in its military campaign against the Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen, multiple sources familiar with the effort say.

The US military personnel are working as part of a newly-established joint forces command, which was formed in recent weeks amid signs Iran was ramping up its own efforts to aid Houthi attacks against Saudi Arabia, one of the sources, a US official, said. That official put the total at roughly 200 troops.

The presence of US troops assisting Saudi Arabia was described to CNN by five sources familiar with the operations.

The US has helped Saudi Arabia use a targeting tool that allows military officers to see in real-time what is happening on the battlefield, one US official told CNN, comparing it to the Maven system used by the Pentagon. Another source familiar with ongoing cooperation between the two countries also said that the US is providing “geospatial” targeting support to Saudi Arabia for strikes against the Houthis.

However, there are currently tight limits to the US support, the sources say.

The US is sharing intelligence with Saudi Arabia — as it routinely does already — but it is not participating directly in strikes. The US is also not helping refuel Saudi warplanes or providing other operational support, as it has in past fighting with the Houthis.

The effort is instead focused on ensuring Saudi Arabia’s operations run smoothly and professionally, one of the sources said.

All of the sources characterized the effort as an extension of preexisting cooperation and training the US was already providing to Saudi Arabia, a strong regional ally.

A Department of Defense official told CNN that “as a matter of practice we do not comment on intelligence-related matters.” CNN reached out to the Saudi Arabian embassy in Washington.

US officials believe there are currently hundreds of Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps officers in Yemen, working alongside the Houthis with goal of ultimately shutting down the Bab-el-Mandeb strait, which connects the Red Sea to the Indian Ocean, one of the US officials told CNN.

And there is a deep wariness inside the military of being too closely associated with a Saudi strike campaign against the Houthis — especially if a strike goes wrong and there are civilian casualties, as happened in the past, another US official said.

“This is not the old days,” another of the sources said.

https://edition.cnn.com/2026/09/10/poli ... iran-yemen

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/18VL2yWvJe/


Behind the Scenes, Vance Gathered Unvarnished Views of the Iran War

Vice President JD Vance took the unusual step over the spring and summer of calling U.S. military commanders in the Middle East, Europe and Asia directly, seeking their unvarnished assessments of the Iran war, according to current and former officials.

Mr. Vance, who opposed the war from the outset and was charged by President Trump with helping to end the conflict, wanted the commanders’ individual judgments, in their own words, before they were consolidated into a Pentagon view.

The conversations delved into an array of issues related to the war, including its objectives, tactics, casualty estimates, what the Iranians would do in the Strait of Hormuz, how adaptable they had become and how much punishment their government could absorb. Mr. Vance also asked for a detailed accounting of what remained in the commanders’ stockpiles, and how the transfer of weapons to the Middle East would affect their ability to deter China, Russia and North Korea.

On that last point, the commanders were blunt. They were most worried about their depleted stocks of Patriot interceptors, the backbone of their air defenses. By late spring, one theater was down to fewer than 100 of them. The war had also exhausted the theater’s supplies of the Army Tactical Missile Systems, which can reach 190 miles, along with stores of the Precision Strike Missiles, which were meant to replace them. Stocks of critical munitions such as these, they told the vice president, were the lowest they had ever seen.

This account is based on interviews with more than a half-dozen current and former officials, who were granted anonymity to disclose sensitive information.

Mr. Vance came away from some of his conversations with deep concerns about the overall strategy and the prospects for success, according to people who spoke to him. The assessments made clear the extraordinary amount of pain the Iranian government was prepared to endure in its fight for survival, and the limited supply of U.S. defensive weapons available to block Iran’s retaliatory strikes, or to deal with threats elsewhere.

The vice president incorporated these lessons into his private talks with Mr. Trump and their inner circle. At the same time, the president was hearing more in his briefings from Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, about the strain on U.S. stockpiles and the resilience of Iranian forces, which Mr. Trump initially found difficult to believe.

There was a gulf between the sobering private assessments that Mr. Vance received and what top administration officials, including the president and vice president, have said publicly. Mr. Trump has continued to falsely claim that the United States has already won the war, that the Iranian military has been demolished and that there are no problems with U.S. weapons supplies. And Mr. Vance recently downplayed the idea that the United States was even engaged in a war.

Privately, the president has raged about media stories detailing the diminished stockpiles, calling journalists “treasonous” for reporting on the topic. In the wake of the coverage, government investigators subjected dozens of senior military officers at the Pentagon to polygraph tests. Other officials have worried about signaling weakness to China and Russia, who are closely surveilling U.S. stockpiles.

Mr. Vance’s calls to the commanders were made with the knowledge of the president; Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth; General Caine; Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who also serves as the national security adviser; and Susie Wiles, the White House chief of staff, according to officials with direct knowledge.

Sean Parnell, a Pentagon spokesman, said in a statement that “to ensure the president’s team receives all available data points regarding ongoing operations in the Middle East, the secretary has facilitated direct access to combatant commanders for the vice president and other senior White House leaders.”

Joseph Holstead, General Caine’s spokesman, said, “There is no gap in the military advice provided to the president, the vice president, and the secretary of war,” referring to the title Mr. Hegseth uses. Mr. Holstead added: “The chairman, joint staff, and combatant commanders are in direct and continuous communication, and their operational and strategic assessments inform the military options and advice provided to senior leaders.”

Steven Cheung, the White House communications director, said, “President Trump has built the most talented national security team in history. The entire team is laser focused on ensuring that the president has all the information he needs in order to deter America’s enemies. Everybody works in coordination with each other on that mission.”

Blunt and Unfiltered Opinions

Before the start of the war on Feb. 28, Mr. Hegseth and General Caine had restricted planning to an unusually small circle of officers at the Pentagon and in Central Command for operational security reasons, and to prevent potential leaks. Key officials, such as the Treasury and energy secretaries, were excluded from the prewar planning meetings.

That secrecy left commanders around the world largely in the dark until roughly a week before the bombs fell, when secret messages arrived from the Pentagon ordering them to transfer specified munitions, in specified quantities, to Central Command, which directs Middle East operations. No explanation was given, and none was needed.

Mr. Vance’s effort to collect more information on the war began early.

Within days of the start of the war, Mr. Vance told colleagues that he wanted more granular briefings to inform his views and to better advise Mr. Trump. General Caine, for his part, saw his job as providing the president with unbiased military options rather than advocacy. He would interpret Mr. Trump’s intentions and lay out ways for him to achieve them. For each option, he would highlight the secondary considerations, the risks and the potential implications.

But he would not tell the president which option to choose, according to officials with direct knowledge of his presentations. The vice president sought out uniformed military officers who would offer blunt and unfiltered opinions and recommendations, and he would incorporate what he heard into his own counsel to the president.

Mr. Vance’s opposition to the war was no secret inside the White House. In the weeks leading up to Feb. 28, he argued against the operation in meetings in the Oval Office and Situation Room, at times to Mr. Trump’s considerable irritation, according to officials who discussed the matter with the president. But once Mr. Trump made up his mind, Mr. Vance defended the decision in public, including during tense television interviews.

The vice president also became the public face of the peace effort, running a series of talks that yielded a memorandum of understanding in June. Its 60-day window closed in August with no agreement and with the two sides seemingly further apart than when the negotiations started.

Mr. Trump had not seriously contemplated the war lasting long enough to strain U.S. stockpiles. He was fresh off the success of the quick military strike to capture Venezuela’s leader, and was impressed by how the United States and Israel had combined to attack Iranian nuclear sites over 12 days the previous year. Before launching the war in Iran, he had privately expected the government there to collapse within days.

As Mr. Vance was making his calls, the fighting ran well past the roughly six-week window that Pentagon planners had initially budgeted for the campaign. Senior White House advisers beyond the vice president did not believe they had a clear-enough understanding of how much the strikes had changed the calculus of the government in Tehran.

As the war dragged on, commanders were ordered to transfer more of their munitions. They watched with alarm as their stockpiles dwindled.

By April, Mr. Trump could see the war was not going the way he had hoped. He authorized his team — including Mr. Vance, the president’s son-in-law Jared Kushner and the special envoy Steve Witkoff — to begin seeking a framework and negotiating a deal with Iran to end the conflict, an agreement that would leave the country’s authoritarians in control. The officials briefed on the calls with the commanders could not say what role, if any, the vice president’s findings played in the president’s shift toward diplomacy.

Mr. Vance reached out directly to Admiral Brad Cooper, who commands U.S. forces in the Middle East, and to officers in Europe and Asia — theaters not directly in the Iran fight but whose weapons and equipment have been drawn down to support it.

Chief among his private interlocutors was Admiral Samuel J. Paparo Jr., the head of the U.S. Pacific Command, who is responsible for all American military activity in the region where China is expanding its reach and directly challenging U.S. supremacy. Admiral Paparo brought experience directly relevant to the Iran war: He previously oversaw naval operations across the Middle East, the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf. (A spokesperson for Pacific Command declined to comment on the vice president’s communications with Admiral Paparo, referring questions to the White House.)

John Ratcliffe, the C.I.A. director, has given him direct access to agency analysts; Mr. Vance knows some of them by first name and calls their desks to ask about raw intelligence or items in his morning briefing, intelligence officials said.

To satisfy the vice president’s demands for details, Mr. Hegseth had the Office of Naval Intelligence write Mr. Vance daily reports on the Strait of Hormuz, which Mr. Trump’s other senior aides now receive as well, according to senior Pentagon officials.

These reports describe which ships are transiting the strait, their flags and their cargo. General Caine sends Mr. Vance previews and recaps of U.S. strikes in the detail normally reserved for the officers running them. (General Caine himself is known to reach out directly to senior C.I.A. officers, including station chiefs in conflict zones, in order to solicit their on-the-ground assessments, officials said.)

But such access is the exception. For most senior officials, information about the war remains hard to come by.

Adam Goldman contributed reporting.

Jonathan Swan is a White House reporter for The Times, covering the administration of Donald J. Trump. Contact him securely on Signal: @jonathan.941

Adam Entous is a Washington-based investigative reporter for The Times, focused on national security and intelligence matters.

Maggie Haberman is a White House correspondent for The Times, reporting on President Trump.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/10/us/p ... tions.html