US and Israel Launch Major Combat Operations Against Iran as Tehran Retaliates

2026-02-28

The BareStory

President Donald Trump announced on Saturday, February 28, 2026, that the United States has initiated "major combat operations" in Iran. Conducted jointly with Israeli forces, the offensive—designated "Operation Epic Fury" by the Pentagon—targets Iranian military, government, and nuclear infrastructure. In a video address, President Trump stated the operation aims to defend the American people by eliminating imminent threats from the Iranian leadership, acknowledging that the campaign could last for days and may result in U.S. casualties.

Officials described the offensive as a massive aerial and naval bombardment. Strikes were reported in Tehran, where smoke was observed over the skyline, as well as in Isfahan and Qom. Sources briefed on the operation indicated that specific targets included the compounds of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and President Masoud Pezeshkian. In retaliation, Iran launched waves of ballistic missiles toward Israel and U.S. military installations in Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates. While U.S. and Israeli defense systems intercepted multiple incoming threats, the UAE reported one civilian fatality resulting from the strikes.

The Trump administration and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu justified the preemptive action as necessary to degrade Iran's missile capabilities and prevent the regime from acquiring nuclear weapons following the alleged failure of diplomatic efforts. Conversely, the Russian Foreign Ministry condemned the attack as an act of unprovoked aggression against a sovereign nation. The Foreign Minister of Oman, who had been mediating indirect talks, expressed dismay that the escalation undermined active negotiations that had reportedly made progress.

Domestically, the operation triggered sharp division within the U.S. Congress. Administration officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, briefed the "Gang of Eight" congressional leaders prior to the strikes. Supporters, including Senator Lindsey Graham, praised the offensive as necessary for regional security and the elimination of a state sponsor of terror. However, critics such as Senator Tim Kaine and Representative Thomas Massie characterized the strikes as unauthorized acts of war. Democratic leadership announced plans to introduce a War Powers Resolution to challenge the President’s authority to conduct the operation without legislative approval.

Left Perspective

Sabotage of Diplomacy
The Escalation Spiral
Unchecked Executive Aggression

Right Perspective

Restoration of Deterrence
Rejection of Appeasement
Defense of Sovereignty

Left Perspective

• Sabotage of Diplomacy Prioritizing militarism over active dialogue often yields catastrophic instability rather than resolution. With the Foreign Minister of Oman confirming that indirect talks were active and making progress, this preemptive offensive is viewed as a reckless abandonment of non-violent conflict resolution. By discarding the diplomatic framework, the administration risks severing the only channels capable of ensuring long-term regional stability without bloodshed.

• The Escalation Spiral Military force is framed here not as a solution, but as an accelerant that guarantees a broadening conflict. The immediate retaliation by Tehran—launching ballistic missiles at multiple nations including Bahrain, Kuwait, and the UAE—demonstrates how aggressive posturing endangers allied populations and civilians, evidenced by the reported fatality in the UAE. This perspective argues that "Operation Epic Fury" has transformed a contained tension into a sprawling regional war that defense systems may eventually fail to contain.

• Unchecked Executive Aggression The decision to initiate "major combat operations" without explicit legislative approval represents a dangerous erosion of democratic checks and balances. Highlighting the objections of Senator Kaine and the introduction of a War Powers Resolution, this view contends that bypassing Congress to authorize acts of war undermines the rule of law. The reliance on a "Gang of Eight" briefing rather than a full congressional vote is seen as a violation of the constitutional requirement that the people’s representatives determine the necessity of war.

Right Perspective

• Restoration of Deterrence National security relies on the credible threat of force to prevent adversaries from crossing red lines. Viewed through this lens, the alleged failure of previous diplomatic efforts necessitated a pivot to "Peace through Strength" to physically degrade Iran’s nuclear and missile infrastructure. By targeting specific military assets and leadership compounds, the operation is interpreted as a necessary restoration of boundaries that prevents a rogue state from holding global security hostage.

• Rejection of Appeasement This framework posits that prolonging negotiations with regimes intent on acquiring nuclear weapons is a strategic vulnerability, not a virtue. The administration’s dismissal of the mediating efforts cited by Oman reflects a belief that such talks were merely stalling tactics used by Tehran to advance its capabilities. Striking the compounds of the Supreme Leader and the President is justified as a decisive move to eliminate the source of the threat rather than managing its symptoms.

• Defense of Sovereignty The primary obligation of the state is the physical protection of its citizens and assets from imminent threats. The interception of Iranian ballistic missiles by U.S. and Israeli defense systems is seen as validation that the threat was real and the military readiness was essential. Supporters like Senator Graham argue that preemptive action against a "state sponsor of terror" protects the homeland and regional allies, prioritizing the survival of established democracies over the objections of international critics like Russia.

How it may affect me

As a U.S. reader:

• U.S. military personnel and installations in Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates face immediate physical threats from Iranian ballistic missile retaliation, with the administration acknowledging the potential for American casualties.

• A significant constitutional dispute is emerging in Congress, where you can expect legislative battles over the introduction of a War Powers Resolution aiming to challenge the President's authority to bypass lawmakers for these strikes.

• The United States has shifted from diplomatic negotiations to active warfare in the Middle East, committing military resources to a joint offensive that officials indicate will involve a sustained campaign of aerial and naval bombardment.

US and Israel Launch Major Combat Operations Against Iran as Tehran Retaliates

The BareStory

Left Perspective

Right Perspective

How it may affect me

Read the story at