Image is of destruction and damage inside Israel, sourced from this article.


Iran and Israel have struck each other many times over the last few days. There has been a general focus on military facilities and headquarters by both sides, though Israel has also struck oil facilities, civilian structures and hospitals, and in return for this, Iran has struck major scientific centers and the Haifa oil facilities.

Israel appears to have three main aims. First, to collapse the Iranian state, either through shock and breakdown by killing enough senior officials, or via some sort of internal military coup. Second, to try and destroy Iranian nuclear sites and underground missile cities, or at least to paralyze them long enough to achieve the first and third goals. And third, to bring the US into a direct conflict with Iran. This is because the US better equipped to fight them than Israel is (though victory would still not be guaranteed depending on what Iran chooses to do).

Iranian nuclear facilities are hidden deep underground (800 meters), far beyond the depth range of even the most powerful bunker busters (~70 meters or so), and built such that the visible ground entrances are horizontally far away in an unknown direction from the actual underground chambers. Only an extremely competent full-scale American bombing force all simultaneously using multiple of the most powerful conventional (perhaps even nuclear) bunker busters could even hypothetically hope to breach them (and we have seen how, in practice, American bunker busters have largely failed to impair or deter Ansarallah). There are several analysts on both sides who have concluded that it is entirely impossible to physically prevent Iran from building nukes.

I fully expect the US to join the war. I believe the current ambiguity is a deliberate invention of the US while they work to move their military assets into position, and as soon as they are ready, the US will start bombing Iran. After that, Iran’s leadership must - if they haven’t already - harden their hearts, and strike back with no fear, or risk following the path of Libya, Syria, and Iraq, either into either surrender, occupation, or annihilation. Every day where they do not possess a nuke is a day where lives are being lost and cities are being bombed.


Last week’s thread is here.
The Imperialism Reading Group is here.

Please check out the RedAtlas!

The bulletins site is here. Currently not used.
The RSS feed is here. Also currently not used.

Israel-Palestine Conflict

If you have evidence of Israeli crimes and atrocities that you wish to preserve, there is a thread here in which to do so.

Sources on the fighting in Palestine against Israel. In general, CW for footage of battles, explosions, dead people, and so on:

UNRWA reports on Israel’s destruction and siege of Gaza and the West Bank.

English-language Palestinian Marxist-Leninist twitter account. Alt here.
English-language twitter account that collates news.
Arab-language twitter account with videos and images of fighting.
English-language (with some Arab retweets) Twitter account based in Lebanon. - Telegram is @IbnRiad.
English-language Palestinian Twitter account which reports on news from the Resistance Axis. - Telegram is @EyesOnSouth.
English-language Twitter account in the same group as the previous two. - Telegram here.

English-language PalestineResist telegram channel.
More telegram channels here for those interested.

Russia-Ukraine Conflict

Examples of Ukrainian Nazis and fascists
Examples of racism/euro-centrism during the Russia-Ukraine conflict

Sources:

Defense Politics Asia’s youtube channel and their map. Their youtube channel has substantially diminished in quality but the map is still useful.
Moon of Alabama, which tends to have interesting analysis. Avoid the comment section.
Understanding War and the Saker: reactionary sources that have occasional insights on the war.
Alexander Mercouris, who does daily videos on the conflict. While he is a reactionary and surrounds himself with likeminded people, his daily update videos are relatively brainworm-free and good if you don’t want to follow Russian telegram channels to get news. He also co-hosts The Duran, which is more explicitly conservative, racist, sexist, transphobic, anti-communist, etc when guests are invited on, but is just about tolerable when it’s just the two of them if you want a little more analysis.
Simplicius, who publishes on Substack. Like others, his political analysis should be soundly ignored, but his knowledge of weaponry and military strategy is generally quite good.
On the ground: Patrick Lancaster, an independent and very good journalist reporting in the warzone on the separatists’ side.

Unedited videos of Russian/Ukrainian press conferences and speeches.

Pro-Russian Telegram Channels:

Again, CW for anti-LGBT and racist, sexist, etc speech, as well as combat footage.

https://t.me/aleksandr_skif ~ DPR’s former Defense Minister and Colonel in the DPR’s forces. Russian language.
https://t.me/Slavyangrad ~ A few different pro-Russian people gather frequent content for this channel (~100 posts per day), some socialist, but all socially reactionary. If you can only tolerate using one Russian telegram channel, I would recommend this one.
https://t.me/s/levigodman ~ Does daily update posts.
https://t.me/patricklancasternewstoday ~ Patrick Lancaster’s telegram channel.
https://t.me/gonzowarr ~ A big Russian commentator.
https://t.me/rybar ~ One of, if not the, biggest Russian telegram channels focussing on the war out there. Actually quite balanced, maybe even pessimistic about Russia. Produces interesting and useful maps.
https://t.me/epoddubny ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/boris_rozhin ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/mod_russia_en ~ Russian Ministry of Defense. Does daily, if rather bland updates on the number of Ukrainians killed, etc. The figures appear to be approximately accurate; if you want, reduce all numbers by 25% as a ‘propaganda tax’, if you don’t believe them. Does not cover everything, for obvious reasons, and virtually never details Russian losses.
https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses ~ Pro-Russian, documents abuses that Ukraine commits.

Pro-Ukraine Telegram Channels:

Almost every Western media outlet.
https://discord.gg/projectowl ~ Pro-Ukrainian OSINT Discord.
https://t.me/ice_inii ~ Alleged Ukrainian account with a rather cynical take on the entire thing.


  • CoolerOpposide [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    edit-2
    16 minutes ago

    Whirlwind of insane reports in the last hour. This shit is so exhausting.

    -Israeli media is reporting that America entering the conflict is now more likely than ever, likely tonight

    -Iranian state run media is claiming “there will be a surprise tonight that the world will remember for centuries”

    -US forces across all Middle East bases placed on high alert

    -Netanyahu holding talks with high ranking military officials/ministers, now on the phone with Trump

    -Iran says it will mine the strait of Hormuz if the U.S. enters the conflict

    God I wish we lived in precedented times

  • SexUnderSocialism [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    42 minutes ago

    I’m getting really annoyed that whenever you express disappointment with China’s passive foreign policy, some people immediately act like you’re being unreasonable and asking China to declare total war, as if there aren’t a dozen other things the world’s biggest manufacturer could do with the amount of cards they have. I guess I shouldn’t be surprised, because if continuing (and even strengthening) trade with the Zionist entity during a genocide didn’t stop those people from making up excuses, then nothing will.

  • sexywheat [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    43 minutes ago

    Hexbears, where is Russia in all of this? Iran/Russia have an ongoing, comprehensive security partnership that, if I am not mistaken, was just recently finalised.

    Is Russia just going to leave Iran out to dry? What good was that partnership then?

    Of course Russia is still caught up in Ukraine, but surely they must be able to provide some sort of assistance to Iran? Especially with the Burger Reich getting directly involved now.

  • Lisitsyn [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    11 minutes ago

    Iran preparing to attack US bases if US joins Israeli attack, with Iraq first target: Report

    Iran has positioned military gear and missiles to strike US bases in the Middle East in preparation should the US join Israel in attacking the Islamic Republic, the New York Times reported on Tuesday.

    The US is already defending Israel from Iranian strikes and supplying it with military gear, but is not yet believed to be engaging directly in offensive operations.

    Tehran is widely expected to retaliate to any US strikes by attacking American military bases.

    The US has thousnads of troops in the Arabian Gulf, but the NYT says Iran is likely to start with attacks on Iraq.

    Iraq is home to thousands of fighters who belong to pro-Iranian militias.

  • ThomasMuentzner [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    edit-2
    1 hour ago

    BIg Twitter treat on China-Iran Relations

    (dont know anything about the OP , i jsut put China- Iran into twitter search ,seems selfflattering but gives a good rundown i think )

    Will China Back Iran? The Answer Is Most Likely Yes — China is already doing it

    spoiler

    The Answer Is Most Likely Yes — China is already doing it

    When Israeli missiles pierced the skies over Tehran in the early hours of June 12th, obliterating the Revolutionary Guard’s command center in a precision strike, Iran found itself stripped of illusions. And when it turned for help, it didn’t call Moscow. It reached for two phone lines: Beijing and Islamabad.

    Within hours, Iran’s foreign minister was on the phone with China’s minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi. Soon after, Pakistan declared its support, and military aircraft were spotted entering Iranian airspace. The symbolism was stark: when the Islamic Republic felt existential threat, it turned to the East.

    So — will China back Iran?

    The answer is: most probably yes—and in some ways, it’s already happening. Iran’s recent missile strikes have become notably more precise, largely due to China granting it access to the Advanced BeiDou satellite navigation system. If Pakistan is visibly supporting Iran, it’s unlikely to be acting alone. China supplies most of Pakistan’s military hardware, and its logistical and technical backing is essential to any sustained Pakistani operation.

    But before looking forward, we must first understand how strained the China–Iran relationship had become.

    China’s support for Iran doesn’t stem from alliance, affinity, or ideological kinship. It’s not about brotherhood. Xi Jinping, as China’s leader and a figure of influence in the Global South, may personally see Israel’s actions as crossing fundamental lines of basic human decency—but that’s not the driving force here. China’s position is shaped by strategic consideration: energy security, the energy corridor, and the broader logic of the Belt and Road Initiative. Supporting Iran, for China, is not sentimental. It’s pragmatic—a rational stance toward a country that sits on a key geopolitical fault line of Eurasian infrastructure.

    A Marriage of Convenience, Not Conviction

    Recently China and Iran’s relationship has been estranged. It wasn’t always this frosty. Back in 2021, China and Iran signed a sweeping 25-year strategic cooperation agreement worth about $400 billion — spanning energy, ports, finance, and even military training. It was hailed as Tehran’s pivot to the East, an exit ramp from sanctions and isolation. For a brief moment, it looked like Iran had chosen the China-Russia bloc.

    But the ink had barely dried before Tehran’s behavior grew erratic. Projects were shelved, port cooperation at Chabahar stalled, solar equipment was seized by the IRGC, and in a twist that felt like a deliberate snub, Iran leased the same port to India — even as India was cozying up to the U.S. and preparing for confrontation with Pakistan.

    Worse, just as India and Pakistan were on the brink of war, Iran signed a full-spectrum strategic agreement with New Delhi. No pretense of neutrality — just opportunism. Wherever the wind blew, Iran tilted. Its foreign policy became a study in hedging: foot in the East, heart in the West, eyes on the next buyer.

    Anti-Americanism for Sale

    What Iran seemed to have discovered was that, in a world divided by a U.S.–China cold war, its anti-American posture had value. Tehran’s liberals — the Western-leaning elite — saw an opportunity. While denouncing the China deal as a national sellout, they also tried to use their anti-U.S. position as a bargaining chip with China. The logic: “We’re useful to you — pay up.”

    But here’s the contradiction: while posturing against the U.S., Tehran was simultaneously trying to mend ties with Washington and Europe, hoping to ease sanctions and attract Western investment. In effect, Iran tried to monetize its anti-Americanism while flirting with the West — a contradictory strategy that neither Washington nor Beijing found trustworthy.

    China didn’t slam the door — it simply pulled away the table. The grand $400 billion plan was quietly frozen. In Beijing, Iran’s flip-flopping became a case study in “how not to do diplomacy.”

    June 12: The Return of the Prodigal Ally

    Then came Israel’s deadly all-out strike. And suddenly, Tehran remembered its friends. But the most telling moment wasn’t the attack itself — it was who Tehran called first. It wasn’t America, Europe, Russia. It wasn’t even the Arab world.

    It was China. And Pakistan.

    Not so long ago, Iran openly expressed support for India during its war with Pakistan. It was a clear signal of distance — Tehran did not want to be seen as a close ally of China, let alone as part of the China-Pakistan strategic axis.

    That is the irony. For all the posturing, when the Iranian government feared collapse, its instincts turned East. Islamabad — despite having been previously humiliated by Iranian moves toward India — responded swiftly, signaling military readiness. Fighter jets entered Iranian skies.

    So if Pakistan is backing Iran, then yes — China definitely is too. Not because of love, but because of necessity. Geography doesn’t lie. Iran sits at the crossroads of Eurasia, the vital node linking the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) to the Persian Gulf, and ultimately, to Europe. If Iran falls, the entire southern flank of the Belt and Road unravels.

    The Belt and Road is the revival of the vast commercial empire that China once was. It’s the global common ring of prosperity that China is trying to build.

    Iran is key to the Belt Road initiative. If Iran falls, the Middle East will become the sole playground of US and Israel.

    The Domino Risk

    The nightmare scenario? A collapsed Iran triggering a domino effect: Israel follows up with strikes on Hezbollah and the Houthis; Syria descends further into chaos; U.S. fleets return to the Persian Gulf; Saudi and the UAE flip fully West; India uses the vacuum to advance its IMEC corridor, bypassing Pakistan altogether.

    And suddenly, China’s entire energy lifeline — its access to the Middle East, Africa, and Europe — is choked off.

    That’s not conspiracy. It’s a scenario already modeled by U.S. think tanks and put into action.

    Russia is bogged down in Ukraine. If Iran becomes the second domino to fall, China finds itself the last wall standing — alone.

    Given the geopolitical reality, China has little choice but to back Iran—if it wants to avoid being strangled by the tightening grip of the U.S. chokehold.

    Why China Remains Cautious

    But Beijing hasn’t forgotten Iran’s pattern of betrayal.

    Despite years of diplomatic lip service, the 25-year agreement has gone nowhere. RMB settlements still lag below 40%, compared to over 90% with Russia. Military deals? Tehran went shopping in Moscow instead — buying Su-35s and S-300s, deliberately sidelining Chinese defense industries.

    China doesn’t forget humiliation. Nor does it reward unpredictability.

    The Problem Isn’t the Foreign Ministry — It’s the Regime

    At the heart of the issue isn’t Iran’s diplomats. It’s Iran’s system. A theocracy cloaked in revolutionary nostalgia, still run by a clergy with Cold War instincts and no consistent foreign policy line.

    While Hezbollah and Hamas bleed on the front lines, Tehran dithers. While others die, it negotiates. While the region burns, it whispers to the Americans — “ease sanctions.”

    That’s why even China keeps a cold distance. It’s not that Tehran doesn’t resist the West — it’s that it resists consistency.

    And even more damning: the Iranian people themselves are no longer believers in the system. They wear Zara, stream Western music, protest in the streets, and — in a bitter twist — some even held signs thanking Israel the day of the attack. The regime is losing its base.

    What China Wants from Iran

    China doesn’t need a “wolf warrior” ally in the Gulf. It needs a bridge.

    The purpose of the 25-year deal was simple: turn Iran into a stable anchor for the Belt and Road’s southern corridor. The North is frozen in Ukraine. The Central route is politically fragile. The South — through Pakistan, Iran, to the Mediterranean — is essential.

    But for that to happen, Iran has to stabilize. Not just militarily. But Politically. Institutionally.

    Beijing’s Message: Stop the Games

    So what would it take for China to truly return? After the war, China would likely request a reset:

    1. Restore the 25-year agreement — not in rhetoric, but in action.

    2. Return port projects to China — including Chabahar.

    3. Settle trade in RMB — at scale.

    4. Signal strategic alignment — no more jumping between camps.

    Because if Iran is serious, China may still open the door. But it will not tolerate a partner that signs deals in the East while flirting with enemies in the West.

    China is not America. It doesn’t demand allegiance. But it does expect consistency.

    Ironically, the very instability Iran now faces may open a path for deeper Eastward alignment. If the current regime falls — and a secular, pragmatic one emerges — it may, paradoxically, be more open to cooperation with China. A new Iran might value development over dogma.

    And that’s Beijing’s real long game. China might be looking for the reformists to emerge.

    Because the future of the RMB, the Belt and Road, and China’s strategic position in the Middle East doesn’t depend on which government rules Iran.

    It depends on whether China is seen — not just by regimes, but by the Iranian people — as a builder, not a bully.

  • Staines [they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    1 hour ago

    The US has already demanded Iran’s surrender and is moving into position to attack. Iran should immediately begin hitting the refineries of all US client states in the region. They might not have the chance soon. Why wait for the US to make a first strike when western countries are all in on the game and will condemn you for defending yourself regardless?

  • sevenapples@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    8 minutes ago

    I seriously hope people talking about US/Israel going nuclear are only dooming. I can’t even begin to fathom the outcome…

  • CoolerOpposide [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    edit-2
    1 hour ago

    Well Hexbear crew, looks like our analysis was correct on Israel running low on anti-missile defenses. Israel has between 10-12 days of anti-missile munitions without resupply from the U.S.

    Link to separate discussion post & Link to the article

    Per Washington Post:

    Without resupplies from the United States or greater involvement by U.S. forces, some assessments project Israel can maintain its missile defense for 10 or 12 more days if Iran maintains a steady tempo of attacks, said an individual briefed on U.S. and Israeli intelligence assessments, adding that as early as later this week, Israel’s systems may only be able to intercept a smaller proportion of missiles because of a need to ration defensive munitions. “They will need to select what they want to intercept,” said the individual, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter. “The system is already overwhelmed.”

    Given this knowledge, we may be seeing something quite interesting strategically from Iran. I would not be surprised if they’ve figured the right amount of missiles to launch and where in order to draw out the best (highest, aka worst for Israeli stockpile) ratio of anti-missile defenses to ballistic missiles launched. Iran knows that its missile production is more efficient in cost (significantly so) and quantity than anti-missile production.

    Iran is also aware that the United States is probably unlikely to willingly toss all of its anti-missile munitions over to Israel, when those anti-missile munitions are likely to be far more valuable in the event of a PRC reunification with Taiwan that the U.S. intervenes in.

  • fever [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    59 minutes ago

    I appreciate it if you guys share your opinions by answering these questions:

    1. How will the United States join this war and mitigate it’s repercussions?
    2. If Iran keeps firing missiles at this pace, how long does it take before they run out?
    3. Which of Iran’s claims are hard to believe?

    Thanks.

  • mkultrawide [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    edit-2
    1 hour ago

    My gut tells me that Iran needs to do something before the US fully has assets in place, in order to catch NATO on it’s back foot. I realize that’s not much in the way of materialist analysis, but I think the only “diplomacy” Trump is going to offer is “unconditional surrender or burn”, and neither China nor Russia seem interested in intervening.