Frequently Asked Questions

Operation Epic Fury is the codename for the United States military campaign against Iran launched on February 28, 2026. The operation involves coordinated air and missile strikes targeting Iranian military infrastructure, air defense networks, missile production facilities, and command-and-control centers across the country. The Pentagon has described it as a multi-wave aerial operation using B-2 stealth bombers, F-35 fighters, Tomahawk cruise missiles, and carrier-based aircraft deployed from the USS Eisenhower and USS Lincoln carrier strike groups in the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea.

The strikes were launched in coordination with Israel's Operation Shield of Judah. U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) confirmed that the operation's first phase focused on suppressing Iran's integrated air defense system (IADS) before moving to strategic military targets. President Trump confirmed the operation in a nationally televised address.

Read more

Operation Shield of Judah, also referred to by Israeli media as "The Roar of the Lion," is Israel's coordinated military campaign against Iran launched simultaneously with the U.S. Operation Epic Fury on February 28, 2026. The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) deployed F-35I Adir stealth fighters, Jericho ballistic missiles, and intelligence assets to strike Iranian nuclear enrichment facilities, missile storage depots, and IRGC command centers.

The operation represents the largest Israeli military action against Iran in history and was planned in close coordination with U.S. CENTCOM over a period of several months. Israeli leadership confirmed the strikes were a direct response to Iran's continued nuclear weapons development and its support for proxy attacks against Israel through Hezbollah and other groups. The operation followed a pattern set by Operation Midnight Hammer in June 2025.

Read more

Iran does not currently possess intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) capable of reaching the U.S. mainland. Iran's longest-range operational missile, the Khorramshahr-4, has an estimated range of approximately 2,000 kilometers (1,240 miles), which can reach targets throughout the Middle East and parts of southeastern Europe but falls far short of the roughly 10,000-kilometer distance to the continental United States.

However, Iran has an active space launch vehicle (SLV) program that Western intelligence agencies believe could provide the technical foundation for future ICBM development. Iran can threaten U.S. interests through other means: its missile arsenal can strike U.S. military bases in Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, and the UAE, as demonstrated by retaliatory strikes on February 28. Iran also maintains cyber warfare capabilities and proxy networks that can target U.S. interests globally.

Read more

As of February 28, 2026, there has been no official announcement of a ground invasion of Iran, and most military analysts consider a full-scale ground campaign unlikely in the near term. Iran's geography presents enormous challenges for a land invasion: the country spans 1.6 million square kilometers of mountainous, desert terrain with a population of over 88 million people. The U.S. experience in Iraq and Afghanistan has made policymakers wary of prolonged ground occupations.

Current U.S. strategy appears focused on air and missile strikes to degrade Iran's military capabilities and nuclear infrastructure without committing ground forces. However, the Pentagon has increased troop deployments to the region, and special operations forces may be conducting limited ground missions. Congress remains divided on authorizing any expanded ground operations, and the War Powers Resolution limits the president's ability to sustain military action without congressional approval.

Read more

The U.S. has significantly increased its military presence in the Middle East region surrounding Iran. Prior to the February 2026 escalation, approximately 40,000–45,000 U.S. troops were stationed across the region, including forces in Qatar (Al Udeid Air Base), Kuwait (Camp Arifjan), Bahrain (Naval Support Activity), the UAE (Al Dhafra Air Base), Iraq, and aboard naval vessels.

Since the buildup began, the Pentagon has deployed additional carrier strike groups, bomber task forces, and Marine Expeditionary Units, bringing the estimated total to over 80,000 personnel in the broader CENTCOM area of responsibility. Two carrier strike groups — the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower and USS Abraham Lincoln — are operating in the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea. Additional Patriot and THAAD missile defense batteries have been deployed to protect U.S. bases from Iranian ballistic missile retaliation.

Read more

The U.S. military is employing a wide range of advanced weapons systems in Operation Epic Fury. Air assets include B-2 Spirit stealth bombers carrying GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrators (30,000-pound bunker busters designed to destroy deeply buried targets like Iran's Fordow enrichment facility), B-1B Lancers with precision-guided munitions, F-35A Lightning II stealth fighters, and F-15E Strike Eagles.

Naval forces are launching Tomahawk cruise missiles from Arleigh Burke-class destroyers and Virginia-class submarines. Carrier-based F/A-18 Super Hornets are flying strike sorties from the two carrier groups. The U.S. is also reportedly using AGM-158 JASSM extended-range cruise missiles and cyber weapons to disrupt Iranian command-and-control networks. Patriot PAC-3 and THAAD missile defense systems are defending U.S. bases against Iranian retaliatory missile strikes.

Read more

The U.S. military vastly outmatches Iran in virtually every conventional category. The U.S. defense budget exceeds $880 billion annually compared to Iran's estimated $25–30 billion. The U.S. has 11 aircraft carriers; Iran has none. The U.S. Air Force fields over 5,000 aircraft including fifth-generation stealth fighters, while Iran's air force relies largely on aging F-14 Tomcats and Soviet-era aircraft.

However, Iran has invested heavily in asymmetric capabilities that make it a formidable regional adversary. Iran possesses the largest ballistic missile arsenal in the Middle East, with an estimated 3,000+ missiles of various ranges. Its drone program has proven effective in regional conflicts. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and its Quds Force command a network of proxy militias across the region. Iran's naval forces, including fast-attack boats and anti-ship missiles, pose a serious threat in the confined waters of the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz.

Read more

Iran has the capability to disrupt shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, at least temporarily, though fully closing it for an extended period would be extremely difficult. The strait, only 21 nautical miles wide at its narrowest point, handles approximately 20–21% of the world's daily oil consumption. Iran could deploy anti-ship cruise missiles (such as the Noor and Qader), naval mines, fast-attack boats, and shore-based missile batteries to threaten commercial shipping.

However, the U.S. Fifth Fleet, based in Bahrain, maintains a permanent presence specifically to keep the strait open. The U.S. Navy's minesweeping capabilities and carrier-based air power would likely be able to reopen the strait within days to weeks of any Iranian closure attempt, though the economic damage from even a brief disruption would be severe — oil prices have already surged over 15% on fears of escalation.

Read more

As of the February 2026 strikes, Iran is not confirmed to possess a completed nuclear weapon. However, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has reported that Iran has enriched uranium to 60% purity — and there are unverified intelligence claims of enrichment up to 90% (weapons-grade) at undisclosed facilities. Iran's "breakout time" — the estimated time needed to produce enough fissile material for one nuclear weapon — had shrunk to as little as one to two weeks before the strikes, according to U.S. intelligence assessments.

Weaponization (designing a deliverable warhead) and miniaturization (fitting it onto a missile) are separate challenges that would require additional time. The February 28 strikes specifically targeted Iran's known enrichment facilities at Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan. Whether these strikes have set back Iran's nuclear timeline or accelerated a decision to pursue weapons remains one of the most critical unanswered questions of the conflict.

Read more

Before the February 28 strikes, U.S. and Israeli intelligence assessed that Iran was dangerously close to nuclear weapons capability. Iran had accumulated significant quantities of uranium enriched to 60% purity and was estimated to be within one to two weeks of producing enough weapons-grade (90%+) highly enriched uranium (HEU) for a single device.

However, producing fissile material is only one component. Iran would also need to design and engineer a functional warhead, miniaturize it to fit atop a ballistic missile, and test or validate the design — a process estimated to take six months to two years. The IAEA had reported ongoing concerns about undeclared nuclear material and activities at multiple sites. The strikes on Natanz, Fordow (built inside a mountain), and Isfahan (uranium conversion facility) were intended to physically destroy enrichment infrastructure, but the full damage assessment is still pending.

Read more

Uranium enrichment is the process of increasing the concentration of the fissile isotope uranium-235 (U-235) in natural uranium. Natural uranium contains only about 0.7% U-235; the rest is non-fissile U-238. For nuclear power reactors, uranium is typically enriched to 3–5% (low-enriched uranium, or LEU). For research reactors, enrichment may reach 20%. Weapons-grade uranium requires enrichment to 90% or above (highly enriched uranium, or HEU).

The enrichment process uses cascades of gas centrifuges that spin uranium hexafluoride gas at extremely high speeds to separate the lighter U-235 from the heavier U-238. Iran's enrichment program is central to the current conflict because the same centrifuge technology used for civilian nuclear fuel can produce weapons-grade material. Iran has been operating thousands of advanced IR-6 and IR-8 centrifuges at its Natanz and Fordow facilities, far exceeding what was permitted under the 2015 JCPOA nuclear agreement.

Read more

The February 28 strikes targeted Iran's three primary nuclear facilities. At Natanz, the main above-ground enrichment halls and centrifuge assembly buildings sustained heavy damage from precision-guided munitions, though the deeper underground facilities may have survived intact. At Fordow, built under 80 meters of granite inside a mountain near Qom, the U.S. deployed GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrators — the largest non-nuclear bombs in the American arsenal — in an attempt to penetrate the hardened facility.

Early satellite imagery shows significant surface damage, but the extent of underground destruction is unclear. Isfahan's uranium conversion facility sustained substantial damage. Reports also indicate strikes on the Arak heavy-water reactor site and Parchin military complex, where weapons-related research was suspected. Iran has restricted all access to the sites, and the IAEA has reported that its inspectors have been unable to verify conditions on the ground.

Read more

IAEA access to Iran's nuclear facilities has been severely disrupted since the February 28 strikes. Iran suspended all cooperation with IAEA inspectors immediately following the attacks, expelling monitoring teams from Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan. Surveillance cameras and monitoring equipment installed under safeguards agreements have gone offline.

The IAEA Director General has expressed grave concern that the agency has lost its ability to verify Iran's nuclear activities at a critical juncture. Before the strikes, Iran had already been limiting IAEA access — withdrawing from the Additional Protocol in 2023 and restricting inspector visits to declared facilities only. Without IAEA monitoring, the international community has no independent means to assess whether Iran is diverting nuclear material to weapons use or reconstituting its enrichment capabilities at undisclosed locations, raising the stakes of the conflict significantly.

Read more

There is currently no indication that the U.S. government plans to reinstate the military draft. The United States has maintained an all-volunteer military since 1973, and the Department of Defense has consistently stated that the current force structure is sufficient for operations against Iran. The Selective Service System, which requires men ages 18–25 to register, remains in place as a contingency, but activating an actual draft would require an act of Congress.

Current U.S. military operations against Iran are primarily air and naval strikes that rely on professional forces, advanced technology, and precision weapons rather than large ground troop formations. However, if the conflict escalates to a ground invasion or a broader regional war involving multiple fronts, the troop requirements could change significantly. For now, the Pentagon is relying on reserve call-ups and redeployments from other theaters to meet increased personnel needs in the Middle East.

Read more

The Iran conflict has had an immediate and dramatic impact on global oil prices and, consequently, U.S. gasoline prices. Within hours of the February 28 strikes, Brent crude surged over 15%, with prices rising above $110 per barrel. Iran is a major oil producer (approximately 3.2 million barrels per day), and the threat of disruption to the Strait of Hormuz — through which roughly 20% of the world's oil supply passes — has sent shockwaves through energy markets.

Analysts project that sustained conflict could push oil prices to $130–$150 per barrel, translating to U.S. gasoline prices of $5–$6 per gallon nationally, with higher prices in California and the Northeast. The Strategic Petroleum Reserve drawdowns in recent years left U.S. reserves at historically low levels, limiting the government's ability to cushion the price shock. Higher energy costs drive up transportation, manufacturing, and food prices across the entire economy.

Read more

Global financial markets have experienced significant volatility since the Iran strikes began. U.S. stock futures dropped sharply in overnight trading on February 28, with the S&P 500 futures falling over 3% and the Nasdaq down more than 4%. Oil and gas stocks surged while airlines, travel, and consumer discretionary sectors fell sharply. Defense stocks, including Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Northrop Grumman, saw significant gains.

Whether this constitutes a sustained crash or a temporary correction depends on several factors: the duration and scope of the conflict, whether the Strait of Hormuz is disrupted, the extent of Iranian retaliation, and the broader economic impact of sustained high oil prices. Historically, markets have often recovered relatively quickly from geopolitical shocks once the immediate uncertainty subsides. However, a prolonged conflict that triggers a global energy crisis could push economies into recession.

Read more

Congress has the constitutional authority to declare war and controls military funding, but in practice, stopping an ongoing military operation is extremely difficult. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and limits unauthorized deployments to 60 days (with a 30-day withdrawal period). Congress can pass a resolution directing the president to withdraw forces, but such a resolution would need to overcome a presidential veto.

The current Congress is deeply divided on the Iran strikes. Some members argue the president exceeded his authority by launching strikes without prior congressional authorization, while others contend the action falls under the president's Article II powers as commander-in-chief. Several lawmakers have introduced War Powers resolutions to constrain the operation, but none have gained enough bipartisan support to pass both chambers.

Read more

While the term "World War 3" has trended globally on social media since the February 28 strikes, the current conflict does not meet the historical definition of a world war — a global conflict involving most of the world's major powers fighting on multiple continents. The US-Iran confrontation is currently a bilateral military conflict with regional dimensions.

However, the risk of escalation is real. Iran's allies — Russia, China, and North Korea (the so-called CRINK alliance) — have condemned the strikes, but none have indicated they will intervene militarily. The greater risk of wider war comes from Iran's proxy network: Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, and Shia militias in Iraq and Syria could open multiple fronts. If a miscalculation leads to direct confrontation between the U.S. and Russian forces in Syria, the conflict could expand significantly. Most analysts assess the probability of a true global war as low but not zero.

Read more

Civilian casualty figures remain highly contested and difficult to verify independently. The Iranian government claims that U.S. and Israeli strikes have killed over 1,200 civilians and injured thousands more, with the heaviest toll in areas near military targets in Tehran, Isfahan, and Shiraz. The Pentagon has stated that strikes were conducted with precision-guided munitions aimed exclusively at military and nuclear infrastructure.

Independent verification is nearly impossible: Iran has expelled foreign journalists, internet connectivity has dropped to approximately 4%, and the ICRC has been unable to access affected areas. Historical precedent suggests that in modern air campaigns, civilian casualties are inevitable even with precision weapons, particularly in urban areas where military facilities are co-located with residential neighborhoods. The true civilian toll may not be known for months or years. The UN Human Rights Council has called for an independent investigation.

Read more

The UNHCR has warned of a rapidly developing displacement crisis resulting from the Iran strikes. Thousands of Iranians living near strike zones in Tehran, Isfahan, Shiraz, and Bushehr have fled their homes, with many heading toward Turkey, Iraq, and Pakistan. Turkey, which already hosts millions of refugees from the Syrian conflict, has placed its border forces on high alert. Iraq's Kurdish region is preparing for an influx of displaced persons.

Internal displacement within Iran is believed to be far more significant, but the near-total internet blackout (connectivity at approximately 4%) makes assessment extremely difficult. Iran is home to 88 million people, and a prolonged conflict could trigger one of the largest displacement events in modern history. Neighboring countries are already stretched thin by existing refugee populations, and humanitarian organizations are scrambling to pre-position supplies and personnel along Iran's borders.

Read more

International humanitarian law (IHL), also known as the laws of armed conflict, establishes strict rules governing the conduct of hostilities. The key principles are: distinction (parties must distinguish between combatants and civilians), proportionality (attacks must not cause civilian harm excessive relative to the anticipated military advantage), precaution (parties must take all feasible precautions to minimize civilian casualties), and military necessity (force may only be used to accomplish legitimate military objectives).

The Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols prohibit direct attacks on civilians, collective punishment, and the destruction of objects indispensable to civilian survival. Both the U.S. and Iran are bound by these rules. Violations can constitute war crimes under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The U.S. has stated it follows the Law of Armed Conflict in all operations. Iran has accused the U.S. and Israel of violating IHL through disproportionate strikes near population centers.

Read more

Yes. Internet monitoring organizations, including NetBlocks and Cloudflare Radar, have reported that Iran's internet connectivity has plummeted to approximately 4% of normal levels since the strikes began on February 28, 2026. This represents a near-total shutdown of both domestic and international internet traffic. Iran has a well-documented history of restricting internet access during crises — the government imposed near-complete shutdowns during the 2019 fuel protests and again during the 2022 Mahsa Amini protests.

Iran's internet infrastructure is centrally controlled through a limited number of international gateways, making nationwide shutdowns technically feasible. The blackout serves multiple purposes for the Iranian government: it prevents the spread of information about strike damage, limits the population's ability to organize protests, blocks OSINT analysts from accessing real-time imagery, and controls the narrative through state media. The shutdown has severely hampered humanitarian efforts and independent reporting from inside the country.

Read more

The U.S. decision to strike Iran stems from decades of escalating tensions, but the immediate catalysts include Iran's accelerating nuclear program, its proxy attacks on U.S. forces and allies, and the failure of diplomatic efforts. After the U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA nuclear deal in 2018, Iran progressively expanded its enrichment activities, eventually reaching 60% purity and approaching weapons-grade levels. Iran-backed militias repeatedly attacked U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria. The Houthi campaign against Red Sea shipping disrupted global trade.

Operation Midnight Hammer in June 2025 was the first direct U.S. strike on Iranian soil, targeting missile production facilities after an Iranian proxy attack killed U.S. service members. When intelligence indicated Iran was on the verge of nuclear breakout capability, the U.S. and Israel coordinated the larger February 28 operation. The administration argued the strikes were necessary to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran. Critics contend the strikes will accelerate rather than prevent Iran's nuclear ambitions.

Read more

Israel views a nuclear-armed Iran as an existential threat. Iranian leaders have repeatedly called for the destruction of Israel, and Iran funds and arms Hezbollah, Hamas, and other groups committed to attacking the Jewish state. Israel's decision to launch Operation Shield of Judah alongside the U.S. Operation Epic Fury was driven by several factors: intelligence assessments indicating Iran was within weeks of nuclear breakout capability, the opportunity to leverage U.S. military support, and the strategic window created by the weakening of Hezbollah following the 2024 Lebanon conflict.

Israel has a long history of preemptive strikes against nuclear threats, including the 1981 bombing of Iraq's Osirak reactor and the 2007 destruction of Syria's Al-Kibar reactor. Israeli leaders have stated that allowing Iran to acquire nuclear weapons would fundamentally alter the Middle East's strategic balance and pose an unacceptable risk to Israel's survival. The operation represents the culmination of years of Israeli planning and intelligence gathering on Iran's nuclear infrastructure.

Read more

Iran's key allies form what analysts call the CRINK alliance: China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea. Russia has deepened its relationship with Iran significantly since 2022, with Iran providing Shahed drones for Russia's war in Ukraine and Russia reportedly sharing advanced military technology in return. China is Iran's largest trading partner and oil buyer, often circumventing sanctions through shadow fleet tanker networks. North Korea and Iran have a long history of missile technology cooperation.

However, none of these allies are expected to intervene militarily — Russia is consumed by Ukraine, China prioritizes economic stability, and North Korea lacks force projection capability. Beyond CRINK, Iran maintains influence through its "Axis of Resistance" — a network of allied non-state actors including Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad in Gaza, and various Shia militia groups in Iraq and Syria. These proxies give Iran strategic depth and the ability to threaten adversaries across the region.

Read more

Iran's proxy network, often called the "Axis of Resistance," is a constellation of armed groups across the Middle East that receive funding, weapons, training, and strategic direction from Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and its Quds Force. The major components include: Hezbollah in Lebanon (an estimated 30,000+ fighters with 150,000+ rockets and missiles), the Houthi movement in Yemen (which has disrupted Red Sea shipping with anti-ship missiles and drones), and Shia militia groups in Iraq such as Kata'ib Hezbollah and Asa'ib Ahl al-Haq.

This network also includes Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad in Gaza, and various groups in Syria. It gives Iran the ability to project power across the region, threaten Israel from multiple directions, disrupt global energy supplies, and attack U.S. interests without direct Iranian military action. In the context of the current conflict, these proxies represent Iran's most potent tool for asymmetric retaliation against the U.S. and Israel.

Read more

NATO allies have responded with a range of positions following the February 28 strikes. The United Kingdom has expressed support for the U.S. and Israel's right to self-defense and has reportedly provided intelligence and logistical support. France and Germany have called for de-escalation while acknowledging the Iranian nuclear threat. Turkey, a NATO member that borders Iran, has called for an immediate ceasefire and warned against further escalation.

NATO as an institution has not invoked Article 5 (collective defense), as the strikes were offensive operations rather than a response to an armed attack on a member state. Several NATO countries are concerned about the economic fallout — European economies are particularly vulnerable to oil price spikes and potential disruptions to Middle Eastern trade routes. Overall, the alliance is divided between those supporting the strikes and those calling for immediate diplomatic engagement to prevent further escalation.

Read more

Yes, significant airspace closures and flight cancellations are affecting travel throughout the Middle East. The FAA has issued NOTAMs (Notices to Air Missions) prohibiting U.S. airlines from operating in Iranian airspace and much of Iraqi airspace. EASA (the European Aviation Safety Agency) has issued similar restrictions for European carriers. Iran has closed its entire airspace to civilian traffic. Neighboring countries including Iraq, Kuwait, and parts of Saudi Arabia have restricted portions of their airspace.

Major airlines including Emirates, Qatar Airways, Etihad, and Turkish Airlines have cancelled or rerouted flights to avoid the conflict zone, resulting in longer flight times and higher ticket prices. Dubai International Airport and Doha's Hamad International Airport remain operational but are experiencing disruptions. Several countries, including the U.S., UK, France, and Germany, have issued travel advisories warning against all travel to Iran and urging caution for the broader Middle East region.

Read more

Yes, cybersecurity agencies are warning of elevated risk. CISA (the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency) issued an urgent advisory on February 28 warning that Iranian state-sponsored cyber actors are likely to conduct retaliatory cyber operations against U.S. critical infrastructure. Iran has a well-documented history of offensive cyber operations: APT33 (Elfin), APT34 (OilRig), and APT35 (Charming Kitten) are among the known Iranian threat groups.

Past Iranian cyber attacks have targeted U.S. banks (2012–2013 DDoS attacks), a New York dam's control system (2013), and Saudi Aramco (the 2012 Shamoon wiper attack that destroyed 30,000 computers). Potential targets include energy infrastructure, water treatment facilities, financial systems, and healthcare networks. Individuals should ensure their devices are updated, enable multi-factor authentication, be vigilant against phishing emails referencing the Iran conflict, and back up important data. Businesses should review their incident response plans and monitor CISA alerts.

Read more

With Iran's internet at approximately 4% of normal capacity and both sides engaged in information warfare, verifying claims about the conflict requires careful use of multiple sources. Reliable approaches include: monitoring established news agencies with on-the-ground correspondents (AP, Reuters, AFP); checking satellite imagery from commercial providers like Maxar Technologies and Planet Labs; following verified OSINT (Open-Source Intelligence) analysts who use geolocation and chronolocation techniques to verify videos and images; and consulting official statements from the Pentagon, IDF, and IAEA while noting their institutional perspectives.

Be cautious of: unverified social media posts, recycled footage from previous conflicts, deepfake or AI-generated content, and claims from state media on either side without independent corroboration. Think tanks like the Institute for the Study of War, CSIS, and the International Crisis Group provide valuable independent analysis. Cross-referencing multiple independent sources before accepting any claim as fact is essential during fast-moving conflicts.

Read more