Aftermath of an Iranian strike on Tel Aviv, February 28th

Kit Klarenberg

As the criminal Zionist-American war on Iran enters its second month, the conflict has proven so ruinous for the aggressors that dire alarm is being widely sounded. Embarrassing failure to subdue the Islamic Republic from the air has raised the prospect of a US ground operation of some kind, widely perceived as a suicide mission. Washington has also burned through over 850 Tomahawk missiles and 1,000 air-defense interceptors, at a rate the Pentagon finds “alarming”. In the process, Israel is rapidly approaching total disarmament.

On March 24th, elite British state-connected ‘think tank’ RUSI published a withering post mortem of the war’s first 16 days. An in-house “ledger tool” tracking the “intense consumption of advanced munitions” by the US and Zionist entity calculates 11,294 fires over this period, which cost a total of approximately $26 billion to produce. Resultantly, US – and thus Israeli – inventories of long-range interceptors and precision strike weapons “are nearing exhaustion.” And it will perhaps cost double that staggering amount to replenish what has been lost.

The Resistance shows no signs of slowing its onslaught, with every indication Tehran’s munitions production continues apace in wartime. Even the Western media has acknowledged Iran’s drone and missile arsenal costs a fraction to produce of the past and future outlay involved in shooting them down. Per RUSI, the war on Iran has exposed a “critical vulnerability” at the core of the Empire’s warfighting capabilities: a “strategically ruinous cost-exchange ratio that the West’s industrial capacity is not prepared to sustain.”

Over a dozen different munitions were fired by the US and Israel over the conflict’s first 16 days, “at a rate that appears to be unsustainable.” Now, Tehran’s relentless barrage “continues to drain the coalition’s most critical assets” – RUSI calculates missile and drone attacks have averaged 33 and 94 strikes daily, on average. By contrast, the organisation’s analysis shows “the magazine abyss” for Washington and Tel Aviv is “coming soon”. Moreover, Rheinmetall’s CEO has cautioned the Empire’s global munitions stockpiles are “empty or nearly empty.”

The Zionist-American war on Iran has thus become “a contest of endurance,” in which “the decisive advantage shifts to the actor that can sustain its defensive economy and replenish its most critical assets.” Based on current battle trends, the Islamic Republic firmly holds that advantage, and will continue to do so. The US could be mere weeks away from running out of ground-attack missiles – including much-vaunted ATACMS – and THAAD interceptors. RUSI similarly forecasts Israel’s Arrow interceptors will “likely” be “completely expended” come April.

On top of enormous expense, even at pre-war production levels, it would take years to replace what was spent in just over two weeks against Iran. As this journalist documented on March 24th, Tehran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz has thrown the Empire’s already shattered defence industrial base into total disarray. Commodities and components central to constructing and maintaining digital and electronic systems, and precision-guided munitions, which hitherto transited the Strait daily in abundance are now scarcer and ever-rising in cost.

‘Constant Alert’

Iran has not only overwhelmed and disarmed the Zionist entity and imperial targets throughout West Asia via systematic, staggered blitzes of drones and missiles. Crippling at least 12 US and allied radars and satellite terminals throughout the region has dented interception rates far further, while increasing the number of munitions necessary to shoot down the latest barrage blasted from Tehran – often unsuccessfully. Up to 11 Patriot interceptors can be fired at an Iranian missile, up to eight at a single drone.

As a March 26th report by highly influential Zionist ‘think tank’ JINSA observes, “Iran’s attacks have imposed mounting costs on every component of the defensive architecture.” The Islamic Republic entered the conflict “with a deliberate plan to degrade US and [allied] capabilities by attacking each element of their air defense architectures.” In the process, “some of the most capable and expensive sensors” in Washington’s global inventory have been destroyed, with little chance of near-term repair.

These sensors in many cases explicitly provide the Zionist entity with an “early warning” system. A gaping and ever-widening hole has thus been torn in Tel Aviv’s detection and warning network. As such, Iranian drone swarms – “frequently drawing on Russian tactical innovations from the Ukraine war” – are routinely proving “far harder to detect and defeat” than missiles, hitting twice the number of targets with pinpoint accuracy. Some US sensor systems cannot detect low-altitude Shahed volleys – including those specifically designed to counter drones.

It is not just Shaheds that have wreaked havoc. The entire Resistance is increasingly deploying fiber-optic guided drones “immune to electronic warfare jamming,” and first-person-view drones “for precision strikes against point targets,” JINSA reports. Other Iranian drones are equipped with jet engines, making them significantly faster than Shaheds, and interception even more problematic. As the conflict evolves too, Tehran has increasingly relied on ballistic missiles carrying cluster warheads, which release up to 80 submunitions at high altitude that scatter across areas spanning several miles.

JINSA assesses over half of the total Iranian missiles fired during this conflict to date carried cluster warheads, compared with three known uses during the calamitous 12 Day War. “Even a successful intercept does not guarantee the bomblets are stopped” – if interceptors fail to strike these missiles before they reenter the Earth’s atmosphere, they still disperse submunitions in the air, or release them upon impact. These attacks don’t deliberately target Israeli civilians, but nonetheless make daily life miserable for the settler colony’s population:

“Smaller, more frequent Iranian salvos keep civilian populations under constant alert…[This] shortens the time between attacks while reducing overall lethality, trading mass effect for persistence to wear down daily life. Warheads with cluster munitions amplify these disruptions by increasing the chance that submunitions or debris fall in populated areas…Israel’s decision not to fire against all incoming ballistic missiles carrying cluster munitions also suggests a need to ration interceptors.”

‘Highly Capable’

However, the Resistance is predominantly concerned with fulfilling its “deliberate plan to degrade” US and Israeli defensive capabilities, to drive the former out of West Asia permanently and make the region safe for Palestine’s final liberation. On this score, JINSA notes the “devastating effects” of Iran’s drones and missile barrages on supposedly invulnerable targets. For example, the Pentagon estimates a single Resistance strike on the US Navy Fifth Fleet headquarters in Bahrain cost approximately $200 million.

It’s one of over a dozen US bases in the Gulf to sustain “significant damage.” Fighter jets have been destroyed, American soldiers injured and killed in sizeable numbers, and survivors sent scurrying to local hotels. Iran has resolved to target these makeshift, remote bases. Concurrently, the Empire’s local air defense batteries are thoroughly preoccupied with “sufficiently defending” devastated US military installations, “to create the conditions for additional assets and repair teams to flow into theater.”

When they will arrive, how long they will take to restore what has been lost, and whether doing so will be remotely safe, remains to be seen. Meanwhile, “Iranian fire against shipping in the Gulf has proven even harder to stop than attacks on land targets.” Over half of known Resistance projectiles fired at vessels in the Gulf and Strait of Hormuz have hit their targets. With Gulf governments depleting almost their entire interceptor stocks since February 28th, what comes next could be catastrophic:

To say the least, from the Empire’s perspective, none of this should be happening. The Zionist-American war on Iran was intended to be a one-sided aerial gangbeating lasting only a few days, which would culminate with the Islamic Republic’s collapse, or at least total capitulation. There was seemingly no sense in Washington, Tel Aviv, or other imperial centres of power that Tehran could fight back at all, let alone bring America’s military machine to its knees.

Yet, the inevitable upshot of kickstarting a major conflict with the Resistance was entirely predictable, and indeed widely predicted. None other than JINSA released an assessment in September 2024 warning how Iran had developed a “large and highly capable missile and drone force,” designed to render US bases in West Asia “unuseable” and “overwhelm” air defences. JINSA acknowledged this capacity posed a dire threat to the Zionist entity and regional US assets – but argued more missile interceptors could sufficiently counter the menace.

That appraisal was authored by former CENTCOM commander Frank McKenzie, who oversaw the Empire’s disastrous retreat from Afghanistan. On March 20th, he openly boasted how the war on Iran was unfolding according to a strategy drawn up by CENTCOM over “many years”, and “my fingerprints are on this war plan.” McKenzie’s failure to take known threats seriously, and delusional belief in the ultimate invincibility – and inexhaustibility – of US and Israeli air defences, surely accounts for the conflict rebounding so spectacularly against the aggressors.

[…]

Via https://libya360.wordpress.com/2026/04/01/collapsing-empire-the-resistance-disarms-israel/

Tamjid Kobaissy

Southern Lebanon is witnessing escalating clashes, with resistance tactics sustaining a war of attrition against Israeli forces and limiting their battlefield progress.

A month after the start of the Israeli offensive on Lebanon, fighting in southern Lebanon continues to intensify within a highly complex battlefield environment. As the operation enters its second month, a clear field dynamic is taking shape – one defined by a focused attrition strategy imposed by Hezbollah, which manages engagements in a way that steadily increases the cost for advancing Israeli forces.

The ongoing ground operations in southern Lebanon fall within an asymmetric confrontation between the Israeli enemy’s army – as a conventional military force with air and technological superiority – and a non-conventional resistance that does not operate according to traditional military doctrine. Hezbollah does not rely on fixed territorial control or linear defense lines; instead, it employs a guerrilla warfare model based on operational flexibility, dispersion, ambushes, and concentrated strikes within a cumulative attrition framework targeting the Israel’s manpower and logistical capabilities.

According to field sources, the enemy’s ground incursions are distributed across several main axes, each with its own geographic and tactical characteristics, as follows:

Khiam axis

Khiam is a vital axis for the Israeli enemy due to its connection to villages where the resistance has no presence, as well as its linkage to the western Bekaa and the occupied Syrian territories – making it a corridor between Lebanon and Syria.
Hezbollah’s tactic here is based on steadfastness and defense through establishing combat pockets within the town, supported by fire from the second line in surrounding villages. So far, the Israel has not been able to fully control Khiam; its presence is limited to parts of it, while Hezbollah remains present. This axis also carries a retaliatory dimension for Israel due to the losses it sustained in attempts to seize it during the 2006 and 2024 wars.

Taybeh–Qantara axis

Taybeh represents the operational flank. Israeli forces aim to reach Wadi al-Hujeir after controlling Qantara, then advance toward the Litani River.
Here, Hezbollah adopts a different tactic than in Khiam – offensive attrition aimed at inflicting the maximum possible human and logistical losses on the enemy. Israeli troops are currently present inside Taybeh and are attempting to consolidate their positions, while the resistance continues targeting soldiers, tanks, and vehicles.

As for Qantara, it remains a close-range engagement zone. Meanwhile, nearby villages (Odaisseh, Rab al-Thalatheen, Kfar Kila, and parts of Markaba) are used as part of a tactic targeting enemy depth. These areas were previously under Israeli control and sustained extensive damage during earlier conflicts, the 60-day withdrawal period following a so-called ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon in 2024, and over the past 15 months.

The key question here is not whether the enemy can reach Wadi al-Hujeir, but rather the operational cost it will incur in doing so – especially since the resistance is not a conventional army and has not defined holding these villages as a strategic objective.

Naqoura axis

The Naqoura axis is a border extension along the coastal strip facing the Blue Line near the Lebanese–Palestinian border. Israel seeks to establish a buffer zone, secure its land and maritime borders, and target Hezbollah’s missile capabilities.
The area is wooded, and villages are connected through orchards, providing effective natural cover for the resistance forces. Another objective is to isolate this axis from its depth in the Tyre (Sur) region and cut supply and reinforcement lines.

Bint Jbeil axis

Field data indicates that Israel has begun troop mobilization and fire preparation for entering Bint Jbeil, which represents a vulnerable flank due to nearby villages where the resistance has no presence. It also holds significant symbolic importance in Israeli consciousness since 2000, following the famous statement by the late Hezbollah secretary-general Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah: “Israel is weaker than a spider’s web.”
This symbolism makes the city both a practical and psychological target. The resistance’s tactic is centered on preventing the city from falling.

Qawzah Axis (Qawzah–Beit Lif–Ramiya Triangle)

The “Qawzah–Beit Lif–Ramiya” triangle forms a strategic border axis, with its villages located on medium elevations overlooking surrounding areas, making it highly sensitive to ground movement and exchanges of fire.
Israel seeks to establish a buffer zone to secure its land borders and degrade the resistance’s missile capabilities. The terrain consists of forests and orchards connected to the villages, providing natural concealment for Hezbollah forces. Meanwhile, adjacent villages lack a resistance presence, making this axis a vulnerable flank that can be exploited, while also restricting military movement due to internal considerations.

General field situation and tactics

After approximately a month since the start of operations, Israeli forces remain positioned within the first line (border villages and the direct line of contact), without achieving a decisive breakthrough into deeper areas due to the ongoing attrition imposed by Hezbollah.

In contrast, the resistance adopts a tactic of allowing limited advances in certain front lines, then exhausting enemy forces from the second line through continuous fire or direct engagement. Unofficial field estimates indicate that the Israeli army has suffered significant human losses, estimated in the hundreds of killed and wounded (possibly reaching around 700), in addition to the targeting of more than 100 Merkava tanks according to data from the Hezbollah’s military media, as well as a number of vehicles and bulldozers. This level of losses would have been sufficient, under previous circumstances, to halt operations.

Hezbollah is currently following a gradual approach in the use of weapons and combat units, while maintaining full command, control, and communication  – reflecting substantial remaining capabilities. The cohesion of the communication system among the central operations room, axis-level command rooms, and combat units is evident, as reflected in improved military and organizational performance and the rapid transmission of field information.

The resistance operates according to an anti-maneuver doctrine rooted in guerrilla warfare, benefiting from a cohesive command-and-control structure and sustained supply lines. In contrast, the enemy suffers from intelligence shortcomings that limit the effectiveness of its isolation-based strategies. Accordingly, the confrontation is taking shape as a struggle between a maneuver-based approach aimed at fragmenting the front  – led by the Israeli army  – and a systematic attrition strategy aimed at exhausting the attacking force and preventing its consolidation  – led by Hezbollah.

Meanwhile, the Israeli army relies on an operational approach based on maneuver through encirclement and isolation rather than direct assault, with the aim of reducing human losses and accelerating the achievement of a field accomplishment that can be exploited for media purposes. This is pursued through attempts to fragment the Hezbollah’s combat structure into isolated pockets and to cut supply lines between the first and second lines south of the Litani River.

The enemy’s strategic dilemma

Israel is fighting without a clear strategic vision, as its declared operations aim to secure northern occupied Palestine and establish a buffer zone for the same purpose. However, even reaching the Litani River does not guarantee the neutralization of Hezbollah’s missile capability, which continues to pose the same threat to the north.

The options available to the enemy include a full-scale invasion to militarily eliminate the resistance  – an option considered impossible under current conditions, given the deteriorated state of its army and its ongoing attrition. This reality was acknowledged by the Israeli Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir himself, who warned of the risk of the army’s collapse if confrontations continue in this manner.

The realistic option, therefore, is to move toward an agreement and indirect negotiations, or to achieve a limited field accomplishment by reaching Wadi al-Hujeir and taking photographs near the Litani River, accompanied by media momentum alongside a diplomatic track.

The media dimension is evident in the visit of Israeli Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir to Tel al-Awida in Kfar Kila and the visit of the army spokesperson to Odaisseh. These actions are presented as media maneuvers, as the two villages had previously been under Israeli control before the war, and are not considered to be deep within Lebanese territory as claimed. These media representations are intended to compensate for the absence of real field achievements.

Recovery of the resistance

In this regard, statements by Hezbollah Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem regarding military recovery appear accurate. A clear improvement in performance is evident compared to the “Operation Al-Bas” battle, where combat was more individual in nature under the concept of fighters’ “field judgment,” and coordination gaps were apparent, particularly when local commanders were killed.

Today, however, operational plans and alternatives are in place, and earlier logistical and positioning problems have been addressed. This development has pushed the enemy to target bridges and roads, especially since, during “Operation Al-Bas,” there were significant difficulties in manpower logistics.

Firepower and technical capabilities

Hezbollah has demonstrated the continued effectiveness of its missile capabilities, with a clear recovery in its rocket units, reflected in long-range salvos reaching up to 200 kilometers (the Gaza envelope).

It has also shown capabilities in air defense, having succeeded in downing several drones and even attempting to target Israeli warplanes and force them to retreat – particularly in the skies over Beirut, marking a first in the history of the resistance.

In addition, Hezbollah maintains capabilities in anti-armor warfare and drone operations. The use of FPV suicide drones with high maneuverability and precision has become prominent, drawing on experience from the Russia–Ukraine war.

Despite the enemy’s technological superiority and aerial dominance, the resistance retains strong reconnaissance capabilities, overcoming obstacles created by enemy fortifications and constant aerial surveillance.

Security level

A source within the resistance’s security apparatus indicates that the recent targeting operations and assassinations resulted from individual security breaches rather than from a structural intelligence penetration, reflecting the cohesion of the Hezbollah’s security system.

The pattern of targets chosen by Israel reveals a state of intelligence blindness. The majority of airstrikes have targeted “security-burned” locations or sites of institutional or civilian character, which suggests a degradation in the effectiveness of the Israeli army’s target bank.

In a related context, the Israeli General Security Service (Shin Bet) issued exceptional instructions, most notably a ban on mobile phones and a complete prohibition on ministers and Knesset members visiting front-line areas in the western and central sectors until further notice. This was accompanied by changes in camouflage protocols, including the use of disguised civilian vehicles when necessary, after it was confirmed that Hezbollah is capable of identifying leadership convoys.

These measures followed an alleged attempt by the resistance to assassinate Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz during a tour in southern Lebanon, according to Israeli media. Opposition leader Yair Lapid launched an attack on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, describing the incident as a “catastrophic intelligence failure.”

Accordingly, this is considered a shock achieved by Hezbollah’s military intelligence unit, alongside its identification of newly established enemy positions and military sites.

Unity of fronts

In this war, the unity of fronts between Iran and its strategic allies is clearly evident, both at the military and political levels.

On the military level, coordination serves as a decisive factor that undermines any enemy attempt at isolation, as clearly demonstrated through field operational coordination.

On the political level, the unity of fronts is reflected in a coordinated stance at the regional and international tables, whereby battlefield gains are translated into diplomatic strength and attempts at isolation or pressure on the resistance are thwarted.

Mousawi: “No current prospect for agreements; the war is long”

Meanwhile, the official in charge of resources and borders in Hezbollah, Sayyed Nawaf al-Mousawi, stated in a private interview that “conditions have not yet matured for any agreements, and we remain in the heart of the battle,” stressing that “the focus now is on fighting in the field, and there is no prospect for agreements at the present time.”

[…]

Via https://libya360.wordpress.com/2026/04/01/inside-south-lebanon-hezbollahs-war-of-attrition-reshapes-the-battlefield/

Rafa Gomez Martín

Alberta has entered a historic chapter.

This week, organizers confirmed that the movement for an Alberta independence referendum has officially passed the required threshold of 177,000 verified signatures, clearing the final legal barrier for a vote set to take place on October 19th.

According to the organizers behind the petition, signatures continue to pour in even after the requirement was met — a sign of the momentum and frustration that have been building across the province.

For many Albertans, this referendum is the result of years of tension with Ottawa, fueled by policies that have targeted the province’s energy sector, restricted development, and undermined the economic backbone of Western Canada. Residents and local leaders argue that Alberta has carried the financial weight of the federation while receiving little more than political pushback in return.

The announcement marks a dramatic turning point in Canada’s national landscape.
Independence movements have existed before, but none had crossed the official threshold required to trigger a formal vote — until now. This makes Alberta the first province to force a federal showdown over sovereignty in the modern era.

Political analysts say the development could reshape the country’s balance of power, testing Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s already strained relationship with Western regions. The federal government, por su parte, has avoided making strong public comments, aware that any misstep could inflate separatist sentiment even further.

Local supporters describe the referendum as an opportunity to reclaim economic freedom, protect the energy industry, and escape federal policies they view as punitive. Critics, however, warn that independence could bring uncertainty, economic disruption, and challenges around currency, borders, and international agreements.

Still, the energy on the ground tells a clear story: Albertans want their voice heard, and they are no longer willing to wait for Ottawa to acknowledge their grievances.

As signature collection continues, organizers say the campaign will shift toward public education, rallies, and preparation for what could become the most consequential vote in Alberta’s history.

[…]

Via https://gatewayhispanic.com/2026/03/alberta-surpasses-177000-signatures-officially-triggering-its-independence/