‘Next war with Israel will be final': High-ranking Iranian official to RT
The source, described as 'informed,' said Tehran had identified vulnerabilities in Israel's security during the most recent 12-day conflict, which ended with a US-brokered ceasefire.
'Iran will make the next war with Israel its last war,' the source claimed, adding that the Islamic Republic could launch hundreds of missiles daily in the event of another conflict. The source added that Tehran had 'found the [Israeli] regime's weak point.'
According to the source, Iranian authorities have 'unprecedented social support' from the population at home, as well as Iranians living abroad, to use a 'historic opportunity to permanently neutralize the Israeli regime's threat.'
They insisted that while the Islamic Republic's leadership is well aware that the US would likely come to Israel's rescue should it once again engage Iran militarily, Tehran 'will overcome this challenge.'The comments come after the latest round of hostilities between Iran and Israel earlier this month, when the Israeli military targeted Iranian nuclear and military sites, citing concerns that Tehran was nearing a nuclear weapons capability.
The Israeli strikes reportedly killed several senior commanders and scientists, as well as hundreds of civilians, according to Iranian accounts.
In response, Iran launched barrages of drones and missiles at Israeli targets and at the US Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar. The United States then carried out strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities, including enrichment sites at Natanz and Fordow.
Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei later claimed that Iran's retaliatory strikes had 'practically crushed' Israel's military capacity, but warned that US intervention prevented a complete Iranian victory.
The ceasefire, negotiated by Washington, has so far held. However, tensions remain high, with US President Donald Trump warning of renewed strikes if Iran continues to pursue nuclear weapons, a charge Tehran denies. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has also suggested that further attacks on Iranian facilities are possible.
Independent confirmation of Iranian missile stockpiles or damage assessments from the recent fighting remains limited. Analysts have cautioned that Iranian statements about overwhelming Israel's defenses may be exaggerated, although Tehran's missile arsenal is widely regarded as one of the largest in the region.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
6 hours ago
- Russia Today
Another war, another trip, another ask: Netanyahu returns to Washington
Fresh off a bruising 12-day war with Iran, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is flying back to Washington. This will be his third visit to the US since Donald Trump returned to the White House – but arguably the most consequential. For Netanyahu, it's more than a diplomatic courtesy call: it's a chance to cash in on battlefield momentum, convert military theatrics into political capital, and solidify his standing with Israel's most crucial ally. According to Israeli media, Netanyahu's agenda goes beyond flag-waving and photo ops. He's expected to push forward on defense cooperation, intelligence sharing, and a new trade deal. But above all, he wants to translate Israel's perceived tactical success into long-term strategic advantage – ensuring that Washington remains firmly aligned with Israeli goals on regional security. Leaked reports suggest that the prime minister's diplomatic playbook includes more than bilateral handshakes. One of the most sensitive issues on the table is the future of the Golan Heights. Sources say Israel has quietly renewed contacts with Syria's new leadership under Abu Mohammad al-Julani – a former jihadist now vying for international legitimacy. Behind closed doors, officials are floating the idea of a partial agreement in which Syria might recognize Israel's control over the Golan, in exchange for security coordination and regional stabilization. But there's a catch: a real deal would demand Israeli concessions, and Netanyahu, still projecting strength, seems unwilling to budge. US officials are aware of these backchannel discussions and are said to be involved at key moments – though how far they're willing to go remains unclear. On paper, Israel's military operation dealt a heavy blow to Iran's infrastructure, damaging key parts of its nuclear program and military network. But at home, the narrative isn't so tidy. The Iranian regime didn't collapse – far from it. Instead, Iranian society rallied around its leadership, framing the conflict as a defense of national sovereignty. In Israel, critics argue that Netanyahu oversold the war's objectives and underdelivered on its results. The war left other wounds too. Dozens of Israeli hostages remain in Hamas custody – a painful, unresolved issue. Despite media efforts to frame the prime minister as a wartime leader, Netanyahu is facing sharp questions not just from his political opponents, but from restless members of his own coalition. According to Haaretz, the Trump administration is growing impatient. US officials are urging Israel to suspend active operations in Gaza and prioritize a deal to bring home the hostages. The message from Washington is blunt: finish the humanitarian business now; total victory can wait. The newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth reports that Netanyahu's tone has shifted. His previous rhetoric about 'total victory' has been quietly replaced by talk of 'humanitarian obligations' and 'pragmatic solutions.' That shift may signal a soft pivot toward a temporary truce. Meanwhile, Channel 12 notes that the Israel Defense Forces are pressing the government to define a clear path forward. Should Israel double down and seize full control of Gaza – or cut a deal with Hamas for a phased prisoner exchange? According to military sources, the army favors the second option, seeing it as more realistic and less likely to spiral into chaos. In the lead-up to the Washington summit, Israeli Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer arrived in the US to test the waters and align messaging. Around the same time, the US approved a new $510 million defense contract with Israel, including over 7,000 sets of precision-guided JDAM munitions. The juxtaposition is striking: even as Washington pushes for de-escalation in Gaza, it continues to arm its closest Middle Eastern ally. The signal is mixed – and may reflect internal divisions within the Trump administration about how hard to press Israel toward restraint. At the heart of the current deadlock is the question of a ceasefire. Hamas has proposed an immediate and full halt to hostilities, along with the complete withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza. Israel has rejected the offer – unwilling to hand over military leverage without securing the return of its citizens. With roughly 50 hostages still held in Gaza, the pressure on Netanyahu is mounting. But the path to an agreement remains narrow and treacherous. Mistrust runs deep, and the window for compromise is closing fast. It's no secret that Trump sees himself as a dealmaker – especially in the Middle East. His declared 'victory' over Iran has set the stage for a new diplomatic push. If he can now broker a ceasefire in Gaza and bring Israeli hostages home, it would be a headline-grabbing foreign policy win ahead of his domestic battles. But Netanyahu isn't rushing to help Trump craft his legacy. The prime minister remains wary: despite public praise from the US president, he's received no guarantees on issues closer to home – such as immunity from prosecution in his two ongoing corruption trials. These criminal cases are more than a legal headache – they're a political time bomb. Trump's vocal support, including recent calls to drop the charges, may play well with Netanyahu's base, but they've stirred unease among Israeli institutions. Some officials see this transatlantic alliance as an attempt to shield the prime minister from accountability. Within Israel, any deal with Hamas – especially one that involves concessions – risks alienating Netanyahu's hardline supporters. For a leader trying to balance survival with statesmanship, the choices are narrowing. A rift is forming between Washington and West Jerusalem. Trump wants swift results – a diplomatic breakthrough that he can sell as evidence of his leadership. Netanyahu, by contrast, is playing a slower game: buying time, protecting his flank, and avoiding decisions that might weaken him politically. Whether they can bridge this gap will define the outcome of the upcoming talks. For Trump, success means a dramatic headline: 'I stopped the war.' For Netanyahu, it's about navigating the storm without sinking. In an ideal scenario – at least from West Jerusalem's point of view – Trump might back a new Israeli campaign against Iran. That would offer Netanyahu a cleaner battlefield, clearer objectives, and the chance to write a more triumphant chapter in his political story. But for now, both leaders are walking a tightrope – balancing war, diplomacy, and ambition – hoping not to fall before the next election.
Russia Today
8 hours ago
- Russia Today
How much should America pay to keep Netanyahu in power?
Fresh off a bruising 12-day war with Iran, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is flying back to Washington. This will be his third visit to the US since Donald Trump returned to the White House – but arguably the most consequential. For Netanyahu, it's more than a diplomatic courtesy call: it's a chance to cash in on battlefield momentum, convert military theatrics into political capital, and solidify his standing with Israel's most crucial ally. According to Israeli media, Netanyahu's agenda goes beyond flag-waving and photo ops. He's expected to push forward on defense cooperation, intelligence sharing, and a new trade deal. But above all, he wants to translate Israel's perceived tactical success into long-term strategic advantage – ensuring that Washington remains firmly aligned with Israeli goals on regional security. Leaked reports suggest that the prime minister's diplomatic playbook includes more than bilateral handshakes. One of the most sensitive issues on the table is the future of the Golan Heights. Sources say Israel has quietly renewed contacts with Syria's new leadership under Abu Mohammad al-Julani – a former jihadist now vying for international legitimacy. Behind closed doors, officials are floating the idea of a partial agreement in which Syria might recognize Israel's control over the Golan, in exchange for security coordination and regional stabilization. But there's a catch: a real deal would demand Israeli concessions, and Netanyahu, still projecting strength, seems unwilling to budge. US officials are aware of these backchannel discussions and are said to be involved at key moments – though how far they're willing to go remains unclear. On paper, Israel's military operation dealt a heavy blow to Iran's infrastructure, damaging key parts of its nuclear program and military network. But at home, the narrative isn't so tidy. The Iranian regime didn't collapse – far from it. Instead, Iranian society rallied around its leadership, framing the conflict as a defense of national sovereignty. In Israel, critics argue that Netanyahu oversold the war's objectives and underdelivered on its results. The war left other wounds too. Dozens of Israeli hostages remain in Hamas custody – a painful, unresolved issue. Despite media efforts to frame the prime minister as a wartime leader, Netanyahu is facing sharp questions not just from his political opponents, but from restless members of his own coalition. According to Haaretz, the Trump administration is growing impatient. US officials are urging Israel to suspend active operations in Gaza and prioritize a deal to bring home the hostages. The message from Washington is blunt: finish the humanitarian business now; total victory can wait. The newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth reports that Netanyahu's tone has shifted. His previous rhetoric about 'total victory' has been quietly replaced by talk of 'humanitarian obligations' and 'pragmatic solutions.' That shift may signal a soft pivot toward a temporary truce. Meanwhile, Channel 12 notes that the Israel Defense Forces are pressing the government to define a clear path forward. Should Israel double down and seize full control of Gaza – or cut a deal with Hamas for a phased prisoner exchange? According to military sources, the army favors the second option, seeing it as more realistic and less likely to spiral into chaos. In the lead-up to the Washington summit, Israeli Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer arrived in the US to test the waters and align messaging. Around the same time, the US approved a new $510 million defense contract with Israel, including over 7,000 sets of precision-guided JDAM munitions. The juxtaposition is striking: even as Washington pushes for de-escalation in Gaza, it continues to arm its closest Middle Eastern ally. The signal is mixed – and may reflect internal divisions within the Trump administration about how hard to press Israel toward restraint. At the heart of the current deadlock is the question of a ceasefire. Hamas has proposed an immediate and full halt to hostilities, along with the complete withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza. Israel has rejected the offer – unwilling to hand over military leverage without securing the return of its citizens. With roughly 50 hostages still held in Gaza, the pressure on Netanyahu is mounting. But the path to an agreement remains narrow and treacherous. Mistrust runs deep, and the window for compromise is closing fast. It's no secret that Trump sees himself as a dealmaker – especially in the Middle East. His declared 'victory' over Iran has set the stage for a new diplomatic push. If he can now broker a ceasefire in Gaza and bring Israeli hostages home, it would be a headline-grabbing foreign policy win ahead of his domestic battles. But Netanyahu isn't rushing to help Trump craft his legacy. The prime minister remains wary: despite public praise from the US president, he's received no guarantees on issues closer to home – such as immunity from prosecution in his two ongoing corruption trials. These criminal cases are more than a legal headache – they're a political time bomb. Trump's vocal support, including recent calls to drop the charges, may play well with Netanyahu's base, but they've stirred unease among Israeli institutions. Some officials see this transatlantic alliance as an attempt to shield the prime minister from accountability. Within Israel, any deal with Hamas – especially one that involves concessions – risks alienating Netanyahu's hardline supporters. For a leader trying to balance survival with statesmanship, the choices are narrowing. A rift is forming between Washington and West Jerusalem. Trump wants swift results – a diplomatic breakthrough that he can sell as evidence of his leadership. Netanyahu, by contrast, is playing a slower game: buying time, protecting his flank, and avoiding decisions that might weaken him politically. Whether they can bridge this gap will define the outcome of the upcoming talks. For Trump, success means a dramatic headline: 'I stopped the war.' For Netanyahu, it's about navigating the storm without sinking. In an ideal scenario – at least from West Jerusalem's point of view – Trump might back a new Israeli campaign against Iran. That would offer Netanyahu a cleaner battlefield, clearer objectives, and the chance to write a more triumphant chapter in his political story. But for now, both leaders are walking a tightrope – balancing war, diplomacy, and ambition – hoping not to fall before the next election.
Russia Today
9 hours ago
- Russia Today
Iran moved its enriched uranium before US strikes
Last month's US strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities failed to hit the country's stockpile of highly enriched uranium, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh has claimed, citing US officials. The attack, which involved seven US B-2 'Spirit' bombers carrying 30,000-pound bunker busters, was not even expected to 'obliterate' the Iranian nuclear program, one of the journalist's sources admitted. 'The centrifuges may have survived and 400 pounds of 60% enriched uranium are missing,' one of the officials said, adding that the US bombs 'could not be assured to penetrate the centrifuge chamber . . . too deep.' The lack of radioactivity at the targeted Iranian nuclear sites – specifically Fordow and Isfahan – following the attack suggest that the enriched uranium stockpile had been moved ahead of time, one US official familiar with the matter said. Fordow, an underground complex built deep inside a mountain that many believed housed the stockpiles, was a particular focus of the attack. The US officials cited by Hersh nevertheless believe that the location of the stockpile and its fate are 'irrelevant' because of the serious damage the strike allegedly dealt to another Iranian nuclear site near the city of Isfahan. The goal of the operation was to 'prevent the Iranians from building a nuclear weapon in the near term – a year or so – with the hope they would not try again,' a US official told Hersh. This could translate into 'a couple of years of respite and uncertain future,' the official added. Following the strikes, US President Donald Trump claimed that the attack 'completely and totally obliterated' Iran's nuclear program. CIA Director John Ratcliffe also told lawmakers that several key sites had been completely destroyed and would take years to rebuild. However, intercepted communications suggested that Tehran had expected a worse impact from the strikes and that the real damage was limited, the Washington Post reported. The strikes were part of a coordinated American-Israeli military campaign launched in mid-June. The Israel Defense Force bombed Iranian targets, claiming that Tehran was close to being able to build a nuclear weapon. Hersh believes that Israel was the 'immediate beneficiary' of the US strike. West Jerusalem does not officially acknowledge possessing nuclear weapons. The Jewish State may still have up to 90 nuclear warheads at its disposal, according to a recent report by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).
