Operation Epic Fury: The Day the US and Israel Struck Iran — and Iran Struck Back

At 8:14 a.m. Tehran time on Saturday, a mother in the Seyed Khandan district heard what she thought was thunder. By 8:16, her windows were gone.

Across Iran's capital, seven missiles slammed into the compound of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Satellite images later showed the complex — home to the nerve center of Iran's theocratic government — heavily damaged or destroyed. Khamenei hasn't been heard from since.

That was just the opening salvo.

Two codenames, one operation

Israel called it Operation Roaring Lion. The Pentagon called it Operation Epic Fury. Whatever the name, it was the largest joint US-Israeli military operation in history.

The Israeli Air Force launched roughly 200 fighter jets — its biggest combat sortie ever — hitting 500 military targets across western and central Iran. The US struck from aircraft carriers and regional air bases. Targets spanned five cities: Tehran, Isfahan, Qom, Karaj, and Kermanshah.

They hit nuclear facilities. Ballistic missile infrastructure. Radar installations. Leadership compounds. The IRGC Navy frigate Jamaran. The port city of Bushehr. Senior IRGC commanders Aziz Nasirzadeh and Mohammad Pakpour were killed. Supreme National Security Council Secretary Ali Shamkhani was also reported dead.

Iran's internet dropped to 4% of normal levels within hours.

Trump's pitch: regime change

Two hours after the first explosions, Donald Trump released an 8-minute video. The message was blunt: this isn't about containment. It's about toppling the regime.

"When we are finished, take over your government," Trump told the Iranian people. "It will be yours to take. This will be probably your only chance for generations."

He offered IRGC members a binary: lay down your weapons and receive immunity, or face "certain death." Netanyahu echoed the framing, calling on Iranians to "cast off the yoke of tyranny."

The stated objectives: destroy Iran's missile capabilities, prevent nuclear weapons, and create conditions for the Iranian people to overthrow their government.

Iran hits back — everywhere

Tehran's response was immediate and wide. Dozens of ballistic missiles flew toward Israel and US military bases across seven countries.

The targets: Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar. Ali Al Salem Air Base in Kuwait. Al Dhafra Air Base in the UAE. The US Navy Fifth Fleet headquarters in Bahrain. Bases in Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq.

Residential areas weren't spared either. A 9-story building took a hit in northern Israel, injuring one. Missiles landed near Dubai Marina. The Fairmont Hotel on Palm Jumeirah caught fire. Shahed-136 drones flew toward the Burj Khalifa, triggering an evacuation. A residential building in Doha was struck. In Syria's Suwayda, four civilians died from falling missile debris.

The Iranian Red Crescent reported 201 civilians killed and 747 injured across Iran. In Israel, 89 civilians were injured. Three US service members were killed and several wounded. One person died from interceptor debris in Abu Dhabi.

The Houthis announced they'd resume Red Sea attacks.

The perception gap

How you understand this depends entirely on where you're reading.

Western media — CNN, the BBC, the New York Times — frames the strikes as a "preemptive attack" against an existential nuclear threat. The language is clinical: "targeted operations," "military infrastructure," "leadership compounds." Iran's retaliation gets covered as the aggressive escalation.

Flip to Al Jazeera, Press TV, or Arabic-language outlets and the frame inverts. The US and Israel are the aggressors. Iran's strikes are "retaliatory" and "defensive." The fact that diplomacy was actively producing results — Oman's foreign minister announced a "breakthrough" just 24 hours before the bombs fell — gets heavy play.

Turkey's response captured the middle ground. Ankara acknowledged the strikes "started with" the US-Israeli attack, while condemning Iran for "targeting third countries."

This framing gap isn't just academic. It shapes what populations demand of their governments. And right now, demands across the region are diverging fast.

The diplomatic wreckage

Here's the detail that's hardest to square: this attack came one day after diplomacy appeared to work.

On February 27, Oman's Foreign Minister Badr Al-Busaidi announced Iran had agreed to never stockpile enriched uranium, accept full IAEA verification, and irreversibly downgrade its enriched uranium to "the lowest level possible." Peace was "within reach," he said.

Twenty-four hours later, bombs fell on Tehran.

The negotiations had been building since early February. Iran and the US held indirect talks in Muscat on February 6. A second round was scheduled for Geneva. Iran even tripled its oil exports between February 15-20 — widely interpreted as a goodwill gesture to ease market fears.

Critics, including Russia's Dmitry Medvedev, accused the US of using nuclear talks as cover for military planning. Pakistan's foreign minister called the attacks "unwarranted." Norway's foreign minister said they breached international law.

The UK, France, and Germany tried to thread the needle — condemning Iran's retaliatory strikes on Gulf states while stopping short of fully endorsing the US-Israeli attack on Tehran.

The Gulf states: furious and trapped

No one wanted this less than the Gulf countries now hosting the fallout.

Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia all host US military assets. That made them targets. None were consulted. All are furious.

Qatar "strongly condemned" Iran's strikes and called them a violation of sovereignty. The UAE called the attacks "cowardly." Bahrain labeled them "treacherous." Kuwait denounced a "flagrant violation" of international law. Saudi Arabia warned of "dire consequences."

But there's a deeper problem. These countries now face a choice they've spent decades avoiding: pick a side. Their economies depend on stability. Their security depends on the US. Their neighborhood includes Iran. Being collateral damage in someone else's war wasn't in the plan.

Oil, Hormuz, and the global shockwave

Iran declared the Strait of Hormuz "practically closed." Tanker owners, oil majors, and trading houses suspended shipments.

That matters because 20-25% of the world's oil and all of Qatar's LNG flows through that strait. Brent crude closed Friday at $72.48. By Saturday, London trading pushed it above $80. Analysts warned of a 70% price spike if Hormuz stays shut.

The downstream effects ripple fast. Europe depends on Gulf LNG for heating. Asian economies — Japan, South Korea, India — are massive crude importers. DNO and Dana Gas halted Kurdistan output. Airlines rerouted or grounded flights across the region.

If this escalates further, $100+ oil isn't speculation. It's math.

The Iranian backdrop: a country already breaking

The strikes didn't land on a stable country. They landed on one already fracturing.

Since late December 2025, Iran's been gripped by the largest protests since the 1979 revolution. More than 100 cities. Economic collapse. The rial in free fall. Estimates of protest deaths range from 3,117 (Iran's government) to 7,000 (HRANA) to Trump's claim of 32,000.

The regime responded with massacres — the deadliest on January 8 and 10. AP reported some Iranians had begun hoping for an American attack out of sheer despair.

This context is crucial. Trump and Netanyahu's regime-change rhetoric lands differently in a country where millions already want regime change. But wanting your own revolution and wanting someone else to bomb your capital are not the same thing.

The legal question nobody's answering

Multiple legal scholars have flagged the strikes as potentially illegal under both US domestic and international law.

Congress didn't authorize military action against Iran. The Gang of Eight received a briefing before the strikes, but that's notification, not authorization. The UN condemned the "military escalation" outright.

The administration's justification rests on claims — disputed by the Defense Intelligence Agency, the IAEA, and European officials — that Iran was days from a nuclear weapon and developing missiles to hit the US mainland. The DIA had previously estimated it'd be a decade before Iran could build such missiles. The Pentagon's own assessment said Iran's nuclear program was set back two years after strikes in June 2025.

On February 27, the IAEA did report Iran had hidden enriched uranium in an undamaged underground facility. That gave the administration its last talking point.

What happens next

Three scenarios are in play.

Scenario 1: Contained exchange. Both sides declare victory and step back. Iran fires its missiles, the US and Israel complete their target list, and back-channel diplomacy — likely through Oman — resumes within weeks. Oil prices settle at $80-90. This is the optimistic read. Scenario 2: Extended campaign. The US follows through on leaked plans for "weeks-long sustained operations." Iran keeps Hormuz closed, Houthi attacks resume in the Red Sea, and Gulf states face continued missile threats. Oil spikes past $100. Global recession risk rises sharply. European energy security deteriorates. Scenario 3: Regional war. Iran activates remaining proxy networks. Kata'ib Hezbollah escalates in Iraq. Houthis intensify Red Sea attacks. Gulf states are forced to respond militarily. The conflict becomes multi-front and multi-actor, with no clear off-ramp.

As of Saturday evening, Israel announced a second wave of strikes on Iranian air defenses. Iran's missiles continue to fly. The Strait of Hormuz remains effectively closed.

Oman's foreign minister — the man who 48 hours ago said peace was within reach — urged Washington "not to get sucked in further."

The world should hope someone's listening.

---

Leonard Livingstone covers geopolitics and conflict for Albis. This article reflects reporting available as of March 1, 2026, and will be updated as events develop.