Apologies that formatting is messed up. These posts were perfectly formed at my end! I suspect that some evil actors are at work.
22.40pm My theme was updated today OceanWP (from version 4.0.9 to 4.1.0). I wonder if that’s what broke everything. Think that I may just leave it until tomorrow …
23.27pm Looks like the theme update broke things. Computers, eh …
18/6/25 8.57 Formatting messed up again, need to change that theme.
Original article by Brett Wilkins republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).
Flight-tracking websites showed dozens of Air Force aerial refueling planes departing from military bases in the United States and heading to Europe on Sunday, fueling speculation of direct U.S. involvement in the widening Israeli-Iranian war.
Military-focused news sites reported that around 30 U.S. Air Force KC-135R and KC-46A tankers were identified by flight-tracking software in what The Times of Israel called an “unprecedented mass deployment” to Europe.
According to The Aviationist:
Most of these aircraft landed this morning at Ramstein Air Base in Germany and at Morón Air Base and [Naval Air Station] Rota in Spain, while two landed at Aviano Air Base in Italy and at least one landed at Prestwick International Airport in the U.K. At the time of writing, some tankers are in flight over the Balkans, headed south, possibly towards Souda Bay in Greece or Incirlik in Turkey.
“While tanker movements in this direction are far from abnormal, such a large, near-simultaneous migration of the jets was very peculiar, especially at a time of extreme crisis in the Middle East,” The War Zone’s Tyler Rogoway wrote Monday. “The exact reason for the mass deployment is unclear, although many of the potential answers would indicate a change, or preparations for a potential change, in the current conflict between Israel and Iran.”
Speaking on condition of anonymity, two U.S. officials toldReuters Monday that the tankers are being deployed to provide the administration of President Donald Trump with flexibility to act in the Middle East. Military experts said the deployment could portend expanded U.S. support for Israel’s war on Iran or even American strikes against the country.
The Trump administration—which recently concluded that Iran is not seeking nuclear weapons—insists that Israel is acting “unilaterally” against its enemy in an effort to prevent it from developing nukes.
However, Trump said Sunday that “it’s possible” that U.S. forces could enter the fight. Iran has accused the United States of complicity in Israel’s bombing—which Iran says has killed more than 200 people, 90% of whom are civilians—and warned Washington of potential dire consequences if it boosts involvement in the war.
Asked about possible U.S. intervention in the war, Trump told reporters during the Group of Seven (G7) summit in Alberta, Canada on Monday, “I don’t want to talk about that.”
“We’re not involved in it. It’s possible we could get involved. But we are not at this moment involved,” the president added.
As Reuters noted:
The United States already has a sizable force in the Middle East, with nearly 40,000 troops in the region, including air defense systems, fighter aircraft, and warships that can help bring down missiles.
Last month, the Pentagon replaced B-2 bombers with another type of bomber at a base in the Indo-Pacific that is seen as being an ideal location to operate in the Middle East. The B-52 bombers can carry large bunker-busting munitions, which experts say can be used against Iran’s nuclear facilities.
Iran has responded to Israel’s bombardment with waves of apparently indiscriminate missile attacks against Israeli cites, killing at least 24 Israeli civilians including women and children and Palestinian citizens of Israel and wounding hundreds of others.
Iranian state media—which was bombed by Israeli forces Monday with reported fatalities—claimed late in the day that Tehran is “preparing for largest and most intense missile attack in history on Israeli soil,” even as Iran’s government reportedly signaled its willingness to negotiate an end to hostilities if the U.S. guarantees it will not attack.
However, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu subsequently toldABC News that Israel would continue bombing Iran, dismissing Tehran’s reported overture as a ruse meant to “lie, cheat, and string the U.S. along.”
Original article by Brett Wilkins republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).
Original article by Medea Benjamin republished from Mint Press News under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 International License.
When Israel launched a surprise military strike on Iran last week, it did more than risk igniting a catastrophic regional war. It also exposed long-simmering tensions in Washington—between entrenched bipartisan, pro-Israel hawks and a growing current of lawmakers (and voters) unwilling to be dragged into another Middle East disaster.
“This is not our war,” declared Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY), one of the House’s most consistent antiwar voices. “Israel doesn’t need U.S. taxpayers’ money for defense if it already has enough to start offensive wars. I vote not to fund this war of aggression.” On social media, he polled followers on whether the U.S. should give Israel weapons to attack Iran. After 126,000 votes (and 2.5 million views), the answer was unequivocal: 85% said no.
For decades, questioning U.S. support for Israel has been a third rail in Congress. But Israel’s unprovoked attack on Iran—coming just as the sixth round of sensitive U.S.-Iran nuclear talks were set to take place in Oman—sparked rare and unusually direct criticism from across the political spectrum. Progressive members, already furious over Israel’s war on Gaza, were quick to condemn the new offensive. But they weren’t alone.
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) called Israel’s strike “reckless” and “escalatory,” and warned that Prime Minister Netanyahu is trying to drag the U.S. into a broader war. Rep. Chuy García (D-IL) called Israel’s actions “diplomatic sabotage” and said, “the U.S. must stop supplying offensive weapons to Israel, which also continue to be used against Gaza, & urgently recommit to negotiations.”
Rep. Summer Lee (D-PA) was even more blunt. “The war criminal Netanyahu wants to ignite an endless regional war & drag the U.S. into it. Any politician who tries to help him betrays us all.”
More striking, however, were the critiques from moderate Democrats and some Republicans.
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA), a longtime advocate for requiring congressional approval before the U.S. gets involved in new wars, blasted Israel for jeopardizing planned U.S.-Iran diplomacy. “The American people have no interest in another forever war,” he wrote. Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI), Ranking Member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, warned that strikes “threaten not only the lives of innocent civilians but the stability of the entire Middle East and the safety of American citizens and forces.”
Some pro-Israel Democrats are feeling comfortable speaking out on this conflict because it fits their anti-Trump critique. Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) said:
We are at this crisis today because President Trump foolishly walked away from President Obama’s Iran nuclear agreement under which Iran had agreed to dismantle much of its nuclear program and to open its facilities to international inspections, putting more eyes on the ground. The United States should now lead the international community towards a diplomatic solution to avoid a wider war.”
Adding to this diverse chorus of opposition are some Republicans from the party’s non-interventionist wing. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) declared, “War with Iran is not in America’s interest. It would destabilize the region, cost countless lives, and drain our resources for generations.” Rep. Warren Davidson (R-OH) lamented that “some members of Congress and U.S. Senators seem giddy about the prospects of a bigger war.”
And in a rare show of agreement with progressive critics, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) blasted the hawks in both parties. “We’ve been told for the past 20 years that Iran is on the verge of developing a nuclear bomb any day now. The same story. Everyone I know is tired of U.S. intervention and regime change in foreign countries. Everyone I know wants us to fix our own problems here at home, not bomb other countries.”
Of course, many in Congress rushed to support Israel. Senate Republican leader John Thune said, “Israel has determined that it must take decisive action to defend the Israeli people.” Democratic Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) voiced full support for the strike and urged the U.S. to provide Israel “whatever is necessary—military, intelligence, weaponry.”
The most crass was Senator Lindsey Graham, who posted:
Game on. Pray for Israel.”
But these crude pro-war responses, once guaranteed to go unchallenged, are now being met with resistance–and not just from activists. With public opinion shifting sharply–especially among younger voters, progressives, and “America First-ers” – the political calculus on unconditional support for Israel is changing. In the wake of Israel’s disastrous war in Gaza and its widening regional provocations, members of Congress are being forced to choose: follow the AIPAC money and the old playbook–or listen to their constituents.
If the American people continue to raise their voices, the tide in Washington could turn away from support for a war with Iran that could plunge the region into deeper chaos while offering no relief for the suffering people of Gaza. We could finally see an end to decades of disastrous unconditional support for Israel and knee-jerk support for catastrophic wars.
Feature photo | Israelis gather next to a direct hit site following an Iranian missile strike against Israel, June 16th 2025. Matan Golan | AP
Medea Benjamin is co-founder of Global Exchange and CODEPINK: Women for Peace. She is the co-author, with Nicolas J.S. Davies, of War in Ukraine: Making Sense of a Senseless Conflict, available from OR Books in November 2022. Other books include, “Inside Iran: The Real History and Politics of the Islamic Republic of Iran” (2018); “Kingdom of the Unjust: Behind the U.S.-Saudi Connection” (2016); “Drone Warfare: Killing by Remote Control” (2013); “Don’t Be Afraid Gringo: A Honduran Woman Speaks from the Heart” (1989), and (with Jodie Evans) “Stop the Next War Now” (2005).
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect MintPress News editorial policy.
Original article by Medea Benjamin republished from Mint Press News under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 International License.
Original article by Common Dreams Staff republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).
Hundreds of thousands of people dressed in red marched through the streets of The Hague on Sunday to demand more action against the “genocide” in Gaza.
NGOs such as Amnesty International, Save the Children, Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders), and Oxfam organized the demonstration, which ran through the city to the International Court of Justice. The protesters were all dressed in red, creating a “red line”.
Organisers described it as the country’s largest demonstration in two decades. Many waving Palestinian flags and some chanting “Stop the Genocide”, the demonstrators turned a central park in the city into a sea of red on a sunny afternoon.
“The Dutch cabinet still refuses to draw a red line. That is why we do it, for as long as necessary,” Marjon Rozema of Amnesty International Netherlands said in a statement.
Protesters walked a 5-kilometer loop around the city center of The Hague to symbolically create the red line that the government has failed to set.
Original article by Common Dreams Staff republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).
