The Roaring Lion: A Military Assessment of Israel’s Campaign Against Iran

By Andrew Klein

March 22, 2026

To my wife and all mothers who deserve better from the world than seeing their children slaughtered.

Executive Summary

On February 28, 2026, the United States and Israel launched a coordinated military campaign against Iran, codenamed Operation Roaring Lion. Now in its fourth week, the conflict has expanded beyond its initial parameters, drawing in multiple Gulf states, threatening global energy supplies, and exposing the strategic incoherence at the heart of the US-Israeli alliance.

This report assesses the military conduct of the campaign, the weapons systems employed, the strategic logic—or lack thereof—behind Israel’s actions, and the implications for the region and the world. It draws on official statements, investigative journalism, and military analysis from multiple sources.

Part One: The Stated Aims – A Moving Target

Netanyahu’s Three Goals

In a March 19 press conference, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu outlined three objectives for Operation Roaring Lion:

Objective Netanyahu’s Description

Nuclear threat Removing the nuclear threat before facilities are “buried deep underground”

Ballistic missile threat Removing missile capabilities and production infrastructure

Regime change “Creating the conditions for the Iranian people to grasp their freedom”

Netanyahu was emphatic about progress: “Iran is being decimated. Iran’s missile and drone arsenal is being massively degraded and will be destroyed. Hundreds of their launchers have been destroyed, their stockpiles of missiles are being hit hard, and so are the industries that produce them. Their navy is lying at the bottom of the sea. Their air force is nearly destroyed. Iran’s command and control structure is in utter chaos” .

Trump’s Shifting Objectives

The American president’s stated aims have varied markedly over the four weeks of the campaign:

Date       Statement

Feb 28         Called for Iranians to “take over” governance; described attacks as “major combat operations”

Feb 28         “We’re going to destroy their missiles and raze their missile industry to the ground. We’re going to annihilate their navy”

March 2      Said war would last four to five weeks

March 6     “There will be no deal with Iran except UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER”

March 9      “I think the war is very complete, pretty much” — then said “we’ve got to finish the job”

March 13     Softened call for internal uprising: “That’s a big hurdle to climb for people that don’t have weapons”

March 20   Posted that US was “getting very close to meeting our objectives as we consider winding down our great military efforts” — but told reporters the same day, “I don’t want to do a ceasefire”

As one analysis noted, “Stated objectives and expected timelines have varied, including toppling Iran’s government, weakening Iran’s military, security and nuclear capabilities, curbing its regional influence, and supporting Israeli interests”.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio offered a different rationale on March 2: “We knew that there was going to be an Israeli action, we knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces, and we knew that if we didn’t pre-emptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties”. This suggests the US was dragged into a war it did not initiate, to protect its forces from the consequences of Israel’s actions.

Part Two: The Conduct of the Campaign

Weapons Systems Employed

Thermobaric Weapons: Investigative reporting has documented Israel’s use of US-supplied thermal and thermobaric weapons—sometimes called “vacuum bombs”—capable of generating temperatures exceeding 3,500 degrees Celsius (6,332 degrees Fahrenheit). Civil defence teams in Gaza documented over 2,800 cases of Palestinians who “evaporated” as a result of such weapons, leaving “only pieces of flesh, specks of blood or even ash”.

The weapons identified include:

· MK-84 “Hammer”

· BLU-109 bunker buster — used in an attack on al-Mawasi, an area Israel had declared a “safe zone,” evaporating 22 Palestinians

· GBU-39 small diameter bomb — used in an attack on al-Tabin school

The Palestinian Ministry of Health in Gaza noted that when a human body is exposed to such high temperatures, it is “chemically inevitable” that it will “vaporise and turn to ash,” as the human body is 80 percent water.

Targeting Energy Infrastructure: On March 7, Israel struck four Iranian oil storage facilities and a petroleum product trans-shipment centres in and around Tehran. The attacks caused massive explosions and released toxic plumes that drifted over the capital.

Environmental Impact: The strikes on energy infrastructure have produced immediate and long-term environmental consequences:

Effect Description

“Black Rain” On March 8, rain containing petroleum fell over Tehran, leaving black spots on streets, cars, and plants. Residents reported eye irritation, headaches, dizziness, and coughing

Toxic plumes Explosions released hydrocarbons, sulfides, and nitrogen oxides into the atmosphere

Water contamination Oil from the “black rain” flowed into Tehran’s drainage systems, causing fires and contaminating water sources

Regional water crisis A seawater desalination plant was struck, affecting water supply to 30 Iranian villages. Similar plants in Bahrain, the UAE, and Kuwait have also been hit

John Balmes, Professor of Environmental Health at the University of California, Berkeley, noted that such plumes appearing over densely populated areas is “rare” and could lead to long-term health risks, with previous studies linking such pollution to various cancers.

AI-Assisted Targeting

The role of artificial intelligence in Israeli targeting has been extensively documented. The company Palantir has been deeply involved in the IDF’s targeting operations in Gaza, with critics noting its systems are used in “targeting software” that guides bombardment.

Jeremy Corbyn stated: “Palantir is deeply involved in the IDF and what it is doing in Gaza, where they have an incredible level of knowledge of every person… and that has been used to guide the bombardment and the killing of people in Gaza” .

Discipline and Brutality

Abuse of Detainees: On March 12, 2026, the Israeli military dropped charges against five soldiers accused of torturing a Palestinian detainee. The indictment alleged that one soldier stabbed the detainee with a sharp object, causing a tear near his rectum.

Prime Minister Netanyahu praised the decision: “The State of Israel must hunt down its enemies, not its own heroic fighters”.

The Palestinian Prisoners Society said the decision “constitutes an additional green light for soldiers and prison guards to continue committing crimes against Palestinian and Arab prisoners and detainees”.

The GHF Fiasco: The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), a US-Israeli-backed aid program managed by American contractors, operated during the war with catastrophic results. Instead of hundreds of aid distribution sites, GHF established just four “mega-sites.” Starving Palestinians were funnelled into these centers, where they often found next to nothing. Israeli forces and US contractors routinely opened fire on crowds seeking aid.

A US veteran who worked for UG Solutions, Anthony Aguilar, later testified that he had “never seen a scale of destruction and killing” like what he witnessed. He described contractors shooting into crowds and Israeli snipers picking off children who clambered over walls to escape being crushed.

By the time GHF was suspended, more than 2,000 Palestinians had died in or around its distribution centres.

The Role of Mercenary Forces

Israel has reportedly sought to use private American security contractors to control the Rafah border crossing between Egypt and Gaza. Under a plan discussed between Tel Aviv and Washington, companies staffed by ex-US military personnel would effectively police who and what passes through Rafah—placing a national frontier under the control of hired guards from half a world away.

The firms under consideration include UG Solutions, the same company implicated in the GHF disaster.

Part Three: The Greater Israel Project

Netanyahu’s statements have made explicit what was once implied. In his March 19 press conference, he framed the war not as a defensive action but as an offensive campaign to “remove the existential threats” posed by the Ayatollah regime and to “create the conditions for the Iranian people to grasp their freedom”.

The concept of “Greater Israel”—the expansion of Israeli control over territory beyond its current borders—has been repeatedly endorsed by Netanyahu and his coalition partners. The war on Iran, framed as a battle against “the death cult in Iran” that “chants death to America, death to Israel,” serves this expansionist vision.

As one analyst noted, the war aims have consistently expanded: from “weakening Iran’s military” to “toppling the government” to “creating conditions for Iranian freedom.” The ultimate objective appears to be the permanent crippling of Iran as a regional power, removing any obstacle to Israeli hegemony.

Part Four: Strategic Reliance – The United States and Beyond

US Military Commitment

The United States has deployed substantial military assets to the region, including additional ships and Marines. White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt said the administration had anticipated the operation would last four to six weeks, hinting that the military campaign may end in as soon as a week.

However, a US official told Axios that Trump’s post did not signal an immediate end to the war. “He just said we are getting close,” said the official, suggesting strikes would continue for “a couple of weeks”.

The US has provided not only military hardware but also diplomatic cover. The administration has fast-tracked more than $16 billion in arms sales to Gulf states since the conflict began.

Reliance on Zionist Organizations

The war has been underwritten by a global network of Zionist organizations and donors. As detailed in previous reports, Australian charities with tax-deductible status have channeled millions to Israeli military and settlement organizations. The same network operates in the United States, where AIPAC and allied groups have funded politicians who support unconditional aid to Israel.

Part Five: Iran’s Response – A Strategy of Endurance

The Strategic Calculus

Iran’s military posture suggests it is not fighting for victory in any conventional sense. It is fighting for survival—and survival on its own terms.

Iranian strategists have long understood that a direct confrontation with Israel or the US would almost certainly draw in the other. Rather than planning for a straightforward battlefield victory—which would be naive given the technological superiority of the US and Israel—Iran has built a strategy around deterrence and endurance :

· Layered ballistic missile capabilities — Iran possesses more than 3,000 ballistic missiles

· Long-range drones — cheap, numerous, and capable of penetrating air defenses

· Network of allied armed groups — Hezbollah, Houthis, Iraqi militias

The Economic War

Iran’s calculus rests partly on the economics of war. Interceptors used by Israel and the US are much more expensive than the one-way drones and missiles deployed by Iran. Prolonged conflict forces the US and Israel to use up high-value assets to intercept comparatively low-cost threats.

The Strait of Hormuz remains one of the world’s most critical chokepoints. Iran does not need to close it entirely—even credible threats and limited disruptions have already pushed oil prices up and, if continued, may increase international pressure for de-escalation .

Decentralized Command

Following the killing of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in the opening strikes, Iran has relied on a decentralized command structure to continue operations. Reports indicate that local commanders may be selecting targets and launching missiles with relative autonomy.

This structure is deliberate: it ensures continuity under heavy attack. Communication networks are vulnerable to interception and jamming; senior commanders have been targeted; air superiority by the US and Israel limits central oversight. Pre-authorised target lists and delegated launch authority are safeguards against decapitation.

Iranian Leadership Statements

President Masoud Pezeshkian has been clear about Iran’s position:

“I emphasized that Iran did not begin this atrocious war. Defending against invasion is a natural right, in which we are good at”.

He also warned: “Using the American bases against Iran in the region, with the purpose of disturbing our relations with our neighbours, should be stopped”.

Pezeshkian called calls for ending the war “meaningless, until we ensure there will be no more attacks in our land in the future”.

Part Six: The Impact on Allies – Australia’s Complicity

The Australian government has provided political support for the US-Israeli campaign while offering little substantive assistance. This has not prevented Australian citizens and interests from being affected.

Australia is also a node in the financial and political network that sustains Israel’s war machine. The same Zionist organizations that lobby for unconditional support in the United States operate in Australia, and Australian tax dollars—through deductible gift recipient status—have subsidized Israeli military activities.

The war has also exposed Australia’s economic vulnerability. The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has driven fuel prices to record highs, and the Australian government’s response has been limited to warnings about price gouging and the release of strategic reserves.

Part Seven: Projections and Forecasts

Timeline

Source Projection

Trump (March 2) 4-5 weeks

White House (March 20) Within 1 week

US official (March 20) “A couple of weeks”

Hegseth (March 19) “No time frame”

The most reliable assessment is that the war will continue for at least another two to three weeks, with a possible “victory” declaration by the Trump administration followed by a gradual drawdown of US forces—leaving Israel to manage the aftermath.

Strategic Outcomes

Scenario Likelihood Consequences

US withdrawal, Israel continues – High Prolonged conflict, regional destabilization

Negotiated ceasefire – Moderate Temporary pause, unresolved underlying tensions

Iranian nuclear breakout- Low Regional nuclear arms race

Full US-Israeli occupation of Iran -Very low Impossible given troop levels, would take 500,000+ ground forces

Economic Projections

Sector Current Status Projected Impact

Oil $100/barrel $240 peak if conflict continues

Fertilizer +26% since conflict began Further increases likely

Food Fertilizer shortages emerging Higher prices in 6-12 months

Medicines Air routes disrupted Cancer drug supply at risk

Conclusion: The War That Cannot Be Won

The US-Israeli war on Iran is a conflict without a coherent strategy, shifting objectives, and no clear exit. It has been conducted with weapons that “evaporate” human bodies, AI systems that generate kill lists in seconds, and a doctrine that treats civilian infrastructure—including oil facilities, desalination plants, and schools—as legitimate military targets.

Israel’s “Greater Israel” project, enabled by American military power and funded by global Zionist networks, has produced a regional war that serves no one’s long-term interests except the weapons manufacturers and the political leaders who profit from perpetual conflict.

Iran is not defeated. Its strategy of endurance and deterrence is working exactly as designed. The Strait of Hormuz remains closed. Oil prices are soaring. The global economy is being destabilized. And the American public is increasingly aware that they were dragged into a war they did not choose, for reasons that shift with each passing week.

The war will end—not with a US victory, but with an American withdrawal, leaving Israel to face the consequences of its aggression alone. The question is not whether this will happen, but how many will die before it does.

Sources

1. Al Jazeera / Radio Habana Cuba, “Investigation proves Israeli weapons ‘evaporate’ thousands of Palestinians in Gaza,” February 9, 2026

2. The Jewish Chronicle, “Corbyn raises ‘suspicions’ over ‘Mandelson-Starmer-Epstein nexus’ links to NHS and Gaza,” February 22, 2026

3. The New Arab, “Gaza aid mercenaries may run Rafah border? What could go wrong!” January 27, 2026

4. Reuters via bdnews24.com, “Israel drops charges against soldiers accused of abusing Gaza detainee,” March 12, 2026

5. Xinhua via 163.com, “【特稿】黑雨、毒烟、油污……美以打击伊朗造成环境灾害,” March 14, 2026

6. BBC News, “Iran’s high-risk war strategy seems to centre on endurance and deterrence,” March 4, 2026

7. Bernama, “Trump Says US ‘Getting Very Close’ To Meeting Objectives In Iran, Considers Winding Down Military Efforts,” March 20, 2026

8. Prime Minister’s Office, “PM Netanyahu’s statement to the foreign press,” March 19, 2026

9. Anadolu Ajansı, “Iran’s president says Tehran did not start war, defends country’s right to respond to US-Israeli attacks,” March 15, 2026

10. Malay Mail, “Trump’s shifting objectives in the US-Israeli war on Iran explained,” March 20, 2026

Published by Andrew Klein

March 22, 2026

Leave a comment