World braces for weekend of war as Iran names new targets…as Trump mulls fresh round of strikes on Tehran
Iran and the United States are both preparing for a possible escalation over the weekend, with Tehran threatening to strike energy infrastructure if American or Israeli forces launch fresh attacks, while Donald Trump signalled he may order further strikes on Iran. The confrontation follows the collapse of a truce reached last month, which the White House says Iran violated by firing on commercial ships and killing American soldiers. The situation matters because it raises the risk of a wider regional war and threatens global oil supplies via the Strait of Hormuz, a critical shipping route already disrupted by the fighting.
A senior Iranian security official told Tasnim News Agency that Tehran has "extensive response plans" and the "capacity and will" to retaliate against what he called US and Israeli "madness". Trump told his Cabinet at Camp David "we will be hitting them very hard", while press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Iran would "continue to pay" until it returns to negotiations meaningfully. Reports differ on how close a decision is, with the Wall Street Journal saying Trump has approved strikes that could begin this weekend and last several days, while Axios said no final order has been given; officials reportedly want any operation finished before Wall Street opens on Monday. Iran has already fired drones at a US-linked base in Kuwait, which were shot down, and its Revolutionary Guard claims to have struck two oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuz, with four other tankers reportedly turning back.
- Iran threatens energy infrastructure strikes if US/Israel attack this weekend
- Trump weighing further strikes; reports conflict on whether he's approved them
- Iran fired drones at Kuwait, struck tankers in Strait of Hormuz
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters of further US strikes could argue that a credible threat of force may deter Iran from targeting regional partners, military facilities or civilian infrastructure, and demonstrate that threats against them carry consequences. They may contend that limited, clearly defined action, paired with diplomatic channels, could help restore deterrence and protect allies while preventing Iran from setting the terms of escalation.
The case against
Opponents could argue that additional strikes on Tehran risk turning an already volatile confrontation into a wider war, with unpredictable consequences for civilians, regional stability and global energy markets. They may say that incomplete public information about Iran’s alleged targets makes restraint especially important, and that urgent diplomacy, de-escalation measures and international mediation offer a better chance of avoiding a cycle of retaliation.