· 41 comments · Save ·
News & Current Events May 7, 2026 at 8:52 PM

Irans state broadcaster says enemy units came under missile fire after US attack

Posted by Pretend_Mango5529

🚩 Report this post

41 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
number39utopia May 7, 2026 +42
Welp there goes the ceasefire
42
No_Rain8512 May 7, 2026 +59
The US literally put out a message that said this has no impact on the cease fire. Can't make this shit up!
59
ViolettaQueso May 7, 2026 +13
So that’s why they sent Marco to visit the pope.
13
National-Charity-435 May 7, 2026 +7
Because he didn't want to unleash the touch-of-death vance?
7
ViolettaQueso May 7, 2026 +2
lol I thought that too.
2
fury420 May 7, 2026 +3
I hear the ceasefire is more what you'd call guidelines than actual rules.
3
number39utopia May 7, 2026 +7
At this point I feel this dumbass of a president has no clue what a ceasefire is.
7
United-Adagio1543 May 7, 2026
You have no idea how negotiations and the military work. LOL!
0
Practical_Test5550 May 8, 2026 +1
And you do?? LOL yourself.
1
albanymetz May 7, 2026 +1
Ceasefire is just a thing you say that allows you to do whatever you want, despite whatever rules they're supposed to be in place. Just like the word locker-room.
1
MarvVanZandt May 7, 2026 +1
The ceasefire is just what they are telling investors to prop up their stock holdings because they can borrow against those and need them to increase in value so they can use new loans to pay off the old loans so they can keep everything.
1
Nodivingallowed May 7, 2026 +1
Totally separate project, bro. 
1
Mysterious-Oil-7094 May 7, 2026 +1
I saw that the new word dear leader used today was a “skirmish”. Anything he can try to get around having congress vote on it…..
1
Old_Programmer_9683 May 7, 2026 +1
That's fine
1
BigwaveBay May 7, 2026 +1
It’s like a mini ceasefire. Kind of like a mini-war. It’s not a full ceasefire or full war … :/
1
sekimet May 7, 2026 +30
There is not a single claim that I trust from either the US or Iran in this war. Ill just find out the truth in 2-3 days.
30
Argues_with_ignorant May 7, 2026 +12
I frankly miss the Biden administrations intelligence releases. I really miss finding out about leaks that only served to provide more information and actually collaborate what our leadership was telling us, instead of contradictory statements from both our leadership and our intelligence communities that both later turned out to be lies
12
Visible_Handle_3770 May 7, 2026 +2
2-3 days is optimistic. I would say we still don't really have a great grasp of the scale of damage done to bases during the initial exchanges. We probably won't really know for months, which wouldn't be unusual, and it may well be longer still given this administration isn't particularly interested in transparency.
2
Sticklefront May 8, 2026 +1
I will believe it if either side says the strait is closed.
1
fury420 May 7, 2026 +35
>U.S. military vessels were ​forced to retreat after sustaining damage from Iranian missile strikes, it added. Doubt.
35
Mental-Permit-599 May 7, 2026 +17
This is pretty standard procedure. When there’s missiles coming down in your area, you relocate. So retreat is correct, but it’s less “run away” and more “relocate so missiles stop raining down on you”
17
fury420 May 7, 2026 +16
Agreed, it's the part about them successfully hitting and damaging US military vessels that I'm skeptical about, this war has seen them make all sorts of big claims about striking US warships.
16
RothkoPollock May 7, 2026 -3
Well, Trump/CENTCOM said US bases weren’t terribly affected by Iranian drones/missiles during initial hostilities and then two months later per CNN report we learned Iran in fact hit a BUNCH of stuff like aircraft, radar installations, housing, etc etc. So I’d take any official reporting with a grain of salt as we won’t learn anything happening today for weeks. However, the amount of press and satellite censorship from the US and its gulf partners is telling. Same with the “airman rescue” which is looking more and more like a failed uranium grab. I have no idea if a US ship was hit or not, but a denial from the administration means little when it comes to the actual truth.
-3
King0Horse May 7, 2026 +4
Trump lies a lot. He's a shit bag. But being open and honest about damage assessments is for military briefings. You don't broadcast specifics of how effective (or ineffective) your enemies attempts to hurt you are. That's just trying to lose.
4
RothkoPollock May 7, 2026 +4
It’s not like they don’t know. Russian and Chinese satellites giving them all the intel they need. Only folks in the dark is the US taxpayer. Anyways, why lie? Just don’t say anything. “We don’t comment on ongoing military operations.” See? Easy. But saying basically nothing happened just to have the news show two months later A WHOLE LOT happened isn’t a great look…not that Trump cares.
4
Playful_Rip_1280 May 7, 2026 +8
The fact that you actually think the pilot rescue mission was a failed uranium grab really says it all lmao. You actually think removing the uranium from deep underground would involve a singular fighter jet? It would require heavy machinery, significant air cover and ground forces. Given the risk and complexity there’s no way that operation would happen and not be widely reported on.
8
TheNicestRedditor May 7, 2026 -1
Singular fighter jet? What are you even talking about lol
-1
Playful_Rip_1280 May 7, 2026 +3
The single fighter jet that was downed that resulted in the rescue operation.
3
TheNicestRedditor May 7, 2026
They’re insinuating that the “rescue operation” was a cover story for attempting to snatch and grab uranium. Why would they need not one but two MC-130s to rescue a singular pilot? Much less 155 aircrafts? There’s also the whole question if the pilot actually exists… but I digress.
0
Impossible-Bus1 May 7, 2026 +4
How would you grab uranium without digging equipment? It's the dumbest conspiracy theory of the war so far.
4
RothkoPollock May 7, 2026 +1
You’re right. Two MC-130s are incapable of transporting bulldozers and related heavy equipment. Good point.
1
TheNicestRedditor May 7, 2026 -1
Bro what? You think Iran just digs up their stock piles when they wanna use some? 😂😂😂
-1
fury420 May 7, 2026 +2
> Why would they need not one but two MC-130s to rescue a singular pilot? The MC-130s transported short range MH/AH-5 "Little Bird" helicopters to a forward operating position at an abandoned airstrip, and from there they helicoptered to rescue the 2nd airman. I would expect they used this approach because their initial rescue of the pilot attracted Iranian attention, at least one of the two Blackhawk helicopters used were reportedly damaged and the Iranians would be on high alert for a second rescue attempt through the same airspace. Hence flying into Iran from a different direction and approaching the 2nd airman from the north, nowhere near their prior flightpath.
2
TheNicestRedditor May 7, 2026 +1
And the other 153 aircrafts?
1
RothkoPollock May 7, 2026 -2
Sure. Pilots like 140 miles apart. ID to a nuclear scientist found on site (never refuted btw). Aircraft stuck in “wet sand” but it hasn’t rained. Two heavy lift aircraft. Dozens and dozens of personnel. Helicopters. Close support attack aircraft. All to rescue one airman who, on a supposed broken limb, was located 140 miles away from his partner, 7000 ft up a mountain, conveniently close to the Iranian nuke facility. And the downed airman have never been identified or interviewed. But sure, I suppose it could have gone down that way…but I highly doubt it.
-2
captain_adjective May 7, 2026 +3
Stuff being on fire in the gulf is not as easy to hide.
3
Old_Programmer_9683 May 7, 2026 +1
Ridiculous
1
[deleted] May 7, 2026 -2
[deleted]
-2
Loose_Skill6641 May 7, 2026
USA still has some missiles left even after trump tried to destroy it all
0
Loni09 May 7, 2026 +3
Iran\*
3
StayFit8561 May 7, 2026 +1
I see what you did here and I enjoyed it.
1
← Back to Board