Iran · 23 July, 2026 · 2 min read
IRGC Says US B-1 Strikes From Fairford Hit Iran, Then Warns Against Oil Ammunition Replacement
IRGC says US used B-1 from Fairford to strike Iran yesterday IRGC claims destruction of the US Electronic Warfare Special Unit at Al-Adiri base
Whether the US strike changed real missile capabilities.
3 of 4 outlets skipped it: al-Adiri base air-traffic-control tower was struck.
10outlets compared
Same story, two versions
tap a side to read it in full
Mehr News Agency
“Any participation and cooperation in the preparation and execution of these illegal attacks will amount”
GünAz TV
“Reuters: The IRGC's Corps of Commanders, gold, and missile equipment have been sent to Yemen.”
Entekhab and Mehr push Iranian retaliation and legality arguments more than GünAz and خبرپو.
B-1 flights and retaliation
The IRGC said the United States used B-1 aircraft against Iran from Fairford Air Base in England, and it warned it would not allow Washington to replace oil and ammunition stocks with “deceptive ceasefires, and then resume attacks.”
“Yesterday, the United States resorted to using B-1 aircraft against Iran from Fairford Air Base in England”
In the same IRGC account, the force said it destroyed the United States Army's Electronic Warfare Special Unit at the Al-Adiri base and struck the base's air-traffic-control tower.
Entekhab reproduced the IRGC announcement text beginning “In the name of God, the Breaker of the Mighty;” and continuing with a call to “Fight them until there is no more fitnah.”
The IRGC also said its fighters carried out “combined attacks, destroying the U.S. Special Electronic Warfare Unit at the Al-Adiri base” and that the barracks were attacked, with “killing and/or wounding a number of them.”
UK accused; UN Charter invoked
Mehr News Agency said Iran’s ministry slammed the UK for hosting US warplanes, describing the decision by the “new British governing administration” to provide bases and facilities for “illegal U.S. military attacks against the Iranian nation” as a violation of the UN Charter and international law.M
The ministry said the action falls under the definition of aggression in Article 3(f) of UN General Assembly Resolution 3314, and it warned that “Any participation and cooperation in the preparation and execution of these illegal attacks will amount to complicity in the crime of aggression and war crimes.”
It further argued that Britain, as a permanent member of the UN Security Council, “had chosen to side with the aggressors instead of fulfilling its legal and moral duties to condemn the military aggression and war crimes.”
The statement concluded that “The Islamic Republic of Iran is determined to defend its national sovereignty, territorial integrity, and national interests and security against foreign aggression,” adding that any party participating would be “responsible for the consequences and repercussions of its decision.”
Regional warnings and escalation
In the IRGC framing carried by Entekhab, the force said the “enemy must pay for breaking its pledge” and repeated that it would not allow the United States to “replace its oil and ammunition reserves with deceptive ceasefires and then resume attacks.”
“Any base used to attack Iranian soil is a legitimate target for us”
The IRGC announcement also asserted that any base used to attack Iranian soil is “a legitimate target for us,” and it warned the British monarchy regime not to “weigh down their own file any further.”
Sputnik’s framing, under the headline “Hosting Americans and existential threats to Arab countries,” cited a Wall Street Journal claim that the United States and Israel “have only knocked down the entrances to Iran's missile bases deep in the mountains; the weapons inside these facilities remain intact.”
The same Sputnik item also referenced “Germany hosting wounded American soldiers from Iran's attacks,” placing the dispute in a wider set of reported cross-border consequences beyond Iran and the immediate strike locations.