Become an Independent member to bookmark this article Want to bookmark your favourite articles and stories to read or reference later? Start your Independent Membership today. Join today Already a member? Log in US military attacks Iran's Qeshm Island in the Strait of Hormuz on the eve of midterm elections Maroosha Muzaffar Tuesday 03 November 2026 07:27 GMT Bookmark popover Removed from bookmarks Close popover Donald Trump had said the U.S. would not resume strikes on Iran before the midterms ( Reuters ) The U.S. conducted defensive strikes against Iranian targets near the Strait of Hormuz , including Qeshm Island, on the eve of the U.S. midterm elections.
A U.S. official described the operation as a limited action against Iranians using surface-to-air missiles against U.S. assets. The strikes occurred despite previous statements from Donald Trump indicating the U.S. would not launch new attacks on Iran prior to the midterms. Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance expressed optimism about reaching a negotiated peace settlement with Tehran. Iranian officials said the ball is in the U.S. court on a prospective deal to end the conflict.
Left out here: Leaves out what changes the picture
The article never says the 'U.S. assets' near Iran are there to enforce a US naval blockade of Iranian oil exports. Without that, a reader takes the US account of a defensive action at face value and does not know the US forces were operating off Iran's coast to blockade it.
The Independent reports a US strike on Iran's Qeshm Island and, in its own opening line, calls it a 'defensive' strike. That word comes from an anonymous US official, and the outlet's own linked headline puts it in quotation marks. The reader gets the US military's description of its own attack as established fact, with no Iranian account of what was hit.
States one side's claim as fact
Serious
“The U.S. conducted defensive strikes against Iranian targets near the Strait of Hormuz”
Why this matters
The Independent writes 'conducted defensive strikes' in its own voice, with no attribution, in the sentence that opens the report.
The impression it gives
A reader takes it as an established fact that the US attack on Qeshm Island was defensive, a response to an Iranian attack.
The context
'Defensive' is how an anonymous US official described the operation. The outlet's own linked headline puts 'defensive strikes' in quotation marks, and other outlets attribute the word to the official. The article gives no Iranian account or independent confirmation that US assets were attacked.
How we know
Elsewhere in the article“US conducts ‘defensive strikes’ against Iran”
Elsewhere in the article“A U.S. official described the operation”
US forces struck Iranian targets near the Strait of Hormuz, including Qeshm Island, on the eve of the midterm elections. An anonymous US official called them defensive strikes against Iranians firing surface-to-air missiles at US assets.
Leaves out what changes the picture
Minor
What is missing
The article never says the 'U.S. assets' near Iran are there to enforce a US naval blockade of Iranian oil exports. Without that, a reader takes the US account of a defensive action at face value and does not know the US forces were operating off Iran's coast to blockade it.