Press TV, on Iran, 6 November 2026

6.0out of 10Serious

Iran

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.2 findings

An advisor to the commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Aerospace Force has warned that any country or force abetting the United States in a new act of aggression against Iran will be considered a “legitimate target” for the country’s reprisal attacks. Brigadier General Ali Belali made the remarks in an interview with Iran's Arabic-language al-Alam television news channel after Leader of the Islamic Revolution and Commander-in-Chief of Iran’s Armed Forces Ayatollah Seyyed Mojtaba Khamenei ordered senior military commanders to ensure that any level or type of enemy threat is met with a “geographically unrestricted response.”

Asked about the Leader’s directive, he said, “In my assessment, when geography is described as having no limitations, this could encompass all regions. “ “Any force or country that assists the US in its aggression against us could become a legitimate target for us. Of course, this depends on the country in question and the extent to which it cooperates and coordinates with the United States.” General Ali Balali, senior adviser to the commander of the IRGC Aerospace Force, says that any country or force assisting the US in a new attack will be a legitimate target. — Highlights (@highlightsnews1) November 5, 2026 Follow: https://t.co/QoHk2icbzQ pic.twitter.com/0y4iFboB8B He also emphasized that Iran’s target list will be disclosed at the appropriate time, when the enemy once again make the mistake of imposing another war on the nation.

He further stressed that the indigenization of Iran’s missile, drone, and air defense industries has enabled the country to maintain its defensive capabilities without relying on external factors and establish deterrence. The US and , which lasted 12 days, in June 2025. Their second aggression began on February 28 and came to a halt in early April after 40 days. In both wars, .

Iran has also maintained a tight grip on the Strait of Hormuz since the early days of the second imposed war . Belali hailed the Islamic Republic for performing significantly better than in previous conflicts in terms of sustaining operations, delivering strikes, and maintaining the offensive tempo. Meanwhile, he said that Iran’s missile bases are distributed across the country, extending from the northeast to the northwest and southeast, adding that the facilities provide sufficient range to reach targets in the Israeli-occupied territories and American military installations.

“These facilities are designed to withstand destruction by conventional weapons, as they are located deep underground and engineered to support sustained deployment and continuous operations,” he added. The IRGC advisor also cited Khorramshahr missile, which releases 80 submunitions, and the Fattah-2 missile with maneuvering capabilities, as examples of Iranian projectiles difficult for enemy air defense systems to intercept. With a range of 500 kilometers, he continued, the Persian Gulf missile was designed to engage moving targets aimed at driving US naval vessels out of the Persian Gulf region.

Meanwhile, he said that Washington and Tel Aviv have spent enormous sums on advanced air defense systems, which are insufficient to withstand Iranian weapons. “While the opposing side has significant capabilities, the sheer volume of weapons we deploy, combined with the tactics we employ, substantially reduces the effectiveness of its systems,” he asserted. Additionally, Belali said that the adversaries have resorted to concealment and censorship regarding the destruction caused by Iranian missiles.

He further warned that no location within the 2,000-kilometer range of Iranian weapons can be considered secure for American troops, adding, “The United States should withdraw its forces from within this range, leave West Asia, and avoid exposing itself to risks.” Moreover, he praised efforts undertaken by Iranian Armed Forces for bringing the production capacity of missiles and drones to a level which needs additional facilities to store.

Read the original article on presstv.co.uk (opens in a new tab)
What we found (2)

Press TV reports an IRGC adviser's warning that any country helping the US attack Iran would become a legitimate target, and attributes his remarks to him throughout. In its own background paragraphs, however, the outlet states as plain fact that the US and Israeli wars on Iran were illegal and that Iran's retaliation forced a ceasefire. It also calls Israel a regime and US conduct mischief in its own voice.

  1. States one side's claim as fact

    Serious

    “waged their first illegal war against Iran”

    Why this matters
    Press TV calls the June 2025 war "illegal" in its own narration, with no source or legal finding attached to the word.
    The impression it gives
    The reader takes it as a settled legal fact that the war was illegal.
    The context
    The article cites no court, UN body or legal authority for that verdict. Anadolu describes the same events without one: the US and Israel "launched attacks against Iran". A fair report would attribute the illegality claim to Iranian officials or to a named legal source.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    “Iran’s resistance and successful retaliatory operations forced the aggressors to accept a ceasefire”

    Why this matters
    Press TV states in its own voice why both ceasefires came about: Iranian operations "forced the aggressors" to accept them.
    The impression it gives
    The reader takes it as established that Iran's military response alone compelled the US and Israel to stop.
    The context
    This is the Iranian government's account of why the fighting ended. The article gives no source for it and offers no other account of the ceasefires. It should be attributed to the Iranian side.

    Show it in the article

    “in response to Washington’s acts of mischief in West Asia”

    Why this matters
    Press TV gives Iran's control of the Strait of Hormuz a justification in its own voice: it was "in response to" US conduct.
    The impression it gives
    The reader takes Iran's own rationale for the Hormuz measures as the plain reason behind them.
    The context
    The motive is Tehran's stated position, not an established fact. The article attributes it to no one.

    Show it in the article

  2. Uses a loaded word

    Minor

    “the Israeli regime”

    Why this matters
    Press TV calls Israel's government "the Israeli regime" in its own narration.
    The impression it gives
    The reader receives a delegitimising verdict on a government as neutral description.
    The context
    The word is a political judgement, not a fact. The same standard that rejects "the regime" for Iran's government applies here.

    Show it in the article

    “acts of mischief”

    Why this matters
    Press TV describes US actions in the region as "acts of mischief" in its own voice, without saying what those acts were.
    The impression it gives
    The reader takes a moral verdict on unnamed US conduct as reporting.
    The context
    The article does not identify the acts it means. A plain report would name them.

    Show it in the article

How other outlets reported it

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Press TV

  1. 8 NovIran prepared to make any new US aggression far more costly: Analyst3.0
  2. 7 NovUS3.0
  3. 7 NovIran’s resolve challenges US-Israeli war plans, reshaping regional dynamics: Analysts0.0
  4. 6 NovNews3.0
  5. 6 NovRezaei’s Moscow meeting part of Iran’s preparations for ‘geographically unrestricted’ war: Analyst6.0

Everything we scored from Press TV