Press TV, on Iran, 7 November 2026

6.0out of 10Serious

Iran

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.2 findings

A senior Iranian security official has warned that any renewed strike against Iran will be grounds for an “immediate, unlimited, and devastating response,” stressing that the country will impose no geographical, temporal, or target-related limitations on its self-defense. The high-ranking official, speaking to Press TV on Saturday, made the remarks in response to the continuation of against Iran. "The United States and Israel keep repeating their threats in an attempt to put psychological pressure on the Iranian people," the official said.

"But they must understand that these threats will have no impact whatsoever on Iran's determination to respond forcefully to any act of aggression." He stated unequivocally that any act of aggression against Iran will trigger a response that would be immediate, unlimited, and devastating, with no restraint. "We do not recognise any concept of a 'limited' or 'short-term' attack," the official said. "Any act of aggression will be met with an unlimited response extending beyond the region."

The official further warned countries in the region that any form of cooperation with the aggressors will turn them into legitimate targets of Iran's defensive operations. "Any attack on Iran will lead to an expansion of the war, not its end," the official stated. "Other parts of the region will not see peace either." The remarks come amid increased US military activity in the region and heightened threats by Washington against Tehran.

The US has recently moved additional naval and military assets toward West Asia, including carrier and amphibious forces, while strengthening air and missile defenses at bases and facilities in the region. The US and waged , which lasted 12 days, in June 2025. Their second aggression began on February 28, 2026, 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. In July, the US conducted waves of deadly air raids on Iran and imposed a naval blockade of the country in violation of the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Islamic Republic, signed on June 17, to end the war. In response, the Iranian Armed Forces and declared the Strait of Hormuz closed to all traffic.

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

Press TV reports an unnamed Iranian security official's warning of an unlimited response to any new strike. In its own background paragraphs it calls the June 2025 war criminal, says Iran forced both ceasefires and calls Iran's strikes devastating, all without attribution. It also uses loaded words such as 'the Israeli regime' and 'the enemy' in its own voice.

  1. States one side's claim as fact

    Serious

    “their first criminal war against Iran”

    Why this matters
    In its own voice Press TV calls the June 2025 war 'criminal'.
    The impression it gives
    That a legal or judicial finding of criminality exists and is settled fact.
    The context
    The article cites no ruling, inquiry or named source that judges the war criminal. It is Iran's position, and the article does not attribute it to anyone.

    Show it in the article

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

    Why this matters
    Press TV gives Iran's account of why both wars ended as plain fact.
    The impression it gives
    That Iranian military success is the established cause of both ceasefires.
    The context
    This is a contested assessment of cause, and no source backs it. The article itself says the US resumed deadly raids in July, which sits uneasily with a settled claim that the aggressors were forced to stop.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“the US conducted waves of deadly air raids on Iran”

    Show it in the article

    “launched devastating strikes against strategic American targets across West Asia”

    Why this matters
    Press TV describes Iran's strikes as 'devastating' and their targets as 'strategic' in its own narration.
    The impression it gives
    That the scale and military value of the damage are established.
    The context
    The article gives no figures, no named targets and no source for the effect of these strikes.

    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
    That the outlet's verdict on the government is neutral description.
    The context
    'Regime' carries a verdict and belongs inside attributed speech, not narration.

    Show it in the article

    “the enemy's military threats”

    Why this matters
    In its own reporting voice Press TV calls the US and Israel 'the enemy'.
    The impression it gives
    That the outlet reports as a party to the confrontation, not as an observer.
    The context
    The official's words could have been attributed to him. Here the outlet adopts the term itself.

    Show it in the article

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: Analyst3.0

Everything we scored from Press TV