Siasat-e-Rooz devoted its headline to the United States’ claim of a possible military attack and Iran’s readiness. It wrote: In recent days, Trump and its several commanders have been speaking of launching a ground operation against Iran.

At first, they announced that their objective was to occupy several Iranian islands in the Persian Gulf. What is currently going on in the minds of Trump and Hegseth, the U.S. Secretary of Defense, is a grave and regret‑inducing miscalculation. The entry of American ground forces into the battlefield is precisely the event that the Iranian Army’s Ground Forces and the IRGC Ground Forces have long wished for, because they have prepared specific plans and arrangements for such a scenario. If the U.S. military attacks Iranian islands in the Persian Gulf or any point on Iranian soil, it will face a situation unlike anything it has ever experienced.

Kayhan: The Zionist–American enemy is working intensely

Kayhan, in its editorial, referred to the behavior of American fans inside Iran. According to the editorial, the deceitful American–Zionist enemy has shown that it will not abandon trickery and conspiracy until the very last moment. It appears that now—after Washington failed to install its preferred figures in positions of power in Iran following the attack—they have brought these individuals onto the scene to help them exit the war. In their speeches and proposals, they present beautifully worded and seemingly compassionate plans that amount to prescribing ‘surrender’ for the Iranian nation. Through populist rhetoric, they speak of ending the war and implementing fundamental reforms in the system’s policies. These American assets in Iran, through such actions, create doubt in public opinion and attempt to create division among the people and officials. They aim to undermine one of Iran’s greatest strengths these days: the nationwide consensus on delivering a regret‑inducing response to the invading enemy.

Javan: The gap between U.S. political and military institutions is widening

Javan analyzed the dismissal of commanders and senior officials who oppose the Trump-Hegseth war strategy. The newspaper said: The dismissals indicate the widening gap between political and military institutions and an attempt to assign blame to reduce political pressure, and this process could weaken the professional independence of the army. According to experts, the consequences of this event go beyond the U.S. and could lead to a decrease in deterrence, an increase in the boldness of competitors, and a change in the global balance of power. The change in the ranks of military commanders is taking place while the illegal US war against Iran has failed to achieve success in 35 days, and this has caused military officials to react to the continuation of this conflict.

Khorasan: From oil to algorithms

Khorasan assessed the closure of the Strait of Hormuz and its impact on the global digital economy. According to the newspaper, the current disruption in the Strait of Hormuz is creating a chain of problems in the global digital economy:
1. Energy supply shocks and price spikes
2. Rising electricity generation costs and pressure on technology companies’ profit margins
3. Rising cloud service prices for end users
4. Slowing investment in new, heavy-duty AI models
This shows that AI is not just an abstract, software-driven phenomenon, but part of the world’s ‘energy-centric’ economy. The Strait of Hormuz, as one of the most critical chokepoints for energy and trade, plays a decisive role in shaping the ‘cost of producing intelligence.’ Every unit of data processed by a language model is, at some point in the chain, tied to energy and transportation routes. The economy of the 21st century may be built on data, but its pulse is still regulated by the flow of energy through geographic bottlenecks.

Farhikhtegan: America's battle is with the Iranian nation

Farhikhtegan wrote the following about the targeting of the B1 Bridge by the US and the Zionist regime: After 35 days of war, it can be proven with clarity and solid documents that America's battle is not with the political system but with the "Iranian nation". The objective manifestation of this was Trump's reaction to targeting a bridge that was built with the knowledge of the Iranian youth. He presents the targeting of the B1 Bridge as an achievement of the war, while he cannot find any excuse that it was a military target. Interestingly, the targeting of the B1 Bridge was justified by claiming that it was used to transport military equipment; with this argument, almost all communication routes can be attacked in the name of a military target. This incident affected the Iranians and opened the mouth of the US President to speak rhetorically. This scene well expresses Iran's relationship with an aggressor called the US.