US strikes Iran over attack that killed troops in Jordan 72%

By The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL0%

7/19/2026, 4:19:21 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 24 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Appeal to Authority, and Availability Heuristic, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 41% saturation with 392 hits. Analysis detected 2,110 faulty-reasoning hits from 956 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 64.1% and a BS Rank of 72% (6,273 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 71.30% of the article peer group.

US strikes Iran over attack that killed troops in Jordan 
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP)  The U.S. military launched airstrikes Sunday targeting Iran’s paramilitary Revolutionary Guard to retaliate for the killing of American troops in Jordan, further widening the exchange of fire between them as an interim deal seeking an end to their war has collapsed. 
The strikes are part of a weeklong campaign that began with a struggle over control of the Strait of Hormuz and has seen Iran strike U.S.-allied countries across the Middle East. 
The U.S. has targeted bridges, electrical facilities and other targets in Iran, and Tehran has retaliated by hitting power and desalination plants in Kuwait, threatening daily life in that small, oil-rich desert nation. 
Iran also has stepped up its threats to further expand the strikes, drawing a warning overnight from the United Arab Emirates. 
Kuwait and Bahrain again activated air defenses Sunday morning as they warned of incoming Iranian drones and missiles. 
The latest US strikes come after troops were killed 
The U.S. military’s Central Command in its statement also said it hit “Iranian military coastal surveillance and air defense facilities, maritime capabilities and missile and drone storage sites.” 
It said the attack was designed to degrade Iran’s ability to control the Strait of Hormuz and “swiftly punish Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps forces,” a key power base in Iran’s theocracy that controls its ballistic missile arsenal. 
Footage released by the U.S. military appeared to show strikes carried out by fighter jets and by Tomahawk cruise missiles launched from the sea. 
One target site appeared to be in a valley of a mountainous region. 
The Guard often has missile bases and other military equipment tucked into mountain ranges. 
Iran has provided no overall information on its materiel losses in the American campaign, which is now in its eighth day as the nations vie over control of the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow mouth of the Persian Gulf through which a fifth of all oil and natural gas traded passes in peacetime. 
Iran’s atomic energy agency said that U.S. strikes early on Sunday morning targeted a construction site of a planned nuclear power plant in southwest Iran, according to Iranian state television. 
Iran had not previously announced that the site of the Darkhovin Nuclear Power Plant, which it says doesn’t yet generate power, had been struck during the war. 
An Iranian attack on a base in Jordan killed two American service members, left one missing and four requiring hospitalization, the U.S. military said. 
Since the war began, 16 U.S. service members have been killed and over 430 wounded. 
Iranian authorities said Saturday that at least 50 people have been killed and more than 500 wounded in the latest U.S. strikes. 
Nearly every Gulf Arab state has been targeted by Iran for retaliatory strikes 
Kuwait said on Sunday that one of the country’s power and water desalination plants was attacked for the second time in two days, causing fires. 
Its Ministry of Water and Renewable Energy said that the power grid remains stable, yet the attack marked the latest instance in which strikes  by both the United States and Iran  have targeted civilian infrastructure used by millions of people. 
In Kuwait, about 90% of drinking water comes from desalination. 
The attacks in Kuwait and Bahrain were the latest reported by U.S. regional allies, including Jordan and Persian Gulf monarchies. 
Iran has over the past week refrained from striking Israel  which has stayed out of this round of fighting  or the United Arab Emirates, a regional military power. 
The semiofficial Iranian news agency Fars, believed to be close to the Guard, issued a threat against the UAE late on Saturday. 
Quoting an anonymous official, Fars said that continued strikes on Iranian civilian infrastructure would mean that the “airports of Dubai and Abu Dhabi, as well as the ports of Fujairah and Jebel Ali, must be immediately evacuated.” 
Apparently responding to the threat, the Emirates’ Foreign Ministry issued a statement calling “for exercising the utmost restraint in order to avoid dangerous repercussions and the region being pulled into new levels of violence and instability.” 
During the Iran war, officials say both the UAE and Saudi Arabia carried out retaliatory airstrikes against Tehran for targeting their nations. 
The secretary-general of the six-nation Gulf Cooperation Council, Jasem Mohamed al-Budaiwi, accused Iran of war crimes for strikes on infrastructure and civilian facilities. 
Legal experts say attacks on infrastructure  power plants, bridges and desalination facilities  that is used to sustain civilian life can amount to war crimes. 
If no steps are taken to avoid harming civilians, such is the case even if the sites serve military purposes. 
Campaign comes as the Strait of Hormuz remains key to the conflict 
Trump has threatened to target Iran’s power stations and bridges to try to compel Tehran to loosen its hold on the Strait of Hormuz. 
Recent attacks suggest the U.S. military is carrying out that plan, beginning first with coastal areas of Iran on the strait. 
The U.S. in the past week also reimposed a naval blockade on Iranian ports to halt its shipments of crude oil, and the military on Saturday said it had redirected five ships and disabled one since then. 
Iran’s Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, in a statement Saturday, warned of “unforgettable lessons” if the U.S. keeps attacking the Islamic Republic. 
An Iranian negotiator said Tehran was suspending its commitments to the interim deal signed about a month ago and aimed at permanently ending the fighting. 
Iran’s joint military command said that U.S. “covetousness, bullying, totalitarianism or brutality” would meet with a “devastating response.” 
Metz reported from Ramallah, West Bank. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 14.4%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 7.5%Boston Globe: 3.0%Confirmation Bias14.4%This article: 4.4%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 1.5%Boston Globe: 0.8%Anchoring Bias4.4%This article: 17.9%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 7.4%Boston Globe: 3.3%Availability Heuristic17.9%This article: 4.9%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 1.6%Boston Globe: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic4.9%This article: 3.6%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 1.2%Boston Globe: 0.7%Hindsight Bias3.6%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 1.1%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 20.7%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 12.1%Boston Globe: 5.2%Framing Effect20.7%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 2.0%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 1.3%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 41.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 22.3%Boston Globe: 7.9%Negativity Bias41.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 1.6%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.7%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 2.1%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.7%Boston Globe: 0.8%In-Group Bias2.1%This article: 3.8%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 1.3%Boston Globe: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias3.8%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 4.0%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 4.8%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 2.3%Boston Globe: 1.4%Recency Bias4.8%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 1.9%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 1.9%Boston Globe: 0.7%Ad Hominem1.9%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 18.5%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 7.9%Boston Globe: 3.8%Appeal to Authority18.5%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 1.1%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.5%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 2.8%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 1.8%Boston Globe: 2.8%Hasty Generalization2.8%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 14.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 9.2%Boston Globe: 5.5%Appeal to Emotion14.0%This article: 2.6%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.9%Boston Globe: 0.6%Begging the Question2.6%This article: 8.9%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 3.0%Boston Globe: 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)8.9%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 1.8%Boston Globe: 0.6%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 5.5%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 1.8%Boston Globe: 0.1%Appeal to Nature5.5%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 2.3%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.8%Boston Globe: 2.0%Anecdotal2.3%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 9.7%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 3.2%Boston Globe: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)9.7%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 2.3%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.8%Boston Globe: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy2.3%This article: 10.1%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 5.5%Boston Globe: 1.5%Unattributed Quote10.1%This article: 7.7%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 3.9%Boston Globe: 0.9%Quote-first Misdirection7.7%This article: 13.2%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 5.5%Boston Globe: 2.1%Biased Writer Voice13.2%This article: 3.5%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 1.2%Boston Globe: 0.7%Indoctrination3.5%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: JON GAMBRELL: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

956 words analyzed.

Speakers

8speakers30%attributed speech672writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 47 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageUS Central Command • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 53 words • 0.0% coverageIran’s atomic energy agency • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageUS Central Command • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageKuwait • 25 words • 0.0% coverageMinistry of Water and Renewable Energy • 42 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 100.0% coverageEmirates’ Foreign Ministry • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageJasem Mohamed al-Budaiwi • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageUS Central Command • 37 words • 0.0% coverageMojtaba Khamenei • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageIran’s joint military command • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverage
100%flagged-word coverage
36 attributed words13% of attributed speech99% writer coverage
0%10.0%20.0%Biased Writer Voice-18.8 ptsWriter: 18.8%Emirates’ Foreign Ministry: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-14.4 ptsWriter: 14.4%Emirates’ Foreign Ministry: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-11.0 ptsWriter: 11.0%Emirates’ Foreign Ministry: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-4.9 ptsWriter: 4.9%Emirates’ Foreign Ministry: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.