What Is Operation Epic Fury?

**Introduction: What Is Operation Epic Fury?**

Operation Epic Fury is the official name given by the United States Department of Defense to a major military campaign launched against the Islamic Republic of Iran on February 28, 2026. The strikes represent one of the most significant escalations in U.S.–Iran relations in decades and mark a transition from years of tension, rhetoric, sanctions, and proxy conflict into direct armed conflict between major state actors.

In parallel with the U.S. designation, Israel conducted its portion of the campaign under its own code name – Operation Roaring Lion. Together, these operations constitute coordinated attacks on strategic Iranian military, defense, and governmental infrastructure.

The scale and ambition of this campaign have drawn comparisons to theater‑level military campaigns, rather than isolated airstrikes or limited operations. The name Epic Fury itself conveys a highly forceful, broad, and sustained effort – both symbolically and operationally – aimed at reshaping the Iranian threat landscape.

Timeline: How the Operation Began

Preceding Escalation

Tensions between the United States, Israel, and Iran had been mounting for months before the February 2026 offensive. There had been:

Increasing clashes over nuclear activities and ballistic missile programs.
Proxy engagements in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen.
Cyber attacks and economic sanctions targeting Iranian financial and industrial systems.

In 2025, there were significant U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear sites under a separate operation, Midnight Hammer. This was widely interpreted as an effort to disrupt Iran’s nuclear program.

The Biden administration did not carry out the early 2026 strikes; instead, the U.S. military action was announced by President Donald J. Trump, emphasizing a shift toward a more aggressive posture.

Launch – February 28, 2026

In the early hours of February 28, 2026, the United States and Israel launched coordinated military strikes on Iranian territory. The U.S. component was formally designated Operation Epic Fury by the Pentagon, which posted the operation name publicly via official social media and statements.

The reported focus of the initial wave included:

Iranian missile production facilities.
Naval assets located along vital waterways.
Military command centers and high‑value targets.
Strategic infrastructure, including sites associated with ballistic missile programs.

The Iranian government confirmed that explosions were heard across major cities, and Iranian air defenses reportedly engaged offensive weapons entering the country’s airspace.

Strategic Objectives

U.S. and Israeli Statements

The official goals, as stated by U.S. and Israeli leaders, emphasize:

Neutralizing Imminent Threats
- Curbing Iran’s ballistic missile capabilities and preventing the development or acquisition of nuclear weapons.
- Degrading Iranian military power to remove the perceived capacity to strike U.S. interests or allies.
Empowering Iranians
- Both leaders suggested that weakening the Iranian regime’s control could create opportunities for internal change, including civil resistance against hardliners.
Dismantling Command and Control
- Targeting key military leadership and senior officials of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).
Regional Security
- Responding to missile attacks in previous months by Iran against U.S. military bases and allies in the Middle East.

From a strategic viewpoint, the campaign is intended to be decisive rather than cosmetic — attempting a significant shift in regional balance. Whether this will achieve its declared goals is widely debated by military analysts.

Operational Scale and Execution

Multidomain Attack Profile

Initial assessments suggest Operation Epic Fury includes:

Air Strikes — Using a combination of U.S. Air Force and Israeli Air Force assets to deliver precision munitions at strategic targets.
Cruise Missiles — The U.S. Navy reportedly fired Tomahawk cruise missiles from ships in surrounding waters, indicating deep, long‑reach strike capability.
Joint Targeting Coordination — The operations involved months of joint planning between U.S. and Israeli military planners, aligning forces and intelligence for synchronized execution.

Analysts note that using both sea‑launched missiles and air power underscores a commitment to overwhelming effects and stand‑off engagement — engaging from outside dense Iranian air defenses where possible.

Target Selection and Spread

Reported target sets include:

Missile and rocket complexes essential to Iran’s strategic deterrent.
Naval infrastructure in the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz.
Command nodes and facilities tied to Iran’s leadership apparatus.
Sites near the office of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Discussions on social media and open‑source intelligence also show footage of missiles overflight paths and debris in Iraqi airspace — consistent with long‑range stand‑off weapon profiles.

Human and Political Fallout

Iranian Reaction

The Iranian leadership condemned the strikes as an act of aggression and violation of sovereignty, labeling the offensive “aerial aggression” or similar by the “Zionist regime and its allies.” Government media confirmed explosions across Tehran.

Iran has reportedly launched ballistic missiles in retaliation, targeting not only Israel, but U.S. military facilities throughout the Middle East, including bases in Gulf states.

Casualties and Collateral Damage

While official casualty figures are unclear, multiple news reports indicate that several high‑ranking Iranian military figures were killed in the initial strikes. There are also reports of collateral civilian casualties, including attacks on a school in the city of Minab.

Global Reactions

United States

U.S. leadership portrayed the operation as necessary for national security. President Trump explicitly warned Iranian forces to “lay down arms or face certain death,” while also acknowledging that American personnel may suffer casualties during the combat.

Europe and Allies

European Union officials expressed deep concern over the escalation and warned that the conflict could spread beyond Iranian borders, affecting global stability and energy markets.

Regional Uprisings and Proxy Shifts

There is speculation (and some reporting) suggesting that Operation Epic Fury could shift the calculus for regional actors such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iraq, and others — either drawing them into indirect conflict or pressuring diplomatic pivots.

Strategic and Geopolitical Implications

1. End of Deterrence‑Only Strategy?

For years, U.S. policy toward Iran largely relied on a mix of sanctions, diplomacy, and deterrence. Operation Epic Fury signals a break from that approach – moving instead to direct confrontation. Many analysts view this as an inflection point in U.S. Middle East policy.

2. Nuclear Proliferation and Arms Race Threats

With Iran’s nuclear program at the heart of U.S. concerns, the operation could accelerate proliferation fears, potentially pushing Tehran to protect or further disperse its nuclear assets, even at great risk. This dynamic may create wider tensions involving Russia, China, and NATO members.

3. Regional Deterrence Breakdown

The strike has diminished the longstanding deterrence norms in the Middle East. A full‑blown military confrontation – even short of all‑out war – opens the door to unpredictable alliances and escalatory cycles, which are historically difficult to manage.

Historical Context and Comparison

Historians and military scholars liken Operation Epic Fury to earlier large‑scale operations — such as:

Operation Desert Storm (1991) – coalition strikes to liberate Kuwait.
Operation Phantom Fury (Second Battle of Fallujah, 2004) – intense ground combat and urban warfare.

While these historical operations were different in context and geography, the defining parallel is scope and intent: applying overwhelming force to achieve strategic objectives against a well‑entrenched adversary. The name Epic Fury itself carries connotations of scale, narrative weight, and psychological impact – projecting a decisive, dramatic operation rather than incremental pressure.

What Happens Next?

Military Trajectory

Operational analysts predict that the campaign could last days to weeks, depending on:

Iran’s capabilities to absorb and retaliate.
The ability of the U.S. and Israel to sustain pressure without significant escalation risk.
Responses from global powers like Russia and China.

Long‑Term Outcomes

Possible scenarios include:

Negotiated Stand‑Down: A cease‑fire brokered through third parties to prevent wider conflict.
Protracted Conflict: A drawn‑out period of tit‑for‑tat strikes and asymmetric warfare.
Full Mobilization: Broader involvement across the region, potentially involving allies and adversaries alike.

Conclusion

Operation Epic Fury stands as one of the most consequential military actions of 2026, representing a stark shift in U.S. policy toward direct confrontation with Iran. It reflects deep geopolitical fractures, longstanding security concerns over nuclear and missile capabilities, and a willingness by some state actors to use force at great risk.