targets

April 14 (Asia Today) — Circle is stepping up efforts to expand its stablecoin footprint in South Korea, aiming to challenge the dominance of Tether through a dual strategy focused on trading and payments.

Tether currently accounts for more than 80% of stablecoin transactions in South Korea and over 60% globally, according to industry data. Circle’s USD Coin, or USD Coin, holds a much smaller share in Korea, at around 10%.

Industry officials said Circle recently met with major South Korean exchanges, including Upbit, Bithumb and Coinone, to expand USDC trading and improve accessibility. The move is aimed at securing liquidity in one of the world’s largest cryptocurrency markets.

Circle CEO Jeremy Allaire visited South Korea this week and signed agreements with local exchanges and fintech firms to promote stablecoin adoption.

With Dunamu, the operator of Upbit, Circle is working on initiatives focused on regulatory compliance, transparency and user education. With Bithumb, the companies agreed to explore integration of multi-chain digital asset infrastructure and stablecoin technologies. Promotions such as fee discounts and airdrops are also being used to boost USDC trading on platforms like Coinone.

Beyond exchange trading, Circle is also expanding its payment infrastructure. The company is promoting its proprietary network to support real-world payments and cross-border transfers, including partnerships with South Korean fintech firm Hecto Financial.

Analysts say this reflects a broader strategy to compete with Tether not only in trading volume but also in real-world financial use cases.

USDC is backed by cash and U.S. Treasury assets and publishes regular disclosures, a structure that has made it attractive to financial institutions. It also operates across multiple blockchain networks, offering flexibility in transaction speed and fees.

Data suggests USDC has gained traction in payments and transfers. According to industry estimates, its on-chain transaction volume reached about $17 trillion last year, exceeding Tether’s roughly $12.9 trillion, indicating stronger usage in real-world transactions rather than exchange trading.

Experts say competition between the two stablecoins is shifting from market share to function.

“Stablecoin competition is no longer about issuance volume but about use cases,” said Gautam Chughani of CoinShares, adding that USDC is expanding rapidly in payments and institutional finance.

Analysts say Tether is likely to maintain its strength in trading liquidity, while USDC could gain ground through integration with the broader financial system.

Circle said it does not plan to issue a Korean won-pegged stablecoin directly, signaling instead that it may participate as a technology provider in a future bank-led consortium structure.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260415010004432

Ukraine has intensified its attacks on Russian energy facilities recently, as peace talks show no signs of progress. Several key facilities have been impacted:

NORSI, Russia’s fourth-largest oil refinery, owned by Lukoil, halted operations on April 5 due to a Ukrainian drone attack. This refinery, which processes 16 million metric tons of oil per year (around 320,000 barrels daily), is also Russia’s second-largest gasoline producer.

The Kirishi oil refinery may restart partial operations within a month after sustaining damage from drone attacks in late March that caused fires. Sources indicate that three of its four main units will resume operations, representing about 60% of its capacity. Last year, Kirishi produced 2 million tons of gasoline, 7.1 million tons of diesel, 6.1 million tons of fuel oil, and 600,000 tons of bitumen.

Novatek’s Ust-Luga processing plant suspended gas condensate processing and naphtha exports after drone strikes caused fires. The complex features three processing units, each with a capacity of 3 million tons per year, processing stable gas condensate into various fuels. In 2025, it processed 8 million tons.

Ukraine’s military reported hitting Russia’s Bashneft-Novoil oil refinery, located over 1,400 km (870 miles) from the border, which can process more than 7 million tons of oil annually.

The Saratov refinery was attacked on March 21, which led to the shutdown of its crude distillation unit. In 2024, it processed 5.8 million metric tons of oil, representing 2.2% of Russia’s refining capacity.

A fire at the Ilsky refinery occurred on February 17 due to drone attacks, with the blaze fully extinguished the next day. The refinery’s annual capacity is 6.6 million tons.

The Volgograd refinery was completely shut down on February 11 from drone strikes, affecting its primary processing unit, which accounts for 40% of its operations, with a processing figure of 13.7 million tons of oil in 2024.

A fire at the Ukhta refinery on February 12, caused by a drone attack, affected its primary oil processing unit, which processes 6,000 tons per day. In 2025, it processed around 3 million tons of oil.

The Afipsky refinery experienced a fire on January 21 due to drone attacks, focusing mainly on exports and processing 7.2 million metric tons of crude oil in 2024.

Additionally, a recent attack by Ukraine damaged facilities at the maritime transhipment complex in Novorossiysk, affecting oil product reservoirs. The damage did not disrupt CPC oil exports via the Black Sea, and U. S. oil major Chevron confirmed that crude oil exports from Tengiz remained stable. Ukrainian drones also caused fires at the Sheskharis oil terminal and damaged an oil pipeline at Primorsk, which saw significant storage capacity losses from drone attacks last month.

With information from Reuters

April 6 (UPI) — Iran warned Monday of “much more devastating retaliation” if U.S. President Donald Trump follows through on his “power plants and bridges day” attacks unless Tehran complies with his Tuesday deadline to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

In a statement carried by state-run broadcaster IRIB, Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters, the Iranian military’s central command, said any repeat of recent strikes on civilian infrastructure would trigger the retaliatory response.

“In the event of a repetition of the attack on civilian targets, the next stages of our offensive and retaliatory operations will be much more devastating and widespread, and their losses and damages in insisting on this approach will be multiplied,” the statement reads.

The threat came after Trump issued an ultimatum full of expletives on Sunday on his Truth Social platform, threatening to obliterate Iran’s power stations and bridges.

“Tuesday, 8:00 P.M. Eastern Time!” he posted shortly afterward, seemingly adding 24 hours to a deadline imposed on March 26 of Monday night for when “all Hell will reign down” if Tehran did not allow safe passage of shipping through the strategically vital sea lane.

Iranian deputy foreign minister Kazem Gharibabadi accused Trump of preparing to carry out war crimes, citing the prohibition in international law on breaches of territorial integrity and destruction of power plants and bridges.

“The American president, as the highest official of his country, has publicly threatened to commit war crimes. The threat to attack power plants and bridges (civilian infrastructure) is a war crime under Article 8(2)(b) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court,” Gharibabadi wrote on X.

There was a slender possibility of a deal before the deadline with Iran and mediators in the region working to put together a 45-day cease-fire, four U.S., Israeli and regional sources told Axios on Monday, while the United States was reported to be “in deep negotiations” with Iran.

“There is a good chance, but if they don’t make a deal, I am blowing up everything over there,” Trump said.

The threat of attacks on ships by Iranian forces has effectively shut the strait since the United States and Israel launched their airborne military offensive on Feb. 28 but Iran has said it could reopen provided reparations are paid for the damage the country has sustained and it receives guarantees it would not be attacked in the future.

It has been suggested that it will begin requiring vessels to pay a toll charge to transit, with the Iranian president’s office saying the Strait of Hormuz would reopen when “a portion of transit tolls is used to compensate for all the damage caused.”

March 29 (UPI) — Iran’s parliament speaker, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, issued a warning Saturday against a possible ground troop invasion as the U.S. military sends more troops to the region.

Ghalibaf made the comments in a message marking 30 days since the start of the war. The United States and Israel began strikes on Iran on Feb. 28 in their efforts to diminish the country’s nuclear weapons program.

Ghalibaf accused the United States of secretly planning a ground invasion of Iran. On Saturday, two U.S. ships arrived in the region carrying 3,500 U.S. service members as well as fighter jets, transport aircraft, amphibious assault vessels and other tactical assets. More troops were expected, U.S. Central Command said.

“The enemy publicly sends messages of negotiation while secretly planning a ground invasion — unaware that our men are waiting for American troops to enter on the ground, ready to unleash devastation upon them and punish their regional allies,” Ghalibaf said, as reported by CNN.

Last week, the Trump administration proposed a 15-point peace plan with Iran. President Donald Trump also ordered a 10-day halt on strikes against Iranian energy sites, though Israel carried out its own attacks on energy sites Friday.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Friday that Iran had not responded to the peace proposal.

“The United States speaks of its aspirations, presenting what it failed to achieve in war as a 15-point list to pursue through diplomacy,” Ghalibaf said.

“As long as the Americans seek Iran’s surrender, the answer of your sons remains clear: ‘Far be it from us to accept humiliation.'”

Ghalibaf’s message came in the wake of a Saturday report by The Washington Post that the Defense Department has drawn up plans for a weeks-long ground operation in Iran. Officials told The Post the plan isn’t considered a full-scale ground invasion, but would involve Special Operations forces and infantry troops.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt issued a statement in response to the possibility of ground troops in Iran.

“It’s the job of the Pentagon to make preparations in order to give the commander in chief maximum optionality,” she said. “It does not mean the president has made a decision.”

Iran has launched attacks on Israeli and other U.S. allies in the Persian Gulf region, including one Sunday on a military camp in Kuwait, which killed 10 Kuwaiti service members. The army said it detected 14 ballistic missiles and 12 hostile drones in Kuwaiti airspace over the previous 24 hours. Since the start of the war, it has monitored more than 300 ballistic missiles, 2 cruise missiles and more than 600 hostile drones.

Meanwhile, Israeli officials said emergency officials were working on a large fire that broke out at a hazardous materials factory at the Neot Hovav industrial complex, The Guardian reported. The Israeli military blamed “a weapon fragment or interceptor fragment” for the damage and fire.

For years, Beirut’s southern suburb has been spoken about as though it were a world apart: A Hezbollah bastion, a target, a warning, or a battlefield. But in Arabic, the word “dahiyeh” simply means “the suburb”.

The word itself is ordinary. What makes it extraordinary in Lebanon is its history.

When the Lebanese speak of Dahiyeh, they do not mean any suburb of their capital city. They mean southern Beirut in particular – a dense belt of neighbourhoods that grew from villages, fields, informal housing and municipal edges into a major extension of the city.

Dahiyeh – in size nearly as big as municipal Beirut – has been shaped by migration and displacement in the past 50 years. While many moved there in search of work or housing, most of the others were pushed there by wars, political unrest, evictions and a general sense of being neglected by the Lebanese state.

The social geography of Lebanon, which gained independence from French colonisers in 1943, began to be transformed in 1948 when Israel’s establishment saw the expulsion of more than 700,000 Palestinians from their land in what is commonly referred to as the Nakba. After Israel’s further occupation of Palestinian lands in 1967 and the expulsion of Palestinian fighters from Jordan in 1970, southern Lebanon and parts of Beirut became increasingly bound up with the Palestinian national movement.

Beirut’s ‘belt of misery’

Dahiyeh’s growth, however, accelerated after 1975, when the Lebanese civil war broke out. People displaced from other parts of Beirut moved south. The subsequent Israeli attacks and invasions in 1978 and 1982 drove more people to the edge of the capital. In that sense, Dahiyeh was not just a destination for “migrants”. It was also a refuge for the uprooted, the poor, and those repeatedly forced to start over.

Studies by scholars such as Mona Harb, professor of urban studies and politics at the American University of Beirut (AUB), show how a common noun – Dahiyeh – gradually evolved into a distinct political space: A stigmatised periphery marked in the Lebanese imagination as Beirut’s “belt of misery” that hardened into a territory with its own social and political significance. Today, it is part of Greater Beirut, woven into the capital geographically, economically and socially, even if the country’s politics may have treated the area as an outlier.

Harb’s work explicitly frames the southern suburb as a politically produced urban territory rather than just a space outside Beirut. To understand how that happened, one has to begin with the making of modern Lebanon.

Under the French Mandate, and later through the political order consolidated at independence in 1943, power in Lebanon was distributed through a sectarian system that heavily favoured the established elites, especially the Maronite Christians, who dominated the presidency and other key positions. The system not only created inequality, but also formalised and reproduced it.

Rural Lebanon, especially the south and the Bekaa Valley, remained underdeveloped and politically neglected for decades. Among those most affected were Lebanon’s Shia community, who were disproportionately concentrated in the poorer agricultural regions and had less access to state investments, infrastructure and patronage than the more privileged urban and mountainous centres. Scholars say it was not simply a temporary developmental gap, but a long history of marginalisation that defined the country’s politics.

Israeli attacks on Palestinian positions inside Lebanon repeatedly hit the surrounding Lebanese communities as well, mainly in the south. For the Shia in southern Lebanon, these attacks sharpened a bitter awareness: They were living on the front lines of a bitter regional conflict, while they were also being denied equal economic rights and meaningful political inclusion in Lebanon itself.

Out of that reality emerged a new form of Shia political mobilisation centred not only on identity, but also on deprivation, dignity and state neglect. That mobilisation found its earliest expression in Harakat al-Mahroumin, the Movement of the Deprived, founded by Imam Musa al-Sadr in the 1970s. Al-Sadr became a towering figure of modern Lebanese Shia politics because he gave social, religious and political forms to grievances building up for decades. That movement later grew an armed wing: Amal.

Al-Sadr’s mysterious disappearance during a 1978 trip to Libya remains unresolved and politically contested to this day. What is not contested is his historical importance. He helped turn the Shia of Lebanon from a neglected rural underclass into an organised political constituency demanding equal rights, representation, and a defining national presence.

The rise of Hezbollah

The 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon changed the Shia political landscape yet again. Israel’s siege of Beirut, the departure of Palestinian icon Yasser Arafat and his Palestine Liberation Organization forces, and Syria’s desire to dominate Lebanon all intensified divisions within Lebanese society.

Amal, which meanwhile had grown closer to Damascus to get weapons, money and political backing, remained a major force. But new Islamist movements emerged from within and around it, shaped by the Israeli occupation, disillusionment with older leaderships, and increasing support from Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, especially in the Bekaa region.

Over time, these currents crystallised into Hezbollah. The split within the Shia movement was less theological and more about political strategy, defined by questions over aligning more closely with Syria, solidarity with the Palestinians, and general resistance against the Israeli occupation. Differences between Amal and Hezbollah over these questions turned violent in the 1980s, an intra-Shia fighting that Lebanese often recall as “a war among brothers”.

As Hezbollah grew stronger, Dahiyeh became much more than a residential belt. It turned into an urban heartland of a social and political force. Hezbollah built institutions there: Offices, schools, clinics, welfare networks and media infrastructure. Amal also had a presence, but the common shorthand that reduces Dahiyeh to a “Hezbollah stronghold” always conceals more than it reveals.

Today, Dahiyeh hosts a Shia majority, but also has a small minority of Palestinians and other Lebanese communities, including Christians. It bleeds physically into what is known as Greater Beirut, including its Christian and mixed areas. So when the suburb is bombed, it is not some isolated military island that is hit, but a deeply inhabited part of urban Beirut.

That is precisely why Dahiyeh is so central to the Israeli military’s thinking. During the 2006 war, large sections of the southern suburb, especially Haret Hreik, were devastated by Israel. The destruction became so emblematic that Israeli military strategists came up with what came to be known as the Dahiyeh Doctrine: Use of overwhelming force and large-scale destruction of areas associated with an armed group, with the aim of generating deterrence and putting pressure on residents supporting the group. Rights activists and legal scholars say the doctrine violates international humanitarian law, as civilian neighbourhoods and infrastructure do not become legitimate targets simply because an armed group is embedded among the population.

That Israeli pattern, however, has intensified since October 2023, when a genocidal war on Gaza and attacks on Lebanon began. Meanwhile, the killing of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah in an Israeli strike in late 2024 eroded Dahiyeh’s resistance. That erosion is more visible in the ongoing Israeli attacks on Beirut and southern Lebanon, where more than a million people have registered as displaced since March 2. The old formula – that Dahiyeh was the principal red line and that any strikes there could be deterred by Hezbollah’s threats of retaliatory strikes on several Israeli cities – no longer holds.

Once again, Dahiyeh has become a focal point of the war, with repeated bombardment sending plumes of smoke over a place that many outsiders still describe as a world apart, but which is in fact woven into Beirut’s daily life. Built over decades by the poor, the migrants and the repeatedly uprooted – and shaped by the politics of marginalisation against those whom al‑Sadr once named “the deprived” – Dahiyeh has long served as both a refuge and a front line. Today, it is again being made to carry the costs of a conflict larger than itself.

March 14 (UPI) — President Donald Trump announced that U.S. forces “totally obliterated” every military target on Iran’s Kharg Island, a key port that exports the vast majority of Iran’s oil.

In a post on Truth Social on Friday evening, Trump described the attack as “one of the most powerful bombing raids in the History of the Middle East.”

He said he directed U.S. Central Command to carry out the bombings after Iran halted ships’ passage through the Straight of Hormuz. About 20% of the world’s crude oil passes through the strait.

“For reasons of decency, I have chosen NOT to wipe out the Oil Infrastructure on the island,” Trump wrote.

“However, should Iran, or anyone else, do anything to interfere with the Free and Safe Passage of Ships through the Strait of Hormuz, I will immediately reconsider this decision.”

Kharg Island is about 15 miles south of the Iranian mainland through which about 90% of the country’s oil exports pass, The Washington Post reported. It’s a critical piece of Iran’s economy and a full attack on the oil infrastructure there could hinder Iran’s ability to pay its military.

Iranian officials said the site was “proceeding normally” after the U.S. attack.

In response to Friday’s bombings on Kharg Island, Iran threatened its own attack on key oil infrastructure in the United Arab Emirates, CNN reported.

Oil has been a key factor in the war in Iran, which began Feb. 28 with surprise U.S. and Israeli airstrikes on dozens of Iranian sites. AAA reported Saturday that the average price of a gallon of gasoline was $3.68 in the United States, up 23% since the start of the war.

This could, in turn, have a dramatic impact on other aspects of the U.S. economy, including food prices, jet fuel and fertilizer.

Attacks on multiple commercial ships in the waters around Iran on Wednesday increased global energy concerns, pushed nations to unleash strategic oil reserves and sparked fresh critiques of the Trump administration’s readiness for a war it started.

As Trump administration and U.S. military officials continued to claim increasing success and advantage in the conflict — and authorities downplayed a reported threat of drone attacks on California — leaders around the world scrambled to respond to the latest attacks and the International Energy Agency’s call for the largest ever release of strategic oil reserves by its members to help stem energy price spikes.

President Trump also faced renewed questions about a deadly strike on an Iranian elementary school at the start of the war, after the New York Times reported Wednesday that a military investigation had determined the U.S. was responsible.

“I don’t know about it,” Trump said when asked about the report.

In an address Wednesday morning, IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol said energy shipments through the Strait of Hormuz had “all but stopped” amid the conflict, driving massive global competition for oil and gas in wealthier countries and fuel rationing in poorer nations.

He said the IEA’s 32 member nations have brought a “sense of urgency and solidarity” to recent discussions on the matter, and had unanimously agreed to “launch the largest ever release of emergency oil stocks in our agency’s history,” making 400 million barrels of oil available.

However, he said the most needed change is the “resumption of traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.”

A vendor pumps petrol from Iranian fuel oil tankers for resale near the Bashmakh border crossing between Iraq and Iran.

(Ozan Kose / AFP/Getty Images)

Several countries, including Germany, Austria and Japan, had already confirmed their plans to release reserves.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment on any U.S. plans to release its strategic reserves, or how much would be released. The U.S. is an IEA member.

Trump told reporters Wednesday that the U.S. has hit Iran “harder than virtually any country in history has been hit,” including by wiping out its naval fleet and eliminating other vessels capable of laying mines, and that he believes oil companies should resume shipments through the strait despite the recent attacks.

U.S. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum backed the idea of releasing oil reserves in a Fox News interview.

“Certainly these are the kinds of moments that these reserves are used for, because what we have here is not a shortage of energy in the world; we’ve got a transit problem, which is temporary,” Burgum said. “When you have a temporary transit problem that we’re resolving militarily and diplomatically — which we can resolve and will resolve — this is the perfect time to think about releasing some of those, to take some pressure off of the global price.”

Burgum said that while Iran is “holding the entire world hostage economically by threatening to close the strait,” Trump has made the consequences of such actions “very clear,” and “there’s a lot of options between ourselves and our allies in the region, including our Arab friends in the region, to make sure that those straits keep open and that energy keeps flowing for the global economy.”

The IEA did not provide details as to the release of the 400 million barrels, part of a broader reserve of some 1.2 billion barrels held by its members. It said the reserves “will be made available to the market over a time frame that is appropriate to the national circumstances of each Member country and will be supplemented by additional emergency measures by some countries.”

The agency said an average of 20 million barrels of crude oil and oil products transited the strait per day in 2025, and that options for bypassing the strait are “limited.”

While some tankers believed linked to Iran were still getting through the Strait of Hormuz, which under normal circumstances carries about 20% of the world’s oil and natural gas, Iranian officials threatened attacks on other vessels — saying they would not allow “even a single liter of oil” tied to the U.S., Israel or their allies through the channel, which connects to the Persian Gulf.

Trump has repeatedly claimed that the U.S. and its powerful Navy would support commercial vessels and ensure the strait remains open to oil shipments, but that has not been the case.

Tankers wait off the Mediterranean coast of southern France on Wednesday.

(Thibaud Moritz / AFP/Getty Images)

The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations center, run by the British military, reported at least three ships struck in the region Wednesday — including ships off the United Arab Emirates and a cargo ship that was struck by a projectile in the strait just north of Oman, setting it ablaze.

The Trump administration and the U.S. military, meanwhile, have been pushing out messaging about wiping out Iran’s ability to plant mines in the strait — posting dramatic videos of major strikes on tiny boats on small docks.

Adm. Brad Cooper, the leader of U.S. Central Command, said in a video posted to X on Wednesday morning that “in short, U.S. forces continue delivering devastating combat power against the Iranian regime.”

“I’ve said this before, but it bears repeating: U.S. combat power is building, Iranian combat power is declining,” he said.

The U.S. has struck more than 60 Iranian ships, and just “took out the last of four Soleimani-class warships,” he said. “That’s an entire class of Iranian ships now out of the fight.”

Cooper said Iranian ballistic missile and drone attacks have “dropped drastically” since the start of the war, though “it’s worth pointing out that Iranian forces continue to target innocent civilians in gulf countries, while hiding behind their own people as they launch attacks from highly populated cities in Iran.”

He also addressed the attacks on commercial shipping in the region directly, saying that “for years, the Iranian regime has threatened commercial shipping and U.S. forces in international waters,” and that the U.S. military’s “mission is to end their ability to project power and harass shipping in the Strait of Hormuz.”

Other U.S. leaders called the U.S. war plan — and specifically its approach to protecting the Strait of Hormuz — into question.

In a series of posts to X late Tuesday, which he said followed a two-hour classified briefing on the war, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) slammed the administration’s plans as “incoherent and incomplete.”

Murphy wrote that the administration’s goals for the war seemed to be focused primarily on “destroying lots of missiles and boats and drone factories,” and without a clear plan for what to do when Iran — still led by “a hardline regime” — begins rebuilding that infrastructure, other than to continue bombing them. “Which is, of course, endless war,” he wrote.

Murphy also specifically criticized the administration’s plan for the Strait of Hormuz — which he said simply doesn’t exist.

“And on the Strait of Hormuz, they had NO PLAN,” he wrote. “I can’t go into more detail about how Iran gums up the Strait, but suffice it [to] say, right now, they don’t know how to get it safely back open. Which is unforgiveable, because this part of the disaster was 100% foreseeable.”

Ships in the strait remained under threat of various forms of attack Wednesday, as did much of the region as the war raged on.

There was an attack on a U.S. Embassy operations center at Baghdad’s airport, which officials attributed to a drone launched by Iranian proxies based in Iraq. No casualties were reported.

Lebanon’s Health Ministry reported the death toll there — from fighting between Israel and Iranian-backed Hezbollah fighters — had risen to 634 since last week, including 91 children. Another 1,500 people had been wounded, the ministry said.

Iranian authorities have said U.S. and Israeli attacks have killed 1,255 people since Feb. 28. That includes many Iranian leaders, including then-Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. U.S. officials have said Iranian attacks in the region have killed seven U.S. service members, with another 140 wounded.

CBS News reported Wednesday that dozens of those injuries were sustained by service members in the March 1 Iranian drone attack on a tactical operations center in Kuwait — which is also where six of the seven deaths occurred.

The outlet reported that the attack was more severe than the Trump administration has revealed, with more than 30 military members still in hospitals Tuesday with a range of battle injuries including “brain trauma, shrapnel wounds and burns.”

Threats extended beyond the Middle East, too — including to California, where law enforcement agencies were warned by federal authorities that Iran “allegedly aspired to conduct a surprise attack” on California using drones launched from a vessel off the U.S. coast.

However, sources told The Times that advisory was cautionary and not backed by credible intelligence.

Times staff writer Gavin J. Quinton, in Washington, D.C., contributed to this report.