The warning came in a bulletin that was reviewed by ABC News.

The FBI warned police departments in California in recent days that Iran could retaliate for American attacks by launching drones at the West Coast, according to an alert reviewed by ABC News.

“We recently acquired information that as of early February 2026, Iran allegedly aspired to conduct a surprise attack using unmanned aerial vehicles from an unidentified vessel off the coast of the United State Homeland, specifically against unspecified targets in California, in the event that the US conducted strikes against Iran,” according to the alert distributed at the end of February. “We have no additional information on the timing, method, target, or perpetrators of this alleged attack.”

The warning came just as the Trump administration launched its ongoing assault against the Islamic Republic. Iran has been retaliating with drone strikes against targets throughout the Mideast.

  • I_Jedi@lemmy.todayEnglish
    3·
    2 days ago

    I’m trying to understand Iran’s plan here, as stated by the article.

    • It takes at least a month to get from Iran to California, so any movement of the drones must have happened during the buildup or earlier. It feels like sleeper agent theory to me.
    • Why would Iran risk getting fucked up by the Coast Guard by launching the drones by boat? The crew will all end up dead or captured by doing it that way, since there’s no friendly ports around. Wouldn’t it be better to send the drones out from some compound Iran bought on land, in the Californian desert somewhere?
    • Even if Iran has a boat under their total control, they can use it better for supplies than military action. If we’re going with Iran sleeper agent theory, it would be better to unload the drones onto some beach somewhere, and then have the Iranian agents move the stuff into their compound. Or, as you say, have some “unaffiliated” dockworkers hand the stuff off to the Iranian agents.
    • If Iran builds the drones on-site or legally orders some drones in the US, then there’s even less need for a boat.
    • Zaktor@sopuli.xyzEnglish
      21·
      2 days ago

      So now your objection is the idea of launching from boat rather than how could they possibly get drones to within striking distance of the US?

      And you think the idea of pre-deploying $35k drones for potential conflict against a president that has been antagonistic to them for almost a decade is infeasible? The county that is known for using proxy forces and smuggling weapons?

      • I_Jedi@lemmy.todayEnglish
        32·
        2 days ago

        Do you have an answer for how they did it, then?

        Oh, and make no mistake: My objection is launching from the boat, combined with getting the drones to the US undetected until launch.