Much of the viral “war footage” shared during the 2026 Iran conflict was not real: fact-checkers traced widely circulated “strike” and “missile” clips to the video game Arma 3, a 2015 warehouse explosion in China, an Algerian football celebration, and AI-generated imagery
By Colin PetersonJuly 19, 2026
Where the evidence lands: ContradictedThat specific viral videos and images circulating online, captioned as real footage from the 2026 Iran conflict, genuinely showed what they claimed: live missile strikes on Tel Aviv, aerial dogfights and jet shoot-downs, cities in flames, and satellite views of devastated bases, all filmed as the events happened.
Contradicted. This file rates the specific viral clips, not the conflict. The confrontation itself is real and is not in question here; what is rated is the wave of individual videos and images captioned as live “strike” and “missile” footage. Working independently, CNN, Poynter, PolitiFact, NewsGuard, BBC Verify, Euronews, France 24, AAP, Snopes and Full Fact traced the most-shared examples to sources that had nothing to do with the events they were said to show: gameplay from the military simulator Arma 3, a 2015 chemical-warehouse explosion in Tianjin, China, a 2021 fire at a Ukrainian ammunition depot, an Algerian football club’s victory celebration, and a growing volume of purely AI-generated video and satellite imagery. Several of the recycled clips had already been debunked in earlier conflicts. On the identified fakes the verdict is debunked. This is not a claim that nothing real happened; it is the narrower, sourced finding that these particular viral files were misattributed, and The Conspiratory takes no position on the underlying geopolitics.
Believed by: Tens of millions of social-media users who viewed and reshared the clips; individual fakes racked up seven- and eight-figure view counts before being labeled, and BBC Verify estimated AI-generated and fabricated material tied to the conflict drew hundreds of millions of views collectively
Every artifact in this file so far came from an anonymous or unattributed account, and this one did not. Lead Stories rated on 31 August that a Truth Social post about Kharg Island was authentic: it was published on the US president's official account on 30 August 2026, and it carried an AI-generated video with the caption that Kharg Island was being blown to smithereens. Lead Stories records that there are no reports indicating either the video or such an attack are real. Keep the two halves apart, because the rating does. What is verified is authorship: the account is official and the post was made. What is not established is anything the video depicts, and no reporting supports a strike on the Iranian oil terminal it names. So the usual question this file asks, whether a war clip is genuine, splits into two here and gets opposite answers: the post is real, its contents are synthetic. That matters for how the rest of the material in this file will travel. An AI video of a strike, circulating from an anonymous account, is a claim a reader can discount by its source. The same video circulating from the official account of a head of state carries an implied endorsement that no detection tool addresses and no provenance check contradicts, because the provenance is impeccable and the footage is still generated. source →
A different kind of fake from everything else in this file, and the difference is worth naming. Fact Crescendo rated Misleading on 22 August a video circulating as Iran unveiling its first domestically manufactured submarine. The footage is Japanese: the launch of the Raigei, the fourth Taigei-class diesel-electric attack submarine, built by Kawasaki Heavy Industries for the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force. It was uploaded to X in June 2023 and to YouTube that October, and Naval News recorded the boat's commissioning at the Kobe shipyard on 6 March 2025. Every other artifact collected here is footage of a strike or its aftermath, which is to say a claim about something that already happened and can therefore be checked against what reporting exists. This one is a capability claim. It asserts what a combatant possesses, there is no event to look for, and its effect is on what an audience expects next rather than on what they believe about last night. Note also how little the substitution had to respect. Japan is not a party to this conflict and a submarine launch is a highly specific naval occasion, not a generic crowd like the Algerian football celebration logged above. It worked anyway, because almost nobody has a reference for what any navy's submarine launch looks like. The trail, meanwhile, was three clicks long. source →
The file's first Indonesian entry, and it carries the most useful measurement in it. Tempo, the Indonesian news organisation, reported on 22 August that Facebook accounts were sharing video said to show thousands of US troops landing on Iranian soil, an event the posts dated to 16 July, circulating, in Tempo's own framing, amid the escalating conflict involving the US, Israel and Iran in the Gulf. Tempo found the footage fabricated. France 24 has reported that no US ground troops were deployed to Iran during the conflict apart from an April operation to recover a downed American pilot. Two things are worth carrying forward. The tells Tempo describes are physical rather than digital: soldiers wade ashore through the sea with uniforms and trousers that are completely dry, and a commander issues orders with rigid lips that do not match the audio. Neither observation requires a tool. And the tools themselves did not agree. On the first clip Hive Moderation returned a 97.6 percent likelihood of AI generation while Truth Scan returned 53 percent, which is a coin flip; on the second the two returned 99.2 and 90 percent. Every entry above that quotes a detection score quotes one number from one tool, and this is the first case recorded here where a second tool was run against the same file. On one of these two videos it would have told a careful person nothing at all. source →
A check that confirms rather than denies, which is worth logging in a file about fabrications. On 18 August Lead Stories examined a widely shared screenshot of a map with the Strait of Hormuz circled under a banner reading "NEW U.S. Territory", and rated it true: Trump posted the graphic to his Truth Social account that day, and the official White House account on X reposted it. The inversion is the interesting part. Much of this file catalogues fabrications that borrow the form of official communication, and here the prior had flipped far enough that many readers took an authentic government post for a forgery. The fact-checker's task was to establish that it was genuine. That is a failure mode this file has not recorded before: once fakes are common enough, the doubt stops being selective and starts falling on the real thing too. source →
Snopes published a collection on 15 August gathering 14 claims it has checked about the Strait of Hormuz, and the value of it is the inventory rather than any single item. Its framing of the documented situation: the waterway was still effectively closed in August 2026 after months of war between the United States and Iran, roughly a fifth of world oil and petroleum product consumption normally passes through it, a ceasefire meant to help reopen it had collapsed, and in early August Iran and Oman were negotiating a new shipping arrangement that disagreements over its terms and over wider US-Iran demands had not resolved. Snopes also cites the International Maritime Organization confirming 18 incidents of damage to ships in the strait. Now look at what the 14 fakes actually are, because it cuts against what this file might have predicted. A naval blockade is the most visual story imaginable, and the obvious fabrication is a burning tanker; only a couple of the 14 are footage or images at all. The overwhelming majority are invented speech attributed to named people: alleged presidential posts, a senator's one-word reply stripped of its context, a musician placed at a Pentagon briefing by a miscaptioned photo, a false claim that a named US Navy officer had formally refused an order to strike. The cheapest thing to fake in a shooting war turns out not to be the war. One item shows how low the production bar can go and still travel, a fabricated presidential post asking for prayers to open the 'Strait of Hormel', misspelled into a lunch meat brand and circulating anyway. Every one of these is recorded here as a claim that was checked and found false, not as anything anybody said or did, and this file accuses nobody of anything. source →
Two items from 6 August, checked on the 7th, and both work by borrowing the form of credible reporting rather than any specific credential. Lead Stories rated a video posted by the account @IsraelMilitaryX as AI-generated, with a detection tool returning 99.1 percent confidence and no credible source recording any such event. It was captioned as Iranian fighter jets attempting to enter Israeli airspace to strike Tel Aviv and being destroyed by a newly deployed Israeli laser defence system. Read the caption closely, because that is where the craft is: 'According to sources', 'reportedly attempted', 'is said to have suffered significant losses'. The fabrication is written in the hedged register of a wire desk that has not yet confirmed anything, so it asserts nothing flatly and offers nothing specific to falsify. Separately, Snopes rated Labeled Satire a claim that Iran's government had announced it would reopen the Strait of Hormuz only if the US president admitted losing the 2020 election, and found that some readers took it as real. Snopes notes it spread against genuine pressure over control of the Strait, which is the same trick as the satire item this week about New York grocery stores: a joke lands as news when it attaches to an argument the audience already knows is live. source →
The conflict re-escalated, and the fakes ran ahead of it. On 28 July 2026 Iran's Revolutionary Guard fired ballistic missiles at the Muwaffaq Salti Air Base and the United States Central Command headquarters in Jordan; CENTCOM said the barrage was knocked down and Jordan's military said it intercepted five missiles. Separately, and ten days earlier, Lead Stories debunked a digitally created clip circulated on 18 July as footage of an Iranian attack on a base in Jordan used by United States forces, and the account that posted it acknowledged within hours that the video was fake. The sequence is worth noting for anyone assessing footage: a fabricated attack video existed before any such attack occurred, so a clip that appears to match a later real event is not thereby authentic. source →
The full story
What this file rates, and what it doesn’t
Start with the boundary. Iran and Israel began exchanging missile strikes in June 2025, and the confrontation widened into early 2026 with U.S. involvement. Those are real events, covered by wire services and major news organizations. This file does not weigh the rights and wrongs of the conflict, does not take a side, and does not adjudicate who did what to whom. On the geopolitics, it is deliberately silent.
What it rates is a different thing: the specific pieces of “footage” that went viral captioned as live coverage of the fighting. Feeds on X, Instagram, TikTok and Telegram filled with clips of missiles hitting Tel Aviv, jets spiraling down, skylines on fire and satellite views of shattered bases. Many of those clips were not what they claimed to be, and a striking number were traced to sources that had nothing to do with the conflict at all.
So the question here is narrow and answerable: did these particular viral videos and images show what they said they showed? For the ones fact-checkers identified, the answer is no. That is the case this file documents, a case study in how war disinformation is built and how it is caught.
The receipts: where the clips really came from
The debunks are unusually clean because so many independent teams reached the same place. Take the recurring category first: video-game footage. Clips billed as aerial combat over Iran or Israel were gameplay from Arma 3, the military simulator. Reverse searches by AAP, VERA Files and gaming outlets tied the footage to years-old uploads, and the developer, Bohemia Interactive, had warned back in 2023 that its game was being “falsely used as footage from real-life conflicts.” It is a habitual hoax: the same game has stood in for the wars in Ukraine, Gaza and the 2025 India-Pakistan clash.
Then the recycled disasters. A much-shared clip of a colossal fireball, captioned as an Iranian strike on Tel Aviv, was the 2015 Tianjin chemical-warehouse explosion in China, an event the BBC and others had covered at the time. It had already been relabeled once, as Ukraine-war footage in 2022. A separate video sold as jubilant crowds reacting to the strikes was, per Euronews and France 24, football fans of the Algerian club CR Belouizdad celebrating with fireworks in Al Mokrani Square in Algiers. That one, too, was a repeat: Euronews had debunked the identical clip in 2023, when it masqueraded as an Israeli attack on Gaza.
Finally, the syntheticmaterial. BBC Verify found an AI-generated video, watched tens of millions of times, that showed Dubai’s Burj Khalifa in flames with crowds fleeing, an event that never happened. AFP and NewsGuard dismantled a fabricated “downed F-35” and a bogus “captured Israeli pilot,” the latter traced to a 2021 photograph of a Chilean Navy officer. Even a “satellite image” of a bombed U.S. facility in Bahrain, posted by the state-linked Tehran Times, was AI-made and exaggerated the damage, flagged by Google’s own SynthID detector.
Game footage, a 2015 warehouse fire, a football party in Algiers, and a machine that can invent a burning skyline in minutes. None of it was filmed in this war.
Why the fakes traveled so far
It is tempting to think only the gullible fall for this, but the mechanics are more interesting than that. War footage is emotionally loaded and time-sensitive, the exact conditions under which a viewer shares first and checks later. When real strikes are genuinely under way, a dramatic clip does not feel like a claim that needs proving; it feels like the news catching up to reality. The fake rides an expectation the true events have already built.
There is also an economy behind it. Fact-checkers documented engagement-farming accounts posting conflict “footage” purely to harvest clicks and monetization, which is why X moved on 3 March 2026 to demonetize undisclosed AI conflict imagery for 90 days. Layer partisan and state-linked accounts on multiple sides, each with a motive to flood the zone, on top of generative tools that can conjure a convincing scene in minutes, and the supply of plausible fakes becomes effectively bottomless.
None of that requires believing the internet is one grand conspiracy. It only requires ordinary incentives, cheap tools and a fast-moving story. The result is predictable, and it repeats every time a conflict flares.
How to spot it
The methods that survived this episode are dull and reliable. A reverse image search on a frame is what unmasked Tianjin and the Arma 3 clips, surfacing the older original. Geolocation, reading landmarks, signage and architecture, is what placed the “Tel Aviv” celebration in a square in Algiers. And the oldest test still works: if a truly major event happened, ask whether reputable news organizations are showing the same footage. If a dramatic clip lives only on anonymous accounts, treat it as unverified.
Two warnings specific to 2026. First, do not lean on an AI chatbot to referee. BBC Verify found Grok labeling AI-generated media as genuine, and Google’s Gemini both authenticating fakes and, at times, calling real footage fake. Automated detection is a hint, not a verdict. Second, watch for AI tells that persist even as the tools improve: physically impossible scale (bystanders the size of buses), objects that merge into one another, warped text, and “satellite” views that are too clean or too catastrophic to match sober reporting.
Reverse search, geolocate, and check whether real newsrooms have it. The unglamorous tools beat the clever ones.
The counsel is not to disbelieve everything. It is to slow down for the length of one search before hitting share, especially on the clips that make the strongest emotional demand.
Fakes do not erase the war
Keep the two layers apart. The conflict was real, and this file says nothing for or against any party to it. The specific viral clips examined here, the ones captioned as live strike, missile, dogfight and satellite footage, were, where fact-checkers ran them down, misattributed: gameplay, recycled disasters, an unrelated celebration, or outright AI fabrication. On those identified clips, the rating is debunked.
What debunked does not mean is that “nothing happened.” That inference is its own error, the liar’s dividend, in which the existence of fakes is used to wave away everything, including the genuine record assembled by wire services and newsrooms. The honest posture holds both truths at once: real events took place, and a large share of the most viral “proof” of them online was not proof of anything.
The value of a case like this is portable. The next flashpoint will bring the same Arma 3 clips, the same recycled fireballs, and better AI than the last round. The defense does not change: attribute every claim, trust provenance over virality, and check before you share. That discipline is the whole point of the file.
Watch
What's still unexplained
- How do you check a clip yourself? The methods that held up were unglamorous: reverse image search to find an older original, geolocation of landmarks and signage (which unmasked the Algiers football video), and checking whether reputable outlets carry the same footage. If only anonymous accounts have it, treat it as unverified.
- Why do the same clips keep coming back? Recycled footage, Tianjin, the Algiers celebration, Arma 3, persists because each new conflict supplies a fresh, unsuspecting audience. A clip debunked in one war is simply relabeled for the next, which is why prior debunks are worth searching for by description.
- Can you trust an AI “is this fake” check? Not on its own. In this conflict Grok and Gemini both mislabeled content in both directions. Automated detection is a hint, not a verdict, and provenance beats it.
- Who is behind the fakes? Fact-checkers attribute the material to a mix of sources, state-affiliated accounts (NewsGuard’s tracker focuses on one such category), partisan users on multiple sides, and apolitical engagement farmers chasing views. This file reports those attributions where made and does not assign blame beyond what each fact-checker documented.
Point by point
The claim: A viral clip showed real aerial combat and airstrikes from the Iran-Israel front.
What the record shows: Multiple such clips were gameplay from Arma 3. AAP, PC Gamer, VERA Files and others geolocated and reverse-searched the footage back to years-old Arma 3 videos, pointing to the tell-tale signs, game-model aircraft, impossible camera moves, HUD artifacts. It is a recurring hoax: the same game had already been misused for the Ukraine, Gaza and 2025 India-Pakistan conflicts, and Bohemia Interactive warned about it publicly in 2023.
The claim: Footage showed a massive Iranian missile strike hitting Tel Aviv.
What the record shows: One of the most-shared “Tel Aviv strike” videos was in fact the August 2015 Tianjin warehouse explosion in China, a well-documented industrial disaster. Fact-checkers matched the fireball frame-for-frame and noted the clip had previously been passed off as footage from the 2022 Russia-Ukraine war. It has nothing to do with Iran, Israel or 2026.
The claim: Crowds were seen celebrating in the streets in response to the strikes.
What the record shows: A widely shared video, watched more than four million times on X and captioned as Iranian missiles hitting central Tel Aviv, was geolocated by Euronews and France 24 to Al Mokrani Square in Algiers, Algeria: fans of the football club CR Belouizdad celebrating a win with fireworks. The very same clip had been debunked by Euronews in 2023, when it was falsely labeled as an Israeli attack on Gaza.
The claim: Dramatic new video showed a city skyscraper and a downed fighter jet up close.
What the record shows: These were AI-generated. BBC Verify identified an AI video, viewed tens of millions of times, that falsely showed Dubai’s Burj Khalifa ablaze with crowds fleeing. Separately, AFP and NewsGuard found that images of a “downed Israeli F-35” and a “captured female pilot” were fabricated: AFP flagged AI hallmarks (bystanders sized like buses, a vehicle merging into the road), and NewsGuard traced the “pilot” photo to a 2021 image of a Chilean Navy officer, Daniela Figueroa Scholz.
The claim: Satellite imagery proved the true scale of damage to a struck military base.
What the record shows: At least one such image was synthetic. BBC Verify and The Guardian reported that a picture of damage to a U.S. Navy facility in Bahrain, posted by the state-linked Tehran Times, was AI-generated and depicted more destruction than had actually occurred; Google’s SynthID watermark detector indicated it was made or edited with a Google AI tool. Fabricated “satellite” views were a recurring category in fact-checkers’ logs.
The claim: So many people, and even some officials, shared these clips that they must be genuine.
What the record shows: Wide sharing is not verification, and this episode shows why. The Israeli military publicly stated that some viral clips were fake, and an IDF spokesman called specific Iranian-media claims “completely baseless”; Bohemia Interactive noted that even mainstream outlets and official institutions had been fooled by Arma 3 footage before. Volume, virality and prominent resharers are exactly what disinformation exploits, not evidence of authenticity.
The claim: You can just ask an AI chatbot whether an image is real.
What the record shows: During this conflict, that failed. BBC Verify reported that Grok was labeling AI-generated videos and photos as genuine, while Google’s Gemini also authenticated fake content, sometimes doing the reverse and calling real footage fake. Automated “is this AI?” checks were unreliable enough that fact-checkers warned against trusting them; reverse image search, geolocation and provenance remained the dependable methods.
The claim: This proves nothing real happened during the conflict at all.
What the record shows: It does not, and this file makes no such claim. Debunking specific viral clips establishes only that those clips were misattributed. Real events occurred and were covered by wire services and news organizations. The finding here is narrow: the identified pieces of “footage” were recycled, staged in a game, or AI-generated, and the reader should not treat them as documentation of anything.
Other readings
Angles that don't fit neatly into the claim or its rebuttal, laid out and weighed, not endorsed.
The “liar’s dividend” problem
A subtler harm runs the other way. Once audiences know that fakes are everywhere, genuine footage can be waved away as “probably AI,” giving anyone caught on camera a ready excuse. Researchers call this the liar’s dividend. It means the flood of fakes damages the information space twice: it spreads false pictures, and it lets real ones be dismissed. Media literacy has to guard against both credulity and reflexive denial.
Why this file is distinct from general “AI slop”
The Conspiratory separately covers the broad claim that online virality is now largely faked by AI. This file is narrower and concrete: it is about a specific, datable event, the media wave around the 2026 Iran conflict, and the particular clips fact-checkers identified and traced. It is a worked example of how war disinformation actually operates, not a sweeping thesis about the internet.
Timeline
- 2013Bohemia Interactive releases Arma 3, a highly realistic military simulator. Over the following decade its gameplay clips are repeatedly ripped and passed off as genuine combat footage from real wars, a pattern fact-checkers document again and again.
- 2015-08-12A catastrophic explosion tears through a chemical warehouse in the port of Tianjin, China, an event covered worldwide at the time, including by the BBC. The dramatic fireball clip will later be recycled as “live” footage of several unrelated conflicts.
- 2023Bohemia Interactive issues a public statement noting that Arma 3 footage has been “falsely used as footage from real-life conflicts,” sometimes even by mainstream outlets and official institutions, and offers guidance on how to tell game clips from reality.
- 2025-06Iran and Israel begin exchanging missile strikes. Within hours, old and out-of-context clips, including Arma 3 gameplay and recycled disaster videos, start circulating as supposed live footage; the Israeli military is among those publicly stating that some viral clips are fake.
- 2026-02-28The confrontation widens with U.S. involvement and reported strikes in the region. Fact-checkers describe an immediate flood of miscaptioned, recycled and AI-generated media across X, Instagram, TikTok and Telegram.
- 2026-03-01The state-linked Tehran Times posts to X an image of damage to a U.S. Navy facility in Bahrain; BBC Verify and The Guardian report the picture is AI-generated and overstates the actual damage, with Google’s SynthID detector flagging a Google AI tool.
- 2026-03-02The 2015 Tianjin explosion clip resurfaces on Instagram, this time captioned as an Iranian strike on Tel Aviv. Fact-checkers note the same footage had already been misused during the 2022 Russia-Ukraine war.
- 2026-03-03X announces it will demonetize for 90 days any account that shares AI images of armed conflict without disclosing they are artificially generated, an acknowledgment of how large the problem has grown.
- 2026-03CNN, Poynter, PolitiFact, NewsGuard, BBC Verify, Euronews, France 24, AAP and Snopes publish detailed debunks; NewsGuard opens a running tracker cataloguing dozens of false claims tied to the conflict.
Contradicted. This file rates the specific viral clips, not the conflict. The confrontation itself is real and is not in question here; what is rated is the wave of individual videos and images captioned as live “strike” and “missile” footage. Working independently, CNN, Poynter, PolitiFact, NewsGuard, BBC Verify, Euronews, France 24, AAP, Snopes and Full Fact traced the most-shared examples to sources that had nothing to do with the events they were said to show: gameplay from the military simulator Arma 3, a 2015 chemical-warehouse explosion in Tianjin, China, a 2021 fire at a Ukrainian ammunition depot, an Algerian football club’s victory celebration, and a growing volume of purely AI-generated video and satellite imagery. Several of the recycled clips had already been debunked in earlier conflicts. On the identified fakes the verdict is debunked. This is not a claim that nothing real happened; it is the narrower, sourced finding that these particular viral files were misattributed, and The Conspiratory takes no position on the underlying geopolitics.
Reviewed by Colin Peterson · Last reviewed September 1, 2026 · How we rate
Common questions
Is Iran war fake footage true?
Contradicted. This file rates the specific viral clips, not the conflict. The confrontation itself is real and is not in question here; what is rated is the wave of individual videos and images captioned as live “strike” and “missile” footage. Working independently, CNN, Poynter, PolitiFact, NewsGuard, BBC Verify, Euronews, France 24, AAP, Snopes and Full Fact traced the most-shared examples to sources that had nothing to do with the events they were said to show: gameplay from the military simulator Arma 3, a 2015 chemical-warehouse explosion in Tianjin, China, a 2021 fire at a Ukrainian ammunition depot, an Algerian football club’s victory celebration, and a growing volume of purely AI-generated video and satellite imagery. Several of the recycled clips had already been debunked in earlier conflicts. On the identified fakes the verdict is debunked. This is not a claim that nothing real happened; it is the narrower, sourced finding that these particular viral files were misattributed, and The Conspiratory takes no position on the underlying geopolitics.
What is Iran war fake footage?
As Iran, Israel and eventually the United States were drawn into open confrontation across 2025 and 2026, social feeds filled with dramatic clips captioned as live footage of strikes, missile barrages and downed jets. A great many were not what they claimed to be. Fact-checking teams at CNN, Poynter, NewsGuard, BBC Verify, Euronews, Poli…
What does the evidence show?
Multiple such clips were gameplay from Arma 3. AAP, PC Gamer, VERA Files and others geolocated and reverse-searched the footage back to years-old Arma 3 videos, pointing to the tell-tale signs, game-model aircraft, impossible camera moves, HUD artifacts. It is a recurring hoax: the same game had already been misused for the Ukraine, Gaza…
Why do people believe it?
The clips are engineered to hit hard and fast. A fireball over a skyline or a jet spiraling down triggers an immediate emotional reaction, and the impulse to share arrives before the impulse to verify. Disinformation researchers call this the speed gap, and fast-moving conflicts widen it.
What is still unresolved?
How do you check a clip yourself? The methods that held up were unglamorous: reverse image search to find an older original, geolocation of landmarks and signage (which unmasked the Algiers football video), and checking whether reputable outlets carry the same footage. If only anonymous accounts have it, treat it as unverified.
Sources
- 1.Strait of Hormuz: 14 claims we've investigated, Snopes (2026)
- 2.Fact Check: FAKE Video Falsely Shows Iranian Jets Being Shot Down Over Tel Aviv By Laser System, Lead Stories (2026)
- 3.Did Iran say it'd only reopen Strait of Hormuz if Trump admitted he lost election?, Snopes (2026)
- 4.Fact Check: FAKE video of Iranian attack on base in Jordan used by U.S. forces, digitally created, Lead Stories (2026)
- 5.Iran launches missiles toward U.S. base in Jordan, American official says, Axios (2026)
- 6.Fake, AI-generated images and videos of the Iran war are spreading on social media, CNN (2026)
- 7.Fake images from the Iran war are spreading online. Here’s how to spot them, Poynter (2026)
- 8.Old and AI-generated videos are fueling misinformation about the Iran strikes, Poynter (2026)
- 9.Israel-Iran Conflict: Iranian State-Affiliated False Claims Tracker, NewsGuard (2026)
- 10.Did you spot these fake videos about the Iran war?, Euronews (2026)
- 11.Social media feeds are awash with Iran war misinformation. Here’s how to identify false imagery, PolitiFact (2026)
- 12.Video game footage passed off as Iran-Israel conflict, AAP FactCheck (2026)
- 13.As war looms in the Middle East, clips of Arma 3 and War Thunder are being used as propaganda, PC Gamer (2026)
- 14.Debunking image allegedly showing Israeli F-35 fighter jet shot down by Iran, Snopes (2026)
- 15.Misleading images turn Iran’s World Cup debut into a political flashpoint, France 24 (Truth or Fake) (2026)
- 16.Misinformation during the 2026 Iran war, Wikipedia
Embed this verdict on your site
Paste this snippet to show our sourced verdict as a small card, with a link back to the full case file. Free to use.
<iframe src="https://theconspiratory.com/embed/iran-war-2026-fakes" title="The Conspiratory verdict" width="520" height="190" style="border:0;max-width:100%" loading="lazy"></iframe>Help us investigate
This is a living case file. If you spot an error or know evidence we missed, tell us, and weigh in on where you land.
Where do you land?
Cast your read on this one.
Comments
Add your take. Comments are read and approved by a human before they appear, so keep it on topic and civil. Please do not accuse named, living people of crimes.