Part 2 Anti-Anti-Nazi Barbarian Hordes are Knocking Down ...

[admin]

Iran’s UNDERWATER KILLERS To Blow Up US Warships? ‘Ocean Assassins AZHDAR Spooks Trump’
Times Of India
Mar 10, 2026 #Iran #StraitOfHormuz #MiddleEastCrisis

The Strait of Hormuz, the world’s most critical energy chokepoint, is becoming the focal point of rising tensions between Iran, the United States, and regional powers. Analysts warn Tehran is deploying a sophisticated network of asymmetric weapons designed to challenge advanced naval forces without relying on traditional warships. Systems such as the Azhdar unmanned underwater vehicle, drone swarms, fast attack boats, naval mines, and anti-ship missiles could overwhelm defenses in the narrow waterway. Nearly 20 percent of global oil shipments pass through Hormuz, raising fears that even limited disruptions could trigger major economic shocks and send energy prices surging worldwide.



Transcript

The Strait of Hormuz, one of the world's
most vital energy choke points, is now
at the heart of a dangerously escalating
conflict between Iran, the United
States, and regional powers. Analysts
warned that Thran doesn't need massive
warships to assert control over these
narrow waters. The stakes are higher
than ever, and the potential for
confrontation is immediate and
unpredictable.
Instead, Iran is leveraging a
sophisticated network of asymmetric
weapons built to challenge even the most
advanced naval forces. Central to this
arsenal is the Azdar, an unmanned
underwater vehicle capable of striking
with precision and secrecy, redefining
how power is projected beneath the
waves. The Azdar is an unmanned
underwater vehicle capable of traveling
at speeds of around 25 knots. Analysts
say it can patrol underwater for up to
four days and cover distances of roughly
600 kilometers on a single charge.
Operating quietly below the surface,
such systems are difficult to detect and
extremely challenging to intercept from
the air. These underwater drones form
only one part of Iran's broader
asymmetric arsenal in the Persian Gulf.
Military observers say Thrron has
developed a layered approach to naval
warfare, one that relies on swarms of
smaller, cheaper systems rather than
traditional fleets. Alongside underwater
vehicles, Iran is believed to deploy
swarms of unmanned aerial vehicles,
anti-ship missiles, fast attack boats,
and unmanned surface vessels. Together,
these systems could create a highly
complex threat environment for ships
attempting to pass through the narrow
straight of Hormuz. Analysts say the
strategy is designed to overwhelm and
exhaust defensive systems through
saturation attacks. Multiple drones or
unmanned vessels could be launched
simultaneously toward a convoy or
warship, forcing naval defenses to
respond to numerous threats at once.
Some of these platforms are believed to
operate autonomously or with artificial
intelligence guidance. In certain
concepts, underwater drones may approach
a ship's hall silently before detonating
explosives at close range. Such systems
resemble so-called suicide torpedo
designs, combining torpedo technology
with autonomous navigation. Iran is also
believed to possess unmanned surface
vessels capable of carrying explosive
payloads. These systems may be guided by
GPS navigation or artificial
intelligence, and some are designed to
operate in coordinated swarms. Military
analysts say these platforms can serve
several roles during naval operations.
They can carry out direct attacks on
warships, disrupt trade routes, conduct
reconnaissance missions, or relay
targeting information for missiles and
other weapons. Surface or underwater
drones can also identify targets and
transmit realtime data, allowing other
weapons such as cruise missiles or
ballistic missiles to refine their
attacks. In combination with coastal
artillery and aerial drones, these
systems can create a multi-layered
strike network. The use of unmanned
platforms offers several advantages in
naval warfare. They are significantly
cheaper than traditional warships or
submarines and can be produced in large
numbers. Their smaller size also makes
them harder to detect using conventional
radar or sonar systems. And in confined
waters like the Persian Gulf, these
systems may be particularly effective.
The narrow geography of the Strait of
Hormuz limits maneuvering space for
large ships, increasing their
vulnerability to coordinated attacks.
This strategy may already be affecting
global shipping routes. Several
intelligence assessments warned that
Iran's drone attacks could disrupt
maritime traffic through the straight of
Hormuz for months. The waterway located
between Iran and Oman is one of the most
important energy corridors on the
planet. Roughly 20% of the world's crude
oil and liqufied natural gas passes
through the strait. Since the conflict
intensified following US and Israeli
strikes on Iran, Thran has launched
hundreds of missiles and more than a
thousand drones targeting Gulf states
aligned with Washington. Air defense
systems intercepted most of the incoming
attacks. However, reports indicate that
several residential areas, commercial
facilities, and military installations
still suffered damage. Iran is widely
regarded as one of the region's major
producers of military drones. According
to estimates from the UK-based Center
for Information Resilience, Iran may be
capable of producing around 10,000
drones each month. One of the best known
models is the Shahed 136, a long range
loitering drone capable of flying
between 700 and a,000 km. From Iranian
territory or potentially from ships in
the Gulf, such drones could reach
targets across much of the southern Gulf
coastline. While Iran's drone production
capacity appears substantial, analysts
say its missile stockpile may be more
limited. Estimates of Iran's ballistic
missile inventory vary widely. The
Israeli military has suggested the
country may possess around 2,500
missiles, while other analysts believe
the number could reach as high as 6,000.
Missile reserves have reportedly been
reduced by earlier transfers to regional
allies, including Hisbullah in Lebanon
and the Houthi movement in Yemen.
Previous conflicts have also depleted
parts of Iran's arsenal. Even so, Iran
retains other tools that could affect
shipping in the Strait of Hormuz. One of
the most significant is its stockpile of
naval mines. According to maritime
intelligence firm Dryad Global, Iran may
possess between 5,000 and 6,000 naval
mines, these mines can be placed on the
seabed, propelled toward targets, or
left drifting until they detonate on
contact with a vessel. So far, there are
no confirmed indications that mines have
been deployed in the Strait of Hormuz,
but analysts warned that if such mines
were laid, clearing them could take a
long time. Mine clearing operations in
busy shipping lanes can take weeks or
even months, especially in a narrow and
heavily traffked waterway like Hormuz.
That could significantly disrupt global
trade. The economic impact is already
being felt. Energy markets have reacted
sharply to the rising uncertainty.
Brent crude oil prices have climbed by
roughly 12% this week, while European
benchmark natural gas prices have surged
by roughly 50%.
Such volatility reflects growing fears
about how long shipping disruptions
might last. For now, the danger in the
Strait of Hormuz isn't coming from
battleships or aircraft carriers. It
comes from the unseen. Drones slicing
low over the water, mines lurking
beneath the surface and autonomous
weapons prowling silently through the
shipping lanes, ready to strike without
warning. In this narrow choke point that
carries a fifth of the world's energy,
even the hint of such threats could
grind global trade to a halt for months,
sending shock waves through markets and
nations alike.
News never stops. The world keeps
turning and every turn tells a story.
Wars, elections, geopolitics, Davids
versus Goliaths.
While everyone is celebrating the US
China trade tour, Trump has been quietly
doing something else across Asia.
Were once home to the ancient Silk Road
connecting east and west.
But who's connecting the dots? Who's
decoding the global storm? Welcome to
Times of India videos.
You're watching a special edition of
Global Pulse with me, Niha Kana.
We decode the shifting grains of
geopolitics to you. From Washington to
Wuhan,
everything
all at once. Just two years ago, Canada
was one of the most popular countries
for Indian stones.
From Davos to Delhi, we track the
decisions that move markets, shift
policies and shape the future. No
jargon, no bias, just clear, credible
global journalism. Because understanding
the world doesn't have to be
complicated. It just has to be smart.
And that's what we do best. At Times of
India videos, we don't just tell
stories, we build perspective. We
connect the dots between what's global
and what's personal. What's happening
out there and what it means for you.
It's fast. It's fearless. It's making
sense of the changing world order. Times
of India videos. Because your world view
is just a tap away.

[admin]

Watch moment Iranian missile hit radical minister, Itama Ben Gvir & others - OPTM
OPTM
Mar 10, 2026



Transcript

Welcome. We are witnessing history being
written in real time. And it is a
history that the corporate media in the
west is doing everything in its power to
bury. If you are just joining us, we
have to start with the seismic
unconfirmed reports that are shaking the
Zionist entity to its very core.
According to a flurry of posts on X and
whispers within the intelligence
community, the unthinkable may have
happened. A precision Iranian strike has
obliterated a key leadership bunker in
occupied Palestine. According
to unverified reports, an Iranian
missile has struck what is believed to
be one of Israel's largest underground
wartime shelters in Tel Aviv, a heavily
protected facility reportedly used by
Israeli leaders during major conflicts.
Dramatic footage circulating online
claims a powerful Iranian missile has
struck a major underground shelter in
Tel Aviv, a site some commentators are
calling BB's bunker linked to Israeli
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The target, it seems, was not just any
military installation. Sources are
reporting that the strike, which also
leveled the private residence of
Benjamin Netanyahu, has left a
catastrophic human toll. Among the
missing and presumed dead are two of the
most odious figures in the regime.
National Security Minister Edidomar
Bengir and the Prime Minister's own
brother Idon Netanyahu. This was not a
random barrage. This was a decapitation
strike of the highest order, a direct
response to the assassination of Iran's
former Supreme Leader Ali Kam by US and
Israeli forces. And it signals a
terrifying new phase in this war.
Courtesy of Iran's new generation of
cluster missiles. Weapons that are
proving to be so advanced, so
devastating that they are turning the
vaunted Iron Dome into little more than
a fireworks display. For days now, we've
watched the sky over Tel Aviv turn
orange. Not from a sunset, but from
relentless barges of Iranian fire that
are getting through. The occupation
regime is panicking. They are literally
removing CCTV cameras across the
country, scrubbing the internet of
footage, and imposing a blackout on
casualty numbers because the devastation
Netanyahu has brought upon his own
people in his quest to destroy Iran is
now too immense to hide. The narrative
of the invincible Israel is over and
what remains is a smoldering wasteland
of their own making. Before we go any
further, I have to ask you to help us
keep this light shining. The mainstream
media won't show you the rubble in Tel
Aviv, and they certainly won't tell you
about the Iranian precision that caused
it. They are too busy carrying water for
their masters in Washington and Tel
Aviv. If you value independent
journalism that tells you the truth
about Palestinian resistance and the
crumbling of Western hegemony, hit that
like button, share this broadcast with
everyone you know, and subscribe. We are
here to document the liberation, not the
occupation. Your support is the only
thing keeping us on the air. Now, let's
get into the sheer magnitude of what has
just happened. The news broke just hours
ago following a massive salvo launched
by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard
course. This wasn't just another round
of retaliatory fire to satisfy the
headlines. This was surgical. This was
revenge. The strike that took out the
leadership bunker was reportedly
pinpoint accurate, targeting a location
deep underground that was supposedly
unknown to Iranian intelligence. But as
we've seen throughout this conflict,
Iranian intelligence has penetrated the
Zionist state at every level. For
months, the occupation has been reeling
from a string of humiliating
intelligence failures. And now we see
the result. Their leadership was caught
gathered in a hardened bunker, likely
coordinating the next phase of their
genocide, only to be buried under it by
a missile they couldn't stop. Let's talk
about the two men who are now missing
and likely burning in hell where they
belong. First, Idomar Beng. If you don't
know this name, you need to understand
the evil it represents. This man is not
a politician. He is a terrorist in a
suit, a disciple of the racist Rabbi Mir
Kahan. As national security minister, he
has spent his entire tenure arming
extremist settlers, transforming the
West Bank into a shooting gallery where
Palestinians are hunted for sport. He
has personally encouraged the police to
open fire on civilians. He has stormed
the Alexa mosque compound to provoke a
religious war and his rhetoric is so
genocidal that he once celebrated a
deadly attack on Palestinians by calling
for the destruction of their villages.
This is a man who keeps a portrait of
Barak Goldstein, the settler who
massacred 29 Palestinians in a mosque
hanging in his home as a hero. Beng
represents the pure unvarnished face of
fascism that has taken over the Israeli
government. He is the architect of much
of the suffering in Gaza and the West
Bank. And that is precisely why Iran
targeted him. He was the ideological
head of the snake, the one pushing
hardest for the ethnic cleansing of
Palestine.
If he is dead and the early report
suggests the bunker took a direct hit,
then a great evil has been lifted from
this earth. Then there is Ido Netanyahu.
He isn't a soldier or a politician, so
why would he be in a command bunker? Ido
is the prime minister's younger brother,
a playwright, and a physician. But more
importantly, he is the family's
consiguary. He has been deeply involved
in shaping the international narrative,
running damage control for his brother's
corruption trials and acting as a
liaison to the hardline settler
movements. His presence in that bunker
suggests a family war council, a meeting
of the dynasty that has brought so much
pain to the region. Having both the
political head of the fascist movement
and the brother of the prime minister
vaporized in a single strike is not just
a military victory. It is a
psychological hammer blow to the morale
of the occupation. And how did Iran
achieve this? Through technological
brilliance and a defiance that the West
simply cannot comprehend. The Iron Dome
is useless. We have to say that clearly.
For years, we were told it was the most
advanced air defense system on the
planet. A miracle shield that could
intercept anything. But Iran's new
cluster missiles have exposed it for the
fraud it always was. These missiles are
designed to overwhelm defenses. Upon
re-entry, they disperse dozens of
submunitions, what an Israeli analyst on
channel 12 desperately tried to downplay
as rainbombs that saturate the sky. The
Iron Dome can only fire one interceptor
per target, and it relies on radar. When
you have dozens of high-speed
projectiles coming down like meteors,
the system shortcircuits, it misses. And
when it misses, the results are
catastrophic. We are seeing videos
despite the censorship of massive
craters in the Gushan region, of
buildings collapsed in Tel Aviv, of
fires raging in Hifa. This brings us to
the censorship. The Zionists are masters
of propaganda, but you can't photoshop
rubble. Reports from inside occupied
Palestine indicate that authorities are
going street to street, removing private
CCTV cameras to prevent homeowners from
uploading footage of the strikes. They
are threatening journalists with arrest
if they show the real scale of the
damage. Why? Because they don't want the
world to see that startup nation is
burning. A retired US Army Colonel
Lawrence Wilkerson was quoted in Iranian
media admitting that the amount of
damage being inflicted on Tel Aviv is
very bad and that the attacks are
relentless. Even American analysts are
admitting that the regime is taking a
severe beating. And yet our news anchors
in the West are still talking about
deescalation and diplomatic solutions.
While Netanyahu's home is a crater,
let's be very clear about the hypocrisy
of the Western outrage machine. We are
now seeing headlines ringing their hands
over Iran's use of cluster munitions.
The Jerusalem Post is running stories
about two killed by cluster bombs,
painting Iran as a dangerous aggressor.
But where was this outrage when Israel
was dropping Americanmade white
phosphorus on Lebanon? Just yesterday,
Human Rights Watch confirmed that the
Israeli military is using white
phosphorus shells in southern Lebanon,
an illegal weapon when used in populated
areas because it melts flesh to the bone
and causes horrific slow deaths.
Where was the UN Security Council then?
Where were the emergency sessions? White
phosphorus is a chemical incendiary, a
weapon that burns at 1,500°
F and continues burning inside the
wound. Cluster munitions are
devastating, yes, but they are
conventional explosives. To see the West
clutch its pearls over Iranian precision
munitions while giving a standing
ovation to Israeli phosphorous attacks
is the height of depravity. It tells you
everything you need to know about who
the international order truly serves,
the oppressor. And the strikes aren't
stopping. We are now on the 30th salvo
from Iran since this phase of the
conflict began. Each wave seems to get
smarter. The Iranians are targeting the
infrastructure of the occupation. They
aren't just launching wild missiles.
They are taking out power grids, air
force bases, and now thanks to strategic
cooperation with Russia, they are
blinding the American radar systems in
the Gulf. The US has THAAD batteries
scattered across the Middle East,
costing half a billion dollars each. The
Sun newspaper, not exactly a friend to
Iran, is reporting that Russian
satellite intelligence has been helping
Iran identify and destroy these
batteries, paralyzing the US ability to
protect the Zionist entity. This is a
gamecher. It means the US is no longer
the uncontested master of the skies in
the Middle East. The resistance axis is
fighting back with technology,
precision, and a will that the pampered
soldiers of the IDF simply cannot match.
In conclusion, what we are seeing is the
beginning of the end. The disappearance
of figures like Bengir and Ido Netanyahu
is more than a headline. It is a sign
that the Iranian response to the
martyrdom of Kam is far more severe than
anyone in Washington anticipated. The
precision, the intelligence, the sheer
volume of fire that is bypassing the
Iron Dome, it all points to a turning
point in history. The regime is trying
to hide its dead. But the truth is
leaking out. The occupation is bleeding
and for the first time in decades, the
oppressors are feeling the heat of the
fire they started. We will continue to
monitor the situation and as soon as we
get confirmation on the fate of these
war criminals, you will hear it here.
Until then, keep your eyes on the skies
over Tel Aviv because the equation has
changed. The resistance is no longer
just fighting back. It is winning.

[admin]

Iran’s ‘KILL TRUMP’ Plot Ready? Chilling Missive Sent To US; 'Watch Out Lest You Be Eliminated'
Times Of India
Mar 10, 2026 #iran #araghchi #larijani

Markets rallied when Trump said the Iran war would be "over soon." Within hours, Iran's officials dismantled that claim entirely. Foreign Minister Araghchi said firing would continue "as long as it takes" and ruled out any talks with Washington. Security chief Larijani told Trump directly on X: "Watch out for yourself lest you be eliminated." The IRGC said it, not Washington, would decide when the war ends. Parliament Speaker Ghalibaf declared Iran is "absolutely not looking for a ceasefire." Trump responded by threatening strikes "twenty times harder" if Iran blocks Hormuz. The Knesset Speaker responded to Ghalibaf in Persian: "unconditional surrender."



Transcript

Iran's top officials have pushed back
sharply against Donald Trump's assertion
that the conflict was nearing its end
with Thran declaring that it is fully
prepared to sustain its military
campaign for as long as required and
ruling out any return to negotiations
with Washington.
Speaking to PBS News, Arachi was
unequivocal. firing would continue, he
said, for as long as it takes, and talks
with the Americans were simply not on
Thran's agenda. The reasoning, he
quoted, was blunt. Iran had sat through
three rounds of negotiations with
Washington, heard assurances of
progress, and then watched the US launch
its opening strikes on Iran. A very
bitter experience was how he
characterized it. He dismissed claims
that the campaign had succeeded in
destabilizing the Islamic Republic,
arguing the US and Israel had failed at
regime change and were now aimless.
Iran's security chief Ali Larijani was
more pointed still responding directly
to Trump on X. Even those greater than
you could not eliminate the Iranian
nation, he wrote, watch out for yourself
lest you be eliminated.
The remarks landed hours after Trump,
speaking at a Florida news conference on
Monday, local time, had told journalists
the conflict would be over soon. Markets
had responded positively to those
comments. Tokyo and Seoul opened
strongly Tuesday and oil prices fell as
much as 5% after benchmark crude had
crossed $100 a barrel the previous day.
The calm proved short-lived as Iranian
officials systematically dismantled the
narrative of a conflict winding down.
The IRGC reinforced the position from a
military angle, stating that it, not
Washington, would determine when the war
concluded and reiterating that oil flows
through the region would be shut down if
strikes continued.
Iran has effectively halted tanker
traffic through the straight of Hormuz.
the narrow passage through which roughly
a fifth of the world's oil moves daily.
The International Maritime Organization
confirmed at least seven sailors had
been killed in attacks on merchant
vessels near the strait.
Trump responded with a sharp escalation
in rhetoric on Truth Social, warning
that any Iranian action blocking
Hormuz's oil flows would be met with
strikes 20 times harder than anything
delivered so far and separately
threatening an attack of incalculable
size if Thran persisted.
On the question of ending the fighting,
Iran's parliament speaker Muhammad Bakir
Khalibah was categorical, writing that
Thran was absolutely not looking for a
ceasefire. He framed the conflict in
broader terms, accusing Israel of
perpetuating a cycle of war,
negotiation, and ceasefire to
consolidate its position and vowing to
break that cycle entirely. His Israeli
counterpart, Knesset speaker Amir Ohana,
responded in Persian with three words.
Unconditional surrender was the only
proposal on the table.
Iran's
foreign minister Seed Abbis Araki has
said that Thrron was prepared to
continue attacks for as long as
necessary.
While speaking to US broadcaster PBS
News, Iraqi said negotiations with the
United States were no longer on the
agenda.
Iraqi's remark comes amid the Iranian
foreign ministry spokesperson saying
that Thrron had refused requests for a
ceasefire from countries including
France, Russia and China.
Some contacts are being held with the
Islamic Republic of Iran as you follow
in the news from China, Russia, France
for and even some countries in the
region are in contact with us and other
countries both Islamic and non-Islamic
ones.
Some of them, yes, are actually
willing to act to stop this war or
establish a ceasefire. Well, this is
their request and we are fulfilling it.
The sessation of this war is in the
hands of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
This means that whenever the Islamic
Republic of Iran decides for them to
stop, the ultimate decision rests with
the Islamic Republic of Iran in this
matter because they were the ones who
committed aggression. They carried out
armed attacks. We must actually stop
when we can feel or have a guarantee
that these aggressive actions will not
happen again and that they will accept
full responsibility for their own
actions. These two conditions they must
accept responsibility. It's not uh it's
not like they'll just come today and say
stop stop and cease fire and we'll say
very well and it's all over. We
currently hold the upper hand. Look,
every single effort they have made has
utterly failed. Even now they have not
achieved their objectives. The Islamic
Republic of Iran has inflicted severe
and painful losses upon the Zionist
regime, America and their allies. Just
observe the state of the global economy
and energy. This is extremely painful
for them. So you see, we have delivered
truly devastating blows in this regard.
So we actually have the upper hand here
and therefore the Islamic Republic of
Iran will determine the end of the war.
Earlier, Donald Trump claimed that the
war in the Middle East would end very
soon.
Thank you, Mr. President. On Iran, you
called it an excursion. You said it
would be over soon. Are you thinking
this week it will be over? Are you
talking about days?
I think soon.
Okay. And and with respect to
very soon. Look,
everything they have is gone, including
their leadership.
In fact, there two levels of leadership
and even actually, as it turns out, more
than that, but two levels of leadership
are gone. Most people have never even
heard about the leaders that they're
talking about. So, uh, it's obviously
been very, very powerful, very
effective.
The Iranian military has also slammed
Trump over his claims, even as a Wall
Street Journal report claimed that
Trump's advisers had urged the US
president to exit from the war.
Is Donald Trump seeking an exit from the
ongoing war against Iran? A bombshell
report from the Wall Street Journal has
claimed that the US president's advisers
have privately urged him to look for an
exit plan amid spiking oil prices and
concerns that a lengthy conflict could
spark political backlash.
While speaking to reporters in Florida,
Trump had claimed that the US military
had mostly achieved its goals. So, we're
winning very decisively.
We're way ahead of schedule. Uh it's our
military is the greatest in the world
with the greatest equipment and the
greatest people in the world. There's
nobody's ever seen anything like it.
Iran's a very powerful country. They
were going to take over the Middle East
if we did not hit them. They were going
to take over the Middle East. They had
thousands and thousands since their last
hit. They had thousands and thousands of
missiles and everything else. Most are
now destroyed, but they were going to
take over the Middle East. Those weapons
were aimed at Middle Eastern countries
that had nothing to do with this. They
were going to take over the Middle East
and they were going to try and destroy
Israel. So, we stopped it with good
timing and we're very proud to be
involved in this and it's going to be
ended soon. And if it starts up again,
they'll be they'll be hit even harder.

[admin]

John Mearsheimer: U.S. Already Lost Iran War - No Off-Ramp in Sight
Glenn Diesen
Mar 10, 2026

Prof. John Mearsheimer explains why the war against Iran has already been lost, and why there is no off-ramp. John J. Mearsheimer is the R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago, where he has taught since 1982.



Transcript

Welcome back. We are joined by Professor John Merchimer uh to discuss the war
against Iran, which is uh definitely not going as planned. So, thank you very much for coming back on. My pleasure,
Glenn. So, uh well, as I said, the war definitely not going as uh Trump had
hoped, but u it seems to be going as many would have predicted. Indeed, uh
Trump himself had uh was met with a lot of warnings before he went down this
road. And uh now of course it's unclear what direction he should take. Uh we
also see reports from the Israeli sorry from the American media that even Israel is now growing concerned. They don't
think is that Iran is going to collapse. They don't think it's going to surrender. So what exactly if time is on
Iran's side? why go down this road? And uh the Wall Street Journal said
something similar that Trump's advisor would like to find a quick exit from
this war. So what do you make of this? Is is this u
reaching the end of the war or will Iran not permit this? Well, it's quite clear that the war is
not going well for the United States. uh and that President Trump I think would
like to put an end to it. Uh and the problem that he faces is he can't find
an off-ramp. Uh I think nobody can tell a plausible story about how this war
ends. uh if we had decisively defeated
uh Iran the way we decisively defeated both Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan in World War
II, then you can say the war is over with. We are the winner and we're going
to impose uh terms on the loser. But that's not what's happened here. uh they
haven't won anything approximating a decisive victory and in a very important
way uh the Iranians have an incentive to
continue the war uh to turn it into a protracted war of attrition
uh and they have the means to do that. So the question then is how does
President Trump uh get Iran to agree to
settle this war? When you listen to people in the administration talk, they sometimes talk as if we're the only
player in the game. Of course, the Israelis as well, but the Americans and the Israelis are in the driver's seat.
We determined when the war started. We determined when it ends. we determine
the conditions uh that the Iranians have to accept. This is the sort of view you
get from uh inside the administration. But this is not the way the real world
works. Uh the Iranians have a say in this. And the question is h how do you
get the Iranians to agree to stop fighting? Now, some people might say
that uh we are inflicting so much punishment on the Iranians that they
would be happy to quit. Uh Pete Hexith has been saying that today is going to
be the day of the heaviest bombardment uh that Israel uh and the United States
inflict on Iran. Okay, let's assume they inflict more punishment today than they
have in any of the previous 11 days of the war. Uh, does that mean that the
Iranians are going to throw up their hands and quit? I hardly think that's
the case. I think that Iran has prepared itself to accept massive punishment by
the United States and Israel. So, we can dish it out, but the Iranians are not
going to throw their hands up. And in fact, what the Iranians are going to do
is they're going to up the ante from their side. As we go up the escalation
ladder, they'll go up the escalation ladder. Uh if you start destroying
critical infrastructure inside of Iran, they'll destroy critical
infrastructure inside the Gulf States. and inside of Israel. And they can do
it. They have lots of ballistic missiles. They have lots of drones. Uh
almost all of them are highly accurate. And they're operating in a target-rich
environment. Uh it's not like uh they can't find targets to hit. They can hit
vulnerable and important economic and strategic targets with relative ease. Uh
so they have a strong hand to play. When I say they, I mean the Iranians have a strong hand to play and they have no
incentive to settle this one on America's terms. Uh they have a
deep-seated interest in making sure they get something out of a settlement. Uh
sanctions relief, reparations, who knows? but uh they're going to drive a hard bargain because the more time goes
by, the more desperate we are going to be to settle this one. So all of this is
to say I I don't see what the offramp is at this point in time for President
Trump. I hope I'm wrong. I hope I'm missing something and the war can just be shut down. But nobody's been able to
tell me a plausible story uh as to how you bring this thing to an end uh
anytime soon. Uh I would just say one final point, Glenn. I think if uh the
effects on um the international economy uh are significant, uh it looks like
we're heading off a cliff and that is possible. I think at that point the Americans will uh bring the war to an
end, but that will not be a victory. We will have caved in to the Iranians uh if
that scenario plays itself out. And that is, as you well know, a very realistic
scenario. What you described or what the United States hoped or thought the war would be
like, it it's what we refer to then as escalation dominance. uh this assumption
that one can decide the pace of moving up or down the escalation ladder. Um
this seems to be something that or was reasonable once one is in a comfortable hegemonic position that is one one can
dominate that is to dictate you know when the war starts who should be involved what are acceptable targets
when do we put an end to it but um uh but but it just seems that Iran can't
end this war because if they end it now except some ceasefire then I guess the
main fear not unlike what the Russians are fearing is then that the US would just be back again in a few months. So
um but but if there is no deal I mean if if you look at the Russian conflict if
they can't get a deal which gives them security they will take territory to make sure but on the Iranian side if
they can't get any deal which gives them proper security to make sure this
doesn't happen again. Uh you know they're not going for territory. It looks as if uh well kicking the US out
of the region by eliminating these Gulf States could be a reasonable pathway. I
use the word reasonable. Well, probably not correct here. Uh but uh but but what
do you think is the consequence for the Gulf States here? How vulnerable are they? Well, the Gulf States are remarkably
vulnerable. Um I mean first of all they have only a handful of um uh petroleum
sites uh where they you know reprocess uh where they process the the petroleum
and the liquid n natural gas and so forth and so on. The the the petroleum
infrastructure uh is just very vulnerable. These are big fat targets. And there's no question
that the Iranians can take out the petroleum infrastructure in all the Gulf
States with relative ease. They have the short-range ballistic missiles and the drones to do it. Uh but the other set of
targets that really matters are the desalination plants. uh these countries in the Gulf States
are uh heavily dependent on fresh water that comes out of the desalination
plants. Uh I was reading the other day that there's one desalination plant uh
that services Riad, the capital of Saudi Arabia. And if you take that
desalination plant out, uh you're taking away 90% of the water that Riad depends
on. And overall it appears that the country of Saudi Arabia
uh depends on 70% of its water uh from desalination plants. Uh Kuwait the
number is 90%. Um Oman the number is 76%. I I mean these
countries are just massively dependent on desalinization plants and and water.
you you can't live without water. Just think about that. So you have this
vulnerable set of targets, these desalination plants that the Iranians
can easily take out. And then you have uh the petroleum sites that I talked
about earlier that are few in number, easily targeted and can be taken out.
You can wreck these states. You could take, you know, Abu Dhabi and and just
wreck it. Uh so the uh the Iranians have really serious
options here. And then if you turn to Israel, I don't think that uh Iran can
do that to Israel. But as time goes by uh and as the Israelis run out of uh
defensive interceptors, you know, interceptors that can knock down these incoming ballistic missiles, the amount
of damage that Iran can do to Israel will be very great. And uh you already
see evidence that the Iranians are pounding Israel. Uh and that pounding
will get greater with the passage of time. So this is why it's so obvious
that the Iranians have real options. Uh the idea that we have escalation
dominance and that, you know, we can uh beat the Iranians as we go up the
escalation ladder, I I think is a facious argument. uh they have in a way
uh uh uh an assured destruction capability. They could destroy the Gulf
States uh and that would have a profound effect on the world economy. Uh and
surely President Trump and his advisers have begun to realize that and that's one of the reasons I think they're
interested in looking for an off-ramp now. But then the question is how do you find the off-ramp? And I don't think
there is an off-ramp at this point. And I think what they'll do is they'll escalate. Uh and they'll think that
escalation will solve the problem. Uh this gets back to my point about what
Pete Hegith is saying about today, Tuesday being uh the day when we will
inflict the most punishment uh on the Iranians that we have
inflicted so far. Okay, we start walking up the escalation ladder. But then this
brings me back to my point about what the Iranians can do if they go up the
escalation ladder with us. And the point is they could do massive damage to the
Gulf States. So they have options here and they can do massive damage to the
international economy. Uh so I think going up the escalation ladder is not
going to produce uh uh a satisfactory uh outcome for us, for the United States
and for Israel. Yeah. Given that they're so vulnerable with the disselination plants, it's a
bit strange that the United States would have chosen to escalate by attacking the
disselination plant within Iran because now Iran can almost uh well can
retaliate by the same means without being seen as the the main aggressor
essentially having an alibi to do so. Um but what how significant though is the
attack on the or the suspension of the trade in energy? Um because did you know
many people make the point this also linked into the entire international financial system with the petro dollar
but uh but this is seems to be one of the areas where the Trump administration
is worried again they make the point now that if Iran tries to block the straight
of our moose then well according to Trump's tweet they will hit Iran 20 times harder and now we hear Macaron
also say well we're going to come and help defensively somehow to open up the straight over moose. Uh how do you see
how important is the energy aspect here or what kind of dimensions are there to it? Well, the energy dimension is of
enormous importance. 20% of the world's uh oil and gas comes out of the Persian
Gulf. uh it just matters enormously and everybody understands that uh if this
turns into a long war it will have disastrous consequences for the world
economy. Uh again this is one of the principal reasons that President Trump is looking for an offramp. Uh he likes
to talk about opening the straits of Hormuz. All I can say is good luck on
that one. Uh if that was easy we would have done it earlier. Uh I don't think
we can open the straits of Hormuzz. You remember not too long ago, President Trump was talking about escorting
tankers in the Persian Gulf. Uh and the Navy basically told them that was not
possible. Uh those naval ships, American naval ships would be too vulnerable. Um
so I don't think that uh they can open the straits. The other thing you want to
remember is if they actually destroy uh the petroleum infrastructure in the
Gulf States, it doesn't matter whether the Straits of Hormuz is open or not. Uh
because uh there's going to be no oil coming out of the Straits of Hormuz. Uh
and if they destroy the desalination plants and the petroleum installations
in the Gulf States, uh there effectively not going to be any Gulf States left. Uh
I mean the point is that the uh the Iranians have options here. Uh they can
play hard ball and uh the consequences would be devastating for the Gulf
States. And as I say, then it wouldn't matter whether the straits are open or not. But I don't think we're going to
open the straits anyway. I don't think we're going to put naval ships uh in the Persian Gulf either. Uh so uh I I think
in a very important way um the Iranians are in the driver's seat. Clint, if I
can just make a historical point uh that gets back to an issue that you were raising before having to do with
escalation dominance and air power and even decapitation.
If you go back to the period before World War I, as we all know, wars before
World War I had no air dimension. Wars were fought between armies and navies.
And it was in World War I where we first saw air forces employed by the fighting
forces in Europe. Uh then after the war, this is in the 1920s and the 1930s, this
is before World War II, you developed independent air forces. And those air
forces became very interested in strategic bombing. And strategic bombing
is another way of saying long range bombing. And the idea was, and this was
of course popular uh in uh the air forces of the world and among air force
thinkers, that an air force by itself could independently win a war. In other
words, you would no longer have to win that war on the ground or at sea. You could just take your air force and you
could hit the other country's homeland. uh you could hit its economy, you could
hit its population, you could hit its military forces, whatever, and you could bring that country to its knees with air
power alone. And in a very important way, we tested this um in World War II
and we have tested this theory many times since. Uh now there's still some
people who believe you can do magical things with strategic air power which again is another way of saying with air
power alone. But the fact is there are real limits to what you can do. There's no question
that you want to have a powerful air force if you go to war. And there's no question that in some cases strategic
bombing helps win a war. But strategic air power by itself cannot win a war. It
just can't. The historical record is unequivocally clear on this. So when you
go to war against a country like Iraq in 2003, you definitely use air power. You
remember shock and augen. That was the American air force uh pounding Iraq
before we sent the ground forces in. Strategic bombing came before the ground forces went in. But the fact is to
create regime change and win a decisive victory in Iraq, we had to use land
power. We had to send in ground forces. We couldn't do it with air power alone.
Fast forward to the present. This is a campaign where we have no boots on the
ground. There's no land power. And we're talking about doing it with air power
alone. We're talking about doing it with strategic bombing. This is what the decapitation strategy in the opening
stages of the war was all about. Uh and when people now talk about going up the
escalation ladder, when you talk about Pete Hexith announcing that we're going to punish uh Iran more today than we
have in any of the previous 11 days, what they're saying is that we're going to win this war with strategic air
power, with air power alone. We don't need ground forces. Well, the historical
record again is unequivocally clear on this. You can't win wars, especially
against formidable adversaries, with air power alone. It just doesn't work. So,
here we are in a world where we have no boots on the ground, and President Trump
does not want to put boots on the ground. I mean, serious boots on the ground. Are we going to conquer Iran the
way we conquered Iraq? I don't think so. So, of course, the end result is that
we're relying on strategic air power alone. And what are we going to do?
We're going to punish we're going to punish Iran like it's never been punished
before. There's no question about that. You turn the American and Israeli air forces loose on Iran, they're going to
do an enormous amount. They're going to inflict an enormous amount of punishment uh do an an enormous amount of damage to
Iran. No question about that. But again, the historical record is clear that countries can absorb that punishment.
Look at what we did in World War II. Look at what we did in Korea. Look at what we did in Vietnam. You can inflict
massive punishment on civilian populations and the countries fight on.
Uh a and in terms of military targets, we're not going to get all
those ballistic missiles and drones. They're going to continue to fire ballistic missiles and drones at Israel,
at the Gulf States, and at American military assets. Uh so strategic bombing
is not going to produce a decisive victory here in all likelihood
unless there's a miracle. And I I don't believe in miracles. I hope I'm wrong,
you know, I hope this war comes to an end, but I don't think that's going to happen. Uh, and I think the historical
record is on my side. So, when Pete Hexith and President Trump, you know,
talk about escalation dominance and pounding Iran more than ever, uh, don't
believe uh don't believe that that's going to going to work. Uh, it hasn't
worked in the past and there's no reason to think it's going to work now.
Yeah, this is a problem. How to put an end to the war on stars. I think it was uh Ottoan Bismar who made a point that
uh was something along the line that it was easy to lure the Russian bear out of his high but difficult to get him back
in. You can say the same about the Iranians here though because they they didn't want this war but now that it's
here it's it's very dangerous for them I think if it ends on terms which would uh
will allow the whole thing to play out yet again. So now not to draw too many parallels with the Russians again, but I
also think that for them now restoring their deterrent to make sure that no one goes down this path again is is a key um
a key objective. But this comparison to Iraq though, I mean even if even if one
would introduce ground troops, Iraq is Iran is almost four times the territory
of Iraq and it has almost twice the population. This is a massive country. The I don't know. I thought it was
strange that the idea of introducing some a few Kurdish troops was was somehow going to overrun this country.
It's uh I mean as you said it would contribute probably probably significantly to disrupt and destroy
things but uh but in terms of if if there's an objective besides just
causing death and mayhem then it is unclear. Is is this the source of the
miscalculation though? because the idea that you could regime change a country
only with an air force. Uh cuz you know there had to be a plan. It appears to be have been regime change. And um again in
in this country we actually had in Norway we actually had a political leader of one of the political parties
who who went out on Facebook or Twitter and actually wrote that well now the
Iranian regime has fallen because they saw that Kame had been assassinated. So
that's it. Now the government is over. I mean, is this the kind of the thinking that, you know, you have one bad man, if
we just kill the bad man, then the regime is gone. I It's very hard. It's so remarkably stupid if if this is the
case. Well, that fact that you have leaders, political leaders who think in this way, communicate in this way. It
makes you think no one's behind the wheel, I guess. Well, a couple points. Uh I I think that
the initial strategy and we have gotten at this issue in our previous comments
but the initial strategy was uh decapitation
uh and then if the decapitation didn't work I I believe that we felt that we
could punish them uh in ways that would force them to throw up their hands and
surrender. we would have escalation dominance. Uh and this is another way of
saying we thought we could do it with air power alone. Now very importantly
uh the administration was told by insiders two sets of insiders before the
war that this was unlikely to work. You remember that General Kaine, who was the
chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and was handpicked by President Trump to
be the chairman, uh remember he brought him out of retirement. He was only a three-star general. President Trump
bought him out of brought him out of retirement, made him a four-star general and made him chairman of the Joint Chiefs. Uh so he was in a very important
way Trump's general. Much to his credit, General Kaine told President Trump that
we did not have a viable military option. This is before February 28th.
Furthermore, the National Intelligence Council, which is separate from General
Kaine, did a study before the war that said, uh, you're unlikely to get regime
change and bring this war to a quick end. Uh this was careful analysis done
by the National Intelligence Council, done by insiders. So there were two flashing orange
lights, if not red lights, that were in the president's face that he just
ignored. And as I said to you before, you know, we have a huge body of
literature on air wars and sanctions and regime
change that anyone can easily access and
easily figure out what the bottom lines are here. It it's not a complex
literature in the sense that almost everybody agrees that air power alone or
strategic bombing doesn't win wars. Uh that sanctions have real limits. That
regime change is wickedly difficult. First of all, it's almost impossible
without ground forces. But even with ground forces, the whole process is wickedly difficult. The literature is
unequivocally clear on this. Uh so when you marry what we know from previous
analysis by scholars and policy analysts with the fact that you had General Kaine
and the National Intelligence Council warning the president not to do this.
And when 20% of the American people approved it, but the rest didn't, you
think about that. Only 20% of the American people were enthusiastic about this war. the other 80% either opposed
it or wasn't too sure to go to war, you know, in those circumstances is quite
remarkable. And you just sort of wonder what was Trump thinking? Uh how could he
have possibly done this? And when you look at where we are today, given
everything I just said, it's hardly surprising that we're in a real mess and there's no apparent way to get out of
it. It's just not surprising what is happening now is consistent with the
historical record. And just to add one more dimension to this, go back to the 12-day war last June. The 12-day war
between Israel and the United States on one side and Iran on the other side. It
was the Israelis and the Americans, not the Iranians, who wanted to end that war
after 12 days. Decapitation didn't work in that war. We didn't have escalation
dominance in that war. Uh I mean what more evidence do you need before
February 28th to tell you that this is a bad idea? Uh but nevertheless uh Trump
jumped in uh along with Netanyahu who of course was pushing him and promising him
that we would have a quick victory. And here we are.
See, that's a great point. That makes this even more extraordinary. The fact that we already had this war in back in
June for 12 days, and it was the same problems. I mean, the the weapon shortage, that was a key problem. That's
why they had to put an end to it. And of course, because it was only with Israel, Iran was more willing to put an end to
it. But how does it surprise you the US didn't pack a bigger bag for this war
though, and that they didn't have more weapons? cuz I heard they only prepared for a few weeks at most. Uh but this is
um yeah or was was was it just assumption that if it didn't work then we can just
put it to halt again after 12 days like last time? Well, you're assuming that President
Trump is a rational legal thinker, right? you you're assuming that he does
the careful analysis that you you would do or I would do if we were taking our
countries into war, but that's just not the way he operates. And it's clear from
listening to him talk that he has all these pictures in his head that bear no
resemblance to reality. He's constantly saying things that are just simply
untrue. And if he believes them, you know, you can see why he just does
foolish things. Uh he's recently been saying that uh uh first of all, Iran has
weapons that are not accurate at all. These are all inaccurate weapons.
Nothing could be further from the truth, right? They have ballistic missiles and drones that are highly accurate. Not all
of the ballistic missiles, for sure, but many of them. and certainly almost all the drones. Uh but to say that they have
an inventory of weapons that are all inaccurate is a foolish thing to say. Uh
and then furthermore, he made the outlandish comment that Iran has
tomahawk missiles. There's no way Iran would have took
missiles. How could he say that? Uh and then he tells all these stories about, you know, how we decimated last year uh
Iran's nuclear capability. We basically erased it from the map. Uh but now we
find out that that wasn't true. that 60% enriched uranium that Iran had before
the 12-day war started before we, the United States, bombed those critically
important Iranian nuclear sites on June 22nd of 1965.
uh that despite all that, the Iranians 60%
uh uh nuclear 60% enriched nuclear material is still there. Uh we didn't
destroy it, but he said we did. So, you never know exactly what he's thinking, but it does seem quite clear that the
pictures, many of the pictures that he has in his head uh don't square with reality. And in that circumstance, you
can understand uh how he could be bamboozled by someone like Prime
Minister Netanyahu uh into thinking he could win a quick and decisive victory. And by the way, if
there's one person who was telling him that this was all going to work out uh in a magical way and we were going to
live uh happily ever after uh after a quick uh military victory against Iran,
it was Prime Minister Netanyahu. He's been arguing for a long time uh that the
regime in Iran was vulnerable and all we had to do was hit it hard uh and it
would collapse and apparently uh more moderate uh leaders would take over in
Iran who would be willing to be subservient to the United States and
Israel. But we just had to show that we had the courage. This is Prime Minister
Netanyahu speaking. We just had to show that we had the courage uh to really hit
Iran hard to pursue a regime change strategy. And Netanyahu for God knows
how long had been trying to get the United States to do that. He's trying he had been trying to drag us into a war
against Iran by promising us that it would produce a great victory. But every
president before Trump, including President Biden, avoided falling into
that trap because they all understood that it was a trap and that we would not
win a quick and decisive victory. Uh but anyway, uh it appears that uh Prime
Minister Netanyahu bamboozled President Trump, convinced him uh that we would
win a quick and decisive victory. uh and uh we have not won that quick and decisive victory.
We can say that's another great irony here that is the whole argument that the Iranians are, you know, an irrational
actor. While we see now this kind of a bit unhinged rhetoric coming from the
White House because or only over the past 24 hours, I've seen Trump's claim that uh the Iranians told Witoff that,
you know, they would insist on developing nuclear weapons no matter what. uh that Iran was going to take
over the whole Middle East if we hadn't uh attacked first. Uh we had maybe 3
days before Iranians would have attacked the United States. And again with this attack on the girls school killing 160
girls, very young ones as well. It looked many of them were between eight and 10. I I again I went with assumption
that this was at least well I think a safe assumption that it was a a mistake.
uh you know no one hopefully doesn't target and kill 160 young girls on
purpose but I don't understand first the claim well there was an Iranian missile then find out it's a tomahawk his whole
administration then goes on you know moving away from okay Iran didn't bomb you know kill these girls uh on their
own but then moving on to the tomahawk that yeah Iran could have it I mean nobody else in the administration would
go out you know with such an absurd statement uh just seems that you know governments always lie all governments
but this really you know takes it to a new level to the extent that the credibility not just of Trump but the
United States could be at at risk and you know that's a you know it's a
nonmaterial um asset you can call it but it's still very vital it would seem though
I think if you look at both Iran and Russia whe whether you like the regimes
in those two countries uh or not uh I think the leaders and here we're talking
about Putin in the case of Russia and of course Ayatollah Himei and now his son
uh all the evidence is that these regimes are rational legal that they're
thinking strategically I mean just to segue to Putin for a second Putin is a
first rate strategic thinker I don't know how anybody could disagree with that uh the idea that he's some sort of
fool who's detached from reality makes no sense. You don't have to like what he's doing. You can think that he was
wrong to invade Ukraine. I understand that. But uh he thinks in a very logical
way. Uh I think he has a powerful strategic mind. And I think if you look
at the Iranians, you listen to the foreign minister talk, uh he is an
impressive individual. Again, you don't have to like uh the Iranian regime and
you can view Iran as an adversary, but I think it's very important when you're in a war and you're trying to assess the
other side that you do it in a rational legal way. And if the other side is
smart and clever, that you appreciate that fact and take it into account uh as
you put your plans together for dealing with the adversary. But all I would say is that the United States when it comes
to dealing with Russia, when it comes to dealing with China as well, and when it comes to dealing with Iran, uh you're
dealing with uh leaders in those countries uh who are smart and uh who
know how to think strategically. But then when you look at the Europeans
and you look at the Americans, especially President Trump and Secretary of Defense Pete Exath, and you listen to
them talk, uh you say to yourself, it's not clear that these people understand
strategy 101. Uh it's not clear that they're operating in a rational legal
way. Uh sometimes I think it's quite frightening to hear President Trump talk
about a particular issue because the things he's saying are just simply not true. Again, the point about Iran having
uh uh tomahawk missiles, this is just not it's not a plausible argument aside
from the fact that it's not true. It's just not plausible. Uh and he tells stories like that all the time. So uh I
think that uh when you look at our side of the equation uh it's not a pretty
picture. Well you have um no no definitely you have written a book on this topic that
is uh was titled why leaders lie. So the truth about lying in international
politics. uh how do you make sense of this then or or why because I I remember
from from your book um um that one of the key arguments was that often we find
more lying in uh from from uh liberal democracies. I I remember I cited that
once in political propaganda because we often portray propaganda simply coming from authoritarian states. But if you go
back to Walter Litman, Edward Bernese, all the original scholars on on propaganda, they all made the point that
you know if you're a liberal democracy, then essentially sovereignty has been transferred to the people. There's more
need to to manage the masses. So there was was more demand for propaganda. But
kind of we we we propagandize the concept of propaganda to only mean what other people would do. Uh but but how do
you have any conclusions why how it came to this? Because as I said this is the
stories in the media is is just you know it it yeah it's beyond uh well belief.
It's it's not credible in any way. Let me excuse me Glenn let me make a
couple points. First of all, in in the book that I wrote about lying, one thing you
discover is that there are not many lies told by states to other states.
And one of the reasons is that if you lie all the time, then lying becomes an
ineffective tool. In other words, lying only works when the other side suspects
that you're telling the truth. So if you're a habitual liar, lying is
just a waste of time. So I was actually shocked to discover when I wrote the
book and many of my audiences refused to believe the argument that states don't
lie to each other very much. And the argument I made was that you see
more lying by state leaders to their own publics than you see cases of state
leaders lying to other leaders. And this is counterintuitive and I found it hard
to swallow at first, but I just gave you the logic. Now, as you point out, I also
found that in democracies, leaders are more likely to lie than they are in
autocracies for the reasons that you laid out. So, you see quite a few
instances of presidents lying to the public. Uh,
and of course, this book was written before President Trump. So, how does
President Trump fit with this book? First of all, uh, President Trump uh,
doesn't lie on a lot of occasions because he actually believes what he is saying,
which is scarier than him lying, right? I think he actually believes a lot of
these statements that he makes that bear little resemblance to reality. I
wouldn't be surprised, for example, if he believes that Iran has tomahawk missiles. He he he he has a lot of false
beliefs firmly embedded in his brain. So that's point one. Point two is I do
think that he tells lots of lies. I think he lies, one could argue, almost
all the time. He He's constantly telling lies, but the fact is that they're
ineffective because everybody understands that he's lying. He he just
says whatever he thinks. As I said before, he may believe some of those things and if he believes them, then
they're not lies. But then there are other occasions where he says things that he has to know are not true. But
the fact that he tells so many lies means that lying is not an effective
instrument for him. Lying again is only effective when people think that you're
a trutht teller or that you're not going to lie. If you and I have a personal relationship that had spanned 25 years
and we've had a huge number of interactions, you Glenn and I, right? And I've always been truthful to you.
It's easy for me to lie to you because you trust me and you let your guard
down. But if you've dealt with me for 25 years, we're friends, but you know that I lie all the time. I really can't get
away with a meaningful lie because you just don't trust me. You see the logic? So, I think with regard to President
Trump, the fact that he lies uh just doesn't make that much difference. It doesn't buy him anything. And if
anything, because some people think some of the time that he really believes what he says, you think that he's not playing
with the full deck. Well, I'm I'm glad you well before
pivoted a bit towards Russia because that seems to be a possible well an important component now. Uh well, for
for two reasons, I guess. One would be um uh well, how how do you see Russia's
involvement here? There's been a lot of noise in the media that uh the Russians are providing intelligence to Iran to
yeah to hit American targets. I um yeah I kind of assume that this was
happening. I think I assume the Chinese were doing the same as they have a concern of course that Iran could be
defeated. Uh but also of course because well the United States is doing the exact same thing in Ukraine. But but
also how what do you think the the extent of the Russian involvement is? But also how do you think this war is
affecting uh our war in Ukraine at the moment?
I think uh to start with the latter part of your questioning that uh this war is
wonderful news for the Russians. Uh first of all, it means that the United
States is wasting precious assets in this fight that it might otherwise give
to the Europeans or allow the Europeans to buy to give to the Ukrainians. Uh I think that there's
no question that this is hurting Ukraine's efforts on the battlefield
because we're expending huge amounts of munitions in this fight. uh you know,
patriots, thads, things like that are being uh used. Uh and and by the way,
you notice that we're bringing uh THADs and patriots from East Asia uh to the
Middle East. Uh and this means that uh we're weakening our deterrent uh against
China. Uh we're weakening our containment policy visa v China. Going
back to the Russians, uh the Russians fully understand uh that this is going
to have delletterious effects for the Ukrainians. U furthermore, uh as you
know, uh the United States has been working overtime, the West has been
working overtime uh to inflict pain on the Russian economy. Uh and this is
going to have this war is going to have the opposite effect. uh if you know the flow of oil and gas
out of the Persian Gulf is greatly reduced that means the demand uh for
Russian oil and gas is going to go up and we already see evidence that the
United States is willing to allow India now to buy more oil from the Russians
because India is hurting as a result of the cut off in the Gulf. Uh so
economically this is wonderful news for Russia and again in terms of the battlefield it's wonderful news. So um
uh so I think this is a net positive from for the Russians from that point of view. Uh with regard to what the
Russians are doing to help the Iranians as you know that's hard to tell. Uh, I
think that it is quite clear that the Russians are providing intelligence for
the Iranians and that that that intelligence is helping the Iranians wage the war. Uh, and it's limiting uh
what the Americans and the Israelis can do to defend against Iranian ballistic missiles. Uh, so I think that uh is
almost certainly uh being done. Uh, and I wouldn't be surprised if at some point
if Iran needs oil, uh, that the Russians provide oil or gas to the Iranians. It's
hard to say for sure what's going on there, but that's another possibility. And I wouldn't be surprised if they
provided some weaponry before the war and they'll provide weaponry during the
war. What exactly they'll provide uh, in terms of numbers and quality, who knows?
Uh but uh I wouldn't be surprised if the Russians and the Chinese as well are
helping the Iranians. Both of those countries obviously have a deep-seated interest and seeing Iran defeat the
United States and Israel in this war. I mean, if you or I were playing China's
hand or playing Russia's hand, uh, we would want to see the United States
suffer a humiliating defeat, uh, in its fight with Iran. So, the incentives here
for Russia and China to help Iran are great, and exactly what they're doing is
hard to say, but it does look like uh they're helping out, especially with regard to intelligence. and that's
complicating our problem. It seems another benefit for the
Russians though would be to I guess improve their image within Iran because
you know if you take a step back and stretch out for you know viewpoint over the past centuries now the Iranians and
the Russians have um you know they had quite a few wars behind them and there's every reason in the war in the world for
the Iranians to distrust the Russians as well. This is a I guess a good opportunity for the Russians though to
be seen as a savior instead of a nemesis or you know someone who who will you
know stab them in the back at the most critical hour. Um but uh it's um yeah I
my last question was really about Europe though because it doesn't it it also has
well responded in some very strange ways. uh the the EU of course is you
know is giving its uh full full support at least rhetorically. I think Mertz he
positions himself now as the number one Trump man to support whatever Trump wants to do. The British are also of
course supportive but they didn't want to send any weapons then now they do want to send weapons but Trump doesn't want it because according to Trump they
already won. uh how how do you make sense of the European position on this and uh you know how much what's the
relevance of French participation you think and uh how are how is Europe
impacted by this war because you know we just cut oursel off or we like to say liberated oursel from Russian energy and
now the Iranians are liberating us from Middle Eastern energy. It's uh it's not
much more uh you know coming our way it seems. I I think the e the economic
consequences for Europe uh if this war escalates and
some of the scenarios we described at the start of the program play out uh the
consequences of that for Europe would be catastrophic. Uh and I think the
European elites understand that. I I think they wish very much that this war
had never started. This is a war that is not good for Europe. But as is almost
always the case, the Europeans do pretty much what the Americans want them to do.
And they're kissing up to the Americans and uh supporting the American war
effort. Uh failing to condemn the United States and Israel for this brazen war of
aggression, for assassinating the leader of a foreign country. The Europeans are
not condemning this. Safe for the Spanish. Uh and uh it's really what you
would expect from the Europeans. And what drives this, as we've talked about many times before, Glenn, is the
European fear that the United States will leave Europe or at least marketkedly reduce its military
footprint. Uh the Europeans don't want that. They want to keep NATO intact. They want to keep the Americans fully
committed to Europe. And the European elites believe that the only way you can do that is to lick America's boots. Uh
and in this case that means lick President Trump's boots. And so as you
would expect the Europeans are following the Pied Piper. Uh the question is do
the Europeans matter uh in terms of winning this war? And the answer is no.
Uh I mean who cares whether the Europeans get involved or not? uh maybe
they'll uh help on the margins, but that just doesn't matter at this point.
There's nothing the Europeans can do uh to, you know, fundamentally affect the
balance of power between Iran on one side and the United States and Israel on the other side. I mean, President
Mcronone talks like uh this is uh 1799
or 1805 where France is, you know, under Napoleon and by far the most powerful
state in Europe. It's it's Europe's Godzilla and France can do X Y and Z.
Those days are long gone. France has very little military capability and it
certainly has little capability to affect events in the Middle East. Uh so
it just doesn't matter very much. This war is going to be settled between the Iranians on one side and the Americans
and the Israelis on the other side. And what's in the interests of those three
actors is what really matters here. And from Europe's point of view, the sad
truth is that their interests are going to be largely ignored because the Americans are just not going to pay
Europe's interests much attention. we don't care that much about Europe.
President Trump views the Europeans uh with contempt. Uh the idea that he's
going to go out of his way to help Europe uh is not a serious argument. Uh
in fact, if the Europeans get hurt in the process, I would imagine that President Trump will uh think that's a
good thing. You know, he has contempt for the European elites. So, Europe is in real trouble. uh it started with the
Ukraine war uh and this war just makes a bad situation much worse.
That seems like again I I always agreed with the idea that the United States is the pacifier and we and Europe's going
to have a lot of problems fragmenting if uh not so much if more than when the
United States departs. But it it looks as if the efforts now to keep the US there is well will only fragment Europe
faster because want to keep the US thereby prolonging the Ukraine war which means we're turning we turn on the
Slovakians the Hungarians uh you know ignore them or now that uh Mertz was
sitting next to Trump and Trump could just hammer away threatening Spain and you know Mers has to sit there obediently not say anything critical
because he has to show loyalty to Trump and now of course They're alienating the Spanish. So, it just seems, you know,
always the worst of both worlds is what the Europeans are are going for. It's quite Yeah, it's quite extraordinary to
watch. Uh doesn't give one a lot of optimism. Um
Yes. Let me let me make a radical statement, Glenn.
I think that one could make an argument that it's in the Europeans's interest to
in effect pursue the Spanish model visa v the United States to play hard ball
with the United States to tell the United States that uh you're going to
greatly improve your relations with China. You're going to trade with China
and you're going to trade sophisticated technologies with the Chinese. And if the Americans don't like that, well,
we'll cut a deal then. But, uh, in the meantime, we're going to fundamentally
change our relationship with China. Uh, and furthermore, with regard to the
Middle East, we're going to condemn what you're doing in the most powerful terms. And we're even going to look for ways to
punish you. Uh, we're going to condemn you for starting a war of aggression.
We're going to condemn you uh for collaborating with the Israelis and waging a genocide. We're going to
condemn you for assassinating Ayatolli Hani. Uh pursuing a really hard ball
strategy with the United States. And given that the United States needs
Europe in all sorts of ways, that will provide the Europeans with some leverage
so that they can protect their own interests. Uh, and what we're saying here is that
by constantly cowtowing to the Americans, by licking President Trump's
boots, you put your situation, you put yourself in a situation where your
interests are not protected. And if anything, your interests are hurt and uh you're getting yourself into more and
more trouble as the years go by. Uh, that's the way I'd look at it if I were a European. But again, this is a radical
argument and the Europeans brains have been grooved to think that this is heresy that, you know, the arguments I'm
making are wrong. They're just simply wrong. We don't have to analyze them. We just dismissed them out of hand. We've
learned all along that the only way to deal with the United States is to be nice and to be subservient. Uh that
might have been true at one point, but I don't think that's true with President Trump. And I'm surprised they haven't
figured that out. Uh, I think the Spanish leader has figured that out. Uh,
President Trump is a classic bully. Uh, in many ways the United States is a country that is a bully and long has
been a bully. But President Trump is a classic bully. And the only way you deal with a bully is you stand up to that
bully. And if you show weakness, the bully will walk all over you. And of course, this is what President Trump is
doing with the Europeans. He walks all over them. He doesn't pay attention to their interests. He does what he thinks
is in America's interest and if that hurts the Europeans, tough luck for them. That's his approach. Uh and you
would think that the Europeans would have learned this by now and would have
altered their policies towards the United States in fundamental ways. But
apparently that's not the case. No, I just like say I don't think it's radical at all. I I always make the
point as well that the most important partner for Europe should be the United States. But if you want to keep this
relationship then you know the Europe should do exactly the opposite of what it instincts tells it. That is not to
put all its eggs in that one basket. What you want to do is diversify work with the Russians, the Chinese, the
Indians and all others. Because if you have this asymmetrical interdependence where all of Europe's relations depend
on the US but Europe is not really that important to the US. With this asymmetry, the US can walk all over
Europe and the relationship isn't any more sustainable. So if you want to save the relationship, you need a balance of
dependence, diversify as well. I mean, this is the logic of the Russians. For them, the R the Chinese relationship is
the most important to have. But they also realize there's a symmetry there that they would become much too
dependent on China compared to China's depends on Russia. So they recognize if they want the Chinese relationship to
work, you diversify as well. also deal with the Indians and all others and you know but I think the mindset in Europe
is just well America's our liberal democratic partner so let's just show our loyalty let's cut oursel off from
the Russians cut oursel off from the Chinese you know threaten the Indians a little bit and now the Americans will
reward us for our loyalty and you know sit in front of his desk call him daddy and somehow everything will be fine it's
it's very strange I don't understand where where the thinking is But um yeah
yeah yeah with with regard to India uh I I've given a number of talks in India
recently and I was recently in Mumbai and my advice to the Indians I hate to say this as an American but if I were an
Indian uh I would not get too close to the United States. Uh as I like to say
the United States is a rogue elephant and uh uh if India gets close it will
pay a certain price. It discovered this last year when we put when President Trump put 50% tariffs on India. Uh and
uh uh I think that that basic logic which applies to India applies to the
Europeans as well. You just do not want to get too close to the United States because when you do that, you give the
United States all the leverage and the United States will use that leverage. That's certainly true of President
Trump. So you want to give the United States as little leverage over you as
possible and you want to maximize the amount of leverage that you have over the United States. This is my point
about trading with China. The United States has a vested interest in making sure that European states don't trade
sophisticated technologies with the Chinese. Okay. But that tells me that
the Europeans therefore have leverage. They can threaten to trade sophisticated
technologies with the Chinese. The Americans will not want that. And the
Europeans can exact the quidd proquo from the Americans uh if they cut off
the flow of uh cutting edge technologies to uh China.
Well, thank you very much, John, for taking the time. As always, uh I always learn a lot listening to you. So, uh
thank you and I hope you come back on soon. Thank you for having me, Glenn. Uh, I enjoyed the conversation. I just
wish the subject wasn't so depressing.

[admin]

Iran 'rejects' Trump's announcement to end war; showcases offensive capabilities | Janta Ka Reporter
Janta Ka Reporter
Mar 10, 2026

Minutes after Donald Trump told reporters that the US mission in Iran would soon end, Iran struck Tel Aviv with the Khorramshahr-4 as officials turned down the US president's offer. The Islamic Republic has laid down conditions for the Arab and European countries to have their ships sail through the Strait of Hormuz. Rifat Jawaid examines the circumstances that may have prompted Trump to consider ending his operation against Iran.





Transcript

In my last video, I told you about
Donald Trump literally conceding defeat
when he said his Iran war was almost
complete. But that wasn't the real
story. The real story is the
circumstances that forced this deranged
occupant of the White House to find a
way out of this quagmire that he has
allowed himself to be dragged into since
he's the president of the US supposedly
the most powerful country in the world.
So he has to do some face saving. Hence,
subsequent utterances by him and his
minion Pete Hexet on boasting about the
USA's military prowess. Here's what
Trump has said about intending to end
his country's illegal invasion of Iran.
So, we're winning very decisively.
We're way ahead of schedule. Uh it's our
military is the greatest in the world
with the greatest equipment and the
greatest people in the world. is
nobody's ever seen anything like it.
Iran's a very powerful country. They
were going to take over the Middle East.
If we did not hit them, they were going
to take over the Middle East. They had
thousands and thousands since their last
hit. They had thousands and thousands of
missiles and everything else. Most are
now destroyed. But they were going to
take over the Middle East. Those weapons
were aimed at Middle Eastern countries
that had nothing to do with this. They
were going to take over the Middle East
and they were going to try and destroy
Israel. So, we stopped it with good
timing and we're very proud to be
involved in this and it's going to be
ended soon.
Thank you. Uh, Mr. President, you've
said the war is quote very complete, but
your defense secretary says this is just
the beginning. So, which is it and how
long should Americans be?
Well, I think you could say both.
However, the Iranians do not want to end
this war. And this is where Trump and
his terrorist friends would find
themselves in real trouble. How do you
deal with a situation where despite
being the most powerful country in the
world, at least on paper, you have been
forced to concede defeat, but your enemy
who you said wasn't so powerful, is in
no mood to end this war. What does it
say about the most powerful country in
the world? It says that this country is
in reality a coward and its claims of
having the most powerful military in the
world is a joke. Just listen to
professor Marandi, a person who was
instrumental in the negotiation of the
JCPOA in 2015 and is very close to the
Iranian establishment. Do his words give
you the impression that Iran really
wants a ceasefire? We will no longer
accept the status quo. The region has to
change. We will not allow the United
States or the Israeli regime to be able
to threaten us again.
In other words, the Iranians will push
this war
until the United States and the West
recognize that attacking Iran is not an
option. Not now and not ever again.
So this war is not going to end
anytime soon unless the other side
capitulates.
And even when the other side backs down,
there will be changes. Iran will not
accept
Arab family dictatorships
hosting US bases that can harm us. and
they will have to pay compensation
for the slaughter and the murder that
has been carried out. None of these
regimes
are innocent, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the
Emirates, Bahrain, Kuwait,
Oman. None of them are innocent. All of
them host US bases. All of those US
bases have been used to conspire against
Iran. All of them have been used to kill
Iranians,
murder Iranians. And not just Iranians,
they've been used to kill people in
Yemen. They've been used to kill people
in Lebanon in a different way.
So
this war will end with a shift in the
balance of power in this region.
the axis of resistance will no longer
accept a hanging sword above it.
What prompted Trump to have a rethink
about his Iran plan was the fear of the
collapse of the global economy. This
would have happened this week had he not
made that announcement last night. The
oil prices in the international market
had already breached $120.
Some analysts had feared that this would
easily have gone past $200. That's
because Iran has choked the state of
Hormuz, thereby bringing the supply of
oil and gas to a grinding halt. Some
countries like France recently expressed
their desire to escort their stuck
ships. But Iran was quick to remind them
politely that the strait was still very
unsafe and Iran could not be held
responsible if something happens to
their assets. Iran, however, has an
offer for countries wishing to use the
state of Hormos. All they have to do is
to expel Israeli and American diplomats
from their soil. Just let me bring you
um a breaking line reported by the
Reuters news agency who say the IRGC,
the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps
say that any Arab or European country
that expels the ambassadors of Israel
and the United States from its territory
will starting tomorrow have full
authority and freedom to pass through
the straight of Hormuz. That's according
to the Iranian state media.
Do you know the irony? When Trump was
busy conceding defeat against Iran, the
Islamic Republic was pounding the
settler colony with more sophisticated
versions of its missiles. The reaction
of this Fox News representative was
priceless. First, he told us on live TV
just how brutal the Israeli crackdown is
on reporting the damage caused by
Iranian missiles. Then he admitted that
Iran's offensive capabilities, his
words, not mine, were of a different
class altogether.
In to the break here, we have sirens in
Tel Aviv. Let's go back to correspondent
Nate Foy who is on the ground there. Hi
Nate.
Hey Martha. So yeah, as you can hear,
the sirens are going off here in Tel
Aviv. Something that we've seen several
times throughout the entire day. And
what we could see here momentarily are
interceptor missiles fired off. Uh we
have seen it right over my shoulder
several different times. Again, Iran
continues to show an offensive
capability launching missiles at central
Israel. We have one interceptor over my
shoulder right now. We can't show you
because we can't show landmarks, Martha.
But something that has really changed
here uh over the past couple days is the
use of these cluster munitions by Iran
where the warhead breaks up into several
different bomblelets. And that's uh
really important because not only does
it spread the damage, but it makes it
more difficult to defend against.
Meanwhile, Trump's minion, Pete Hexet,
is forced to lick his wounds in the wake
of his boss's embarrassing acceptance of
defeat. Now he wants to vent out his
frustration by displaying his
anti-Muslim hatred. He once again
repeated his usual nonsensical lies that
the Iranians had murdered Americans for
47 years.
Iranians murdered these Americans so
silently and quietly and disposed of
their bodies so well that no one, not
even the immediate family members of
those murdered by Iranians, got to know
about this. This is what you get, dear
Americans, when you have an uncut, an
uneducated thug representing you as the
country's head of military
internationally. For 47 years, these
barbaric savages in the Iranian regime
have murdered our brothers in arms. My
guys, your guys. Our guys through their
terrorist proxies and cowardly attacks.
Now they race toward a nuclear bomb to
hold the world hostage.
The Iranians have targeted and killed
thousands of my American brothers.
That race to a nuclear bomb, President
Trump will never allow it. Not now, not
ever, not on our watch.
The mulas are desperate and scrambling
like the ter terrorist cowards they are.
They fire missiles from schools and
hospitals, deliberately, deliberately
targeting innocents because they know
their military is being systematically
degraded. Only a few days ago, this Pete
Hex's chap was flaunting the carnage
caused by his country's military in Iran
when they slaughtered 180 innocent girls
from an elementary school. He has said
that the US had just got started even
though his country was winning. Today,
he blamed Israeli terrorists for the
military strikes on oil refineries and
oil depo in Thran. Well, I would just
state by saying Israel's been a really
strong partner in this e effort. Uh
where they have different objectives,
they've pursued them. Uh ultimately,
we've stayed focused on ours. But when
Iran what Iran has felt is the power of
the world's two most powerful air
forces. Uh in that particular case, that
wasn't our those weren't our strikes or
that objective uh or or that wasn't our
necessarily our objective. Look, Trump
started this war under duress from
terrorist Netanyahu and he's now going
to end this war both to please his
Israeli master and protect his own
business interests. Trump didn't run for
the presidency to serve people. He is no
mother tracer. In fact, he has as much
respect for humanity as pedophile
Jeffrey Epstein had for innocent
children. The soaring oil prices were
going to wreak havoc to the US economy.
This can still happen if Trump doesn't
quickly get out of the Middle East.
Stock markets were going to experience a
bloodbath, wiping out hundreds of
billions of dollars. This would have
significantly impacted Trump and his
family members who too would have been
badly bruised. Many people feel that
Trump did this due to growing anger
within the US against his decision to
invade Iran. But Trump doesn't give a
to such public sentiments.
But he does care when it entails missing
out on billions of dollars. His Israeli
boss Netanyahu too is under huge
pressure from his own people who
historically praised him and supported
him for causing the genocide in Gaza.
But they too have turned their back on
this dreaded war criminal following the
death and devastation caused by Iranian
missiles. Netanyahu hasn't been seen in
public for more than a week now. His
last video was also released from an
unknown location. Many people believe
he's on the run to avoid being killed by
the Iranians. Others feel he is already
in the US hiding in Mara Lago. You never
know. Either way, continuing with war
doesn't suit the US or the settler
colony. Hence, their desperate excuses
to get out of this mess. But Iran says
it will decide when to end the war.
Meanwhile, Trump has also made a
desperate plea to Russia and China to
convince Iran to agree for a ceasefire.
But for Iran, this is a question of
their existential crisis and also the
Persian pride after the Israeli and
American terrorist massacred their
86-year-old supreme leader, his daughter
and daughter-in-law along with their
children. I will leave you with this
clip of a broadcast from inside Thran by
the Iranian state TV. If you wanted to
truly understand the courage of the
average Iranians, this video is an
example. Tens of thousands of Iranians
gathered in Revolution Square in support
of the new Ayatah when American and
Israeli terrorists began to drop bombs
nearby indiscriminately.
Not one person moved or fled from the
scene. These are the people Trump and
Netanyahu dream of defeating.
Hello.
Hello.
for
my holy power. My
Compare this to the Israelis who are
never tired of hiding in bunkers. That's
it from me. Thank you very much for your
support of this platform and our
journalism. If you haven't subscribed to
my channel, please do so because that's
one of the many ways you can support
independent journalism. God bless you
all.w[/youtube]

[admin]

[admin]

*******************

UAE billionaire asks Trump: Who authorised turning our region into a war zone?

https://www.khaleejtimes.com/uae/uae-bi ... fresh=true

Khalaf Al Habtoor, chairman of Al Habtoor Group, says the Gulf and Middle Eastern countries, and their people, are not arenas for settling scores among the great powers
PUBLISHED: Thu 5 Mar 2026, 12:12 PM UPDATED: Thu 5 Mar 2026, 12:18 PM
By:Waheed Abbas

[Editor's Note: Follow Khaleej Times live blog amid Israeli, US strikes on Iran for the latest regional developments.]


The UAE billionaire Khalaf Al Habtoor on Thursday wrote an open letter to the US President Donald Trump questioning his authority to drag the Gulf and the Middle East into the ongoing military conflict with Iran.

The founder of Al Habtoor Group raised many questions in his open and candid letter, authored in Arabic and shared on the social media platform X, asking Trump whether it was solely his decision to go to war or whether he was influenced by the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The US and Israel launched attacks against Iran on Saturday, targeting its leadership and military infrastructure. Following the US-Israel attack, Iran launched missile and drone attacks on the UAE and other Gulf countries. The majority of those missiles and drones were intercepted and destroyed.

The UAE and its neighbouring countries have been calling on all parties to end the conflict and engage in peace talks.

“You have placed the Gulf Cooperation Council and the Arab countries at the heart of a danger they did not choose. Thank God, we are strong and capable of defending ourselves. We have armies and defences that protect our homelands. But the question remains: Who gave you permission to turn our region into a battlefield?” said Al Habtoor.

Khalaf Al Habtoor. Photo: Al Habtoor Group

He pointed out that the US decision to go to war with Iran not only threatens the people of this region but also the American people, whom he promised peace and prosperity.

“They are, today, finding themselves in a war funded by their money and taxes, with costs ranging, according to the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), between $40 and $65 billion for direct military operations, and $210 billion if economic impacts and indirect losses if the war lasts four to five weeks.”

Al Habtoor Group has been very vocal in sharing its views on local, regional and global issues. He also funds a think tank to highlight and bring solutions to topical issues.

Promise not fulfilled

Al Habtoor said the US President broke his promises of not getting involved in wars.

“You ordered foreign military interventions during your second term in seven countries: Somalia, Iraq, Yemen, Nigeria, Syria, Iran, and Venezuela, in addition to naval operations in the Caribbean and the eastern Pacific Ocean. You directed more than 658 foreign airstrikes in your first year in office, which equals the total strikes in (ex-US President Joe) Biden's entire term, for which you directed your arrows of criticism for involving the United States in foreign wars.”

As a result of these decisions, the Dubai-based billionaire warned the US president that his approval ratings among Americans had declined by about nine per cent in just 400 days.

“These numbers say something clear: Even within the US, there is growing concern about being dragged into a new war, and about exposing the lives of Americans, their economy, and their future to unnecessary risks… If these initiatives were launched in the name of peace, then we have the right today to demand full transparency and clear accountability,” said Al Habtoor.

Who is accountable?

In another message shared on X, Khalaf Al Habtoor questioned who would be held accountable for the damages inflicted on the Gulf and Middle East.

“Who will pay the price for the tensions imposed on us as a result of a conflict we have no part in among Iran, America and Israel?” he said, adding that the entire region bears the consequences of the war involving three countries.

“Our economies, our security, and the stability of our peoples are not arenas for settling scores among the great powers. We are advocates of stability and peace, and we did not choose to be part of this confrontation. Yet we find ourselves paying the price for an escalation we did not create,” he added.

“The question that must be asked clearly today is: Who is responsible and who will compensate for the losses incurred by the region’s
countries and peoples due to the conflicts of others? The region needs a cool head, not more reactions that fan the flames higher,” he concluded.


*****************

https://sochtimes.com/2026/03/06/who-ga ... an-strike/

Letter