PART 3 ANTI-ANTI-NAZI BARBARIAN HORDES ARE KNOCKING DOWN THE
23 posts
• Page 3 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Re: PART 3 ANTI-ANTI-NAZI BARBARIAN HORDES ARE KNOCKING DOWN
by admin » Sun May 24, 2026 2:37 am
xxx
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 40974
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am
Re: PART 3 ANTI-ANTI-NAZI BARBARIAN HORDES ARE KNOCKING DOWN
by admin » Sun May 24, 2026 5:57 pm
Trump PANICS as US Defeat in Iran War BLOWS UP Israel's Trap | Patrick Henningsen
Danny Haiphong
May 24, 2026
Patrick Henningsen discusses why the US's defeat to Iran has exposed a chilling reality about the war, a trap laid by Israel that has changed the world forever.
Transcript
Israel is reportedly pushing for renewed strikes on Iran. They're claiming that Iran is planning a surprise attack at
any moment and that's why Donald Trump in his administration needs to drop any pretenses of diplomacy. There was this
very interesting report uh the times of Israel citing the Washington Post that says the US has used over half of its
dad interceptors defending Israel during those 37 days or so of active hostilities. And I just want to read
this very important quote from the US officials who decided to disclose what was going on. and they said Israel is
not capable of fighting and winning wars on its own, but nobody actually knows this because they never see the back
end. Amid these reports, you have Israel pushing for renewed war and you have US officials saying that they spent half of what they had left. What do you make of
this? Uh how critical is this to understanding what exactly is going on right now? Well, just on this this uh
story, I think it's just emblematic of the relationship between the United States and Israel um whereby they feel
compelled to have the US empty out its stocks of valuable interceptors, you know, high altitude THAAD interceptors.
So, um and and Israel is obliged to hold back its stock. So, it is so for the US
it's Israel first and for Israel it's Israel first. You see, and that's that's an incredible thing considering the US
is always also trying to manage multiple theaters uh around the world. They're they're not just busy in West Asia.
there. The US is busy in uh half a dozen other theaters and two in particular of
note uh which is the Ukraine theater uh as well as the uh East Asia and and the
Taiwan uh theater as well visav the uh the other allies in the region. So, I
think that's uh that that should be like a real clear signal to people who might be questioning what our relationship
with Israel is. That's the net net result. And it just it goes to show you that
this this war, this undeclared war of aggression, this uh this sort of errant adventurism by the US vis with with Iran
just getting involved with this. This is just accelerating the demise of the United States as a viable imperial power
globally. It you can't manage all of these things. They're not right now.
See, they're in a sort of uh production mode, capitalizing the defense industry.
You see all these sort of big tech people that are now getting into defense and they they're like, "No, no, we're not going to make this mistake again.
We're going to double down on production and this is what we're going to do." Palmer lucky. He's got all this great tech. Palunteer is going to do the back
end. It's going to be fantastic. We're just going to churn out artillery and everything else. Whatever we need, we're have endless stream of it, right? They
think that they can just switch this on and that then all the things that are that are killing the US right now in in
the uh managerial imperial sense. Uh we're going to eliminate all those problems because we we're we're on it
now. We're on it now. And uh it doesn't it's not going to work. It's not it's not going to work because the what's the
premise of the imperial what what's the premise of the imperial mission? What's what's the what's the
imperial sales pitch to the world? What what is that? That that's the important bit. You can you can build up all this
constant conflict and the the the military-industrial might behind that that keep keeps it
going. But if you're not if you're not able to sell this to to the world and to your own allies, you have to threaten
and coers all of your allies. Then you know there's no point there's no point.
What this will do is bankrupt the United States.
And this is again a this is a classic symptom of latestage empire is they'll they'll then bankrupt themselves to try
to maintain their previous position in the world when in fact their previous position in the world is is has has been
vacated. uh probably more because of their political orientation with the world and how they're treating uh everybody and and it's just too
expensive to maintain and to micromanage all of these different theaters and all these different uh um uh you know choke
points and all of these different geopolitical uh flash points. That's how the British Empire collapsed. the British Empire at
the height of the British Empire when it kind of peaked before its ultimate demise.
It was managing something like 40 different conflicts. 40.
And so it had to resource all of that, had to pay for all that. Then there's the political capital, the diplom diplomatic capital, then the economic
considerations, the supply chains and so forth. that that's why they could not afford to maintain all of that. this the
inter interdependency which was at one point the strength of the British Empire became the biggest
liability of the British Empire and by the same token the interdependency of the US empire which is mainly a dollar
driven it's a dollar-driven empire that interdependency which was its greatest asset
um is now its greatest liability and that's because of the behavior of the United States itself
and and and also by prioritizing economic warfare in order to let's be let's be honest the
reason the US has has pursued such an aggressive sanctions agenda was to avoid having to use the military because that
wasn't seen as popular or it's bad optics internationally. So, oh that's okay. We're going to sanction them. We're going to coers them to sanctions.
Of course, sanctions don't work. They never have. They never proven to show that they work. They only work really against your allies, if anything. Hardly
ever against your enemies. They don't change the behavior. So, it was always seen as a bloodless Americans will sell it to themselves. Congress and Senate
love it because they can they can do something by passing sanctions uh without having to send troops.
You know, post Vietnam, this has always been a very popular policy. But by doing
so, they're they're slowly grinding down and killing the goose that laid the golden egg for Uncle Sam. And and and
7 minutesand then they're into the interdependency of the global petro dollar and the US reserve currency, the real engine of US empire. All of a
sudden, it's it's now becoming a liability for everybody else holding it and really only doing the US a favor by
not dumping all their treasuries on the market. and and you know what there will come a point where they'll have to dump them because otherwise it's a get something versus nothing
and and that that day may be not far off. Certainly Japan these are the issues that the Japanese
uh central banks are mulling over at the moment and I'm sure the Chinese and others are have been thinking the same for a very long time. the the numbers
are are pretty staggering just in this report. Uh that there's uh the Washington Post report says 200 FAT
interceptors left. And so if we do some simple math, half being depleted means
uh 200 used uh during 37 days. That's a lot. $12.7 million per interceptor
missile. It's a lot of money. And uh uh this uh goes also in league with you said there's this a huge liability being
built here to being entangled in all of this all of these conflicts. Well, that liability is actually showing real
results. Uh uh this center for responsible statecraft cited the acting navy secretary Hong to Tao who said that
the Iran war stockpile wos are behind the pause on US munition aid to Taiwan.
Um he said Donald Trump that this was a negotiating chip which is why Trump has
not made a decision on this arms package the latest one to Taiwan. But it seems like actually what's happening is that the US military might which is so
important to preserving this hegemony that you just described and outlined on all fronts uh that seems to be actually
depleting and diminishing right before our eyes in real time.
So that's that's the so here's the equation. The equation is and if you take political science or history right
from you know junior high through high school to college they history in America I'll I have an American education so I'll speak and half British
but I'll I'll speak about my American education focus is on war focuses on military battles dates wars generals
treaties that's the focus that's what we learn about we're indoctrinated to believe that American empire is led led
by military. It's not the US dollar as a as a reserve currency leads the US
empire and that that financial power is backed up by the military. But if you don't have the military to back up that
financial uh prepundonderance, as I call it, uh then the whole equation starts to fall apart. And isn't it amazing that
we're watching that equation fall apart in real time right now? And that's to say nothing about the economic disparity
between the cost of producing uh an interceptor missile or a drone in the United States uh versus the cost of
producing the bogey uh in in Iran, the the Shahi drone um or the Iranian uh
missile uh and and just the disparity in terms of the the economy of these two things. It's it's it's it's
unbelievable. And it really would any sane person would look at this at scale and say this is clearly not sustainable.
This is not sustainable economically. So then the there must be another route that is more sustainable. you know, like
maybe negotiations, diplomacy, perhaps trade, you know, you know, maybe mutual
11 minutesbenefit and partnership rather than coercion and punishment. I don't know.
uh but at some point you know so but hey if you're in the industry if you're in those industries right now and that's where the where the money in the US is
flowing but I think I think you could also see a a you know the the defense bubble if you look at history which is
interesting you have financial bubbles those can wipe out economies and countries but what can wipe out governments and regimes is a defense
bubble uh and be because it's usually tied with some uh outrageous adventurism
militarily. Uh and so yeah, the US whe whether it's this presidency, this administration or the next administration,
uh I think this is going to have devastating consequences for for the government uh and also probably for the
US economy. So this could end up also being a bubble of sorts. Pete Hexth, remember he gave this speech uh he put
out this happy clappy video, this sort of like stupid little kind of it's like one of those dumb NGO videos or Sesame Street or something and he's basically saying
no more of these cost overruns. We're not going to do that. And then we're robbing giving the fake populist pitch.
We're rob you're robbing the American taxpayer. Come on. You just doubled the defense the war budget to 1.5 trillion
and asked for another 200 billion o override. 1.7 trillion. that's jacking up our money supply and our inflation.
Uh so who are you what are you talking about the middle the working class? Who who are you talking about? But that that that idea
if this is where the US economy is going if the if the the def the war the war machine the war budget becomes the
central the central piece in the political economy of the un of the of the United States. Uh that's assuming
they're going to be winning all these wars that they're waging. That's a big assumption because if it if it goes the other way, it's not going to be a happy
ending for for America. I'm just going by other historical examples. Uh not not
to mention the obvious one, but you know, it's like um and and also Yeah.
And they're they're depending on a lot of foreign money, too. you know, like a lot of international capital to help uh
bolster this uh defense war war department, war revolution in America.
Um this listen, why would Boeing or Lockheed or Rathon or whatever? Why would they put up the cost of a factory uh unless they have some guarantees?
They're not going to be hiring the best engineers. And then what's Pete Hexath going to do? going to cancel their contract after two years because they're
over budget and start over again and then wait two more years to wait for those interceptor missiles. Okay,
so you you got the system you got in America. It's bloated. It's corrupt.
It's slow. It's overpriced. It's not good value for the money. And a lot of the stuff in the field is redundant by
the time it comes uh by the time it's it comes off the assembly line. But that's the system we got. It's absolutely
concominant with our empire. So you're gonna have there's no way you can operate any other way. Otherwise, you got to get rid of the empire. And that
ain't going to happen or they don't want it to happen. So they're stuck. You know, it's just to me amazing the delusion, the delusional mindset of
these people that cope. Uh we'll call it the postimperial cope. You know, it's just incredible that they would like
push some of these ideas out and clearly it's like real economists and business people even in the defense industry are looking at that happy clappy video by
Hexath and going I don't think so. Like I just had lunch with you last week in New York and we weren't talking about
this, you know, kind of thing. But anyway, no, I mean, and you know, this fantasy
of the Golden Dome and all of these new weapons, new jets, the B-21, you know,
on and on and on. Fantasies in many respects, especially when the old stuff just goes to Israel anyway. I mean, half of it is just going to go to them
because and the really old stuff goes to Ukraine.
Yeah. Yeah. The really they just So, it's a it is it is quite uh the mess.
And and speaking of of this uh then how much of this factors into all of these reports about it feels like it's like
deja vu we are back to the start where despite the the the massive military
expenditure uh diminishment uh from the United States and uh and of course all the damage done to the Gulf to Israel.
We're in this point again where we have a mediator this time Pakistan. Now we're here in Qatar. There's a lot of players trying to get into the mix to Russia
limited framework to allow for talks and to extend the period where there's no fighting. It feels like back before
February 28th when Oman went with the Omani um was it the prime minister who was who was uh uh brokering the talks went on to NBC.
Foreign Minister. Yeah, foreign minister. The foreign minister of Oman went on NBC and said, "We are so close
to a deal that will avoid a war and then not later, the US and Israel were bombing Iran." It seems like Israel
is pushing for that. But what do you make of this uh flurry of news? Nobody, especially the US side, is giving any
indication that uh there's anything genuine going on in the US side. Iran is very firm. It's about their rights. They
don't have any interest in uh settling for limited frameworks. They're they're demanding what they want uh out of uh
the uh destruction that they were uh uh imposed that was imposed upon them plus the fact that they believe they won. So what's your thoughts on this?
Well, that I saw when I saw the the announcement going viral, the usual Twitter accounts putting out fake news.
I won't mention any names, but everybody knows who they are. Saying that there's a draft of this deal and so forth. And immediately it gets leverage because
that's what good propaganda does. Gets leverage. It gets traction because it's what people desire to hear. Everybody is
desperate for some kind of a a peace solution or some kind of a ceasefire and some kind of a treaty or whatever. So,
everyone's desperate. So, you put that out immediately, it's going to get lapped up. and what the net of that from a propaganda point of view would be like
people think well okay Trump's finally you know he's finally read the writing on the wall at last Donald he's come to
his senses um is and it was those those Gulf states that really brought him to to heal and brought him down to reality
Qatar and the Saudis and the Kuwaitis they really tamed the the the beast of Donald Trump okay um and but none of
that was true none of that was true and I I when I saw that I'm like okay and you know little media lesson you know if
if you see something like that and you think wow is that happening or not just go to the Iranian media go to the
Iranian uh websites go to Iran Iran's ex and Twitter accounts nothing there. So where does where does this exist? Uh
it's fake news. It exists in Donald Trump's head. Uh it exists with influencer accounts on X that are all
basically coining money off Elon Musk's monetization uh by putting out fake news. There's just too many of these so-called political analysis accounts or whatever.
But um the the bottom line is this, Danny. Um as far as the peace process goes, in my humble opinion, I'd be happy
if you know things calm down, but there ain't going to be any deals. There's not going to be any deals. there going to be
no no major agreements. Um there might be announcements, there might be temporary impasses, but until this US
administration demonstrates that it has the the a the uh the ADHD
uh proof ability to sit down and actually get involved in some serious diplomacy, then uh I I I I see no hope
for during this presidency that they'll they literally do not have the ability to do a major deal, any kind of
multilateral deal. You're going to need people on the US side as guaranurs.
Otherwise, ain't going to work. So, and who is that? It's not going to be a couple of Gulf states. No, you need major powers. You need China in there.
You need the U. You need Russia in there to glue it. You know, you need Turkey in there to glue it down. You need other uh
not just Gulf states and not just the uh and the Israelis have to give some commitment. There's no use for the US to do anything, put anything down on paper
because Israel can come and undo it in a minute just by attacking that forces the US hand. So I think Danny that they are
now where where Iran and the US are now is where the US and Russia were a year ago, which is Wickoff and Kushner off to
Moscow for caviar. That's where they are. Pre- Alaska. Pre- Alaska. And guess what's happened with Russia and Ukraine?
Nothing. Nothing. Things just grind on as they are on the ground. That's very sad to say, but I think this if that's
the result of a US administration in what is probably would have been the most highstakes geopolitical risk point,
which is uh tension between Europe uh and Russia with Ukraine in the middle there. And if you can't even make any
headway on this, any real headway after a year and a half, I have zero confidence that they can do anything
with Iran. Zero confidence. The best thing the US can do is just back off and go to the US media pretending until the
midterms that nothing ever happened and just focus on something else. That's the best the US can do. They cannot
architect any meaningful framework. They have a problem. It's called Israel.
And uh and you're dealing Iran is not stupid. They know they're dealing with a two-headed beast. And Israel is not
coming to the table. I mean, so if Israel is not coming to the table, then forget it. Forget it. It's it's going to
be uh unstable, status quo, slightly chaotic.
Iran's going to rebuild it and bolster its uh defenses and it's going to do what it needs to do in its near abroad
to secure its national security interest exactly like Russia is doing in Ukraine. No different.
22 minutesSo that's my my my prognosis.
Patrick, I I didn't take you as a neocon, but uh Robert Kagan has said something similar. They're not exactly
the same, but he said that Trump is hoping to the best case scenario for him or at least this isn't what Robert Kagan
is arguing. Uh even though it's likely the best case scenario, Robert Kagan is saying that Trump's actions seem to be
attempting to slip away without Americans noticing the magnitude of the defeat in Iran. This is the second piece
in as many weeks that Robert Kagan has wrote. uh very scathing, deceptive and scathing. Deceptive in the sense that uh
it's uh promoting a more effective kind of war on Iran uh while attempting to uh
argue that uh everything Trump has done is ineffective and totally on him. Um but also there are reports to
Patrick about this. You know, Donald Trump said something very strange where he said he has something called Iran to deal with uh when it comes to his son's
wedding. So, his son is getting married uh over the Memorial Day weekend. And then he just I don't even know Eric. I don't know.
Oh, Donald J.
Donald Jr. Yes. Yes. So, um the one that the Indonesian president supposedly called him a good boy or something and
he wanted to meet with him further. Very strange family. Of course, we know the activities that they are involved with both financially and uh let's say
otherwise. And he just announced that he will not be going to the wedding after all. And this
has made people concerned that this is because uh the United States is kind of dropping everything to hold on to the
possibility of renewed war on Iran. Uh given that Israel is pushing with the surprise attack narrative, Trump himself
has said, "Oh, we'll give a few days and see if we get the answer that we like." They're not going to get the answer that they like, Patrick. So, uh, what do you
make of all this? This appears, I mean, it's unprecedented how clownish this is, but also it is, as Reuters has reported,
an indicator this is where we're at. uh looking at what Trump is saying on Truth Social because that's how he is governing foreign policy. This is
literally what European diplomats are saying, this is what uh many people are saying in the administration that they just hold a screen of true social and
they wait to see what Trump says to get an indication of what they should be doing.
The one of the tells was last week when when Donald Trump said, "I was uh I was I was about to attack. We've been we
would have been doing it by now. we've been doing. But uh the the Qataris and I think he I think it was the Saudis, I can't remember. Two Gulf states said,
"No, wait, wait, wait. We're making progress on the negotiations. What on earth is he talking about?" Anyway, that
was his story. and that that that what what that was was this um that he that
the US wasn't ready and they've had some issues between themselves and Israel that are probably more like logistical
issues more than anything. You know, there Axios reported that there was a scathing phone call between Trump and
Netanyahu, but quite frankly, I don't I don't believe anything in Axios that's foreign policy related, especially when it pertains to Israel.
And how many times have we heard the scathing phone call from Trump and then they work in coordination to escalate war right after this?
That's called Wrestlemania, Danny. It's called Wrestlemania. So, there is an element of that. Okay.
But what what more likely what Trump is referring to and you have to be able to translate Trump because he just makes things up on the fly. But there's always
an element of truth. There's like a thread or there's some he there are real things in the thread of what he's talking about. You just have to
rearrange them. And I think uh the the truth in what Trump was saying was that he's act they actually have problems uh
regarding Saudi Arabia the usage of airspace for attacks on Iran and the use of Saudi bases for direct attacks and
Qatar as well as all of the GCC countries Kuwait included more more than anybody because they're in the closest proximity to Iran. But that's the that's
been a real uh I think sticking point and a real obstacle for the United States in trying to mount an attack because it means you just all of a
sudden you've got more narrow attack vectors against Iran. You don't have full control and you don't have run of
the table as it were. Iraq is also a massive problem now for the United States. And so Iran has made some
changes and they have no doubt made some major contingencies. Uh and probably I
would say uh I wouldn't put it out of the realms of possibility that Iran could have slightly more westernly
forward operating positions. Let's just put it that way. Um than they might have had before. And that changes things as
well. So it just puts a little additional pressure on uh on the United States in mounting such an attack on
Israel as well. So I think that's what Trump was kind of referring to when he was talking about the Gulf States because they weren't negotiating with
the Iranians. you know I mean it might have been conversations happening but between the US it's middlemen people in
Pakistan Saudi and the Pakistanis who are very very close those two governments and and in terms of of defense and foreign policy but that's
what I think that's how I would translate that so yes it is uh very um
it's very tense right now so I don't discount any of these reports that you're saying I think The Iranians are
very realistic about they're preparing for an attack. Um the US is playing the sort of political game. The Iranians are
like we're just preparing for an imminent attack. And but but still there's a chance that this could run into problems because the United States
at the end of the day is a slave uh to all sorts of political uh twoing and throwing um that that drives our our uh
our political system. So, and and you're talking about the exial existential survival of this administration, the Republican party in the midterms, plus a
lot of other big business and uh energy and industrial concerns, economic concerns.
All these things are just additional spanners in in the works of this story. And there's too many of them actually.
And you know what? The longer you wait, the more the tougher it is to restart this war because there's nothing popular about this war. No one supports it.
29 minutesThere is no benefits from it. It's only been drawbacks. And the longer you wait, every day you wait, you make it more
difficult to prosecute and it gives more time for other people to intervene, including golf powers and other international actors, including the
Chinese, including the Russians. More phone calls. Don't do it, Donald. If you do, that's going to happen. And you
start adding these things up and the calculus changes. If he was to do he should have, if he was able to, he would have done it a month ago. But the US did
probably doesn't have the uh the equipment or the ammunition to actually do that. So somehow they think that they
got an opportunity here. It it can only be a short run. It can only be We're talking they've acknowledged over and over.
Yeah. two week campaign max, maybe three.
But what what's the what's week three look like? US jets going into Iranian airspace and getting shot down.
Yes, because that's how the last one ended. That's true.
o, you know, it it's just there's so many drawbacks to this. It's really hard. I can't unless they're they're planning to do something really stupid.
I mean the the really stupid thing too is what uh that curious report in Reuters talking about the uh the curious
way in which the Trump administration administers foreign policy at this time.
Uh it's my understanding and in our last few minutes you can react to this. This seems like the Trump administration really wanted to and Donald Trump
himself maybe wanted to go for this strike the moment he posted on uh True Social that he wanted to end Iran's
civilization that it was going to all end. Uh and there were concerns from Europeans that are you talking about a
nuclear weapon? Because when you say you're gonna wipe out everybody, you need a weapon strong enough to do that.
You don't have weapons conventionally strong enough to do that. So are you talking about nukes? And nobody knew.
31 minutesNobody knew. But uh ultimately I think uh it seems like the delay uh uh had a lot to do with these limitations and all
these variables which the US empire as you said cannot handle. There's too many. There's too many. The economic fallout, the military fallout, the
political fall, and there's there's intricacies in various variables within each of these fronts that uh it does
feel like a gamble and kind of throwing, you know, dipping your hand in one of them and saying, "Okay, we'll go with that one." Um, and that is that that is
concerning. Not to mention the fact that it seems like the Trump administration has this idea that if it can get a victory that might be more worthwhile
now and they're talking about Cuba. They move Nimmits over to Cuba. So um and which I don't think will actually be a victory. I don't think it'll end up like
Venezuela, but there there are those who are are looking at this. So uh your final comments uh Patrick before we wrap
up here? Yeah, I mean uh the the I can see Cuba has a lot of appeal to Trump.
Uh it's a country that's more or less defenseless. Uh you know, from a heavy military point of view, so you could
beat them up, whail on them, uh bully them around. I mean, that's more Trump's flavor, I think. Uh very close to home,
so probably not going to spend a whole lot of money. Um I mean, it looks good on the surface, doesn't it? Like, you know, look at what we did in Venezuela.
We're going to do the same here. I somehow I don't think it's going to end the same as Venezuela. Cuba is a whole different story. I think an invasion or
a military incursion or attack on Cuba, I think that will well and truly be the end of this administration. I think that
will be the final tipping point. Um and and if if if they do go for that, it
would be to parlay uh the disappointment of not doing what they hoped they could do to Iran, which
we're not really clear exactly what that is. There's so many different uh mission statements and ideas that have been
floated out. They can't quite seem to figure out what the objectives are militarily or or politically or whatever
uh in Iran. And so I don't think they're going to be able to achieve. It's easy not to achieve something that you
haven't actually specified. I guess this is in the Danzoo art of war uh art of war, art of the deal of war, whatever.
Don Don Trump's new book, guide book on on how to prosecute wars when he he retires. It'll be a great handbook for
future failed leaders. But so it'll be interesting to see uh how that progresses. I I think for this
administration, I could see them a lot of appeal. We we can get a win in Cuba. Mr. President, I know we can get a win.
I can see Hegathth and these guys just getting off right now. Rubio and everybody else.
Viceroy Marco Rubio. I like the sound of it. It really has a ring to it, doesn't it? Viceroy Rubio. another job title for Marco.
As if he doesn't have enough already. Um I don't So maybe Cuba could be the saving grace for Iran
if that becomes more politically expedient, but it's still going to end in disaster for the Trump administration. I I really that's going
to be one hand too many at the table. I just have a feeling. Uh never I mean I just think they underestimated the
Iranians. That's clearly, you could say from a military and political perspective that was the big mistake.
They underestimated the Iranians in all levels of capability, including the ability for Iran to troll them on social
media with, you know, bringing the US propaganda machine down with Lego videos. Nobody saw that coming. So I
35 minutesthink uh Cuba as well has so much global support and a lot you'll see that
support come come to bear uh if the US attacks and and I think yeah Cuba has deep deep deep political support
globally which is incredible for a country that small but it shows you how uh symbolic they are and how important they are for like the global working
class for the global south and I think you're going to see diplomatic is The US has no basis for doing anything to Cuba.
Cuba hasn't done anything to the United States. They're still grinding in acts of Castro's revolution 70 odd years ago
if if that's what this is about. I mean, the perfect example, the the indictment of Raul Castro this week. What a clown
show. They're indicting him for intervening in what was clearly a CIA
operation. a ter for intervening in a CIA terrorist operation against Cuba. I
mean, is that the best they could come up with? So, what you're you're you're wanting to indict this person for trying
to thwart one of your clandestine terrorist attacks on on Cuba? Seriously, do you think the public's that stupid?
You guys must be that stupid to think that you could sell this. I mean, this this is just a level of clownery that I didn't think the you that this
administration had it in them, but I mean, no limits, I guess. But, uh, just
I mean, unbelievable. So, this shows us, Danny, that either they're incompetent or they're not serious or this is a
truly a clown show with with Washington because there's hundred other things you could have spun up, fake indictments. I
mean, just put some smart people in a room and they'll come up with something plausible after a few hours, you know?
Yeah. Some fake drug charges or something. I don't know. But that to actually go for this one, the brothers
to the rescue shootown in 1996, you want to do that one that sort of
failed CIA operation and hang Cuba, hang the Cuban uh leadership for that.
Seriously, you're dealing with a low IQ cabal that that have superglued themselves to this
Trump administration. This is I can't imagine who's Whose brainchild is this?
Is this is this from Marco Rubio's office? Is this Sebastian Gorka? Have we got Steven Miller involved in spinning
this one up? I mean, they or is this is this are these MAGA supporters from Miami?
people that golf with Trump that who spun this up? This one's amazing.
Danny Haiphong
May 24, 2026
Patrick Henningsen discusses why the US's defeat to Iran has exposed a chilling reality about the war, a trap laid by Israel that has changed the world forever.
Transcript
Israel is reportedly pushing for renewed strikes on Iran. They're claiming that Iran is planning a surprise attack at
any moment and that's why Donald Trump in his administration needs to drop any pretenses of diplomacy. There was this
very interesting report uh the times of Israel citing the Washington Post that says the US has used over half of its
dad interceptors defending Israel during those 37 days or so of active hostilities. And I just want to read
this very important quote from the US officials who decided to disclose what was going on. and they said Israel is
not capable of fighting and winning wars on its own, but nobody actually knows this because they never see the back
end. Amid these reports, you have Israel pushing for renewed war and you have US officials saying that they spent half of what they had left. What do you make of
this? Uh how critical is this to understanding what exactly is going on right now? Well, just on this this uh
story, I think it's just emblematic of the relationship between the United States and Israel um whereby they feel
compelled to have the US empty out its stocks of valuable interceptors, you know, high altitude THAAD interceptors.
So, um and and Israel is obliged to hold back its stock. So, it is so for the US
it's Israel first and for Israel it's Israel first. You see, and that's that's an incredible thing considering the US
is always also trying to manage multiple theaters uh around the world. They're they're not just busy in West Asia.
there. The US is busy in uh half a dozen other theaters and two in particular of
note uh which is the Ukraine theater uh as well as the uh East Asia and and the
Taiwan uh theater as well visav the uh the other allies in the region. So, I
think that's uh that that should be like a real clear signal to people who might be questioning what our relationship
with Israel is. That's the net net result. And it just it goes to show you that
this this war, this undeclared war of aggression, this uh this sort of errant adventurism by the US vis with with Iran
just getting involved with this. This is just accelerating the demise of the United States as a viable imperial power
globally. It you can't manage all of these things. They're not right now.
See, they're in a sort of uh production mode, capitalizing the defense industry.
You see all these sort of big tech people that are now getting into defense and they they're like, "No, no, we're not going to make this mistake again.
We're going to double down on production and this is what we're going to do." Palmer lucky. He's got all this great tech. Palunteer is going to do the back
end. It's going to be fantastic. We're just going to churn out artillery and everything else. Whatever we need, we're have endless stream of it, right? They
think that they can just switch this on and that then all the things that are that are killing the US right now in in
the uh managerial imperial sense. Uh we're going to eliminate all those problems because we we're we're on it
now. We're on it now. And uh it doesn't it's not going to work. It's not it's not going to work because the what's the
premise of the imperial what what's the premise of the imperial mission? What's what's the what's the
imperial sales pitch to the world? What what is that? That that's the important bit. You can you can build up all this
constant conflict and the the the military-industrial might behind that that keep keeps it
going. But if you're not if you're not able to sell this to to the world and to your own allies, you have to threaten
and coers all of your allies. Then you know there's no point there's no point.
What this will do is bankrupt the United States.
And this is again a this is a classic symptom of latestage empire is they'll they'll then bankrupt themselves to try
to maintain their previous position in the world when in fact their previous position in the world is is has has been
vacated. uh probably more because of their political orientation with the world and how they're treating uh everybody and and it's just too
expensive to maintain and to micromanage all of these different theaters and all these different uh um uh you know choke
points and all of these different geopolitical uh flash points. That's how the British Empire collapsed. the British Empire at
the height of the British Empire when it kind of peaked before its ultimate demise.
It was managing something like 40 different conflicts. 40.
And so it had to resource all of that, had to pay for all that. Then there's the political capital, the diplom diplomatic capital, then the economic
considerations, the supply chains and so forth. that that's why they could not afford to maintain all of that. this the
inter interdependency which was at one point the strength of the British Empire became the biggest
liability of the British Empire and by the same token the interdependency of the US empire which is mainly a dollar
driven it's a dollar-driven empire that interdependency which was its greatest asset
um is now its greatest liability and that's because of the behavior of the United States itself
and and and also by prioritizing economic warfare in order to let's be let's be honest the
reason the US has has pursued such an aggressive sanctions agenda was to avoid having to use the military because that
wasn't seen as popular or it's bad optics internationally. So, oh that's okay. We're going to sanction them. We're going to coers them to sanctions.
Of course, sanctions don't work. They never have. They never proven to show that they work. They only work really against your allies, if anything. Hardly
ever against your enemies. They don't change the behavior. So, it was always seen as a bloodless Americans will sell it to themselves. Congress and Senate
love it because they can they can do something by passing sanctions uh without having to send troops.
You know, post Vietnam, this has always been a very popular policy. But by doing
so, they're they're slowly grinding down and killing the goose that laid the golden egg for Uncle Sam. And and and
7 minutesand then they're into the interdependency of the global petro dollar and the US reserve currency, the real engine of US empire. All of a
sudden, it's it's now becoming a liability for everybody else holding it and really only doing the US a favor by
not dumping all their treasuries on the market. and and you know what there will come a point where they'll have to dump them because otherwise it's a get something versus nothing
and and that that day may be not far off. Certainly Japan these are the issues that the Japanese
uh central banks are mulling over at the moment and I'm sure the Chinese and others are have been thinking the same for a very long time. the the numbers
are are pretty staggering just in this report. Uh that there's uh the Washington Post report says 200 FAT
interceptors left. And so if we do some simple math, half being depleted means
uh 200 used uh during 37 days. That's a lot. $12.7 million per interceptor
missile. It's a lot of money. And uh uh this uh goes also in league with you said there's this a huge liability being
built here to being entangled in all of this all of these conflicts. Well, that liability is actually showing real
results. Uh uh this center for responsible statecraft cited the acting navy secretary Hong to Tao who said that
the Iran war stockpile wos are behind the pause on US munition aid to Taiwan.
Um he said Donald Trump that this was a negotiating chip which is why Trump has
not made a decision on this arms package the latest one to Taiwan. But it seems like actually what's happening is that the US military might which is so
important to preserving this hegemony that you just described and outlined on all fronts uh that seems to be actually
depleting and diminishing right before our eyes in real time.
So that's that's the so here's the equation. The equation is and if you take political science or history right
from you know junior high through high school to college they history in America I'll I have an American education so I'll speak and half British
but I'll I'll speak about my American education focus is on war focuses on military battles dates wars generals
treaties that's the focus that's what we learn about we're indoctrinated to believe that American empire is led led
by military. It's not the US dollar as a as a reserve currency leads the US
empire and that that financial power is backed up by the military. But if you don't have the military to back up that
financial uh prepundonderance, as I call it, uh then the whole equation starts to fall apart. And isn't it amazing that
we're watching that equation fall apart in real time right now? And that's to say nothing about the economic disparity
between the cost of producing uh an interceptor missile or a drone in the United States uh versus the cost of
producing the bogey uh in in Iran, the the Shahi drone um or the Iranian uh
missile uh and and just the disparity in terms of the the economy of these two things. It's it's it's it's
unbelievable. And it really would any sane person would look at this at scale and say this is clearly not sustainable.
This is not sustainable economically. So then the there must be another route that is more sustainable. you know, like
maybe negotiations, diplomacy, perhaps trade, you know, you know, maybe mutual
11 minutesbenefit and partnership rather than coercion and punishment. I don't know.
uh but at some point you know so but hey if you're in the industry if you're in those industries right now and that's where the where the money in the US is
flowing but I think I think you could also see a a you know the the defense bubble if you look at history which is
interesting you have financial bubbles those can wipe out economies and countries but what can wipe out governments and regimes is a defense
bubble uh and be because it's usually tied with some uh outrageous adventurism
militarily. Uh and so yeah, the US whe whether it's this presidency, this administration or the next administration,
uh I think this is going to have devastating consequences for for the government uh and also probably for the
US economy. So this could end up also being a bubble of sorts. Pete Hexth, remember he gave this speech uh he put
out this happy clappy video, this sort of like stupid little kind of it's like one of those dumb NGO videos or Sesame Street or something and he's basically saying
no more of these cost overruns. We're not going to do that. And then we're robbing giving the fake populist pitch.
We're rob you're robbing the American taxpayer. Come on. You just doubled the defense the war budget to 1.5 trillion
and asked for another 200 billion o override. 1.7 trillion. that's jacking up our money supply and our inflation.
Uh so who are you what are you talking about the middle the working class? Who who are you talking about? But that that that idea
if this is where the US economy is going if the if the the def the war the war machine the war budget becomes the
central the central piece in the political economy of the un of the of the United States. Uh that's assuming
they're going to be winning all these wars that they're waging. That's a big assumption because if it if it goes the other way, it's not going to be a happy
ending for for America. I'm just going by other historical examples. Uh not not
to mention the obvious one, but you know, it's like um and and also Yeah.
And they're they're depending on a lot of foreign money, too. you know, like a lot of international capital to help uh
bolster this uh defense war war department, war revolution in America.
Um this listen, why would Boeing or Lockheed or Rathon or whatever? Why would they put up the cost of a factory uh unless they have some guarantees?
They're not going to be hiring the best engineers. And then what's Pete Hexath going to do? going to cancel their contract after two years because they're
over budget and start over again and then wait two more years to wait for those interceptor missiles. Okay,
so you you got the system you got in America. It's bloated. It's corrupt.
It's slow. It's overpriced. It's not good value for the money. And a lot of the stuff in the field is redundant by
the time it comes uh by the time it's it comes off the assembly line. But that's the system we got. It's absolutely
concominant with our empire. So you're gonna have there's no way you can operate any other way. Otherwise, you got to get rid of the empire. And that
ain't going to happen or they don't want it to happen. So they're stuck. You know, it's just to me amazing the delusion, the delusional mindset of
these people that cope. Uh we'll call it the postimperial cope. You know, it's just incredible that they would like
push some of these ideas out and clearly it's like real economists and business people even in the defense industry are looking at that happy clappy video by
Hexath and going I don't think so. Like I just had lunch with you last week in New York and we weren't talking about
this, you know, kind of thing. But anyway, no, I mean, and you know, this fantasy
of the Golden Dome and all of these new weapons, new jets, the B-21, you know,
on and on and on. Fantasies in many respects, especially when the old stuff just goes to Israel anyway. I mean, half of it is just going to go to them
because and the really old stuff goes to Ukraine.
Yeah. Yeah. The really they just So, it's a it is it is quite uh the mess.
And and speaking of of this uh then how much of this factors into all of these reports about it feels like it's like
deja vu we are back to the start where despite the the the massive military
expenditure uh diminishment uh from the United States and uh and of course all the damage done to the Gulf to Israel.
We're in this point again where we have a mediator this time Pakistan. Now we're here in Qatar. There's a lot of players trying to get into the mix to Russia
limited framework to allow for talks and to extend the period where there's no fighting. It feels like back before
February 28th when Oman went with the Omani um was it the prime minister who was who was uh uh brokering the talks went on to NBC.
Foreign Minister. Yeah, foreign minister. The foreign minister of Oman went on NBC and said, "We are so close
to a deal that will avoid a war and then not later, the US and Israel were bombing Iran." It seems like Israel
is pushing for that. But what do you make of this uh flurry of news? Nobody, especially the US side, is giving any
indication that uh there's anything genuine going on in the US side. Iran is very firm. It's about their rights. They
don't have any interest in uh settling for limited frameworks. They're they're demanding what they want uh out of uh
the uh destruction that they were uh uh imposed that was imposed upon them plus the fact that they believe they won. So what's your thoughts on this?
Well, that I saw when I saw the the announcement going viral, the usual Twitter accounts putting out fake news.
I won't mention any names, but everybody knows who they are. Saying that there's a draft of this deal and so forth. And immediately it gets leverage because
that's what good propaganda does. Gets leverage. It gets traction because it's what people desire to hear. Everybody is
desperate for some kind of a a peace solution or some kind of a ceasefire and some kind of a treaty or whatever. So,
everyone's desperate. So, you put that out immediately, it's going to get lapped up. and what the net of that from a propaganda point of view would be like
people think well okay Trump's finally you know he's finally read the writing on the wall at last Donald he's come to
his senses um is and it was those those Gulf states that really brought him to to heal and brought him down to reality
Qatar and the Saudis and the Kuwaitis they really tamed the the the beast of Donald Trump okay um and but none of
that was true none of that was true and I I when I saw that I'm like okay and you know little media lesson you know if
if you see something like that and you think wow is that happening or not just go to the Iranian media go to the
Iranian uh websites go to Iran Iran's ex and Twitter accounts nothing there. So where does where does this exist? Uh
it's fake news. It exists in Donald Trump's head. Uh it exists with influencer accounts on X that are all
basically coining money off Elon Musk's monetization uh by putting out fake news. There's just too many of these so-called political analysis accounts or whatever.
But um the the bottom line is this, Danny. Um as far as the peace process goes, in my humble opinion, I'd be happy
if you know things calm down, but there ain't going to be any deals. There's not going to be any deals. there going to be
no no major agreements. Um there might be announcements, there might be temporary impasses, but until this US
administration demonstrates that it has the the a the uh the ADHD
uh proof ability to sit down and actually get involved in some serious diplomacy, then uh I I I I see no hope
for during this presidency that they'll they literally do not have the ability to do a major deal, any kind of
multilateral deal. You're going to need people on the US side as guaranurs.
Otherwise, ain't going to work. So, and who is that? It's not going to be a couple of Gulf states. No, you need major powers. You need China in there.
You need the U. You need Russia in there to glue it. You know, you need Turkey in there to glue it down. You need other uh
not just Gulf states and not just the uh and the Israelis have to give some commitment. There's no use for the US to do anything, put anything down on paper
because Israel can come and undo it in a minute just by attacking that forces the US hand. So I think Danny that they are
now where where Iran and the US are now is where the US and Russia were a year ago, which is Wickoff and Kushner off to
Moscow for caviar. That's where they are. Pre- Alaska. Pre- Alaska. And guess what's happened with Russia and Ukraine?
Nothing. Nothing. Things just grind on as they are on the ground. That's very sad to say, but I think this if that's
the result of a US administration in what is probably would have been the most highstakes geopolitical risk point,
which is uh tension between Europe uh and Russia with Ukraine in the middle there. And if you can't even make any
headway on this, any real headway after a year and a half, I have zero confidence that they can do anything
with Iran. Zero confidence. The best thing the US can do is just back off and go to the US media pretending until the
midterms that nothing ever happened and just focus on something else. That's the best the US can do. They cannot
architect any meaningful framework. They have a problem. It's called Israel.
And uh and you're dealing Iran is not stupid. They know they're dealing with a two-headed beast. And Israel is not
coming to the table. I mean, so if Israel is not coming to the table, then forget it. Forget it. It's it's going to
be uh unstable, status quo, slightly chaotic.
Iran's going to rebuild it and bolster its uh defenses and it's going to do what it needs to do in its near abroad
to secure its national security interest exactly like Russia is doing in Ukraine. No different.
22 minutesSo that's my my my prognosis.
Patrick, I I didn't take you as a neocon, but uh Robert Kagan has said something similar. They're not exactly
the same, but he said that Trump is hoping to the best case scenario for him or at least this isn't what Robert Kagan
is arguing. Uh even though it's likely the best case scenario, Robert Kagan is saying that Trump's actions seem to be
attempting to slip away without Americans noticing the magnitude of the defeat in Iran. This is the second piece
in as many weeks that Robert Kagan has wrote. uh very scathing, deceptive and scathing. Deceptive in the sense that uh
it's uh promoting a more effective kind of war on Iran uh while attempting to uh
argue that uh everything Trump has done is ineffective and totally on him. Um but also there are reports to
Patrick about this. You know, Donald Trump said something very strange where he said he has something called Iran to deal with uh when it comes to his son's
wedding. So, his son is getting married uh over the Memorial Day weekend. And then he just I don't even know Eric. I don't know.
Oh, Donald J.
Donald Jr. Yes. Yes. So, um the one that the Indonesian president supposedly called him a good boy or something and
he wanted to meet with him further. Very strange family. Of course, we know the activities that they are involved with both financially and uh let's say
otherwise. And he just announced that he will not be going to the wedding after all. And this
has made people concerned that this is because uh the United States is kind of dropping everything to hold on to the
possibility of renewed war on Iran. Uh given that Israel is pushing with the surprise attack narrative, Trump himself
has said, "Oh, we'll give a few days and see if we get the answer that we like." They're not going to get the answer that they like, Patrick. So, uh, what do you
make of all this? This appears, I mean, it's unprecedented how clownish this is, but also it is, as Reuters has reported,
an indicator this is where we're at. uh looking at what Trump is saying on Truth Social because that's how he is governing foreign policy. This is
literally what European diplomats are saying, this is what uh many people are saying in the administration that they just hold a screen of true social and
they wait to see what Trump says to get an indication of what they should be doing.
The one of the tells was last week when when Donald Trump said, "I was uh I was I was about to attack. We've been we
would have been doing it by now. we've been doing. But uh the the Qataris and I think he I think it was the Saudis, I can't remember. Two Gulf states said,
"No, wait, wait, wait. We're making progress on the negotiations. What on earth is he talking about?" Anyway, that
was his story. and that that that what what that was was this um that he that
the US wasn't ready and they've had some issues between themselves and Israel that are probably more like logistical
issues more than anything. You know, there Axios reported that there was a scathing phone call between Trump and
Netanyahu, but quite frankly, I don't I don't believe anything in Axios that's foreign policy related, especially when it pertains to Israel.
And how many times have we heard the scathing phone call from Trump and then they work in coordination to escalate war right after this?
That's called Wrestlemania, Danny. It's called Wrestlemania. So, there is an element of that. Okay.
But what what more likely what Trump is referring to and you have to be able to translate Trump because he just makes things up on the fly. But there's always
an element of truth. There's like a thread or there's some he there are real things in the thread of what he's talking about. You just have to
rearrange them. And I think uh the the truth in what Trump was saying was that he's act they actually have problems uh
regarding Saudi Arabia the usage of airspace for attacks on Iran and the use of Saudi bases for direct attacks and
Qatar as well as all of the GCC countries Kuwait included more more than anybody because they're in the closest proximity to Iran. But that's the that's
been a real uh I think sticking point and a real obstacle for the United States in trying to mount an attack because it means you just all of a
sudden you've got more narrow attack vectors against Iran. You don't have full control and you don't have run of
the table as it were. Iraq is also a massive problem now for the United States. And so Iran has made some
changes and they have no doubt made some major contingencies. Uh and probably I
would say uh I wouldn't put it out of the realms of possibility that Iran could have slightly more westernly
forward operating positions. Let's just put it that way. Um than they might have had before. And that changes things as
well. So it just puts a little additional pressure on uh on the United States in mounting such an attack on
Israel as well. So I think that's what Trump was kind of referring to when he was talking about the Gulf States because they weren't negotiating with
the Iranians. you know I mean it might have been conversations happening but between the US it's middlemen people in
Pakistan Saudi and the Pakistanis who are very very close those two governments and and in terms of of defense and foreign policy but that's
what I think that's how I would translate that so yes it is uh very um
it's very tense right now so I don't discount any of these reports that you're saying I think The Iranians are
very realistic about they're preparing for an attack. Um the US is playing the sort of political game. The Iranians are
like we're just preparing for an imminent attack. And but but still there's a chance that this could run into problems because the United States
at the end of the day is a slave uh to all sorts of political uh twoing and throwing um that that drives our our uh
our political system. So, and and you're talking about the exial existential survival of this administration, the Republican party in the midterms, plus a
lot of other big business and uh energy and industrial concerns, economic concerns.
All these things are just additional spanners in in the works of this story. And there's too many of them actually.
And you know what? The longer you wait, the more the tougher it is to restart this war because there's nothing popular about this war. No one supports it.
29 minutesThere is no benefits from it. It's only been drawbacks. And the longer you wait, every day you wait, you make it more
difficult to prosecute and it gives more time for other people to intervene, including golf powers and other international actors, including the
Chinese, including the Russians. More phone calls. Don't do it, Donald. If you do, that's going to happen. And you
start adding these things up and the calculus changes. If he was to do he should have, if he was able to, he would have done it a month ago. But the US did
probably doesn't have the uh the equipment or the ammunition to actually do that. So somehow they think that they
got an opportunity here. It it can only be a short run. It can only be We're talking they've acknowledged over and over.
Yeah. two week campaign max, maybe three.
But what what's the what's week three look like? US jets going into Iranian airspace and getting shot down.
Yes, because that's how the last one ended. That's true.
o, you know, it it's just there's so many drawbacks to this. It's really hard. I can't unless they're they're planning to do something really stupid.
I mean the the really stupid thing too is what uh that curious report in Reuters talking about the uh the curious
way in which the Trump administration administers foreign policy at this time.
Uh it's my understanding and in our last few minutes you can react to this. This seems like the Trump administration really wanted to and Donald Trump
himself maybe wanted to go for this strike the moment he posted on uh True Social that he wanted to end Iran's
civilization that it was going to all end. Uh and there were concerns from Europeans that are you talking about a
nuclear weapon? Because when you say you're gonna wipe out everybody, you need a weapon strong enough to do that.
You don't have weapons conventionally strong enough to do that. So are you talking about nukes? And nobody knew.
31 minutesNobody knew. But uh ultimately I think uh it seems like the delay uh uh had a lot to do with these limitations and all
these variables which the US empire as you said cannot handle. There's too many. There's too many. The economic fallout, the military fallout, the
political fall, and there's there's intricacies in various variables within each of these fronts that uh it does
feel like a gamble and kind of throwing, you know, dipping your hand in one of them and saying, "Okay, we'll go with that one." Um, and that is that that is
concerning. Not to mention the fact that it seems like the Trump administration has this idea that if it can get a victory that might be more worthwhile
now and they're talking about Cuba. They move Nimmits over to Cuba. So um and which I don't think will actually be a victory. I don't think it'll end up like
Venezuela, but there there are those who are are looking at this. So uh your final comments uh Patrick before we wrap
up here? Yeah, I mean uh the the I can see Cuba has a lot of appeal to Trump.
Uh it's a country that's more or less defenseless. Uh you know, from a heavy military point of view, so you could
beat them up, whail on them, uh bully them around. I mean, that's more Trump's flavor, I think. Uh very close to home,
so probably not going to spend a whole lot of money. Um I mean, it looks good on the surface, doesn't it? Like, you know, look at what we did in Venezuela.
We're going to do the same here. I somehow I don't think it's going to end the same as Venezuela. Cuba is a whole different story. I think an invasion or
a military incursion or attack on Cuba, I think that will well and truly be the end of this administration. I think that
will be the final tipping point. Um and and if if if they do go for that, it
would be to parlay uh the disappointment of not doing what they hoped they could do to Iran, which
we're not really clear exactly what that is. There's so many different uh mission statements and ideas that have been
floated out. They can't quite seem to figure out what the objectives are militarily or or politically or whatever
uh in Iran. And so I don't think they're going to be able to achieve. It's easy not to achieve something that you
haven't actually specified. I guess this is in the Danzoo art of war uh art of war, art of the deal of war, whatever.
Don Don Trump's new book, guide book on on how to prosecute wars when he he retires. It'll be a great handbook for
future failed leaders. But so it'll be interesting to see uh how that progresses. I I think for this
administration, I could see them a lot of appeal. We we can get a win in Cuba. Mr. President, I know we can get a win.
I can see Hegathth and these guys just getting off right now. Rubio and everybody else.
Viceroy Marco Rubio. I like the sound of it. It really has a ring to it, doesn't it? Viceroy Rubio. another job title for Marco.
As if he doesn't have enough already. Um I don't So maybe Cuba could be the saving grace for Iran
if that becomes more politically expedient, but it's still going to end in disaster for the Trump administration. I I really that's going
to be one hand too many at the table. I just have a feeling. Uh never I mean I just think they underestimated the
Iranians. That's clearly, you could say from a military and political perspective that was the big mistake.
They underestimated the Iranians in all levels of capability, including the ability for Iran to troll them on social
media with, you know, bringing the US propaganda machine down with Lego videos. Nobody saw that coming. So I
35 minutesthink uh Cuba as well has so much global support and a lot you'll see that
support come come to bear uh if the US attacks and and I think yeah Cuba has deep deep deep political support
globally which is incredible for a country that small but it shows you how uh symbolic they are and how important they are for like the global working
class for the global south and I think you're going to see diplomatic is The US has no basis for doing anything to Cuba.
Cuba hasn't done anything to the United States. They're still grinding in acts of Castro's revolution 70 odd years ago
if if that's what this is about. I mean, the perfect example, the the indictment of Raul Castro this week. What a clown
show. They're indicting him for intervening in what was clearly a CIA
operation. a ter for intervening in a CIA terrorist operation against Cuba. I
mean, is that the best they could come up with? So, what you're you're you're wanting to indict this person for trying
to thwart one of your clandestine terrorist attacks on on Cuba? Seriously, do you think the public's that stupid?
You guys must be that stupid to think that you could sell this. I mean, this this is just a level of clownery that I didn't think the you that this
administration had it in them, but I mean, no limits, I guess. But, uh, just
I mean, unbelievable. So, this shows us, Danny, that either they're incompetent or they're not serious or this is a
truly a clown show with with Washington because there's hundred other things you could have spun up, fake indictments. I
mean, just put some smart people in a room and they'll come up with something plausible after a few hours, you know?
Yeah. Some fake drug charges or something. I don't know. But that to actually go for this one, the brothers
to the rescue shootown in 1996, you want to do that one that sort of
failed CIA operation and hang Cuba, hang the Cuban uh leadership for that.
Seriously, you're dealing with a low IQ cabal that that have superglued themselves to this
Trump administration. This is I can't imagine who's Whose brainchild is this?
Is this is this from Marco Rubio's office? Is this Sebastian Gorka? Have we got Steven Miller involved in spinning
this one up? I mean, they or is this is this are these MAGA supporters from Miami?
people that golf with Trump that who spun this up? This one's amazing.
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 40974
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am
Re: PART 3 ANTI-ANTI-NAZI BARBARIAN HORDES ARE KNOCKING DOWN
by admin » Sun May 24, 2026 8:38 pm
Dawn of a new era: Third imposed war winds down with Iran's ascendency as US hegemony collapses
by Press TV Strategic Analysis Desk
Sunday, 24 May 2026 1:28 PM Last Update: Sunday, 24 May 2026 1:28 PM
https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2026/05/2 ... -collapses
The third war imposed by the United States and its Zionist proxy on the Islamic Republic of Iran on February 28 is drawing to a close under conditions that unequivocally signify a comprehensive strategic failure for the aggressors.
Not a single one of the publicly declared objectives of the American-Israeli war alliance – the demand for "regime change," the insistence on unconditional surrender, or the explicit threat to physically dismantle Iran's military and civilizational fabric – has been achieved.
On the contrary, the Islamic Republic has not only survived the unprovoked and illegal military aggression but has emerged from it demonstrably strong and more resilient.
The enemy's miscalculations regarding Iran's true military capabilities, its social resilience, and its regional influence have backfired catastrophically.
The end of this war marks nothing less than a historic turning point: the dawn of Iran's era as a new superpower and the definitive beginning of American hegemonic decline.
Anatomy of a failure - Enemy's unachieved objectives
From the outset, the US and the Zionist regime operated under a profound miscalculation of Iran's national power. Convinced that a lethal cocktail of military pressure, economic strangulation, and internal subversion would suffice, they launched the third imposed war with a singular, delusional objective: the complete annihilation of the Islamic Republic.
This was never a limited engagement aimed at extracting concessions but an existential offensive built entirely on the assumption that Iran was brittle, isolated, and ripe for collapse. Every day of the 40-day war proved that assumption catastrophically wrong.
The enemy's propaganda machine, operating with an uncharacteristic transparency born of sheer arrogance, publicly advertised a litany of war aims that have since become historical artifacts of hubris, something acknowledged by both friends and foes of Iran.
From the very first day, American and Israeli regime officials explicitly declared that the war's purpose was nothing less than the destruction of the Islamic Republic. They sketched vivid scenarios of a partitioned Iran, demanded unconditional surrender, and announced the imminent annihilation of Iran's air and naval forces.
President Donald Trump himself speculated openly about designating a new leadership in Tehran. The boasts only escalated – Iranians would soon beg for a ceasefire, the job left unfinished 47 years prior would finally be completed, all of Iran's oil would be seized, Iranian civilization would be reduced to rubble, Iran itself would be wiped off the map.
These were not casual offhand remarks. They were repeated, recorded, and broadcast to the world throughout the 40 days of war and well beyond. Now, they stand as a permanent, irrefutable record of the enemy’s overreach and miscalculation. Notably, this pattern of pre-war grandiosity was not without precedent. During the 12-day war in June last year, the US had already claimed the complete destruction of Iran's nuclear industry, a boast that proved equally hollow. The repetition of such claims only deepens the humiliation of their failure.
Nowhere was the enemy's strategic confusion more starkly on display than in the confrontation over the Strait of Hormuz. Faced with Iran's decisive and entirely lawful action to block the waterway, a sovereign right exercised in legitimate self-defense, Americans cycled frantically through a series of incoherent and self-contradictory postures.
First, it claimed it would reopen the Strait immediately. Then, it declared it would simply abandon the Strait, absurdly asserting that it had no interests there and that others, who supposedly did have interests, should bear the burden.
Next, it called on NATO and its European allies for military assistance, without any favorable response. It then launched a naval armada to force the Strait open by raw military power, only to see that operation collapse in failure in less than 48 hours.
It resorted to a series of propaganda stunts, seeking souvenir photographs near the Strait and exploiting a ceasefire and the Islamabad negotiations to sneak two vessels through deceitfully. It threatened to attack and occupy Kharg Island. Finally, it attempted to line up 30 commercial vessels for an escorted exit from the Strait – an operation that failed disastrously, with serious damage inflicted upon the escorting naval assets.
Each of these maneuvers, from bluster to retreat, exposed a central, undeniable truth: the American war machine lacked both the strategic coherence and the operational capability to challenge Iran's legitimate and unopposed control over its sovereign waters.
The twin miscalculations – Hubris meets reality
The entirety of the enemy's failure can be traced to two fundamental miscalculations, each compounding and reinforcing the other in a deadly spiral of strategic blindness.
The first error was America's intoxication with its own crude propaganda. It grew dangerously arrogant about its capabilities across multiple domains. In domestic politics, it assumed it could sustain a prolonged war without triggering internal backlash. In its internal economy, it believed its financial power could simply outlast Iran's resilience. In international politics, it took for granted that it could maintain a unified coalition.
In military, strategic, and intelligence affairs, it assumed that technological superiority would automatically translate into decisive military victory. This was pure delusion and a classic case of a declining hegemon mistaking its fading legacy for living reality.
The second error – far larger and more consequential – was the enemy's systematic underestimation of Iran's actual capabilities. The US and its Zionist proxy failed catastrophically to assess the full spectrum of Iranian power.
It didn’t take into account Iran’s military and strategic strength, including advanced missile forces and asymmetric warfare doctrines; its deep regional influence and network of allies, chief among them the resistance front; its domestic political cohesion and popular legitimacy, including people’s remarkable resilience and unwavering willingness to defend the nation; its economic and social endurance under maximum pressure; and the extraordinary adaptive capacity of Iranian institutions in wartime.
This double miscalculation, inflating one's own power while deflating the adversary's, is the classic formula for strategic disaster. The enemy marched into this war expecting a walkover and found itself trapped in a deep quagmire with no easy or dignified exit.
This miscalculation wasn’t limited to Iran alone. The Zionist regime repeated the identical error regarding Hezbollah's capabilities, resources, and strategic leverage.
Having profoundly underestimated the Resistance's battlefield competence, logistical depth, and staying power, the regime now finds itself ensnared in southern Lebanon, caught in Hezbollah's strategic net, with no viable path forward and no honorable retreat.
This parallel failure across two fronts underscores a systemic intelligence and strategic deficit running deep through the entire enemy camp, from Tel Aviv to Washington and beyond.
The end of the war – Imposed defeat on America
The war is ending not through an American victory, nor even through a negotiated compromise, but through the outright imposition of a ceasefire upon the United States.
Whether formalized as a memorandum of understanding or a final agreement, this ceasefire has been forced on Washington and its proxies without the achievement of a single one of Trump's declared objectives or boasts. By merely agreeing to end hostilities under such terms, the American side has implicitly admitted the totality of its miscalculations and initiated a disgraceful, headlong retreat from every demand and threat it once made.
For the US, the outcome is a ledger of absolute zeros: no fall of the Islamic Republic, no “regime change,” no strategic realignment of Iranian policy, no weakening of Iran's nuclear or missile capabilities (let alone their destruction), no degradation of the resistance front, and, most critically, no uprising or internal collapse.
Every scenario the enemy had scripted played out instead as a humiliating debunking.
For Iran, by contrast, the gains are substantial and irreversible. Sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz is now a fact on the water, not a legal abstraction. Iran's power projection in the Persian Gulf has been dramatically enhanced, with its role and standing elevated beyond any pre-war measure. Designated terrorist groups operating against Iranian interests have been destroyed or seriously weakened. Iran's international image, severely damaged by the January coup attempt, has been restored and even enhanced.
And on the domestic front, the war has forged unprecedented unity, marked by the continuous, historic presence of the Iranian people on the scene, actively and visibly supporting the Islamic Republic and the country's armed forces.
Even in the purely hypothetical – indeed impossible – scenario where Iran received no material compensation for the destruction caused by the enemy during the war, the mere fact of American failure would still constitute an unequivocal Iranian victory.
America's failure in the third imposed war must be understood as the final act of a trilogy. In less than ten months, Iran has emerged victorious from three distinct wars: the 12-day war, the January coup attempt, and now the 40-day imposed war. Two military campaigns and one covert regime-change operation – all failed consecutively and disastrously.
This is no coincidence but an unmistakable pattern of systemic Iranian resilience on one side and systematic American incompetence on the other.
The geopolitical earthquake – Iran's superpower emergence and American decline
Even if secondary issues remain unresolved, such as the precise mechanism for lifting illegal sanctions, the question of war reparations, or formal American recognition of Iran's sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz, the central, undeniable fact stands immutable: the United States deployed its most advanced military, economic, and technological arsenal to bring Iran to its knees, and it failed utterly and humiliatingly.
Consider the magnitude of this moment. For at least a full century, this was the superpower that dominated global wars and conflicts, a superpower whose mere deployment of aircraft carriers would topple governments and redraw regional maps at will.
That same superpower has now failed against the Iranian nation, a nation materially and economically less powerful by any conventional metric. This is not a minor setback or a tactical inconvenience but a seismic event with far-reaching consequences. It stands as the single most visible evidence of American decline since the end of the Cold War.
The failure of the third imposed war marks not merely a decisive Iranian victory, but the beginning of an entirely new era: Iran's emergence as a superpower in its own right.
This is not hyperbole but a structural shift in the global balance of power. A nation that successfully defends its sovereignty against a full-spectrum and unprovoked aggression, imposes its terms on the defeated aggressor, expands its regional influence, and demonstrates strategic patience and civilizational resilience – such a nation has unequivocally earned its place at the table of great powers.
Iran has accomplished all of this while operating under the most severe sanctions regime in modern history, which continued even during the recent war.
At a minimum, this outcome has radically and permanently altered the cost-benefit calculations of any future aggressor. The decision to impose another war on Iran – should any enemy be foolish enough to contemplate such madness again – is now exponentially harder, more complex, and more perilous than the decision the enemy made on February 28. Iran's deterrent capability has been elevated from a regional asset to a strategic global reality and the war planners in Washington fully know it.
The unending struggle – Hostility with no end
Despite the impending end of the third imposed war, several critical issues within the agreement desired by Iran remain deliberately ambiguous. The US has conspicuously failed to provide clear answers on key clauses. Therefore, from Iran's perspective, no final agreement exists – and no such agreement will be recognized – until every element, component, and clause of it is fully realized and unambiguously clarified.
Moreover, even if an agreement were to be finalized, the potential for American treachery is not a mere possibility but a feature encoded deep in the enemy's political DNA.
The American war machine twice launched wars in the very midst of negotiations. An enemy that resorts to aggression while talking cannot be trusted to honor commitments once the ceasefire takes hold. Past behavior is not merely a warning but a predictor of future conduct.
The enmity and hostility of the US and other arrogant powers toward the Islamic Republic is not a temporary policy disagreement, nor a conflict over this or that administration's priorities. It is a structural feature of the international system itself, and it will remain so as long as Iran maintains its independence, upholds the basic rights of its people, and adheres unwaveringly to its revolutionary Islamic principles and identity.
This struggle will not end with any single agreement, memorandum, or ceasefire. It will persist, relentlessly, albeit on shifting battlefields and through evolving tactics.
Even at this late stage, the enemy retains its full capacity for deception. The heavy offensive military deployment currently arrayed around Iran's borders – troops, naval assets, and air power in overwhelming concentration – is not defensive posturing by any definition. It is a clear signal of potential renewed betrayal.
Iran must therefore remain vigilant, operating always under the expectation that the enemy may once again violate both the spirit and the letter of any dialogue and any agreement. Vigilance is not paranoia but a strategic necessity against an enemy like the US.
Strait of Hormuz – A sovereignty neither negotiated nor dependent on recognition
Iran does not require – and has never sought – American recognition of its legal sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz. The strategic waterway in the Persian Gulf is under Iran's effective control, a fait accompli carved not from negotiation but from [LC: geography &] action, a right achieved [LC: gifted] and exercised, not a favor to be begged for at the negotiating table.
To expect Americans to formally admit this reality would be to expect the enemy to officially certify its own superpower decline and decay. American global hegemony was built upon two pillars above all others: uncontested naval power and the freedom of movement across every waterway on the planet. Formal recognition of Iranian control over one of the world's most vital chokepoints would be nothing less than a public, ceremonial admission that those pillars have crumbled and that era has ended.
Iran's presence in the Strait of Hormuz is not an act of extortion, as enemy propaganda endlessly claims, but an act of responsible stewardship.
The services Iran provides, ensuring maritime security against piracy and aggression, protecting the fragile marine environment from pollution and disaster, offering necessary navigational aid and emergency response to vessels in distress, actively facilitating the free flow of trade and economic prosperity for the entire region and the world at large.
Therefore, any fees Iran receives or will receive for these services are not arbitrary "tolls" or "taxes" levied on international commerce. They are legitimate service charges for vessels transiting the waterway. This framing is no mere semantic distinction but the legal, operational, and moral basis for Iran's continued administration of the waterway.
And unlike the hegemon's unfounded claims, it rests not on boasts but on boots on the ground – or rather, ships on the water.
by Press TV Strategic Analysis Desk
Sunday, 24 May 2026 1:28 PM Last Update: Sunday, 24 May 2026 1:28 PM
https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2026/05/2 ... -collapses
The third war imposed by the United States and its Zionist proxy on the Islamic Republic of Iran on February 28 is drawing to a close under conditions that unequivocally signify a comprehensive strategic failure for the aggressors.
Not a single one of the publicly declared objectives of the American-Israeli war alliance – the demand for "regime change," the insistence on unconditional surrender, or the explicit threat to physically dismantle Iran's military and civilizational fabric – has been achieved.
On the contrary, the Islamic Republic has not only survived the unprovoked and illegal military aggression but has emerged from it demonstrably strong and more resilient.
The enemy's miscalculations regarding Iran's true military capabilities, its social resilience, and its regional influence have backfired catastrophically.
The end of this war marks nothing less than a historic turning point: the dawn of Iran's era as a new superpower and the definitive beginning of American hegemonic decline.
Anatomy of a failure - Enemy's unachieved objectives
From the outset, the US and the Zionist regime operated under a profound miscalculation of Iran's national power. Convinced that a lethal cocktail of military pressure, economic strangulation, and internal subversion would suffice, they launched the third imposed war with a singular, delusional objective: the complete annihilation of the Islamic Republic.
This was never a limited engagement aimed at extracting concessions but an existential offensive built entirely on the assumption that Iran was brittle, isolated, and ripe for collapse. Every day of the 40-day war proved that assumption catastrophically wrong.
The enemy's propaganda machine, operating with an uncharacteristic transparency born of sheer arrogance, publicly advertised a litany of war aims that have since become historical artifacts of hubris, something acknowledged by both friends and foes of Iran.
From the very first day, American and Israeli regime officials explicitly declared that the war's purpose was nothing less than the destruction of the Islamic Republic. They sketched vivid scenarios of a partitioned Iran, demanded unconditional surrender, and announced the imminent annihilation of Iran's air and naval forces.
President Donald Trump himself speculated openly about designating a new leadership in Tehran. The boasts only escalated – Iranians would soon beg for a ceasefire, the job left unfinished 47 years prior would finally be completed, all of Iran's oil would be seized, Iranian civilization would be reduced to rubble, Iran itself would be wiped off the map.
These were not casual offhand remarks. They were repeated, recorded, and broadcast to the world throughout the 40 days of war and well beyond. Now, they stand as a permanent, irrefutable record of the enemy’s overreach and miscalculation. Notably, this pattern of pre-war grandiosity was not without precedent. During the 12-day war in June last year, the US had already claimed the complete destruction of Iran's nuclear industry, a boast that proved equally hollow. The repetition of such claims only deepens the humiliation of their failure.
Nowhere was the enemy's strategic confusion more starkly on display than in the confrontation over the Strait of Hormuz. Faced with Iran's decisive and entirely lawful action to block the waterway, a sovereign right exercised in legitimate self-defense, Americans cycled frantically through a series of incoherent and self-contradictory postures.
First, it claimed it would reopen the Strait immediately. Then, it declared it would simply abandon the Strait, absurdly asserting that it had no interests there and that others, who supposedly did have interests, should bear the burden.
Next, it called on NATO and its European allies for military assistance, without any favorable response. It then launched a naval armada to force the Strait open by raw military power, only to see that operation collapse in failure in less than 48 hours.
It resorted to a series of propaganda stunts, seeking souvenir photographs near the Strait and exploiting a ceasefire and the Islamabad negotiations to sneak two vessels through deceitfully. It threatened to attack and occupy Kharg Island. Finally, it attempted to line up 30 commercial vessels for an escorted exit from the Strait – an operation that failed disastrously, with serious damage inflicted upon the escorting naval assets.
Each of these maneuvers, from bluster to retreat, exposed a central, undeniable truth: the American war machine lacked both the strategic coherence and the operational capability to challenge Iran's legitimate and unopposed control over its sovereign waters.
Press TV
@PressTV
Analysis - Empire at its nadir: Trump’s hollow threats mask America’s descent as Iran stamps its authority
By Press TV Strategic Analysis Desk
From presstv.ir
6:50 AM · May 23, 2026
The twin miscalculations – Hubris meets reality
The entirety of the enemy's failure can be traced to two fundamental miscalculations, each compounding and reinforcing the other in a deadly spiral of strategic blindness.
The first error was America's intoxication with its own crude propaganda. It grew dangerously arrogant about its capabilities across multiple domains. In domestic politics, it assumed it could sustain a prolonged war without triggering internal backlash. In its internal economy, it believed its financial power could simply outlast Iran's resilience. In international politics, it took for granted that it could maintain a unified coalition.
In military, strategic, and intelligence affairs, it assumed that technological superiority would automatically translate into decisive military victory. This was pure delusion and a classic case of a declining hegemon mistaking its fading legacy for living reality.
The second error – far larger and more consequential – was the enemy's systematic underestimation of Iran's actual capabilities. The US and its Zionist proxy failed catastrophically to assess the full spectrum of Iranian power.
It didn’t take into account Iran’s military and strategic strength, including advanced missile forces and asymmetric warfare doctrines; its deep regional influence and network of allies, chief among them the resistance front; its domestic political cohesion and popular legitimacy, including people’s remarkable resilience and unwavering willingness to defend the nation; its economic and social endurance under maximum pressure; and the extraordinary adaptive capacity of Iranian institutions in wartime.
This double miscalculation, inflating one's own power while deflating the adversary's, is the classic formula for strategic disaster. The enemy marched into this war expecting a walkover and found itself trapped in a deep quagmire with no easy or dignified exit.
This miscalculation wasn’t limited to Iran alone. The Zionist regime repeated the identical error regarding Hezbollah's capabilities, resources, and strategic leverage.
Having profoundly underestimated the Resistance's battlefield competence, logistical depth, and staying power, the regime now finds itself ensnared in southern Lebanon, caught in Hezbollah's strategic net, with no viable path forward and no honorable retreat.
This parallel failure across two fronts underscores a systemic intelligence and strategic deficit running deep through the entire enemy camp, from Tel Aviv to Washington and beyond.
The end of the war – Imposed defeat on America
The war is ending not through an American victory, nor even through a negotiated compromise, but through the outright imposition of a ceasefire upon the United States.
Whether formalized as a memorandum of understanding or a final agreement, this ceasefire has been forced on Washington and its proxies without the achievement of a single one of Trump's declared objectives or boasts. By merely agreeing to end hostilities under such terms, the American side has implicitly admitted the totality of its miscalculations and initiated a disgraceful, headlong retreat from every demand and threat it once made.
For the US, the outcome is a ledger of absolute zeros: no fall of the Islamic Republic, no “regime change,” no strategic realignment of Iranian policy, no weakening of Iran's nuclear or missile capabilities (let alone their destruction), no degradation of the resistance front, and, most critically, no uprising or internal collapse.
Every scenario the enemy had scripted played out instead as a humiliating debunking.
For Iran, by contrast, the gains are substantial and irreversible. Sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz is now a fact on the water, not a legal abstraction. Iran's power projection in the Persian Gulf has been dramatically enhanced, with its role and standing elevated beyond any pre-war measure. Designated terrorist groups operating against Iranian interests have been destroyed or seriously weakened. Iran's international image, severely damaged by the January coup attempt, has been restored and even enhanced.
And on the domestic front, the war has forged unprecedented unity, marked by the continuous, historic presence of the Iranian people on the scene, actively and visibly supporting the Islamic Republic and the country's armed forces.
Even in the purely hypothetical – indeed impossible – scenario where Iran received no material compensation for the destruction caused by the enemy during the war, the mere fact of American failure would still constitute an unequivocal Iranian victory.
America's failure in the third imposed war must be understood as the final act of a trilogy. In less than ten months, Iran has emerged victorious from three distinct wars: the 12-day war, the January coup attempt, and now the 40-day imposed war. Two military campaigns and one covert regime-change operation – all failed consecutively and disastrously.
This is no coincidence but an unmistakable pattern of systemic Iranian resilience on one side and systematic American incompetence on the other.
Press TV
@PressTV
Analysis - With strategic upper hand, Iran conditions nuclear talks on war's definitive end – on its terms
By Press TV Strategic Analysis Desk
https://t.co/7IkQA1le2u
From presstv.ir
7:08 AM · May 21, 2026
The geopolitical earthquake – Iran's superpower emergence and American decline
Even if secondary issues remain unresolved, such as the precise mechanism for lifting illegal sanctions, the question of war reparations, or formal American recognition of Iran's sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz, the central, undeniable fact stands immutable: the United States deployed its most advanced military, economic, and technological arsenal to bring Iran to its knees, and it failed utterly and humiliatingly.
Consider the magnitude of this moment. For at least a full century, this was the superpower that dominated global wars and conflicts, a superpower whose mere deployment of aircraft carriers would topple governments and redraw regional maps at will.
That same superpower has now failed against the Iranian nation, a nation materially and economically less powerful by any conventional metric. This is not a minor setback or a tactical inconvenience but a seismic event with far-reaching consequences. It stands as the single most visible evidence of American decline since the end of the Cold War.
The failure of the third imposed war marks not merely a decisive Iranian victory, but the beginning of an entirely new era: Iran's emergence as a superpower in its own right.
This is not hyperbole but a structural shift in the global balance of power. A nation that successfully defends its sovereignty against a full-spectrum and unprovoked aggression, imposes its terms on the defeated aggressor, expands its regional influence, and demonstrates strategic patience and civilizational resilience – such a nation has unequivocally earned its place at the table of great powers.
Iran has accomplished all of this while operating under the most severe sanctions regime in modern history, which continued even during the recent war.
At a minimum, this outcome has radically and permanently altered the cost-benefit calculations of any future aggressor. The decision to impose another war on Iran – should any enemy be foolish enough to contemplate such madness again – is now exponentially harder, more complex, and more perilous than the decision the enemy made on February 28. Iran's deterrent capability has been elevated from a regional asset to a strategic global reality and the war planners in Washington fully know it.
The unending struggle – Hostility with no end
Despite the impending end of the third imposed war, several critical issues within the agreement desired by Iran remain deliberately ambiguous. The US has conspicuously failed to provide clear answers on key clauses. Therefore, from Iran's perspective, no final agreement exists – and no such agreement will be recognized – until every element, component, and clause of it is fully realized and unambiguously clarified.
Moreover, even if an agreement were to be finalized, the potential for American treachery is not a mere possibility but a feature encoded deep in the enemy's political DNA.
The American war machine twice launched wars in the very midst of negotiations. An enemy that resorts to aggression while talking cannot be trusted to honor commitments once the ceasefire takes hold. Past behavior is not merely a warning but a predictor of future conduct.
The enmity and hostility of the US and other arrogant powers toward the Islamic Republic is not a temporary policy disagreement, nor a conflict over this or that administration's priorities. It is a structural feature of the international system itself, and it will remain so as long as Iran maintains its independence, upholds the basic rights of its people, and adheres unwaveringly to its revolutionary Islamic principles and identity.
This struggle will not end with any single agreement, memorandum, or ceasefire. It will persist, relentlessly, albeit on shifting battlefields and through evolving tactics.
Even at this late stage, the enemy retains its full capacity for deception. The heavy offensive military deployment currently arrayed around Iran's borders – troops, naval assets, and air power in overwhelming concentration – is not defensive posturing by any definition. It is a clear signal of potential renewed betrayal.
Iran must therefore remain vigilant, operating always under the expectation that the enemy may once again violate both the spirit and the letter of any dialogue and any agreement. Vigilance is not paranoia but a strategic necessity against an enemy like the US.
Press TV
@PressTV
Analysis - The geometry of power: Trump’s repeated retreats prove US systemic paralysis, Iran’s strategic ascent
By Press TV Strategic Analysis Desk
https://presstv.ir/Detail/2026/05/19/76 ... gic-ascent
10:01 AM · May 19, 2026
Strait of Hormuz – A sovereignty neither negotiated nor dependent on recognition
Iran does not require – and has never sought – American recognition of its legal sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz. The strategic waterway in the Persian Gulf is under Iran's effective control, a fait accompli carved not from negotiation but from [LC: geography &] action, a right achieved [LC: gifted] and exercised, not a favor to be begged for at the negotiating table.
High angle satellite image
To expect Americans to formally admit this reality would be to expect the enemy to officially certify its own superpower decline and decay. American global hegemony was built upon two pillars above all others: uncontested naval power and the freedom of movement across every waterway on the planet. Formal recognition of Iranian control over one of the world's most vital chokepoints would be nothing less than a public, ceremonial admission that those pillars have crumbled and that era has ended.
Iran's presence in the Strait of Hormuz is not an act of extortion, as enemy propaganda endlessly claims, but an act of responsible stewardship.
The services Iran provides, ensuring maritime security against piracy and aggression, protecting the fragile marine environment from pollution and disaster, offering necessary navigational aid and emergency response to vessels in distress, actively facilitating the free flow of trade and economic prosperity for the entire region and the world at large.
Therefore, any fees Iran receives or will receive for these services are not arbitrary "tolls" or "taxes" levied on international commerce. They are legitimate service charges for vessels transiting the waterway. This framing is no mere semantic distinction but the legal, operational, and moral basis for Iran's continued administration of the waterway.
And unlike the hegemon's unfounded claims, it rests not on boasts but on boots on the ground – or rather, ships on the water.
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 40974
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am
23 posts
• Page 3 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Return to United States Government Crime
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests