متتبع أزمة إيران-الخليج 2026
CC
Events Archive
strikeMar 31, 2026

It's Bipartisan: Moral Imbeciles Follow Trump's Lead to War

Summary

The moral imbeciles ruling the United States cannot even fathom the stakes of the game they are playing and America’s moral collapse is contributing to the strategic disaster that is POTUS Trump’s Ramadan War on Iran. UPDATED:Jim Webb had some very fitting remarks on The Duran that I added at the end of the post. What are the stakes exactly? Shall We Play a Game of Global Thermonuclear War? Beyond the obvious geo-strategic implications of a hyperpower blundering into a war with a major regional power — combat deaths of soldiers and civilians, potential global economic crisis/collapse, major realignment of the regional and global balance of power — there is even more at stake. Finnish economic analyst Tuomas Malinen laid it out starkly last fall for the GnS Economics newsletter: …the fact that attacking Iranian nuclear facilities would, most likely, engulf the region into a darkness, freeze Europe, plunge the world into an economic depression of never-before-seen scale and possibly even set the world ablaze. … A judgement failure in the Middle East leading to an eruption of a regional war and to the collapse of the global economy is probably the largest possible Black Swan risk in President Trump’s second term. … Iran is a much more formidable adversary than many thought. With Russia backing Tehran, chances of defeating Iran in a war are slim to none. For those who need to hear from a more trusted name, I’ll quote from Professor Norman Finkelstein’s appearance yesterday on the Robinson Erhardt podcast serve to remind us what’s in the balance: (MIT Professor Emeritus Ted Postol) said that Prime Minister Netanyahu is a homicidal maniac and he said it’s not true that Iran is far away from a bomb. He said they could within about 10 days construct one. And if Israel uses theirs, Iran will use theirs. Now, beneath the veneer, the patina of a cool, objective MIT scientist, I inferred, I can’t say for sure, that he’s Jewish and because he mentioned at some point that his friends in Tel Aviv were saying how terrible the situation is. And you could see beneath the cool objective veneer he was concerned that Israel might cease to exist. … This is a deadly serious moment. This could be the one. I know as of the time we’re we’re recording it doesn’t feel it as it felt a few days ago when uh the Israelis and Americans attacked the nuclear the nuclear site in Iran and in return Iranians targeted a sites in the vicinity of Dimona and it looked pretty it was pretty scary. I’m opening with this to draw on the credibility of two elder statesmen in Professors Postol and Finkelstein before invoking the specter of mass death. The stakes are thus as high as possible and the corrupt, craven, incomprehending moral imbeciles ruling the United States are incapable of even fathoming the forces they are playing with. Trump’s America as Rogue Power Stephen Walt has a piece in Foreign Policy that accurately describes the Trump administration as it begins a major war of choice: the United States is now acting like a predatory hegemon, exploiting positions of leverage built up over decades to exploit allies and adversaries alike. This zero-sum approach to nearly all relations with others includes a deep hostility toward most international institutions and norms, deliberately erratic behavior, and a tendency to treat other foreign leaders with ill-disguised contempt while expecting demeaning acts of submission and fealty from most of them. As the fallout from the war in Iran spreads throughout the region and around the world, it underscores that the administration either didn’t understand how its actions would affect other states or simply didn’t care. …U.S. foreign policy is now in the hands of a remarkably incompetent set of officials, from the president on down. International influence depends on many things, but one of the key ingredients is other states’ belief that the people they have to deal with are smart, well-informed, and generally know what they are doing. At this point, does anyone in the higher echelons of the Trump administration merit that description? Not that I can see. Conducting foreign policy is a difficult business, and no government gets everything right, but this administration commits own goals on a weekly basis while insisting that it is infallible. To make matters worse, some of these features are not going to be easy to correct after Trump leaves office, even if he is replaced by someone with very different views. How corrupt and incompetent are we here in America? So corrupt that the dreaded military industrial complex upon which the empire’s power rest is so choked with grift it can no longer build effective weapons platforms. $13 Billion and the Toilets Don’t Flush We’ll let the manifest failure of one such weapons platform serve as our example. It’s been a crappy week for the largest warship ever built. A raging fire in its laundry facilities and persistently clogged toilets have taken the $13 billion USS Ford aircraft carrier out of the Iran fight — and it could remain out of service for a year. The massive, 1,106-foot-long vessel left the Red Sea last week and has been docked in Crete for repairs since Monday, far from the air and sea attack on Iran it had joined two weeks earlier. Damage to laundry facilities — essential on a floating city of nearly 4,500 sailors — is severe, lawmakers told The Post. It got so bad that they were “taking helicopters to move their laundry to other ships so that it could be washed,” said Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI), the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee. Lawmakers said the March 12 fire impacted multiple berthing areas, an indication smoke may have coursed through the ship’s massive air circulation system, fouling linens and mattresses, and making areas virtually unusable. “I’m told that there are 400 sailors that spent many days sleeping on the floor. It’s been at sea now for almost a year, so that is an incredible stress on the whole crew,” added Reed, a retired Army officer. Fire isn’t the only element at issue — so is water. The ship’s high-tech sanitation system has had problems since at least 2020, with routine clogs, pricey fixes, and a green design that has caused repeat maintenance problems costing at least $4 million. We’ll set aside the debates about whether the USS Ford was really this damaged by a laundry fire, if sabotage was involved, or if the Iranians actually hit the ship with a drone swarm as some have (probably mis-)interpreted POTUS Trump’s comments to mean. The point is this hulk has been taken out of the theater of combat largely because, despite its enormous cost, the thing barely works. Let’s hear more from Responsible Statecraft explaining the endemic systemic corruption that spent so much for so little combat utility: In the early 2000s, Navy leaders decided to replace the existing fleet of Nimitz-class aircraft carriers, which have provided reliable service for more than 50 years, with a newly designed ship. Doing so meant the contractor could milk the development process given that the government would reimburse the company for the research and development costs. The process incentivized the inclusion of nearly two dozen new, unproven technologies. This complicated the development process and delayed delivery by at least three years and increased costs more than 25%, from $10.5 billion to $13.2 billion. This spending has done little to improve the vessels’ capabilities. But the inclusion of so many new technologies did create economic opportunities all over the country. More than 200 suppliers, spread across the country, build components for the Ford-class program. Note the sentence I bolded at the end. The scam of distributing the manufacture of these monstrosities is how the gravy is passed around the country via Congress. William D. Hartung called this “political engineering” —- the strategy where defense contractors purposely spread the manufacturing of a single weapons system (like the F-35) across as many congressional districts as possible to ensure that canceling the program would cost local jobs, effectively forcing Congress to keep funding it regardless of performance — in his classic tome Prophets of War: Lockheed Martin and the Making of the Military-Industrial Complex. But more about the ship, because the thing is a literal (family blog) hole: The Navy’s glitzy new aircraft carrier isn’t very good at launching aircraft, but the crew has even more reason to knock the ship’s delicate plumbing system. The vessel’s designers rejected a traditional sewage system and instead charged taxpayers to develop a vacuum system similar to the kind used in commercial aircraft, but scaled up to accommodate the needs of a 4,000 person crew. The Government Accountability Office, however, warned in 2020 that the sewage system clogged frequently and required regular acid flushes to clear calcium buildups in the system’s narrow pipes. Each flush costs approximately $400,000. Not surprisingly then, the Ford’s sewage system has been a constant source of trouble. Sailors report daily breakdowns of the system. NPR reported that during a four-day period in 2025, engineers logged 205 breakdowns. Embarked sailors are frequently told the heads (the nautical term for toilets) are unavailable for a period because technicians are making urgent repairs to the system. I could pile on with comparable case studies of the F-35 from the U.S. General Accountability Office or the the Littoral Combat Ship class (“A $100,000,000,000 Billion U.S. Navy Mistake“), but the point is made: Team America is focused on grifting the Department on Defense, not building usable weapons. Or as Will Schryver posted on X: “The US military industrial complex is a modestly scaled high-end fashion boutique. It is not capable of producing the necessary implements for a real war against a peer adversary.” David Sirota and Jared Jacang Maher have outlined how the U.S. Congress reached this state of total corruption in their book Master Plan: The Hidden Plot To Legalize Corruption In America and I’ve discussed the process in a previous post. The outcome of 50 years of deliberate effort to corrupt our legislative system is the Congress we know today: a collection of moral imbeciles and narcissists looking for payoffs and having little or no grasp of what they are actually doing. Let’s look at a recent egregious example of this process in action, but first let’s set the context with some polling. There Is Immense Opposition to Trump’s Iran War Responsible Statecraft has the polling data: A new poll released Wednesday found that, although 63% of Republicans support airstrikes against Iranian military targets, only 20% are in favor of deploying U.S. troops. That’s only about 2 in 10 Republicans in favor of boots on the ground. Again, these are Republicans — including MAGA. Among all Americans, according to the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, 62% percent oppose deploying U.S. troops on the ground in Iran. “Trump still has deep support among Republicans,” according to the poll summary, but the results indicate that he “risks frustrating his voters during a midterm election year if the United States gets involved in the kind of prolonged war in the Middle East that he promised to avoid.” This new survey comes on the heels of several other ones that show Americans drawing a bright line sending ground troops into this war. A Data for Progress poll from mid-March showed similar results, with 68% of all respondents saying they opposed deploying U.S. troops to Iran. Breaking down by party ID, 48% of Republicans, 85% of Democrats and 71% of independents said they were opposed to boots on the ground. A Quinnipiac University poll taken between March 6 and 8 found that 74% of voters oppose U.S. ground troops in Iran, with only 20% supporting. In that poll, 52% of Republicans, 95% of Democrats and 75% of independents said they oppose. So this ought to be a layup for the opposition party, right? Right?!? Hakeem Jeffries’ Delays War Powers Vote According to The New York Times, the Democrats’ hands are tied: House Democrats could again try to force a vote on a war powers resolution on Iran, after Republicans voted down a similar measure earlier this month. Representative Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the minority leader, said Tuesday that “when we present something on the floor, it’s our determination to win.” But Republicans in that chamber would be all but certain to block it. But Ryan Grim and Zeteo point out there was a path to victory: Nancy Mace gives Dems the votes to pass the War Powers resolution. Meeks said go talk to Republicans. Prem talked to Mace, I talked to Davidson. The votes are there. If Dems don’t put it on the floor now it’s because they don’t want it to pass now. https://t.co/7MzpVJOyVb — Ryan Grim (@ryangrim) March 27, 2026 Those interested can read Jeffries’ excuses at Axios. But I think Our Revolution boils down the situation pretty accurately: As @ryangrim reported last night, Dems had the votes to pass the War Powers resolution. "If Dems don’t put it on the floor now it’s because they don’t want it to pass now," he said. "If Dems say they oppose the war but won't force a vote, it reinforces the sense they're not… pic.twitter.com/eo9poIN5jJ — Our Revolution (@OurRevolution) March 27, 2026 But I’ve got to keep moving, lots of ground to cover here and it’s not just Congressional Democrats that are moral imbeciles who either don’t understand the stakes or don’t care. 2028 Presidential Hopefuls Waffle on Genocide Speaking of moral imbeciles, here’s opposition leader Gavin Newsom in action: Newsom: "I revere Israel. Proud to support Israel. Deeply oppose Netanyahu. Deeply oppose the far right in the West Bank." He is trying to pretend only Netenyhu is the problem. The settlers, the occupation, the genocide-that's Israeli policy, not a personality. You can't revere… pic.twitter.com/ejRc6RM5uc — Ounka (@OunkaOnX) March 24, 2026 Gavin Newsom pulled a classic flip-flop on Israel. The Guardian has the deets: The California governor, Gavin Newsom, backtracked on earlier remarks likening Israel to an “apartheid state” in a new interview with Politico published on Tuesday. In the interview, the Democrat, who is widely expected to launch a presidential bid in 2028, said that when he used the term three weeks ago, he meant it to apply to Israel’s future should it continue on its present trajectory. Asked whether he regrets using the term, Newsom said: “I do in this context. I said it, and I referenced why I used it – a Tom Friedman article – in that same sentence where Tom used it in the context of the direction that Bibi is going.” Pressed further, he clarified he does not believe the term applies to Israel’s present. He added: “And that is a legitimate concern I have, that I share with Tom – that that direction, if that vision and that direction of the far right that Bibi is indulging, that if they see the full annexation of the West Bank, then that’s not something – that’s a word you may hear others use.” When asked if he considers himself a Zionist, the governor did not respond directly: “I revere the state of Israel,” he answered. “I’m proud to support the state of Israel. I deeply, deeply oppose Bibi Netanyahu’s leadership, his opposition to the two-state solution and deeply oppose how he is indulging the far right as it relates to what’s going on in the West Bank.” The original remarks came during a book tour event with Pod Save America’s Jon Favreau. At the time, Newsom said of Netanyahu: “He’s trying to stay out of jail. He’s got an election coming up. He’s potentially on the ropes. He’s got folks on the hardline that want to annex the West Bank. Friedman and others are talking about it appropriately, [as] sort of an apartheid state.” Kentucky Governor Andy Bashear is providing no alternative: Dem @GovAndyBeshear is declining to call Israel’s actions in Gaza “genocide.” “That’s becoming one of those new litmus tests that we said we would never do as a party,” he told our @DashaBurns on #TheConversation. Listen to the full interview: https://t.co/iMrcJwsgGU pic.twitter.com/4dvaLhPrEo — POLITICO (@politico) March 27, 2026 The Democrats seem determined to recreate the fate of Keir Starmer’s Labour Party — sweep into office on a wave of Conservative Party failures and then utterly fail to provide an alternative or any form of productive leadership. Check this out. The Party of IdPol and Woke Goes Full Racist Never go full racist. But the Dem establishment just can’t resist. Boxed out of campaigning on popular issues by their loyalty to wealthy donors, they’ve decided it’s a sex and race deal. Per Axios: Some top Democrats are quietly debating a fraught question: whether the party’s best bet for winning back the presidency in 2028 is to nominate a man — perhaps a straight, white, Christian man. Their fear, divulged with dismay in group chats, at cocktail parties and increasingly in public, is that parts of the electorate are too biased to support a woman or other diverse candidate for president. Former first lady Michelle Obama fueled such talk recently, saying the U.S. is “not ready for a woman.” Democratic strategists have put it bluntly, with several saying a version of “It has to be a white guy.” I’ll let Nikhil Pal Singh handle the rebuttal: Hillary invoked “hardworking white Americans” against Obama in ‘08, and then tried to discredit Bernie in ‘16 by saying “breaking up the big banks won’t end racism” toward black people. Democrats who play race/identity games to avoid political substance are not serious people. https://t.co/eFNIZc4GTS — Nikhil Pal Singh (@nikhil_palsingh) March 30, 2026 This is the same Democrat establishment that thinks it is an urgent priority to distance the party from massively popular podcaster Hasan Piker (does no one remember the quest for a “Democratic Joe Rogan”?) After POLITICO reported that Piker, the far left political streamer with millions of followers, will stump in Michigan with Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed next month, his history of divisive comments launched an avalanche of criticism from Republicans and Democrats. Two of El-Sayed’s opponents, state Sen. Mallory McMorrow and Rep. Haley Stevens, lambasted El-Sayed, with Stevens telling Jewish Insider “someone who’s campaigning with someone like that is not going to win in Michigan” and McMorrow saying Piker “says extremely offensive things in order to generate clicks and views and followers, which is not entirely different from somebody like Nick Fuentes,” comparing him to the antisemite nationalist influencer. Zeteo blames centrist think tank Third Way: prominent Democrats – ranging from elected members of Congress, to 2026 Senate candidates, to likely 2028 presidential hopefuls – are spending their time condemning Hasan Piker, the left-wing streamer and influencer, as part of a cancellation campaign spearheaded by Third way, the centrist think tank. Third Way, which is funded by billionaires and corporate interests, has been quite open about its broader goal and ongoing campaign to marginalize the left. “We will be the chief opponent of the left in the 2028 Democratic presidential primary,” the organization’s president, Jon Cowan, recently pledged. Asked to define the kind of lefty candidates Third Way doesn’t like, he pinpointed pols who “are for Medicare for All, the Green New Deal, abolishing ICE, open borders.” Cowan told the New York Times that Third Way will “probably spend $30 million to $50 million” toward this campaign over the next few years. Again the polling data shows that the moral imbeciles leading the Democrats are choosing their big money donors over the popular will: Here's everything Democratic voters agree with @hasanthehun over the Dem party. – 95% Support Raising Taxes on Billionaires – 85% Support Medicare-For-All – 78% Supports Abolishing ICE – 77% oppose US using military force to attack Iran – 67% Believe Israel Committed Genocide pic.twitter.com/hRXlI8fNKu — JulesNader386 (@Julesnader386) March 28, 2026 Speaking of Moral Imbeciles: Here’s Cory Booker I gotta close with this off the chain example of obtuseness from zionist Senator Cory Booker: Cory Booker was asked if he’d support Trump’s diplomatic efforts to end the war and weirdly says no, because he doesn’t support anything this administration does. Ok Trump sucks but can we end the war? This is crazy talk pic.twitter.com/GsUdMciGv1 — Ryan Grim (@ryangrim) March 30, 2026 Ok, ok, I’ll end on a more hopeful note with this from Democratic Maine candidate for US Senate Graham Platner: Graham Platner to Chuck Schumer: “You need to stop having a problem with the illegal wars we have been starting simply because of the paperwork that wasn’t done properly. You should be against them because they are fundamentally immoral, unethical, and illegal. We should have… pic.twitter.com/1YdnD3Dj1W — Marco Foster (@MarcoFoster_) March 27, 2026 Just as with the opposition to Trump’s ICE invasion of blue cities last year, citizens against the war will have to lead the fight without relying on the misleadership class of either party. UPDATE: Jim Webb (not the former US Senator but the 30-something military analyst) appeared on The Duran today and when asked “Why does the US no longer do diplomacy?” he included this bit in his answer: Jim Webb: What really poisoned (American diplomacy) was the global war on terrorism and the rise of neocons within the conservative and liberal ranks of both parties. It’s a bunch of people who did not cut their teeth on any kind of battlefield. If you look at the people who populated uh different administrations from the 60s, the 70s and the 80s, these were people who if they did not serve in World War II, they at least understood the toll of what a large conflict was and were motivated to have diplomatic solutions to problems before they got to a point where you had to commit large amounts of your youth into (war). Flash forward to the people who brought us the Iraq war in 2003 followed by Yemen, Somalia, I mean the whole round around North Africa, Ukraine and they have become fixated on this notion that we can force change one way or the other. Even our diplomacy is coercive. It is now sanctions based. We will cut you off economically. We have weaponized the dollar which is very much as you know making the rest of the world consider dropping it. That would be an unbelievable catastrophe for catastrophe for the United States. We’ve had a very capable military for a very long time going back to the ’90s. We were the superpower. So it was an easy button to push and if you never really see the ramifications of what happens on the back end of that by comparison to other conflicts such as Vietnam, Korea, World War II, your casualty counts are pretty low. You are inclined to do that over and over and over again. And it’s become, I can say from my experience in DC, it is a very popular notion to discuss in the salons and the brunch tables, that it’s not a big deal if we dump our guys in there to take out a regime. What is a few dozen casualties? Those people no longer have a connection to the military. They don’t have any friends who serve. They really don’t have family who serve. They don’t understand the cost. It becomes a very cold and borderline evil type of way to go about business. Moral imbecility explained in under three minutes.

Actors involved

USIranIsrael

Sources

See this event through different lenses

Compare how Western, Iranian, Israeli, Global South, and Pro-Peace perspectives frame this event.

Compare Perspectives

Community Notes

Community Notes

Loading notes...

Related events

strikeUnverifiedUSIranProxyRussia
1 source

A total of four commodity vessels crossed the strait on Monday, mostly on the Iranian route, down from seven the previous day, Kpler data showed. Also read: US military completes its latest strikes on Iran, marking the 10th successive night of attacks The four vessels included two tankers that exited the strait as well as two vessels that entered.

The two vessels that exited comprised a tanker that was carrying petrochemicals and one that was empty. Meanwhile, the two vessels that entered the strait included a bitumen tanker and an oil tanker. There were no visible very large crude carrier (VLCC) or liquefied natural gas tankers passing through the strait on Monday.

Shipping tensions intensified further as Yemen's Iran-aligned Houthis said on Monday they were imposing a naval blockade on Saudi Arabia, a move that threatens to disrupt global energy supplies beyond the Gulf. The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations agency said on Tuesday it had received multiple reports that a tanker had messaged that it had been struck by an unknown projectile in the Strait of Hormuz.

Separately, Greek shipping company Dynacom Tankers said two of its managed vessels were hit by projectiles of unknown origin on Monday while sailing off the coast of Oman, while a third tanker was struck by a drone at Russia's Novorossiysk CPC terminal in the Black Sea.

strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIranProxy
1 source

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. and Iran are back to bombing every day in a bid to control the Strait of Hormuz. And neither is backing down, showing the limitations of President Donald Trump’s reliance on escalating airstrikes to bend Tehran to his will.

While the Trump administration says it is open to diplomacy, Iran so far has refused to loosen its grip over the crucial oil shipping corridor in the Persian Gulf. It is raising questions about the strategy for the next phase of the conflict as intensifying attacks have collapsed an interim ceasefire deal, left additional American troops dead and sent U.

S. gasoline prices back up — posing new problems for Republicans ahead of the midterm elections. Even with glimmers of hope for talks, the sides could be headed back to all-out war, with Trump warning that “every time Iran kills an American Soldier” going forward, “they will pay for that killing many times over.

” The renewed escalations reflect "a fundamental misreading of the Iranian psyche and a lack of learning” from previous fighting, said Mona Yacoubian, director of the Middle East Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

“I think it’s driven by a calculus on either side that they can double down on military escalation as a way of breaking the impasse and getting the other side to relent,” Yacoubian said. “The danger, of course, is that the more escalatory it becomes, the harder it will be to seize any potential opening back to diplomacy.

” The Trump administration says the door to diplomacy is open Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the U.S. is still open to negotiating, telling reporters Sunday night that Iran continues "to send signals that they want to talk, that they want to negotiate, but their behavior is what we’re responding to.

And their behavior is they’re launching missiles and drones at ships” in the Strait of Hormuz, where a fifth of the world's oil normally passes. “The United States always remains open to a diplomatic solution, and we’ve tried multiple times with Iran, and we’ll continue to try," he said.

"If that door opens, we’ll be happy to see it open.” Trump is focused on making Iran pay for the recent deaths of U.S. troops, violations of the interim deal reached last month and attacks on ships in the strait, according to a U.S. official, who was not authorized to comment publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.

The official said that military strikes on Iran would continue until Trump decides otherwise, but that talks between the countries also would go on. For some outside observers, the administration appears to be struggling to find an off-ramp, both militarily and diplomatically.

“This administration currently is flustered,” said Alan Eyre, a former U.S. diplomat once involved in past nuclear negotiations with Tehran and now a fellow at the Middle East Institute. “It really doesn’t have a coherent and consistent strategy as to how to extricate itself from this quagmire.

” There are some limitations to Trump's air war The U.S. military can only accomplish so much as it ramps up attacks on Iran, experts say. The conflict has demonstrated the limits of relying solely on air power, said Christopher Preble, a scholar at the Stimson Center think tank focused on U.

S. foreign policy. But he noted that sending in ground troops would be unpopular with many Americans and members of Congress. “It seems that President Trump certainly has the capability to continue to bomb, and Iran will have the capability to continue to keep the strait closed — or closed well enough,” Preble said.

David Schenker, a former official in the first Trump administration who is now a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said the renewed strikes on Iranian infrastructure are a repeat of attacks during the early weeks of the war. And those did not result in Iran’s capitulation.

“The U.S. hit 13,000 targets in the first 6 weeks of the war, and this didn’t sway Iran to take a knee,” he said. Retired Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall, who served under President Joe Biden, said previous wars such as Vietnam showed the limitations of air power alone.

“Generally, you have to couple air power with ground operations, sometimes naval operations as well, and certainly space today,” he said. When launching the war on Feb. 28, the U.S. and Israel struck many fixed targets identified before the conflict began.

But Iran had a long time to prepare for the attacks by concealing and dispersing weapons. “So the easy targets are pretty much gone,” Kendall said. “They can hide ballistic missiles and cruise missiles and small air vehicles pretty easily.

So it’s a very hard job to try to suppress that kind of a threat over a period of time. And that’s why they’re still able to attack not just ships in the Straits, but also our bases in the region and so on.” Diplomacy has struggled with a lack of trust between the US and Iran A diplomatic solution also could prove elusive.

Eyre, of the Middle East Institute, said the Trump administration has shown no preference for “actual diplomacy,” relying instead on close advisers with little international relations experience while outsourcing some of the work to mediators such as Qatar, Pakistan and Egypt.

“We’ve got a tough road ahead of us, but it theoretically could be done,” Eyre said of potential negotiations to end the conflict. “Unfortunately, there is so little mutual confidence in the other side. There’s so little bilateral trust between the U.

S. and Iran that it makes everything so much harder.” Both Schenker and Yacoubian said recent comments from Trump, Rubio and their Iranian counterparts reflect some openness to diplomacy. Yacoubian pointed to the “measured” response from Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to the recent killing of U.

S. service members in Jordan, indicating a possibility for an off-ramp. Iran’s release last week of an Iranian-American woman who had not been allowed to leave the country also showed a sign of goodwill from Tehran, she said. But these small, positive signals could quickly become moot if the decision by Yemen's Iran-backed Houthi rebels Monday to announce a maritime embargo against Saudi Arabia expands to a complete shutdown of the Bab el-Mandeb Strait.

That, Yacoubian says, could constitute “a perfect storm of disruption” for the already precarious global economy. ___ Amiri reported from New York. Associated Press writers Aamer Madhani and Michelle L. Price contributed to this report.

strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIranProxyRussiaChina
1 source

Over the weekend, after exchanges where the US hit bridges and a desalination plant in Iran (reportedly repaired very quickly) and Iran’s response included hitting a much more important desalination and power plant in Kuwait and pounding important US operations in Jordan, the US attacks fell way back one night and CENTCOM and even Trump were quiet.

Some speculated that more Gulf states were denying the US the use of their airspace and the US was having to make a major regrouping. However, the US resumed strikes last night, with the pretext that the US had suffered two more military deaths on top of two just reported.

1 Trump had promised intensified strikes beginning more or less today if Iran did not return to negotiations, as in capitulate. And as many noted, the US had escalated last week, albeit not to the level of attacks during the initial phase of the war, not just with the number of strikes but also the targeting: the aforementioned desalination plant, bridges, too close for comfort to the Bushehr nuclear plant2 and to a nuclear site under development at Darkhovin.

Many have argued that the latest round of strikes look like shaping attacks in preparation for a ground operation, which pretty much everyone with even a modicum of military knowledge sees as insane.3 Daniel Davis has also mentioned in passing that despite all the noise about using ground forces and other signs of a buildup, such as more refueling tankers flying to Jordan, that Trump was shaken by the near-disaster at Isfahan, where a supposed rescue of a downed pilot resulted in the loss of more air assets than in any single engagement since Vietnam.

Many experts have contended that that was an actual operation, a botched attempt to remove some of Iran’s “nuclear dust.” However, Scott Ritter may have squared that circle. See his brief clip starting at 11:55: From a lightly-edited machine transcript: Jawaid: Scott Ritter thinks that Israeli lap dog Trump will soon launch a ground invasion of Iran, but he will fail miserably.

Also, this is something Iran has been wanting Trump to commit to for a long time. Ritter: There’s a a mission called a raid. Um, and I, you know, we already had US troops fighting on the ground. We did a raid to rescue a pilot. We were in limited ground combat operations there.

I think there’s a high potential that the US will conduct a raid here and there because that’s a that’s a a very specific task. A raid is is the only military mission where we plan to retreat. You know, every other military mission there’s no plan. You commit and you go, but a raid is in and out.

So maybe we can do a raid, but the idea that we’re going to land in seize territory, there’s zero chance that will happen because there’s zero chance of success. Now admittedly, if pilot rescue came about as the result of the botched operation in Isfahan, that would be debatable as a raid.

Even though the intent again was to retreat, the US would have had to stage equipment for the removal and transport of nuclear material, so there would be a short-lived occupation of terrain and not just a fast snatch and grab, as with Maduro. Nevertheless, the US military may not be totally suicidal, so the plan may be for a fast landing to inflict some sort of concrete form of damage that cannot be well inflicted from the air and then to decamp.

This segment also includes a very informative explanation of how important the operations in Jordan are to the US, and how the Iran intend is destroy bases so that the US has to retreat to Israel and then Iran will proceed forcefully against the remaining assets there.

We’ll soon turn to updates, but to start with some bigger picture considerations: it is disconcerting to see how many commentators resort to the trope that neither side can prevail on the battlefield, that they will in the end negotiate an outcome. As we pointed out, a study of modern wars found that more than half did not.

The distrust between the two sides, which has now reached the level of mutual loathing as a result of the fast breakdown of the already likely to fail Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), means any “deal” is vanishingly unlikely. Iran knew even before it entered into talks that the US and Israel intended to execute a “mowing the lawn” strategy, of keeping crippling sanctions in place and beating up on Iran every so often to weaken it and hopefully create severe internal divisions that would trigger an overthrow or balkanization.

Even if Iran’s 47 year record of taking severe punishment and surviving says this plot would probably fail, Iran had been preparing since the Iraq War for the US and Israel to launch a major campaign. After the illegal launch, the assassination of a major part of Iran’s leadership, as well as war crimes exemplified by the massacre of school children in Minab, the nation is highly unified around inflicting a decisive defeat on the US, so that it won’t even think about military action against Iran for at least a decade.

We were far from alone in making that case early in the war and Iran’s resolve has only stiffened as it can see how it has weakened the US while Iran has learned from combat and claims to have even bigger inventories of key weapons than it had at the start of the war.

Critically, Iranian leaders have said, bluntly, that negotiating with the US is not just pointless but also demeaning. Consider the germane parts of a recent statement by the Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei,4 as summarized at PressTV: - Leader said the United States had once again violated the memorandum of understanding signed between the presidents of Iran and the US, proving that the signature of the American president is worthless and unreliable.

- He said bullying, hegemonic ambition, and savagery are inseparable characteristics of the United States and that Washington had once again revealed its true, unmasked face to the world. - He described the latest developments – US attacks against southern Iran, mainly targeting the civilian infrastructure – as further evidence of America’s deceitfulness, irrationality, unreliability, and wickedness.

- Leader said the United States is seeking to ignite further war despite facing heavier costs and greater disgrace. - He warned that the Iranian nation and the Resistance Front have unforgettable lessons for the United States, adding that the bravery of Islamic resistance fighters and the courageous people of southern Iran have already demonstrated examples of those lessons.

However, Araghchi subsequently gave an interview which can be read as pushing back against the Supreme Leader:5 Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi says that negotiations with the U.S. should be pursued even if the chances of success are only 10 percent, further highlighting disagreements between Iran’s political and military echelons.

“I am the Foreign Minister for the interests of… pic.twitter.com/uW1DzcfRhG — Ariel Oseran أريئل أوسيران (@ariel_oseran) July 19, 2026 Keep in mind also that China is still bleating about the need to settle the conflict and Pakistan and Qatar (among others) are also pressing for a resumption of the talks, so Araghchi as Foreign Minister has to keep the idea in play, irrespective of whether he privately places much stock in the idea.

6 And there is another way to read Araghchi’s talk: So they wanted to manufacture a clean record of “we exhausted every diplomatic option." Once that record existed, the hardliners with Mojtaba could shut the process down without looking like the ones who refused talks.

Moderates who pushed the channel now own the failure, and… https://t.co/Y63yYJVaEZ — Vonbury Research (@VonburyResearch) July 19, 2026 Kinetic action seems likely to continue to dominate: ADVISOR TO IRANIAN SUPREME LEADER, MOHSEN REZAEI, SAYING: “I declare it is over.

Both negotiation and war are over. If in the next two or three days the Americans continue the war, we will enter a phase of complete offense and destruction.”#Iran #IranWar pic.twitter.com/1M3A1pboH9 — Iran Now – WANA (@WANA_Iran) July 18, 2026 Robert Pape also seems confident that US escalation will continue7.

I found this discussion noteworthy because Andrew Neil strongly resisted the idea that there would be no negotiated ending and also found it inconceivable that Iran could become, as Pape has argued, the fourth world power. In other words, Neil seems to epitomize a set of normally pretty smart people who find it hard to see where the direction of travel is going because those outcomes so conflict with their priors: From a lightly cleaned up machine transcript: Pape: This is not what’s coming in the next few weeks likely.

What’s much more likely is he’s [Trump’s] going to do the close blockade and if he can then use the southern corridor with that close blockade to reopen the Strait, he’ll he’ll be probably satisfied with that. Very unlikely that’s going to work and that’s why you’ve got the 82nd Airborne and the Marines there to push back further.

Now, I’m not saying this is going to work, Andrew…. Neil: So, I’ve got to ask you some questions in this because I’m unclear. Do you think that the of the limited options President Trump now has, that escalation as you describe it is the most likely?

Pape: Yes. Neil: And that escalation will begin with a much more aggressive, more comprehensive a naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz with the possibility of ground incursion on the northern side of the straight in Iranian territory? Pape: Yes. Yes, and it’s our and and the first part has already started this week.

So, so you’re already seeing in fact last week was the beginning of the air suppression campaign for this week. And as President Trump laid out the bombing schedule last night, the reason he will, if he if this keeps going forward, okay, just keep saying that if, he’s going to want to take out things like electric power and bridges is because he’s going to want to try to suppress as much of Iran’s military defenses as he can as he goes forward here.

And the military is giving him the plans for doing that. One place where I differ with Pape is that he posits that Congress might get out of bed in six months and Do Something to check Trump then. To again invoke Stein’s Law, if something cannot continue, it will stop.

The US and Israel can of course carry on with terrorism within Iran, such as assassinations and cyber attacks. But the level of weapons depletion and on current trajectories, shortly-arriving fuel shortages, seems very likely to put a choke chain on US aggression soon.

From Larry Johnson in The US Faces a Strategic Crisis with Iran…The Rapid Depletion of US Battlefield Missiles:8 The tables below are based on the most recent publicly available analyses from CSIS, the Payne Institute, and major media outlets (as of mid-2026), and provide a current (overly optimistic in my opinon) estimate for US inventory levels of these key weapons systems.

Please note that actual inventories are classified; these are informed estimates derived from DOD budget documents, procurement records, and reported expenditures during Operation Epic Fury (the US-Israeli war with Iran). Air Defense Missiles Anti-Radiation / SEAD Long-Range Strike (Ground & Sea-Launched) Missiles These are not just the numbers currently in the hands of US CENTCOM (i.

e., the US military command in charge of the war against Iran), these are the total numbers available to all of the US military commands. If these missiles are allocated evenly to the other two critical commands — i.e., EUCOM (European Command) and PACOM (Pacific Command) — then you begin to understand the gravity of this deficit.

Let’s take the case of the Tomahawk missile. Let’s assume there are 3,000 left (I believe that is a generous over estimate) and the remaining number are divided evenly among CENTCOM, EUCOM and PACOM… That means each command gets 1,000. Does anyone want to argue that in the event of a hot war with Russia or China that EUCOM and PACOM respectively would be able to sustain combat operations for more than four weeks?

Hell, CENTCOM fired 850 of them during the first four weeks of EPIC FURY. Here’s another major problem: All eight missile systems rely on rare earth elements — there are no exceptions among modern US precision-guided weapons. The dependence is nearly universal because rare earth permanent magnets are irreplaceable for the high-performance actuators, guidance motors, and seeker gimbals that make these weapons accurate.

And who controls the supply chain of these rare earth minerals? China!… The supply chain isn’t just about mining — it’s about processing, separation, and magnet manufacturing, which China controls: - Mining: China ~60% of global rare earth oxide production - Refining/Separation: China ~91% - Sintered NdFeB Magnet Manufacturing: China **~94%** Now to updates.

From Aljazeera’s live feed: - A vessel is on fire in the Strait of Hormuz after being hit by a projectile, forcing the crew to abandon ship. They were later rescued by a tugboat. - One person has been killed and several others wounded after the US military attacked the Iranian city of Tabriz in northwestern Iran.

The entries in the feed include ones describing how Mr. Market is taking cheer from the Iran Foreign Ministry admitting they are getting communiques from intermediaries and reviewing them as if they originated from the US. Recall that the negotiators have often developed ideas and tried to sell both sides on them.

Bloomberg’s Javier Blas, who has been a consistent seller of lower oil prices, is refreshingly precise about Iran not saying either way as to whether the missives were from the US or just the negotiators operating on their own: Iran has received “some proposals” from unspecified mediators regarding the war with the US, Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Esmail Baghaei says in press conference, without elaborating.

— Javier Blas (@JavierBlas) July 20, 2026 Contrast that with the Aljazeera account: Oil prices ease after Iran says US contacts continuing through mediators Oil prices have scaled back their gains after hitting their highest in a month after Iran said diplomatic exchanges with the US are ongoing via mediators despite renewed conflict in the Middle East.

Grr. Another Aljazeera live feed entry: Iran ‘counting down the minutes’ for US ground invasion [Today’s Iran war post launched more or less complete. I will be off duty for a while. If there are any updates, they will come in the comment section later] Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei says the United States will face “consequences of any adventure” to seize Kharg Island in southern Iran.

He added there are people in Iran’s leadership “counting down the minutes to welcome” US forces in any ground invasion. Kharg is the heart of Iran’s oil industry. It sits 55km (34 miles) off Iran’s coast in Bushehr province. President Trump has repeatedly threatened to seize the territory during the war.

A raid on Kharg could fit Ritter’s raid scenario, with the US busting things up and then leaving.9 But experts have pointed out that Iran has at least four other export routes. Kharg is the most efficient but losing it while being repaired would be inconvenient as opposed to a fatal blow.

From Bloomberg’s landing page: From US Bombs Iran for Ninth Day as Standoff Over Hormuz Deepens: The US conducted a ninth straight day of airstrikes on Iran, trying to force the Islamic Republic to stop shipping attacks and reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

The American military bombed military targets and communications networks in a three-hour operation ending around 5:30 a.m. Iranian time on Monday. Iran continued to attack US bases in the likes of Kuwait, Jordan, Bahrain and Iraq. The standoff shows no sign of easing, with Iran refusing to relent over Hormuz and insisting it has a right to manage traffic through the waterway.

Energy prices have jumped on the worsening hostilities. Brent crude oil rose to above $90 a barrel for the first time in more than five weeks in early trading on Monday. US gasoline prices climbed back over the $4-a-gallon mark, potentially hurting President Donald Trump and his Republican party ahead of midterm elections in November… Hormuz Shipping Traffic Slumps as US-Iran Hostilities Worsen The tit-for-tat attacks are getting deadlier….

Shipping volumes have slumped and the number of tankers and other vessels going through Hormuz is roughly down to the same level from the height of the conflict in March and early April… US President Donald Trump warned Iran last week he’d escalate airstrikes and widen the scope of targets until it backed down… Kuwait continues to experience some of the worst attacks from Iran.

Over the weekend, Kuwait’s main state energy company said an unspecified site sustained “significant material losses,” causing its evacuation and a number of injuries, while two power and desalination plants have been hit in recent days. And from Hormuz Traffic Near Standstill as US-Iran Hostilities Escalate: - Visible traffic through the Strait of Hormuz appeared at a near standstill Monday after Iran targeted vessels in the narrow waterway.

- A Marshall Islands-flagged bulk carrier and a liquefied petroleum gas carrier appeared to approach the strait, with the bulk carrier turning off its transponder while approaching. - The targeting of vessels will likely raise fresh concerns over the safety of ships transiting Hormuz, which could deepen disruptions to energy flows from the Persian Gulf to global customers.

Indirectly importance of US operations in Jordan, the lead story in the Wall Street Journal is Jordan Becomes New Flashpoint in U.S.-Iran War as Troop Deaths Rise. But it fails to set forth any of the juicy details that Janta Ka presents. This is the thin strategic gruel offered: For years, Jordan sought to play down its close military and intelligence cooperation with the U.

S. The U.S. aircraft that carried out strikes on Islamic State from a base in Jordan during the American war with the militants didn’t advertise the country they were operating from. But Jordan’s role is now becoming too prominent to obscure. Jordan has become an attractive location for U.

S. armed forces since it is among the most permissive in the Arab world when it comes to allowing the U.S. to operate from its bases. A bit more on Jordan: The view from Tehran. “The increased focus on Jordan may serve as part of Iran’s preparation and testing of operational concepts for more intense and precise strikes against Israel in later stages of the conflict.

Qatar and Saudi Arabia—have at times sought to impose limits… — Policy Tensor (@policytensor) July 20, 2026 By contrast, the House of Saud published a remarkably revealing document (hat tip Eugene Linden), Iran Struck Prince Sultan and No One Was Required to Say So: Iranian ballistic missiles struck Prince Sultan Air Base in Al-Kharj on July 18, wounding twelve US service members — two critically — and hitting KC-135 Stratotankers on the flight line while a second rotation was still climbing out.

Saudi Arabia’s Civil Defense Authority cleared the sirens six minutes later without naming the weapon, the origin, or the damage, and neither Riyadh nor Washington has issued an official statement since. The strike was the first direct Iranian attack on Saudi territory in approximately four months, a gap during which the IRGC struck Kuwait, Bahrain, Jordan, Qatar, and the UAE while conspicuously sparing the Kingdom.

Its return to PSAB — confirmed by a US official to Axios, corroborated by satellite imagery, and detailed by Air & Space Forces Magazine — ended whatever territorial immunity Saudi Arabia believed it still possessed. But the more consequential development is not the strike itself.

It is the silence that followed, and the institutional architecture that sustains it: a three-party managed ambiguity in which Iran, Saudi Arabia, and CENTCOM each benefit from leaving the damage question unanswered, because answering it would force a public reckoning with a PAC-3 reserve that is approaching a ceiling none of them can afford to name.

The strike was confirmed by a US official cited by Axios as “the first time the Islamic Republic has directly attacked the kingdom in four months” — a description that the State Department, the Pentagon, and the Saudi Ministry of Defence have each declined to repeat on the record.

Air & Space Forces Magazine, drawing on multiple US military sources, reported at least twelve wounded and multiple Stratotankers damaged on the tarmac. Open-source satellite imagery corroborated the impact site within the base perimeter. Iran’s state broadcaster supplied what no government would.

The missiles were launched “moments after American refueling planes took off,” a detail that only makes sense if the IRGC had real-time ISR coverage of PSAB’s tanker rotation schedule. The aircraft hit were those that remained on the flight line after the airborne pair departed — the timing was deliberate, and the targeting message was not about maximising destruction but about demonstrating that PSAB’s daily operational patterns are watched, clocked, and within reach….

Riyadh cannot confirm the strike without confronting two questions it has spent the war avoiding. The first is defensive: if Iranian missiles hit PSAB and wounded US personnel, the Sakhir Declaration — the mutual defence framework Saudi Arabia negotiated with Washington — becomes the operative instrument, and invoking it requires publicly admitting what the Arab Center DC described as the core strategic dilemma: “the PAC-3 architecture is functionally exhausted.

” The second is economic. Aramco’s August Arab Light OSP already dropped $11 month-on-month to $1.50 per barrel below Oman/Dubai, the largest such cut in over two decades and the lowest since June 2020. Confirming that Iranian ballistic missiles are landing on military installations 77 kilometres south of the capital forces a sovereign-risk reassessment that Riyadh’s fiscal position — a Q1 deficit of SAR 125.

7 billion, with Aramco’s free cash flow at 0.85 times its quarterly dividend — is not structured to absorb…. Washington faces a different but parallel constraint. Confirming the strike means confirming that 2,300 US service members at PSAB are taking casualties at a base where 43 US warplanes have been grounded since Saudi Arabia’s Operation Project Freedom in May 2026.

CENTCOM cannot describe a defensive engagement at PSAB without also describing the legal anomaly: the 1977 USMTM memorandum governing US presence is not a Status of Forces Agreement, and Project Freedom severed the operational relationship between American air power and Saudi host-nation authority.

An official statement would invite the Congressional question that the Pentagon’s communications strategy is built to defer: why are American troops still at a base where their aircraft have been grounded by the host nation, absorbing Iranian fire under a legal framework that was designed for peacetime advisory missions?

Please read this article in full. It contains remarkable operational detail. It is over my pay grade as to why it was published, but it seems to suggest considerable unhappiness at Riyadh. Due to the length of this post, we have skipped over the fact that Ansar Allah seems just about to threaten or actually close the Bab el-Mandeb strait: 🚨 BREAKING 🇾🇪 YEMEN’S HOUTHI FORCES WILL MAKE A “HUGE” ANNOUNCEMENT TODAY AT 8:30 AM ET.

REPORTS EXPECT THEM TO ANNOUNCE A BLOCKADE OF THE BAB EL-MANDEB STRAIT. TOGETHER WITH THE STRAIT OF HORMUZ, THESE TWO CHOKEPOINTS HANDLE OVER 25% OF GLOBAL SEABORNE OIL TRADE. IF TRUE,… pic.twitter.com/yjavHpPKOi — Wimar.X (@DefiWimar) July 20, 2026 This does not look terribly negotiation-receptive.

And some additional sightings from Twitter: Israelis have never felt less secure. 64% are unhappy with how the endless wars have been run. 73% are upset at how there has been no real investigation of October 7. 73% of the public also feel the government has not dealt well with the rise in crime.

No one wins from these… https://t.co/4OjhLUD14O — Shaiel Ben-Ephraim (@academic_la) July 19, 2026 These remarks would seem to negate happy thinking about negotiations: ⚡️⭕️ Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei says Tehran is determined to exercise sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz through measures already taken, and states the US failed to fulfill its commitments under a memorandum of understanding, so Iran will not fulfill… — Middle East Observer (@ME_Observer_) July 20, 2026 The average price for a gallon of gas hit $4, the second time it has reached that benchmark since the war in Iran disrupted global oil supplies https://t.

co/Cg8rE3XnJ7 pic.twitter.com/3UqHfwU4sc — CNN (@CNN) July 20, 2026 Done for today! See you tomorrow! ____ 1 What kind of admission of weakness is this? Part of the job description of a service member is that they may wind up dying for their country.

Admittedly, the US is widely suspected of suffering a much higher body count and covering that up. But this show of extreme sensitivity to losses again shows the US has a glass jaw. 2 Nima also discusses at some length at the top of a new talk with Larry Johnson why they look misguided.

He knows Bandar Abbas well, which is where the US has been hitting bridges so as to isolate it. Nima explains and even shows pictures that the bridges exist only to cope with seasonal floods for a few months a year. Those sluices are dry now, so Bandar Abbas is easily accessible by all sorts of routes.

3 🚨 BREAKING: Russia has evacuated 198 of its personnel from the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant in Iran. It is believed that the plant could be targeted again. pic.twitter.com/lPoQB05qgo — GBC (@GBC_Press) July 17, 2026 4 A new trope in the US-backing commentary community is to depict the new Supreme Leader as a figurehead, which is easy to make stick given his lack of public appearances (I suspect that among other things, he is having facial reconstruction; that can take an extremely long time since procedures are done serially with healing time in between).

I believe it was on a recent Dialogue Works talk where Professor Marandi debunked one popular claim, that he IRGC was operating on its own authority. Professor Marandi described the governing structure and said the military (both the regular forces and the Guards) needed approval of the Supreme Leader for its operations.

Having said that, I have commented that Iran seems to have a Japanese-style decision-making structure, as in more bottoms-up than the West. That results in more time to make decisions but much more internal cohesion when they are reached, since those at lower levels would be able to voice concerns and make suggestions.

Upon reflection, this would make sense given that Iran adopted its “mosaic” structure of extreme decentralization so as to allow it to function well even when the leadership was killed or incommunicado, as we saw at the onset of the current conflict.

In the Japanese model, decisions are effectively made at the senior-middle level ranks, which does tend result in the board and CEO being ceremonial. But the top level can and does say no, or effectively does so by asking probing questions and sending the matter back down the chain for further study and perhaps some revision.

I have been involved in decisions in Japan where the board and CEO were highly engaged, and these were ones that were of critical strategic importance. 5 DropSite has a longer recap of Araghchi’s remarks: ⭕️ Iran FM Araghchi: Wars End Either Through Total Victory or Negotiations… Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi: 🔹 A war must be ended precisely at the point when you hold the upper hand on the battlefield.

Ending a war is possible either through total military victory or… pic.twitter.com/kHeYhShsXC — Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) July 20, 2026 IMHO his analysis is wrong-headed. As indicated above, a bit over half the modern wars do not end with a negotiated settlement.

And it is a false dichotomy to say that to win, Iran must conquer the US and Israel. FFS, please explain Vietnam. Bad logistics and depleting weapons mean that ex nukes, the US cannot win against Iran. The question is how long it takes and how much damage is done not just to Iran but also the world economy.

Keep in mind the intermediaries are still busy but motion is not progress: #Iran's Foreign Ministry Spokesperson has confirmed that Tehran has received "ideas and proposals" from mediators. He declined to provide any further details regarding the specifics of the mediation efforts.

pic.twitter.com/8Pzs25eauc — Iran Nuances (@IranNuances) July 20, 2026 6 A memorable scene in the Daniel Ellsberg memoir Secrets is when Ellsberg, widely seen as the top US expert on Vietnam, briefed McNamara in a helicopter about how badly things were going.

McNamara said, “Just as I suspected,” and then upon landing updated the press on the great progress the US was making. 7 It has taken me too long to see why Pape often acts as if he is speaking to children or the stoopid. Making this his normal manner of presentation means that when he actually is having to speak to someone who is being stoopid, they won’t take offense.

8 However, to quibble with Johnson on another matter: he has been saying, as he does in the talk linked in Footnote 2 above, that the Iran attacks on a former US base in Syria, Al Tanf, were pointless because the base had been vacated for years. Vanessa Beeley, who has spent a lot of time on the ground in Syria and still has contacts there, begs to differ.

She says the base was recently restored to service. From Why did Iran target the US Occupation base at Al Tanf, Syria? On Friday 17th July, Iran carried out an extensive attack on the US occupation base at Al Tanf in Syria. A drone and missile strike targeted a US Special Operations Command base in south-eastern Syria..

the first strike on Syrian territory since the toppling of the former government in December 2024. In a statement, the IRGC said its aerospace forces conducted what it described as the 11th phase of “Operation Nasr-2,” targeting the strategically located base near Syria’s borders with Iraq and Jordan.

The IRGC further claimed the attack destroyed a radar installation and several U.S. military helicopters, while alleging that many American personnel were killed. This strike occurred as the build up of both Turkish and HTS military forces increases inside Syria, along the border with Lebanon and in the coastal region to the north of Lebanon.

I have been reporting on this here and here. Syrian sources provided more detail on the attack: Despite previous reports of an almost total evacuation of the Al Tanf base, located on the borders of Syria, Iraq and Jordan, almost 5 months ago – the intensity of the strikes suggested a shift in the site’s operational status.

This was not an empty base, in fact, according to sources, the IRGC’s tracking systems and human intelligence in the region detected U.S. forces airdropping “Special Forces” units into the base approximately two weeks before the attack. Analysis would suggest that the purpose of these drops might be to prepare for a ground incursion across Iraqi territory (Sulaymaniyah Axis) in coordination with the local Kurdish separatist factions in Iraq.

One military analyst told me: The attack reflects the operator’s ability to breach the secrecy surrounding U.S. movements and to convert radio and visual data into precise target coordinates. According to reports from inside Syria, the strikes inflicted direct damage on the base’s newly constructed infrastructure, neutralised the US elite combat force and derailed the Iraq-Axis operation against Iran.

Of course, US media will not report on the planned operations or on the number of casualties – such a critical security breach and the significant scale of damage, as reported, will not be revealed. 9 Maybe mines?

strikeUnverifiedIran
1 source

Vessel transits through the Strait of Hormuz totaled 53 in the week through July 20, according to Lloyd's List Intelligence data, down from 157 the previous week, with tanker and gas carrier movements falling to 30 from 90. Kpler tracking showed daily crossings declining from averages above 20 vessels before July 15 to single digits by July 16 and remaining low thereafter.

These figures followed the reported start of a U.S. blockade and related maritime restrictions announced by Iranian authorities.

Location: Strait of Hormuz