Brace Yourselves For War Between Iran and Israel

axj said:
His "Art of the Deal" seems to be to make the most extreme demands first, to then arrive at a more balanced deal that he wanted in the first place. I hope this is what he is doing, as the alternative is indeed pretty dire.
Click to expand...

The problem with this negotiation style is that Trump needs to be the first mover and take up the most space, so that everyone following is a reaction to him. This was leveraged well by the Liberals to secure their reelection in Canada.

With this war though, Israel has the initiative and everything is now ensuing tit-for-tat from their unprovoked attack. Trump is trying to retcon himself as the chief orchestrator, but are any of the real actors on the ground even listening?

Between the attack on Iran and Trump’s milquetoast military parade, he looks increasingly powerless and out of touch with geopolitical and military realities.

He reminds me of the theoretical zookeeper in the middle of a gorilla fight. Would either of the parties even deign to notice him, as occupied as they are??

 
whitecoast said:
He reminds me of the theoretical zookeeper in the middle of a gorilla fight. Would either of the parties even deign to notice him, as occupied as they are??
Click to expand...
Israel most likely needs the US for a protracted war and Iran certainly does not want to fight the US directly. So Trump does have leverage over both sides. The big question, in my view, is whether Trump thinks that he needs the Zionists and has to do what they want.

As I mentioned earlier, the timing of Israel starting the war right after the Trump-Musk fight may suggest that Trump pivoted back to the Zionists after a couple months of snubbing them - maybe because he "broke up" with the technocrats (Thiel, Musk, etc.) to some degree and still needs a powerful ally.
 
Excerpts:

Steve Bannon, a man who rarely minces words, just slapped us with a stark declaration: World War III, he argues, has begun. He’s not whispering it from a backroom; he’s blasting it out, suggesting that the next 200 days are not just important, they are the defining stretch for the very soul of the American republic. This isn’t just about foreign policy anymore; it’s about the fundamental stability of our nation, a direct challenge to the peace we’ve largely taken for granted on our own soil.
Click to expand...
Bannon’s warning is grim, insisting that if America doesn’t get its house in order, if it doesn’t “sort” things out with a swift, decisive hand, we’re going to find ourselves neck-deep in a full scale war with Iran. And here’s the chilling part of his pronouncement: the potential death toll, he claims, could even dwarf the unimaginable sacrifices of World War II.
Click to expand...

Now, into this cauldron of mounting dread steps none other than President Trump, just hours after floating the idea of a “last ditch effort” meeting for a peace deal with Iran. One might imagine a leader eager to dial back the temperature, to find a path to de-escalation. Instead, when reporters pressed him on the matter of Iran’s nuclear ambitions, he dismissed the recent testimony from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, a former congresswoman and military veteran, who had indicated that Iran wasn’t actively building a nuclear weapon.
Click to expand...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1934900995818926084
https://twitter.com/x/status/1934926257084334287
https://twitter.com/x/status/1934809630296920321
citizenwatchreport.com

Trump dismisses DNI, Insists Iran nears nuke breakthrough demands Iran nuke surrender, and says he is 'not in the mood' for negotiations just hours after floating 'last ditch effort' peace deal - Citizen Watch Report

The air hangs thick with an almost palpable tension, a foreboding quiet before the thunder, and make no mistake, some folks are shouting that the storm is - Citizen Watch Report
citizenwatchreport.com citizenwatchreport.com

How world wars start - by a series of totally inane actions.
 
axj said:
His "Art of the Deal" seems to be to make the most extreme demands first, to then arrive at a more balanced deal that he wanted in the first place. I hope this is what he is doing, as the alternative is indeed pretty dire.
Click to expand...
Actually that is not what he is doing. He started with reasonable demands. Then when Iran was willing to work something out with Witkoff, we went off the deep end with crazy demands like 0% enrichment and no ballistic missiles. And obviously this latest is the most extreme. This is not a winning negotiating strategy. This is utter stupidity. Especially when you are negotiating on a twitter account for the entire world to see! It makes him look like a dumb ass. Everyone KNOWS Iran was not the one refusing to negotiate. They were literally attacked when Trump told them they were safe and negotiations would still take place (PERFIDY under international law), and to now demanding they just step down for defending themselves? The entire Global South is probably looking at this guy like he is Hitler or Nero now, including myself. This is not sane. This is a guy who is literally losing it and is desperate. So he does the only thing he knows how to do and go 100% bombastic on his twitter account because he is realizing he put himself between a rock and a hard place (1) allow Israel and his financial backers to be UTTERLY DESTROYED in a long term war of attrition, (2) intervene directly in the war destroying his base and presidency, in a war that they might not win (how embarrassing for his fragile ego; the Houthi thing was bad enough...), or (3) allow Israel to nuke Iran, normalizing the use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine and around the world, not to mention risking Pakistan returning the favor and the entire world rushing to get nukes because the US and Israel cannot be trusted. Trump is fucked, he knows he is fucked, and he is handling it poorly.
 

TEHRAN (Tasnim) – The Chief of Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces unveiled plans for “punitive operations” against the Zionist regime, saying the counterattacks that Iran has carried out so far were merely aimed at deterrence. ​

"In a video message released on Tuesday night, Major General Abdolrahim Mousavi warned the Zionist regime to brace itself for a punishment for its act of aggression against Iran."

"punitive operations against the Zionist regime will kick off soon."

"He also issued an evacuation warning, calling on the residents of the occupied Palestinian territories, particularly the people in Tel Aviv and Haifa, to leave those regions to save their lives and not sacrifice themselves for the animal desires of Benjamin Netanyahu."

www.tasnimnews.com

Top Commander: Iran to Embark on Punitive Action against Israeli Regime - Politics news - Tasnim News Agency

TEHRAN (Tasnim) – The Chief of Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces unveiled plans for “punitive operations” against the Zionist regime, saying the counterattacks that Iran has carried out so far were merely aimed at deterrence.
www.tasnimnews.com www.tasnimnews.com
 
axj said:
Israel most likely needs the US for a protracted war and Iran certainly does not want to fight the US directly. So Trump does have leverage over both sides. The big question, in my view, is whether Trump thinks that he needs the Zionists and has to do what they want.

As I mentioned earlier, the timing of Israel starting the war right after the Trump-Musk fight may suggest that Trump pivoted back to the Zionists after a couple months of snubbing them - maybe because he "broke up" with the technocrats (Thiel, Musk, etc.) to some degree and still needs a powerful ally.
Click to expand...

Israel does need the US to effectively fight Iran, but even if Iran doesn’t want to fight the US directly I think it would be more than prepared to do so. Its survival is at stake.

Nobody who isn’t a neocon wants US involvement. In spite of that though deep state elements and congress could reliably circumvent Trump’s wishes (remember when the generals straight up lied to Trump about the US presence in Syria?). Not that they’d need to, given Trump’s hawkish attitude, but if they did Trump would trip over himself to lead the charge because he still needs to project that he has the cards.

I don’t think Musk’s publicized manic episode reflects any deep strategic changes between MAGA and the technocratic elite. Palantir is still joined at the hip to the US government’s designs.

One wonders if any of the logistical support for the color revolution machinery in Iran was ever touched by the DOGE boys. My guess is no, or that it’s being managed by a different group entirely, perhaps on Israel’s end.
 
An interesting development - Tulsi, dated June 10:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1932368919039459348

It apparently set off a firestorm:

Tulsi Goes Nuclear on the Warmongers
A pack of self-styled conservatives this week piled on after Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard released a mournful, humane statement on the reality of nuclear war. Her brief video speaks powerfully for itself. But I feel compelled to respond to her detractors, if only to smack down the poisonous self-confidence of the many war promoters who have insinuated themselves into the political right.

The people who have jumped to dismiss and ridicule Gabbard’s warning against playing around with nukes are doing more to out themselves than to refute her point. For all their cockiness, they’re showing that they’re either simply illiterate when it comes to conservative thought, or, worse, cynically preying on a conservative audience that they believe to be illiterate itself.

This despite the fact that, as I argued in my own policy white paper on disarmament, the aim of minimizing the nuclear threat to humanity’s future is rooted in the principles of a deeply conservative tradition known as Just War Theory.
Click to expand...

I've just started reading this article and it brings up previous arguments about the nuclear bombing of Japan. Sorry - there was no justification for those bombings and multiple military officials said so. I made note of these with posts to Veteran's Today several years ago. Total BS that it was done to bring an end to the war and prolonged killing of American soldiers.

Talk show host Mark Levin similarly outed himself as either a lightweight or a sinister enemy of Trumpism who aims to undermine the movement from within. After some fear mongering about Iran, he explained that the bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki “were dropped because it was believed we’d lose perhaps hundreds of thousands of soldiers if we invaded Japan.”
Click to expand...

It was well known that Japan was totally defeated. Truman was pressured and convinced by the usual suspects to make the call to bomb. Truman, who was the first to recognize the newly created State of Israel via the Nakba. Despicable beyond words. I lost all respect for the man.

Catholic philosopher Elizabeth Anscombe, one of the greatest political thinkers of the 20th century, wrote a sharp critique of Oxford’s decision to award Truman an honorary degree in the 1950s. Her argument? The man who dropped those bombs should never be honored by an institution that claims to represent Western values.
Click to expand...

President Ronald Reagan, another central figure to conservatives, decried nuclear bombings and energetically pursued nuclear arms reductions even in the midst of the Cold War. “A nuclear war can never be won and must never be fought,” Reagan famously said. He expressed a desire that nuclear weapons would be “banished from the face of the Earth.”

Even among Truman’s own cabinet and inner circle, numerous U.S. military officials had the moral sense to speak out strongly against the bombing.

Future Republican president Dwight Eisenhower, then supreme allied commander, said after the war that it “wasn’t necessary to hit [the Japanese] with that awful thing… I voiced to [Truman] my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary… Secondly, because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory.”

Truman’s chief of staff, Admiral William Leahy, outright condemned what he called “the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki,” arguing it “was of no material assistance in our war against Japan.”

“The Japanese were already defeated,” Leahy added. “My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages.”
Click to expand...

The implication is that Gabbard’s warning against nuclear war falls far outside the pale of conservative thought—and that anyone who speaks against the bombings is essentially on trial, bearing the onus to prove themselves moral by accepting that a Democrat’s order to kill civilians and wipe out cities is ethically sound. “Surely you don’t disagree with Truman!” goes the unspoken illogic between the lines. “That would make you guilty of being a traitor to conservatism. How do you plead?”
Click to expand...

www.theamericanconservative.com

Tulsi Goes Nuclear on the Warmongers

Opposing the atomic bombings of Japan is a great conservative tradition.
www.theamericanconservative.com www.theamericanconservative.com

Will she fall in line or stick to her principles? Resign or hang in there with the hope of being a moderating voice?
 
Joe said:
What I find amusing about this situation is that they suspect Iran has nukes, but the usual 'immunity' that would provide a nation in such a situation is not afforded because it is not "official", and under cover of this non-official status they are attempting to regime change Iran in order to take control of those nukes. Basically, it was a bad move by Iran to NOT declare to the world that it has nukes.
Click to expand...

When the C's session came out about Iran's nuclear arsenal, I instantly thought Iran-Contra as the source of those weapons. If we accept that the MIC in the U.S. is completely unhinged and profit-driven it could be the case. If the "Quorum" had a major change in the 80's, could this be part of it? The Soviet's and Russians were well-aware of Saddam and Iraq being used as a military force against Iran in the 80's for regime change. Russia wouldn't let nuclear weapons on their geographical doorstep get into the hands of a country that was potentially overthrown by the U.S. Iran is way too close to allow for nukes to be potentially used against Russia.

It would be too risky.

Iran-Contra could have had components of nuclear technology transference that was covered up. The Iranians may have refined it, but the trail of evidence could still exist. there was a transfer of technology, not fully disclosed, that it was unlikely for Iran to obtain anywhere else in that early tumultuous period of the Islamic Republic.

If - by chance - this theory is correct - then Iran obviously knows this. The U.S. MIC knows this. Israel knows it. Russia would probably know it as well. Isn't some situation like Iran-Contra the source of Israel's nukes after the Kennedy assassination?

Think of the blackmail involved on the U.S. if it was revealed that Iran-Contra was the source of Iranian nukes? Of course false flags can come in etc. that might throw that off. But nuclear weapons can only come from a few source countries. If Russia and Israel know Iran-Contra is the source of the original Iranian nuclear program, then the U.S. has to do everything in its power to make sure that never comes out. So Israel would have a lot of extra and military leverage to get the U.S. to step in if Israel couldn't destroy enough of Iran in its own warped plans?

Just a thought on my part, there's no smoking gun per se. But may things about Iran-contra never made sense...
 
Steve Ben Nun is reporting his sources in the US military have told him that the US will enter the war in the next 48 hours. They will be using tactical nukes and "rods from God" (tungsten weapons dropped from space) to go after the bunkers. Whether they admit the latter given that space-based weapons are supposed to be legal is another story. I am sure the Russians and Chinese will take note of yet ANOTHER international norm thrown in the toilet. And I have to wonder at what point they do not conclude the only way to deal with an irrational and crazy actor like the US and Israel who will do ANYTHING no matter how immoral to get their way is a sneak attack of their own using hypersonic missiles in a first strike during some sort of domestic disturbance in the US where the military is distracted. That is how I see things unfolding now, unfortunately.
 
There is no need for some false flag attack on the US to get US into the war with Iran on Israel's side. The war between the US and Iran is already happening. Israel cant have their planes armed and above Iran without the US logistical help. The US is already under total Israel's control, and its not relevant what people of the US thinks or wants, thus no need for false flag action. The question is - is there a need for american boots on the ground. There is, because there is no that much of Israelis, and it will happen.

Iran can count on help only from China and Pakistan. Forget Arabs, they are ever turncoats, Turkey the same, or Russia, which is empire (somewhat autistic to be honest), and only do whats in their direct interests. With that in mind Iran can suffer a little bit more, and than facing with total destruction, go berserk on Israel.

All of that brings another question, is this a plan for destruction of Iran or destruction of Israel. Which really would bring balance in that part of the world, if not the whole of the world.
 
whitecoast said:
I don’t think Musk’s publicized manic episode reflects any deep strategic changes between MAGA and the technocratic elite. Palantir is still joined at the hip to the US government’s designs.
Click to expand...
I think Musk may have had the most influence on Trump among the technocrats. Even Thiel does not seem to be working as closely with Trump as Musk did. Some even claimed that Musk is the "real president".

How big of a difference the Trump-Musk breakup has on the influence of technocrats we don't know. Both Palantir's spread in US agencies and the Stargate AI plan seem to continue as before.

However, why else would Trump go from snubbing the Israelis publicly for weeks to agreeing to their attack on Iran? Is it a coincidence that Trump's sudden change of heart regarding the Israelis happened right after the Trump-Musk fight?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom