Ian Welsh

The horizon is not so far as we can see, but as far as we can imagine

Category: Iran Page 1 of 4

Iran Has Settled In For The Long Haul As Hardliners Take Control

By

On August 17, 2026

21 Comments

It appears that the Iranians are no longer negotiating with America. In fact they’ve said that they won’t negotiate as long as Trump is President. Their demands are an end to all attacks, including in Lebanon and Gaza, a return of all frozen funds, an end to all oil sanctions and that US bases are never rebuilt. They won’t negotiate on the Strait, saying that’s between them and Oman.

While this is understandable: Trump is completely untrustworthy and can’t keep a deal, I think it’s not entirely true.

But when dealing with Trump, everything has to be cash or carry. The first step will be giving them all the funds: flown in in crates in non-US dollar denominations. The second is an end to sanctions.

At that point, I’d guess they’ll talk.

But the bottom line is simple: America has lost the war.

Further the new Supreme Leader has systematically been putting hard liners in key positions, including some who thought that when Israel kept attacking Lebanon, Iran should have attacked Israel. The new supreme leader is far more hardline than the old. He gave the less hardline leaders a chance to negotiate with the MOU, but that failed. The Iranian government works on “if there’s a consensus to try something the supreme leader will usually let it happen to see if it works.”

But it failed. And that gives Motjaba the legitimacy to say “you had your shot, now we’ll try it the other way.”

Iran’s fairly opaque, though not as much as what passes for Trump’s brain, so I don’t know what they’ll do, but I think if they are serious about Lebanon and Gaza they’re going to have to go to war with Israel in a real way, and defeat Israel unambiguously, as they have America.

Assuming that Israel doesn’t use nukes (which would lead to the end of Israel), this is entirely within their capabilities: they’re still producing missiles and drones, and the US is virtually out of interceptors and low on many other important weapons. Bases are badly damaged and dangerous to use. Aircraft carriers are exhausted and they’ve now had to withdraw ALL carriers from Asia. Ukraine is essentially out of interceptors, and Russia is hitting everything and anything it wants, and attacks on ports have turned Ukraine into a land locked country just as harvest season hits and Ukraine needs to ship out its grain.

The US Empire is overstretched, and Israel is a small country with less than ten million people. It’s the tail that wags the dog, but there’s not much dog left to wag and increasing influential Americans are admitting they’re going to have to make a deal on Iranian terms.

Iran has now won the missile race, which I said they would do day one of the war. The question is if they’ll win the economic race: both America and Iran’s economies are under pressure: who will succumb to that first?

Thankfully for Iran, they’ve been sanctioned for decades and China is supporting them economically. They’re not nearly as reliant on imported goods as the US is. So my guess is they win the “who can take the economic pain longer” race too, especially since if Trump doesn’t cut a deal and possibly even if he does given how long he’s left it, the Republicans are likely to get slaughtered in the midterms and Trump’s control of Congress is in question. Sure, Democrats are massive warmongers too, but forcing Trump to admit defeat isn’t politically unpalatable.

All of this is, essentially, a result of a stubborn refusal to admit reality. To admit that America couldn’t manufacture enough weapons. To admit that Iran could close the Strait and that it mattered. The weird support of Ukraine attacking Russian refineries, just as America needs Russian oil on the market.

America is so used to being able to shove everyone around that it just doesn’t seem to have occurred to most American leaders that they could decisively lose a war in a way they could not just walk away from as in Vietnam or Afghanistan. The Iranians have America by the balls and are squeezing, and America has no way to make them stop.

It’s a contest of who can inflict and endure the most pain, and the answer to both questions is “Iran.”

So Iran will win this war and it will get a good peace deal. That’s essentially baked in now. The question is if they can or will do what is necessary to force Israel out of Lebanon and Gaza. My guess is Gaza ain’t happening, but I think Lebanon is possible. The same calculus applies to Israel as America: Iran can do more damage to Israel than vice-versa, has a more secure weapons supply and nukes don’t change that: Israel can destroy Iran, but that won’t destroy all their missiles and the remaining forces would then take out Israel, including using a dirty nuke, and hitting Israel’s nuclear facilities and desalination plants. Israel would be rendered uninhabitable.

If Iran pushes hard enough on Israel, they’ll be forced to back down as well.

Wars have consequences. This one will be looked back on by historians as the death knell of America. It may be the death knell of Israel as well.

 

What I write here is for the benefit of everyone, but alas, I live in capitalism and I, and the site, take money to keep running. If you value the writing here and can, please subscribe or donate.

America Almost Out Of Long Range Strike Munitions

By

On August 4, 2026

21 Comments

Why did Trump call off his big attacks? Why did the US stop attacking suddenly?

he U.S. Army has used up much of its stockpile of highly accurate long-range missiles during its five-month war with Iran, according to three people familiar with the data, raising concerns about the military’s ​readiness for future conflicts.
The missiles are principally the Army’s surface-to-surface weapons, known as Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) and Precision Strike Missiles (PrSM). The U.S. has used “virtually all” of these weapons, according to two of the sources.

There are also claims that the US is running out of long range air to ground munitions as well.

Combined these two things mean that if America wants to keep bombing Iran, they have to actually fly over Iran and put themselves in much more danger from Iranian anti-air, and by all accounts the Iranians still have plenty left.

This problem comes from the same place virtually all US problems come from: rather than optimizing for results (production) everyone optimizes for profits. Selling fewer missiles for much more money is a better business deal, yes?

And that the US cannot significantly increase the production is due to de-industrializing: sending most of America’s key industries to China, because hey, it doesn’t matter where things are made.

China is now the US in WWII. They could, in a war, easily retool to produce literally millions of drones. They can produce a hundred warships per warship the US produces. Etc.

These are systematic issues. De-financialization is politically impossible. Without de-financialization re-industrializing is not possible, as it would require companies to make far lower profits. Chinese companies are MUCH bigger than American ones, and make less profit (not revenue, but profit) and have far lower valuations.

In 2025 BYD sold 2.26 million cars. Tesla sold 1.64 million. And China has many auto companies.

The mindset for scaling and the mindset for profit-maxing are very different. American elites are all looking for moats: they all want to be able to charge more for a product than it is worth because no one is competing with them on price. (This is why Chinese EVs aren’t allowed in America: they compete on price and the American car industry would cease to exist on contact.)

America lost the Iran war over fifty years as it changed from an industrial power to a financial power. Power comes from what a country can actually do. What it can buy from other countries is a minor consideration unless it has the ability to force them to sell, and that ability comes from what the country can do. Against Venezuela and Cuba, the US is still strong enough. Against a middle power which prepared for war and knows how to use geography, not so much.

In general terms, everything that is happening was predicted decades ago by objective people looking at the trends. Power comes from capability, America was systematically getting rid of that capability to optimize for the number of rich people it could generate.

Military decline, industrial decline, technological decline: all of this comes from making profits the end-goal, rather than the mean by which worthwhile goals were achieved.

“We need to make a profit do X” is very different from “we do X to make a profit.”

What I write here is for the benefit of everyone, but alas, I live in capitalism and I, and the site, take money to keep running. If you value the writing here and can, please subscribe or donate.

Capacity v.s. Desire: What I Got Right & Wrong At The Start of the Gaza Genocide

By

On July 30, 2026

33 Comments

Regular readers will remember that I thought the resistance could defeat Israel over the genocide in Gaza. Iran, Syria, Iraqi militias, Hezbollah and Ansar-Allah.

I was right.

They could. But the decision was made not to.

I base this on the fact that Iran is defeating the US and Israel.

If they can do it now, they could have done it then, when they still had Syria and Hezbollah hadn’t been mauled.

They didn’t because they didn’t want to. They still don’t: what has changed with the leadership is a willingness to defend Iran and Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. The MOU failed, ultimately, because Israel would not stop attacking in Lebanon.

When the US and Israel took out the previous leadership, they changed the desire: what Iran wanted to do. Iran is no longer willing to play nice, and it is willing to stay at war to help Hezbollah. It wasn’t willing to go to war to help Hezbollah or stop the Gaza genocide before, and it won’t stay at war to stop the genocide now. It will, however, try and stop the ongoing ethnic cleansing in Southern Lebanon, which is more than the Lebanese government will do, so there’s that.

There are three parts to understanding in situations like this

  1. What can be done.
  2. What elites will do.
  3. What the consequences of action or inaction are. The real world has the final say.

The consequence of Iran not intervening was the death of substantially all of their senior leadership, and the same happened to Hezbollah. Oh, and at least half a million deaths in Palestine (if you believe the official numbers you’re so stupid I’m surprised you can breathe.) And, of course, the loss of Syria.

(Slightly inaccurate, one other person survived)

There was a complete insistence on never seizing the initiative or even responding significantly to Israeli or American attacks, so they just sat their and let Mossad and the CIA line up their ducks and knock them down.

This is always the hardest part of analytic prediction of events. There really is a lot of freedom at the top: they have a great deal of choice about what to do and what not to do. (Trump has shown that, contra arguments I heard for decades, that in fact, the President can “just do things”.)

Constitutionally cautious, Iran’s leadership was unwilling to ever fire first, or if fired on, to even fire back in a genuinely painful fashion. They certainly weren’t willing to shoot a missile to save an ally.

And so, emboldened by their apparent weakness, the Israelis and America eventually went to war with them: after stripping them of their Syrian ally, shattering Hamas and badly damaging Hezbollah: after weakening their allies, whom Iran refused, repeatedly, to defend.

But, and this is the important point: Iran always had more missiles and drone and production ability to run the US and Israel out of interceptors. It always had the ability to win a war, its leaders just didn’t have the desire.

I got the capability right, and the intention wrong. A lot of people got it the other way around: they assumed America and Israel were stronger than Iran in a local fight, and that Iran was holding back because they were weak. Since they thought Iran was weak, starting a war made sense.

It’s good that Iran’s new leadership has decided there’s an ally they won’t let die rather than do nothing, even if it comes after half a million dead Palestinians and the capture of Syria by actual terrorists. And it’s also true that Iran has done more than anyone nation except Ansar-Allah (oddly, the only actually ethical nation in the entire world: the only one actually willing to go to war to stop a clear genocide). So I don’t want to be too harsh.

But the bottom line is that if Iran, under its old leadership, had fought sooner they’d have had a lot more allies, and been in a stronger position militarily. Perhaps being 100% the clear victim and reasonable party is worth the losses, there are those who argue it is so.

But that’s a lot of dead, maimed, tortured and raped people to get to “we’re the reasonable victim.”

 

What I write here is for the benefit of everyone, but alas, I live in capitalism and I, and the site, take money to keep running. If you value the writing here and can, please subscribe or donate.

America Doesn’t Have Enough Missiles To Fight Iran

By

On July 20, 2026

51 Comments

Readers will remember that at the start of the Iran war I said that if it got serious, the Iranians would win, because they would run the US out of missiles, especially air defense missiles.

The math is simple. If Iran keeps firing, and the US/Israel does not take out the launchers and missile stockpiles in large numbers, Iran will run the US and Israel (it has its own variants, but the same supply issues) out of interceptors. At that point Iran hits everything it shoots at.

If Iran just keeps going long enough, it WILL win the war. The main danger is Iran’s leaders accepting a cease-fire too soon.

Well, confirmation from within the government:

“The U.S. is planning for a wider war,” said one U.S. official familiar with internal administration discussions, adding that the Pentagon was increasing the number of military aircraft in the region.
But the official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk to the media, cautioned that the expansion of U.S. operations will be limited by dwindling stockpiles of air defense and long-range munitions and constraints on the ability to surge more troops and aircraft into the area because of battle damage.
“We do not have enough to safely sustain operations, and I don’t think the White House is aware of that,” the official said.

You will notice that I said the main mistake the Iranians could make was going to peace too soon. At least militarily speaking, there were diplomatic reasons to do so, since both Pakistan and China wanted a peace deal, and Pakistan has a defense pact with Saudi Arabia. Iran needed to prove that they had made all possible efforts, to continue receiving the support they need from China and to keep Pakistan out of the war.

There were also significant internal political reasons. What most people don’t understand is that the supreme leader almost never over-rides government consensus. Elijah Manjier is reliable on this (part behind a paywall). He has a lot of contacts in Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas.

The Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Sayyed Mojtaba Khamenei, never trusted the Memorandum of Understanding negotiated with Washington that was too good to be true. From the outset, he reportedly expressed reservations about American real and honest intentions and questioned whether the United States would ultimately implement its commitments. Nevertheless, despite his scepticism, he did not impose his personal assessment on the country’s political institutions or prevent the agreement from proceeding once it had secured substantial institutional support equivalent to the majority of the National Security Council voting.

In doing so, Sayyed Mojtaba Khamenei reportedly followed the political approach adopted by his assassinated father, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, during the negotiations that produced the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. Although the late Ayatollah Ali Khamenei repeatedly warned that the United States could not be fully trusted, he allowed President Hassan Rouhani, Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif and the majority supporting them within the Supreme National Security Council to pursue the nuclear agreement because they believed diplomacy remained preferable to confrontation.

This position reflected a broader principle within Iran’s strategic decision-making system. The Leader establishes the general direction of national policy, but crucial security decisions are debated within institutions that include officials elected directly or indirectly by the population and their representatives, among them the president, the parliamentary speaker and senior government and military representatives. When a substantial institutional majority supports a particular course, the Leader permitted that collective judgement to be tested, even where it conflicts with his personal assessment of the risks involved.

However, the MOU’s failure strengthens those in the government who thought it was a waste of time.

The damage extends beyond the current political leadership. Future Iranian governments, regardless of their ideological orientation, will judge the risks of dealing with Washington against the combined experiences of the JCPOA and the more recent Memorandum. Even officials inclined towards negotiation may conclude that engagement carries prohibitive domestic costs unless future arrangements include enforceable guarantees, simultaneous implementation and mechanisms preventing one party from receiving concessions before abandoning its own obligations…

…Yet diplomatic options have not disappeared completely. The Memorandum itself showed that both sides remain capable of negotiating when the military, political and economic costs become sufficiently high. Any renewed process, however, would require a substantially different structure based on reciprocal implementation, verifiable sequencing, the release of assets alongside measurable Iranian steps, and guarantees sufficiently credible to survive political change in Washington or Tehran.

Manjier’s connected. I’d assume the last paragraph reflects what the Iranian government wants said about any possible new agreement.

Meanwhile in the war itself the Iranians are concentrating on taking out US bases, radars, supply depots, command/communications centers and so on. They’re systematically degrading the infrastructure the US uses. Note that they have started attacking in Jordan, which they had rarely done before. Jordan could be considered the “last shield” before Israel, and Israel’s basing of US assets is the next big goal, I suspect.

It seems clear that Iran is taking apart US logistics and command and control, and depleting weapon stocks faster than the US is doing this to Iran.

Again, the simple math.

Anything can happen in war, but I don’t see any way for the US to win this war if Iran stays the course, and we haven’t even included all the shortages coming down the line, especially now Ansar-Allah has closed another strait. The only people with serious leverage over Iran are China and Pakistan (and Pakistan’s is limited. There’s a deal, but they’d have mass riots if they tried to attack Iran. Pakistan’s population support for Iran polls around 80%.)

If America were even marginally competently run this would be the point where Congress would impeach Trump. He won’t admit defeat and oil stockpiles are running low. He has no viable part to victory, but keeps acting as if he does. He’s turning a military defeat into an economic catastrophe thru his delusional disconnect from reality, or perhaps because he’s being blackmailed. Whatever the reason for his behaviour, he needs to go. (Yes, I’m aware this won’t happen, that’s the point.)

In all my life, and I’m getting old now, I have never seen a stupider war or an American elite more determinedly detached from reality.

 

What I write here is for the benefit of everyone, but alas, I live in capitalism and I, and the site, take money to keep running. If you value the writing here and can, please subscribe or donate.

 

x

America Attacks Iran & Declares The Truce Over

By

On July 8, 2026

30 Comments

From the orange man’s mouth:

“As far as I’m concerned, it’s over,” Trump said at the ongoing Nato summit in Ankara when asked if the truce with Iran was now finished.

“It’s just a waste of time dealing with them,” AFP reported.

He blasted Iran’s leaders after Washington launched strikes on the Islamic Republic and Iran said it targeted US bases in the Gulf.

“They’re sick, there’s something wrong with them,” he said.

Treasury also re-instated oil sanctions on Iran.

The simple calculus is that the US was trying to re-open the Strait through Oman waters, and while they got a few ships thru, the Iranians stopped most of them hit some. As long as the Strait stays closed, the US is under pressure, because there is a physical economy, and reserves are running down, leaving aside shortages in fertilizer, helium and so on.

Iran just needs to keep the Strait closed to put pressure on the US homeland. As usual, the US can’t be hit directly by its enemies, so this is Iran’s way of hurting America even though its missiles can’t reach American cities.

On the other hand, the US can directly hit Iran, and if they didn’t actually want peace on the terms of the MOU, which apparently they didn’t (though I think this is a factional dispute inside the administration), then going back to hitting Iran makes sense.

Problem is that if the Iranian military does what it’s threatening to do, which is to blow the hell out of oil infrastructure in the Gulf States, the shortages will last years.

And the US isn’t leaving Iran with a lot of other options in terms of escalation.

Anyway, we’ll see what happens. Trump’s decisions have the consistency of runny jello, the real question is if the Iranian hard line faction wins their internal debate and is given the green light to go all out.

What I write here is for the benefit of everyone, but alas, I live in capitalism and I, and the site, take money to keep running. If you value the writing here and can, please subscribe or donate.

Brief Iran Update

By

On June 26, 2026

24 Comments

So, Iran closed the Strait because Israel wouldn’t leave Lebanon. Some ships tried to leave to Iran struck the ships. Trump called that a violation of the truce and struck targets in Iran.

As predicted, there is no peace possible if the US won’t control Israel.

Meanwhile in Lebanon the government signed an agreement with Israel saying that Hezbollah is to be disarmed. Hezbollah straight up said:

Hezbollah MP Hassan Fadlallah: ‘Hezbollah considers the Lebanese presidency and government illegal and unconstitutional. We shall not permit this unconstitutional institution to implement any deal on the ground.’

The Lebanese army can’t disarm Hezbollah, Hezbollah is far stronger. I doubt they’ll seriously try, whatever Aoun orders. The deal would amount to ceding southern Lebanon to Israel permanently. Aoun might not care, it’s all Shia land, but Hezbollah won’t go along.

No peace is possible if the US won’t either restrain Israel or cut it loose. “If Iran and Israel fight, we will not intervene.”

Controlling Israel is easy. What Kissinger and Nixon did was just stop weapon shipments. That’s all it takes.

Oh, and Israel lost its battle to take Ali Taher Hill. Wound up begging Hezbollah to allow them to retrieve the corpses of their fallen soldiers. The Israeli ground forces really are absolute crap.

The MOU was very one sided: everything was what Iran wanted, not what the US wanted. That’s because the Strait being closed really will wreck America. This remains true. Iran appears to believe this, and they are willing to go back to war or semi-war until the US disciplines Israel. No signs of cutting Hezbollah loose.

Hope you’re looking forward to very high food prices, bare shelves and eventual food riots. Because if the US doesn’t make peace these are all coming to America. Oil prices have been held artificially low by market manipulation, but there is a real world and in that real world distillates like diesel are running very low.

At this point it’s clear Trump has to go, for America’s sake. Vance is scum, but he’s realistic scum. If it was up to him, there’d be peace.

Here’s hoping the MOU gets back on track. I don’t like the world where it doesn’t.

What I write here is for the benefit of everyone, but alas, I live in capitalism and I, and the site, take money to keep running. If you value the writing here and can, please subscribe or donate.

Israel’s Support Is Eroding In the US

By

On June 19, 2026

14 Comments

A friend pointed out to me that Israel’s support is eroding hard. The elite consensus is shifting. Point in case:

The hard core Zionists will keep opposing this deal, of course, but there are two groups that are shiftable. The first is the one that Tapper belongs to: he’s an authority follower. He’s been hardcore pro-Israel and loathes Muslims, but his first instinct is to follow the leader. Trump’s made a clear turn, and Jake is following.

The second group are those who need administrative favor. Their livelihood or plans depend on the levers the President controls favoring them. They were for Iraq, for Ukraine, etc… but they have no strong ideological commitment, only self-interest.

Trump made a mistake letting hard core Zionists roll up media and social media, but there’s still enough run by self-interested or follow the leader types that if Trump stays solid, the American elite zeitgeist will shift towards his stance. Israel is an ideological commitment, it’s not, for most elites and courtiers, all that involved with making lots of money or being part of the in-group. If the window shifts, they’ll shift with it.

At a fundamental level what happened is that America got itself involved in a war which it couldn’t just walk away from. Losing in Vietnam was embarrassing but really, who cares? Just walk away. Losing in Afghanistan, likewise.

But the Iranians have the West’s balls in a vise and the vise was slowly tightening. Key reserves were way down. Oil at Cushing OK is near historic lows. Distillates are getting scarce. Market manipulation of the price of oil was very successful, but actual physical shortages were on the way, starting in a month or so. (Ironically, price manipulation meant that oil reserves drew down faster than if actual price discovery had been allowed.)

There is a real world, and a real economy and Iran had control of it. The econo-morons talking about how the effect of this has been less than the oil shocks are right when looking at market numbers, but it wasn’t going to stay less and even Trump figured that out.

So the neocons and the hard Zionists will attack, but if Trump had the least concern for the actual economy, he had to make a choice.

Meanwhile Israel is still fighting in Lebanon and the first real battle of the Lebanese invasion is taking place.

Both Hezbollah and Israel are concerned there’ll be a new, actually real ceasefire and Israel is seeking to create facts on the ground. Ali Taher hill is an important strategic objective, giving whoever controls it sight lines for miles around. This is the first large engagement I’m aware of in this invasion where Hezbollah has chosen to stand and fight, instead hitting and fading. (That’s not a criticism. Guerilla warfare makes sense for them.)

And so far they’re doing well, because the Israeli ground forces are actually crap.

The Iranians have not gone to Geneva for the signing or negotiations. They are holding firm on Lebanon. And that means Trump can either rein in the Israelis or the vise starts tightening around America’s balls again.

America cannot win this war. It is impossible. Even using nukes probably wouldn’t work fast enough. That’s why they agreed to a deal that is very pro-Iranian.

That has not changed. They can rein in Israel or cut it loose now, or they can do it in two months when the US is in much more pain, or in 4 months when there are food riots.

There’s a real world. America lost a war that matters. There’s going to be a price for that. If America is smart and not completely controlled by Israel, they’ll pay that price now and if necessary cut Israel lose, because the price will go up every day if the MOU fails.

What I write here is for the benefit of everyone, but alas, I live in capitalism and I, and the site, take money to keep running. If you value the writing here and can, please subscribe or donate.

 

Vance Is Trying To Thread That Vice Presidential Needle

By

On June 19, 2026

21 Comments

J.D. Vance, Trump’s vice-president has often said that his job is to support the president.

He’s also made sure that people know he was against the Iran war, the 12 day war, and so on, with careful leaks. Publicly he’s all pro-whatever Trump says or does, but he’s trying to have it both ways.

The MOU gave him a present, he was able to say that Israel are ungrateful turds who shouldn’t be so violent: nine million people can’t kill their way out of all of their foreign relations troubles, and that Trump is the only major world leader who has supported them (essentially true. In this calculus only Russia, China, Turkey and the US matter.) Israelis turning on Trump are ungrateful. (Well yes, but you didn’t expect people whose idea of making war is to kill children en-masse to have a fine moral sense.)

Anyway, here he is:

Vance has always had a very narrow road to follow. He wants to be President. He can’t directly oppose Trump on anything publicly because even if Trump is driven from office in disgrace, there’s a hard core of primary voters who will never give him up. On the other hand Trump’s becoming increasingly toxic and it’s pretty clear that he’s going to leave office very unpopular.

This issue killed Kamala. She was ahead and doing well. I still remember when she was asked on TV if there was anything she’d have done different than Biden. She said no. And it was at that moment I knew that Trump was going to win: she needed to say something, even something a bit weak “well, I admire what the President has done, but I’d like to have done even more to bring down grocery prices and to end the Gaza war” say.

Vance is attempting to get around this with his loyalty pledge: you support the President even if you disagree, but you can disagree and advise him so be hind the scenes.

He’s hoping that two-step, “I was loyal to Trump, but I would have done some things differently” will keep him electable.

We’ll see. A lot will depend on who Democrats nominate. Democrats rarely select their most popular candidate, they prefer party loyalists who can be expected to keep the corporate pork rolling and not upset important funders like the Israeli lobby.

If Democrats serve up a lukewarm candidate and if Vance makes his turn correctly, he could squeak in as the next President.

Iran MOU update: As predicted the Israelis kept attacking in Lebanon, the Iranians said they wouldn’t go to the signing in Geneva on Friday till the fighting stops, and negotiations won’t start till they do. Israel appears to be attempting to take an important strategic point Ali al-Taher hill. Hezbollah is going all out to stop them. We’ll see if the US is capable (politically, it can easily do so in principle) of discipling Israel. 

What I write here is for the benefit of everyone, but alas, I live in capitalism and I, and the site, take money to keep running. If you value the writing here and can, please subscribe or donate.

Page 1 of 4

Next

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén