The war in Iran (or whose war is it anyways?)

[sear]

"Odd how the Straits of Hormuz are so important, since you would think they would have built more pipelines by now?" R5 #260

"... by now"?
Until now, there was no need, commerce flowed fairly freely, despite disruption here or there through motorized history.

What has changed is, not only has President Trump glaringly advertised U.S. military limitations.
Trump has simultaneously educated Iran about how powerful its choke hold is on Earth's economies.

It was a dismally amateurish blunder on Trump's part.
Yet it was a predictable if not inevitable consequence of Trump surrounding himself with "yes-men" buffoons.

Any sensible field-grade commander could have / should have warned Trump of these risks before Day #1. They couldn't, after Trump cut them out of the loop.

When Trump bungles as an inept gambling casino owner it harms the casino.
When Trump bungles as president of the United States the harm is both global and severe.

 

[Shiftless2]

This is an American mini-series that is heading to be a soap opera. And in the process, some 'connected' Wall Street wolves are making money out of every sway of stock/bond pricesvalues, especially of energy, financial & defense companies, which, by the way are also owned by the same wolves.

And who are the victims?

The ordinary people, not only Americans, but worldwide.

𝗪𝗛𝗘𝗡 𝗘𝗩𝗘𝗥𝗬 “𝗙𝗜𝗡𝗔𝗟 𝗪𝗔𝗥𝗡𝗜𝗡𝗚” 𝗚𝗘𝗧𝗦 𝗔 𝗡𝗘𝗪 𝗗𝗘𝗔𝗗𝗟𝗜𝗡𝗘, 𝗣𝗘𝗢𝗣𝗟𝗘 𝗦𝗧𝗔𝗥𝗧 𝗔𝗦𝗞𝗜𝗡𝗚 𝗤𝗨𝗘𝗦𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡𝗦

For weeks, the message surrounding Iran has sounded almost the same every time:

• “Very close to a deal.”
• “Just a little more time.”
• “A final warning.”
• “A short delay.”

And each time, the deadline moves again.

Critics argue that repeated delays and shifting timelines make the situation start looking less like clear foreign policy strategy and more like political theater played out in public.

Supporters may say diplomacy takes time and delaying conflict is better than rushing into war.

But opponents argue that constant countdowns create uncertainty for:

• soldiers
• allies
• financial markets
• and ordinary people watching global tensions rise

The larger concern is credibility.

When warnings are repeated again and again without resolution, people eventually begin questioning whether the threats are strategic pressure — or simply political messaging.

Because wars are not television episodes.

And global conflict is not supposed to feel like a cliffhanger that keeps getting another extension.

The bigger question now is this: when governments constantly extend “final” deadlines, does it strengthen deterrence — or weaken public trust in leadership altogether?

 

[sear]

"ELECT A CLOWN EXPECT A CIRCUS." #262

ooohhhhh ! ! !
Orange makeup!

NOW I get it !

 

[sear]

Looming Iran peace deal shows how Trump’s maximalist goals have shrunk​

Sobering reality for president after three-month odyssey that threatens to take him back to where he started
Robert Tait / Sat 30 May 2026 06.00 EDT

It is an oft-stated principle of warfare that hopes and plans optimistically hatched and trumpeted at its outbreak do not survive first contact with the enemy.
Yet even by that cautionary standard, Trump’s wildly diverging goals and narratives since embarking on war with Iran on 28 February amount to a bewildering odyssey that – in the end – threatens to take him back to where he started.

After weeks of stop-start negotiations, the US and Iran now reportedly stand on the verge of a deal to end the fighting, the most immediate and tangible consequence of which will be the reopening of the strait of Hormuz.

Trump claims to be on verge of peace deal but Iran signals no agreement reached
Read more

Looming Iran peace deal shows how Trump’s maximalist goals have shrunk

Sobering reality for president after three-month odyssey that threatens to take him back to where he started

www.theguardian.com

The deeply painful reality is, from this point, 8AM/ET Saturday May 30, after squandering $Billions on Iran Trump will claim victory if he can struggle back to
where the Obama administration left U.S. / Trump.

Without offering much if any precise analytical criticism Trump labeled Obama's 7 party (Britain, France, Germany, China, Russia, U.S. & Iran) a bad deal,
and unilaterally withdrew the U.S. from it.
Trump may pretend his unilateral decision is consequence free.
But as Trump is learning, Iran's negotiators now have explicit reason to distrust U.S. negotiators.
Iran can plausibly argue: you broke the previous agreement. How can we be sure you won't break the next one also?

Meanwhile, presidential claims to the contrary, Trump's global economic downturn would not have occurred
if Trump had not broken his campaign promise against starting a War.

For Trump it was a War of choice,
but is a peace of necessity. And Iran knows it.

 

[Rigby5]

Looming Iran peace deal shows how Trump’s maximalist goals have shrunk​

Sobering reality for president after three-month odyssey that threatens to take him back to where he started
Robert Tait / Sat 30 May 2026 06.00 EDT

It is an oft-stated principle of warfare that hopes and plans optimistically hatched and trumpeted at its outbreak do not survive first contact with the enemy.
Yet even by that cautionary standard, Trump’s wildly diverging goals and narratives since embarking on war with Iran on 28 February amount to a bewildering odyssey that – in the end – threatens to take him back to where he started.

After weeks of stop-start negotiations, the US and Iran now reportedly stand on the verge of a deal to end the fighting, the most immediate and tangible consequence of which will be the reopening of the strait of Hormuz.

Trump claims to be on verge of peace deal but Iran signals no agreement reached
Read more

Looming Iran peace deal shows how Trump’s maximalist goals have shrunk

Sobering reality for president after three-month odyssey that threatens to take him back to where he started

www.theguardian.com

The deeply painful reality is, from this point, 8AM/ET Saturday May 30, after squandering $Billions on Iran Trump will claim victory if he can struggle back to
where the Obama administration left U.S. / Trump.

Without offering much if any precise analytical criticism Trump labeled Obama's 7 party (Britain, France, Germany, China, Russia, U.S. & Iran) a bad deal,
and unilaterally withdrew the U.S. from it.
Trump may pretend his unilateral decision is consequence free.
But as Trump is learning, Iran's negotiators now have explicit reason to distrust U.S. negotiators.
Iran can plausibly argue: you broke the previous agreement. How can we be sure you won't break the next one also?

Meanwhile, presidential claims to the contrary, Trump's global economic downturn would not have occurred
if Trump had not broken his campaign promise against starting a War.

For Trump it was a War of choice,
but is a peace of necessity. And Iran knows it.

It all seems to obvious?
Since the WMD claims about Iraq were so obviously false, the real motive had to be that Iraq has all that oil.
Since Venezuela has never had any even slight drug cartel connection, the real motive of attacking Venezuela has to be all that oil.
Since Iran has never attacked anyone, the real motive of attacking Iran has to be all that oil.

 

[Shiftless2]

 

[Rigby5]

View attachment 5165

Since Iran seems more responsible than North Korea, China, Pakistan, or India, then it seems wrong to worry about Iran at all.

 

[sear]

Live Updates: Trump says he's in "no hurry" to make a deal on Iran​

Frank Andrews / Sun, May 31, 2026 at 6:37 AM GMT-5

Live Updates: Trump says he's in "no hurry" to make a deal on Iran

President Trump recently held a meeting with key advisers to hammer out a "final determination" on a potential deal with Iran, but no word has come on a decision.

www.yahoo.com

Perhaps, for clarity, we should simply rename the white house "the waffle house".

 

[sear]

Iran president's request adds new twist to US-Iran talks as Trump weighs peace proposal​

Fox News - Breaking News Updates | Latest News Headlines | Photos & News Video

Breaking News, Latest News and Current News from FOXNews.com. Breaking news and video. Latest Current News: U.S., World, Entertainment, Health, Business, Technology, Politics, Sports.

www.foxnews.com

Trump roasts CNN over Iran deal coverage​

President Donald Trump on Sunday defended his Iran deal against criticism from CNN, arguing that it explicitly bars Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and accusing the network of falsely claiming otherwise.

Trump warns Iran US will 'finish the job' if deal collapses as Israel expands Lebanon offensive

War Secretary Pete Hegseth says the U.S. military is “more than capable” of resuming strikes on Iran if peace talks collapse, as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu orders an expanded military offensive in Lebanon.

www.foxnews.com

If it is not already obvious:
Trump's petty domestic squabbles about "fake news" are not solid ground upon which Iran can formulate a reliable peace partner.
After all, Trump himself broke the previous hard-won agreement from years of Obama administration negotiation.
And now after Trump's war of choice, Iran is expected to trust Trump enough to sign a treaty with him?
Would you?

 

[sear]

Last Update May 31, 2026, 10:00 PM EDT

Trump warns Iran US will 'finish the job' if deal collapses as Israel expands Lebanon offensive​

War Secretary Pete Hegseth says the U.S. military is “more than capable” of resuming strikes on Iran if peace talks collapse, as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu orders an expanded military offensive in Lebanon.

Trump warns Iran US will 'finish the job' if deal collapses as Israel expands Lebanon offensive

War Secretary Pete Hegseth says the U.S. military is “more than capable” of resuming strikes on Iran if peace talks collapse, as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu orders an expanded military offensive in Lebanon.

www.foxnews.com

Not sure how much longer Trump will drag this out, before he:
- admits to himself he failed
- realizes he won't get the terms he originally designated
- declare victory on basis of whatever is on the negotiating table when Trump's patience reaches its limit
- attempts to complete his presidency on the pretense of success.

Care to guess how much longer? A week? Two ?

 

[Shiftless2]

 

[Rigby5]

View attachment 5275

What is so strange is that it was so obvious when Bush attacked Iraq, that it was really over oil and not WMD.
And now Trump is repeating the same thing with Venezuela and Iran.
It should not fool anyone.

 

[sear]

"What is so strange is that it was so obvious when Bush attacked Iraq, that it was really over oil and not WMD." R5 #272

The wars are ending; the obligations, just beginning now. By James Fallows / March 29, 2013
A little over 10 years ago, George W. Bush fired his economic adviser, Lawrence Lindsey, for saying that the total cost of invading Iraq might come to as much as $200 billion. Bush instead stood by such advisers as Paul Wolfowitz, who said that the invasion would be largely "self-financing" via Iraq's oil, and Andrew Natsios, who told an incredulous Ted Koppel that the war's total cost to the American taxpayer would be no more than $1.7 billion. https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...the-costs-of-iraq-for-decades-to-come/274477/

I saw Koppel interview Natsios on this issue. Seems to me Natsios was as persuasive as any other swindler.

We agree the younger Bush administration's War on Iraq was NOT about WMD. The Bushies outright lied about that.

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt that he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us." V.P. Cheney"8/26/02" C-SPAN2

"You lie!" Rep. Joe Wilson heckling President Obama's address to congress

"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt, that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised." U.S.President Bush (the younger) televised address to the U.S. March 17th, 2003

"You lie!" Rep. Joe Wilson heckling President Obama's address to congress

MARCH 30, 2003: Donald Rumsfeld: We know where the WMD are
We know where [the weapons of mass destruction] are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat. [ABC This Week, 3/30/03]

"You lie!" Rep. Joe Wilson heckling President Obama's address to congress

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I've long believed the younger President Bush chose to go back to War against Saddam / Iraq to teach President Bush's father, President Bush a lesson. Specifically:
instead of shutting down Schwarzkopf's Desert Storm as soon as Iraq's military was out of Kuwait, Schwarzkopf / Bush (elder) should have chased Iraq's military all the way back to Baghdad.

So the younger Bush lied us into War over a family squabble, which the elder Bush decisively won.

The horrendously painful irony of this is, during the 8 years of the younger President Bush administration, #1 on the FBI's Ten Most Wanted List was UBL. He killed
3,000 innocent Americans during those 8 years.
During those same 8 years President of the United States of America Bush (younger) killed over a thousand more innocent Americans than UBL did.
UBL fed the fish.
Former President Bush gets a generous federal pension, and Secret Service protection for life.

 

[Rigby5]

I saw Koppel interview Natsios on this issue. Seems to me Natsios was as persuasive as any other swindler.

We agree the younger Bush administration's War on Iraq was NOT about WMD. The Bushies outright lied about that.

"You lie!" Rep. Joe Wilson heckling President Obama's address to congress


"You lie!" Rep. Joe Wilson heckling President Obama's address to congress


"You lie!" Rep. Joe Wilson heckling President Obama's address to congress

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I've long believed the younger President Bush chose to go back to War against Saddam / Iraq to teach President Bush's father, President Bush a lesson. Specifically:
instead of shutting down Schwarzkopf's Desert Storm as soon as Iraq's military was out of Kuwait, Schwarzkopf / Bush (elder) should have chased Iraq's military all the way back to Baghdad.

So the younger Bush lied us into War over a family squabble, which the elder Bush decisively won.

The horrendously painful irony of this is, during the 8 years of the younger President Bush administration, #1 on the FBI's Ten Most Wanted List was UBL. He killed
3,000 innocent Americans during those 8 years.
During those same 8 years President of the United States of America Bush (younger) killed over a thousand more innocent Americans than UBL did.
UBL fed the fish.
Former President Bush gets a generous federal pension, and Secret Service protection for life.

But just as there was no actual evidence of Iraq having WMD in 2003, there is no evidence of drug cartel connections to Venezuela or reasons to be concerned over Iran enriching uranium.
The real similarity actually is just that all 3 are the biggest oil producers
So that is likely the real reason for the US to attack them.
I assume these attacks greatly increased the price of Texas oil?

 

[sear]

"But just as there was no actual evidence of Iraq having WMD in 2003, there is no evidence of drug cartel connections to Venezuela or reasons to be concerned over Iran enriching uranium." R5 #274

Stuxnet - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Stuxnet malware story is one for the ages.
It doesn't seem to leave much doubt about whether Iran was enriching.

And if Iran's nuclear weapons program was just a bunch of groundless political bluster, how do you explain the 7 nation agreement with Iran about it: "Britain, France, Germany, China, Russia, U.S. & Iran"
Would you have us believe they are ALL dupes?

"The real similarity actually is just that all 3 are the biggest oil producers
So that is likely the real reason for the US to attack them." R5 #274

Trump doesn't care about oil.
Trump cares about Gold.
I don't deny Trump's interest.
But I suspect it has more to do with wanting a piece of the action with oil producers. $money

I'm not Catholic. But I believe avarice is one of the 7 deadly sins. I know of no cure for it.

 

[Rigby5]

Stuxnet - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Stuxnet malware story is one for the ages.
It doesn't seem to leave much doubt about whether Iran was enriching.

And if Iran's nuclear weapons program was just a bunch of groundless political bluster, how do you explain the 7 nation agreement with Iran about it: "Britain, France, Germany, China, Russia, U.S. & Iran"
Would you have us believe they are ALL dupes?


Trump doesn't care about oil.
Trump cares about Gold.
I don't deny Trump's interest.
But I suspect it has more to do with wanting a piece of the action with oil producers. $money

I'm not Catholic. But I believe avarice is one of the 7 deadly sins. I know of no cure for it.

{...
In the standard list, the seven deadly sins according to the Catholic Church are pride, envy, wrath, gluttony, lust, sloth, and greed.
...}