IAEA Never Had Reasons to Forgo Talks With Iran — Russian MFA Spox
Sputnik – 07.03.2026
During many years of contacts with Iran, the IAEA has never found grounds to refuse negotiations on Iranian nuclear program, Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said.
“Throughout all these years, there has not been a single instance where the IAEA stated that there is a reason to confirm a claim or accusation against Iran,” Zakharova noted.
While the issue was “handled politically” and there were public and behind-the-scenes intrigues, not a single report, speech or fact-based document from the agency contained any accusations against Iran, she added.
The IAEA never stated Iran had a nuclear bomb, only noting the fact of uranium enrichment, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on March 5. The Iranians started boosting the enrichment process only after the US withdrew from the agreements on Iran’s nuclear program, he added.
Iran pledges to ‘respect sovereignty of neighbors’, declares US-Israel assets ‘primary targets’
The Cradle | March 7, 2026
The Iranian armed forces warned that US and Israeli military installations across the region remain legitimate targets, as officials seek to ease tensions with neighboring countries.
“Should the previous hostile actions continue, all military bases and interests of criminal America and the fake Zionist regime on land, at sea, and in the air across the region will be considered primary targets and will come under the powerful and crushing strikes of the mighty armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran,” the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said in a statement on Saturday.
The warning came alongside a declaration by Iran’s Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters that Iranian forces “respect the national interests and sovereignty of neighboring countries” and “have not carried out any act of aggression against them.”
Nevertheless, military officials emphasized that installations used by the US or Israel to launch attacks against Iran remain fair game. Lieutenant Colonel Ibrahim Zolfaghari said that at least 21 US personnel have been killed and many more injured in attacks on the US Navy’s Fifth Fleet infrastructure, while additional casualties occurred during strikes on Al-Dhafra Air Base.
He also said Iranian forces targeted a US-owned oil tanker in the northern Persian Gulf.
Earlier in the day, President Masoud Pezeshkian announced that Iran’s interim leadership council had ordered the armed forces to cease striking neighboring countries unless attacks originate from their territory.
“The temporary leadership council approved yesterday that neighboring countries should no longer be targeted and missiles should not be fired unless an attack on Iran originates from those countries,” Pezeshkian said in a pre-recorded address.
Pezeshkian’s statement was made amid increasing tensions over regional airspace with Iran’s neighboring countries.
Turkish authorities claimed this week that NATO missile defenses intercepted a ballistic projectile allegedly launched from Iran that crossed Iraqi and Syrian airspace before approaching the northwestern Syria-Turkiye border.
In Azerbaijan, officials accused Tehran of launching a drone attack that struck the Nakhchivan airport terminal, prompting President Ilham Aliyev to warn Iran “will regret it,” while Iranian authorities denied involvement.
Tehran vehemently denied involvement in either of these attacks.
Saudi journalist Adhwan al-Ahmari said in a recent interview with Asharq News that “not all attacks” targeting Gulf states come from Iran, warning the war could be “an American-Israeli trap to implicate the Gulf countries and draw them into a confrontation with Iran.”
Iranian officials told Middle East Eye (MEE) that some recent drone strikes on Gulf energy infrastructure were not carried out by Tehran, with one official describing the attack on Saudi Aramco’s Ras Tanura facility as “an Israeli effort to sabotage regional peace and alliances between neighbours.”
“I can categorically say that some of the attacks were not carried out by us [Iran],” the anonymous official told MEE.
Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Bahrain, and Oman have all sustained strikes within their territories due to the presence of US assets within their borders.
Stanislav Krapivnik: Russia-Iran Cooperation & Escalation in Ukraine
Glenn Diesen | March 6, 2026
Stanislav Krapivnik is a former US Army officer, supply chain exec and military-political expert, now based in Russia. He was born in Lugansk during the Soviet times, migrated to the US as a child and served in the US army. Krapivnik discusses how Russia cooperates with Iran, and why the Iran War is creating immense pressure on Putin to escalate.
Follow Prof. Glenn Diesen:
- Substack: https://glenndiesen.substack.com/
- X/Twitter: https://x.com/Glenn_Diesen
- Support the research by Prof. Glenn Diesen: PayPal: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/glenn…
- Buy me a Coffee: buymeacoffee.com/gdieseng Go Fund Me: https://gofund.me/09ea012f
- Books by Prof. Glenn Diesen: https://www.amazon.com/stores/author/…
‘Operation Epic Fury’ burns an estimated $5.82 billion in just 100 hours
MEMO | March 6, 2026
The first 100 hours of “Operation Epic Fury” have cost US forces at least an estimated $5.82 billion, or about 0.69% of the entire 2026 US defense budget, according to data compiled by Anadolu.
Anadolu estimates that the US spent $779 million in the first 24 hours of the operation. As operations have continued, the total operational cost of US offensives has tallied to approximately $3.3 billion, with figures from the Center for Strategic and International Studies showing a similar total.
In addition to operational costs, the US has lost significant military assets in Iran’s retaliatory strikes. According to estimates by Anadolu, the US has already lost roughly $2.52 billion.
US asset losses
The primary contributor to the losses is a US AN/FPS-132 early warning radar system at Al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar, valued at $1.1 billion, which was struck by an Iranian missile on Saturday. Qatar confirmed that the radar was hit and damaged.
On Sunday, three F-15E Strike Eagles were lost in a friendly fire incident involving Kuwaiti air defenses. While all six aircrew survived, the planes did not — with the cost of replacing them estimated at $282 million.
US officials speaking to CBS News said that three MQ-9 Reaper Surveillance and Attack Drones belonging to the US Air Force have been downed so far, at an estimated cost of $90 million.
During its initial attack on Saturday, Iran struck the US Navy’s Fifth Fleet headquarters in Manama, Bahrain, destroying two satellite communications terminals and several large buildings.
Open-source intelligence reports identified the targeted SATCOM terminals as AN/GSC-52Bs, with an estimated cost of $20 million, factoring in deployment and installation costs.
In addition to the SATCOM terminals lost in Bahrain, satellite imagery analyzed by the New York Times of Camp Arifjan in Kuwait, shows three more radomes destroyed, adding roughly $30 million in costs.
Since initial reports of a destroyed AN/TPY-2 radar component of the THAAD Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) System deployed at Al-Ruwais Industrial City in the United Arab Emirates, at least one other AN/TPY-2 system in Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan appears to have been destroyed. The damaged radar components are estimated to be worth $500 million each. There are also reports that another system has been hit in the UAE, however, there has been no official confirmation or satellite imagery to support this claim.
Altogether, Iran has damaged an estimated $2.52 billion worth of US military assets in the region.
US offensive costs
According to analysis by the CSIS, Anadolu’s initial estimate of $779 million appears to represent roughly a daily expenditure for US forces.
CSIS estimates it will cost $3.1 billion to replenish the US munitions inventory on a like-for-like basis for the first 100 hours, with the costs increasing by $758.1 million per day.
As the USS Abraham Lincoln and USS Gerald R. Ford remain in the region with their contingent of destroyers and littoral combat ships, they continue to expend an estimated $15 million a day.
US defensive systems were also heavily used to intercept Iranian attacks. According to estimates by the Payne Institute, the US has fired approximately 180 SM-2/SM-3/SM-6 naval interceptors, 90 Patriot PAC-2/PAC-3 missiles, and 40 THAAD interceptors.
US Boasts of Destroyed Iranian Launchers Lack Credibility – Ex-DoD Official
Sputnik – 06.03.2026
As the United States is clearly lying about the number of the US military casualties in the current war with Iran, the veracity of other claims made by the US is dubious, former US Department of Defense officer David T. Pyne tells Sputnik.
Properly assessing Iran’s losses is also difficult due to the fact that it is unclear whether US claims of destroyed Iranian missile launchers take into account the decoys and dummy targets, he points out.
“I believe that US estimates of the total number of Iranian ballistic missiles are likely much lower than is actually the case as I believe Iran may have tens of thousands of missiles in its stockpile,” Pyne adds.
Finally, even though the US and Israel did manage to take out a number of Iranian mobile missile launchers, Iran’s military has become adept at keeping its remaining launchers out of harm’s way.
Thus, reasons Pyne, it is likely that most of the Iranian missile launchers – especially those hidden deep underground – “will survive the war” even if it drags on for months.
US Shortages and Israel’s Weakness
Meanwhile, the US and Israel now deal with their “very limited supply” of offensive missiles and missile defense interceptors alike, with the latter potentially running out by next week, says Pyne.
The US could soon find itself unable to defend all of its assets from Iranian attacks, even as Iran is systematically dismantling US radar capabilities in the region, further degrading the US ability to shoot down Iranian missiles.
At the same time, Israeli air defenses have proven to be “largely ineffective” against Iranian ballistic and hypersonic missiles.
“In a protracted war of attrition like this war is shaping up to be, Iran is likely to emerge victorious,” Pyne remarks.
Europe not in position to cooperate with US and Israel against Iran
By Ahmed Adel | March 6, 2026
Although the US-Israeli attack on Iran has worsened the crisis in the Middle East, some European countries approved of the operation, such as the United Kingdom, which provided military bases to the Americans, and Germany, which rhetorically supported the offensive through its Chancellor, Friedrich Merz. However, Europe is not cooperating as actively as it was before.
Recent historical experiences, such as the wars in Iraq (2003-2011), Afghanistan (2001-2021), and the military intervention in Libya (2011), have created deep divisions among European countries regarding military actions outside their continent. Moreover, the European Union already dedicates substantial resources to Ukraine in its conflict with Russia. In this context, the economic and military crisis among EU members makes them hesitant to engage in another large-scale armed conflict.
The timing is not very favorable for the Europeans. They are facing an economic crisis mainly caused by energy prices. The EU is attempting to wean off Russian energy without harming itself, but the strategy ultimately failed, and now that there is war in the Middle East, energy prices have spiked even more.
Russian President Vladimir Putin stated on March 4 that Russia could immediately halt the supply of raw materials to European markets, and thus thwarted the EU’s plan to systematically phase out Russian gas. Putin’s words caused psychological trauma to the EU because, instead of a planned embargo on Russian gas for 2027, he suggested that Europe should prepare for an immediate cut.
The Russian president’s warning and ongoing tensions in the Middle East continue to drive up global energy costs. The price increases mirror developments in international energy markets. Oil and gas prices have risen since the war on Iran began, particularly because it has disrupted shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most important transit routes for oil and natural gas.
Disruptions to shipping and decreased production by several Gulf states have tightened global supply. As a result, the price of Brent crude, the European benchmark oil, rose to around $84 per barrel on March 5, roughly 16% higher than before the conflict started, and close to its highest level since mid-2024.
Additionally, from a military perspective, Europe knows that its weaponry is not capable of conducting a high-intensity war due to a technical shortfall. At the same time, the EU wants to replace the US as Ukraine’s main benefactor, a corrupt state that drains many of the bloc’s resources.
Another reason for Europeans to remain impartial is the growth of the Muslim population in these countries, which also holds electoral influence and the power to sway domestic policy outcomes. The Muslim population in Europe is quite sizable, and European attacks in the Middle East could face internal opposition. Besides the Muslim community, most European citizens would be largely unwilling to fight for the Americans, especially in a scenario where the US might not achieve its objectives.
Europe uses rhetoric to avoid commitment. In the current context of hostilities in the Middle East, European leaders are not demonstrating a unified stance, even though some rhetorically support Washington and Tel Aviv’s initiatives. However, this behavior indicates a lack of European political cohesion.
London is not following Washington’s lead, something that has not occurred often since the Second World War. Germany is showing support, but lacks the power to act. Spain initially contradicted the White House but then quickly announced that a warship would be deployed to Cyprus in response to threats of sanctions from US President Donald Trump. In other words, Europe is divided and fragmented and therefore cannot act effectively at this moment.
Another obstacle is Iran’s warning that if Europeans join the offensive, there will be a fierce response. Because of this, Washington’s traditional Western allies are becoming mere observers in the region, even though they also have bases near the epicenter of the crisis. European bases are at risk if Europe attacks Iran, and it is a risk they are unwilling to take, besides not wanting to lose money in yet another conflict.
Furthermore, the Europeans are not even trying to mediate the conflict to avoid antagonizing Trump.
A new reconfiguration of the Middle East might happen after this conflict ends. The US could become weaker, which might impact its close ties with Gulf countries. Therefore, Europe might seize the opportunity created by its ally to expand its trade relations.
Nonetheless, Europe is not in a position to cooperate with the US and Israel and is acting opportunistically. They are observing Washington weaken politically in the Middle East, probably aiming to occupy spaces in neighboring countries after this war, because there will be new business opportunities.
In this context, Europe’s struggle to achieve political unity at the continental level is due to differing interests among its governments within the EU, as well as to managing its internal issues. Meanwhile, the bloc’s powers tend to exploit the situation to uphold their rhetoric aligned with Western values, while concealing their military weaknesses.
Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.
Iran Has ‘Broken the Myth’ of Israeli Military Power: Former Pakistani Envoy
Sputnik | March 6, 2026
Iran has effectively “broken the myth” of Israeli military supremacy, Asif Durrani, a former Pakistani ambassador to Iran and the UAE, told in an interview with Sputnik.
Despite decades of investment by the United States and Israel in advanced military technology, Iran successfully penetrated the much-vaunted Iron Dome defense system and struck Israeli installations, Durrani noted.
Durrani also condemned the assassination of Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, describing it as a highly dangerous escalation. He stressed that such a direct attack on the leader of a sovereign state sets a perilous precedent, one that has not been seen in previous global conflicts.
“Regime change should be in the hands of the Iranian people. No other country has the right to exercise that right. In fact, such attempts are likely to lead to further bloodshed and destruction in Iran,” he affirmed.
Durrani pointed out that despite 47 years of US efforts to topple the Islamic Republic since the 1979 revolution, those attempts have consistently failed. He added that there is currently no sign of a viable internal alternative to the existing government.
Commenting on Pakistan’s reminder to Iran of its alliance commitments to Saudi Arabia following Iranian strikes on Saudi territory, Durrani noted that Pakistan and Saudi Arabia share a historically close relationship. They have signed a strategic partnership agreement under which an attack on one is considered an attack on both. Nevertheless, he emphasized that Pakistan maintains a longstanding policy of promoting cooperation among Muslim nations and expects disputes to be resolved peacefully, particularly with regard to the Sunni world.
The former envoy expressed confidence that Iran will provide an explanation for its decision to strike American bases in Saudi Arabia. He noted that it is understood that if a country hosts military bases, those facilities may become legitimate targets in times of war.
“I hope there will be explanations coming from Iran as well as Saudi Arabia,” the diplomat concluded.
The General who swallowed his truth
By Jasim Al-Azzawi | MEMO | March 5, 2026
General Dan Cain, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, delivered a private warning to President Trump with the bluntness that democracies depend upon and empires routinely ignore: “We don’t have enough ammunition to win this war. It would not be pretty.” This was not timidity. This was the solitary act of institutional honesty still flickering inside the corridors of American military power.
Trump’s response was the response of a carnival barker, not a commander-in-chief. On Truth Social — that funhouse mirror of American political life — he swatted away the warning with a salesman’s swagger: “Oh no, no, no. If we do it, it will be easily won.” A sober assessment became a sales pitch. A caution became a lie.
But the greater lie came next. When Cain’s warning leaked, Trump did not merely dismiss it. He inverted it. He told the American public, with the breezy confidence of a man who has never been held accountable for anything, that the general had said the opposite — that the United States had plenty of missiles, plenty of munitions, plenty of everything. “That’s not what he said at all,” Trump declared. He put triumphalist words in the mouth of a man who had spoken warnings.
And General Cain said nothing.
That silence is not a footnote in this story. It is the story. By staying quiet, Cain allowed the American public to absorb a fabrication as truth. He did not say: “No, Mr. President, that is not what I said.” He did not invoke the oath he swore, or the soldiers who would pay with their lives for the gap between political rhetoric and logistical reality. He chose the safety of silence over the danger of truth. In doing so, he did not merely fail himself. He failed the republic.
This is the rot at the core of American militarism.
As the historian Andrew Bacevich has long warned, the professional military has become less a defender of democratic values than a tool of imperial ambition, its senior officers more attentive to their next posting than to the Constitution they swore to uphold.
Cain’s silence was not an aberration. It was a symptom.
The logistics picture Cain reportedly described in private is not theoretical. The math is unforgiving. Current inventories of interceptors and precision munitions cannot sustain a prolonged air campaign against a nation three times the size of Iraq. The Wall Street Journal has documented an “alarming gap” in US missile stockpiles, reporting that reserves “fell significantly short” of requirements for high-intensity, sustained operations. Pentagon contractors have been instructed to “double or even quadruple” production of Patriot interceptors, SM-6s, and precision strike missiles — a tacit admission that the arsenal built for Cold War scenarios is inadequate for the war being prosecuted today.
Consider Gaza. Israel, the most lavishly armed military power in the Middle East, with complete air and sea dominance, has reduced a tiny coastal strip to a moonscape desolation over two and a half years, and still has not broken Hamas. Gaza is thirty-seven kilometres long.
Iran is a nation of ninety million people, mountainous, strategically deep, with hardened infrastructure and a battle-tested Revolutionary Guard. The idea that it collapses under a few weeks of American airstrikes is not a strategy. It is fantasy dressed up as resolve.
“God help us if this continues, if it even reaches its fourth week,” Colonel Daniel Davis warned on the Deep Dive podcast. He was speaking militarily. The same prayer applies politically.
When Trump now floats the prospect of ground troops, he is not escalating from a position of strength. He is improvising from a position of denial. The admission that airpower and missiles alone cannot achieve the political objective is the admission that the original objective was never honestly assessed. This is the pattern of American war-making at the end of empire: grandiose promises, catastrophic miscalculations, and then the slow, terrible reckoning paid in blood by those who never had a seat at the table where the lies were told.
The costs are already accumulating — not merely in the currency of munitions and treasure, but in the currency that empire always spends last and regrets most: credibility. America’s word, already devalued by two decades of manufactured justifications for war, grows cheaper by the day.
Democracies can endure miscalculation. They can endure bad presidents. What they cannot long endure is the institutionalization of a culture in which truth is spoken in whispers behind closed doors and swallowed whole in front of cameras. When the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs permits his own words to be weaponized as propaganda — when the man charged with counting the missiles will not correct the president who pretends there are plenty — something more than military credibility collapses.
What collapses is the social compact between the governed and those who send them to die.
Cain’s silence was not caution. It was complicity. And in the machinery of empire running low on ammunition and low on honesty, complicity is the one resource that never seems to run short.
Because when the missiles finally run out, slogans will not replace them.
Reality will.
Donald Trump Was Installed in Office to Do One Thing
José Niño Unfiltered | March 5, 2026
Long before Donald Trump descended the golden escalator, long before he learned to tell campaign crowds what they wanted to hear about ending endless wars and bringing the troops home, he told the world exactly what he intended to do about Iran. He wrote it down. He published it. And almost nobody bothered to read it.
In his 2011 book Time to Get Tough, Trump laid out his position on Iran’s nuclear program with the subtlety of a sledgehammer. “America’s primary goal with Iran must be to destroy its nuclear ambitions,” Trump wrote. “Let me put them as plainly as I know how. Iran’s nuclear program must be stopped by any and all means necessary. Period. We cannot allow this radical regime to acquire a nuclear weapon that they will either use or hand off to terrorists.”
By any and all means necessary. Those six words should have settled every subsequent debate about Trump’s foreign policy instincts toward Iran. They were not the words of a non-interventionist. They were not the words of a man who believed in restraint, in diplomacy, or in the sovereign right of nations to manage their own affairs without American interference. They were the words of a man who had already decided, more than a decade before he ordered B-2 bombers over Fordow, that Iran’s nuclear program would be destroyed on his watch. Everything that followed was execution.
Tearing Up the Deal
Trump repeatedly condemned the Iran nuclear deal throughout his 2016 campaign, calling it “the worst deal ever” that would lead to “a nuclear holocaust.” Though he occasionally struck a peaceful tone with select audiences, his actual policy toward Iran was one of consistent escalation from the moment he took office. The International Atomic Energy Agency had certified Iran’s compliance with the agreement on at least ten occasions. Trump’s own administration certified Iranian compliance in April and July 2017. None of it mattered at the end of the day.
On May 8, 2018, Trump withdrew the United States from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action and launched what his administration called the “maximum pressure” sanctions campaign. A White House statement announced that the administration would “immediately begin the process of re-imposing sanctions” targeting “critical sectors of Iran’s economy, such as its energy, petrochemical, and financial sectors.” Trump also warned of “severe consequences” for any country that continued doing business with Tehran.
Maximum Pressure, Minimum Restraint
The sanctions that followed ranked among the most severe in modern American history. The White House stated explicitly that the campaign was “intended to bring Iran’s oil exports to zero, denying the regime its principal source of revenue.” The Trump administration steadily widened the scope of the economic siege, targeting Iran’s central bank, space agency, and shipping industry. In June 2019, Trump signed an executive order imposing sanctions on Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei personally, his office, and those closely affiliated with his access to key financial resources. In July 2019, the Treasury sanctioned Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif. By November 2019, the administration had targeted Khamenei’s inner circle of advisers, including his son Mojtaba and the head of Iran’s judiciary.
Between 2018 and 2021, the Trump administration imposed more than 1,500 sanctions designations on Iran and on foreign companies or individuals who did business with Tehran. According to the International Crisis Group, the campaign targeted more than 80 percent of Iran’s economy.
Branding Another Country’s Military a Terrorist Organization
In April 2019, Trump took a step that no previous American president had ever contemplated. He designated Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a Foreign Terrorist Organization, the first time in American history that any branch of a foreign government’s military had received that label.
At the time, Trump bragged about the move in a White House statement that read like a victory lap. “If you are doing business with the IRGC, you will be bankrolling terrorism,” Trump declared. “This designation will be the first time that the United States has ever named a part of another government as an FTO.” He called it an “unprecedented step” and boasted that it would “significantly expand the scope and scale of our maximum pressure on the Iranian regime.”
The timing was notable. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faced national elections the following day. The Soufan Center assessed that the designation appeared designed in part to bolster Netanyahu’s electoral chances. Iran’s Foreign Minister Zarif called it “another misguided election-eve gift to Netanyahu.” The move had little practical effect beyond the sanctions already in place, but it sent an unmistakable signal about whose interests Trump’s Iran policy was designed to serve—world Jewry.
Assassination in Baghdad
The most dramatic escalation of Trump’s first term came on January 3, 2020, when he authorized a drone strike near the Baghdad International Airport that killed Iranian Major General Qasem Soleimani, the commander of the IRGC’s Quds Force, along with Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, deputy commander of Iran-backed militias in Iraq, and several others.
Trump addressed the nation from Mar-a-Lago the following day. “Soleimani was plotting imminent and sinister attacks on American diplomats and military personnel, but we caught him in the act and terminated him,” Trump declared. The claim of an imminent threat became the administration’s central justification. However, reporting from Pepe Escobar found that Soleimani was on a diplomatic mission with Iraqi paramilitary leader Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis.
But the story began to unravel almost immediately. The Trump administration shifted its justifications repeatedly over the following weeks. First Trump said Soleimani was plotting to attack the Baghdad embassy. Then he told Fox News it “would have been four embassies.” Then he tweeted that it “doesn’t really matter” whether the threat was imminent. A UN human rights investigator later concluded that the killing was “unlawful” under international law.
Iran retaliated with missile strikes on American bases in Iraq, leaving more than 100 U.S. soldiers with traumatic brain injuries. The world braced for open war. The killing of Soleimani represented the first known instance of a nation invoking self-defense to justify an attack against a state actor on the territory of a third country. It was a line that no previous administration had dared to cross.
The Generals Who Tried to Stop Him
Even after the Soleimani episode, Trump continued to explore military options for striking Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. According to The New Yorker, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley spent the final months of Trump’s first term in an alarmed effort to prevent the president from launching a strike on Iranian interests that could ignite a full-scale war.
Trump had a circle of Iran hawks around him and remained close with Netanyahu, who continued to push for military action against Iran even after it became clear that Trump had lost the election. “If you do this, you’re gonna have a f***ing war,” Milley would warn. He began holding daily morning briefings with White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, meetings he referred to as the “land the plane” calls. “Both engines are out, the landing gear are stuck, we’re in an emergency situation,” Milley told his staff. “Our job is to land this plane safely and to do a peaceful transfer of power the 20th of January.”
On January 3, 2021, Trump convened one final Oval Office meeting on Iran, asking his advisers about reports from the International Atomic Energy Agency on Iran’s nuclear activities. It was the last time Milley spoke with Trump as president. The generals had managed to prevent the strike, but only barely, and only because the clock ran out.
Finishing What He Started
When Trump returned to office, there were no generals left to stop him. In February 2025, he signed a presidential memorandum reimposing “maximum pressure” and directing his Treasury and State Departments to implement a campaign aimed at “driving Iran’s oil exports to zero.” He sat beside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as he signed it. He told reporters, “With me, it’s very simple. Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.”
According to The Wall Street Journal, Trump informed senior aides that he had “approved of attack plans for Iran” but was “holding off on giving the final order to see if Tehran will abandon its nuclear program.” The offer was never serious. American military assets, including carrier strike groups, bombers, and fighter jets, were moved into strategic positions across the region.
In June 2025, Trump ordered Operation Midnight Hammer, the first direct American military strike on Iranian soil. B-2 stealth bombers dropped bunker-buster bombs on the Fordow and Natanz nuclear facilities, while a submarine launched Tomahawk cruise missiles at Isfahan. Trump declared on Truth Social that the strikes had “completely and totally obliterated” Iran’s nuclear sites, including the deeply buried Fordow facility. “Nobody thought we’d go after that site, because everybody said, ‘that site is impenetrable,’” Trump boasted to Fox News.
But the intelligence agencies told a different story. A preliminary report from the Defense Intelligence Agency suggested that the strikes inflicted only limited damage, potentially setting back Iran’s nuclear program by months rather than years. IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi told CBS News that Iran could resume uranium enrichment “in a matter of months.” “Frankly speaking, one cannot claim that everything has disappeared and there is nothing there,” Grossi warned. Iran remained, in his assessment, “a very sophisticated country in terms of nuclear technology.”
Then came February 28, 2026. Operation Epic Fury. The joint American and Israeli assault that killed Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, decimated the IRGC, and spread the conflict across the entire Persian Gulf. The culmination of everything Trump had promised over the course of 15 years.
Trump’s relentless hostility toward Iran is the predictable culmination of a career built upon deep integration with the most influential elements of American Jewry. These associations provided the capital and connectivity required for his ascent, inevitably shaping his worldview to prioritize their geopolitical ambitions. Consequently, Trump has functioned as the ideal vessel for those who seek to turn Old Testament fantasies into reality through American military might.
This pattern reveals that contemporary populism—and its Zio-populist offshoots across the pond—acts merely as a Trojan horse for Zionist interests. By exploiting rhetoric concerning immigration, race relations, and economic nationalism, these movements successfully capture the loyalty of the disaffected, only to redirect their political energy toward the preservation of Jewish supremacy rather than the survival of the European peoples of the West.
Nationalists must recognize these figures as false prophets and instead prioritize the demographic and civilizational continuity of our own nations through a policy of strict realism abroad and nationalism at home.
Featured Video
Houthis Keep Advancing as the Red Sea Crisis Deepens
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Clash of Civilization, Iran Part II
By Jamal Kanj – Intifada-Palestine.com – January 14, 2011
Israel’s survival kit is: perpetuate conflict, insecurity to rationalize collective hate and finally playing victim.
Devoid of conflict, Israel implodes internally; without hate, Zionism loses its justification; and playing eternal victim to continue blackmailing the West. Absence of this holy trinity, Israel ceases to exist. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Macgregor: We Haven’t Seen the Worst of the Iran War Yet
- ‘We are not like everyone else’ laws that bind other nations do not apply to Israel, says Likud lawmaker
- Report: Saudi Arabia seeks allies’ assistance as missiles deplete amid war on Yemen
- Fuel Crisis Deepens: Pakistan Warns Tanker Attack in Red Sea Would Be an ‘Act of War’
- ‘Bucha massacre’ a false flag orchestrated by UK – Moscow
- China Rejects Outside Pressure on Trade Ties After New US Russia Sanctions Bill
- Houthis Keep Advancing as the Red Sea Crisis Deepens
- Iran spent $1 million to wipe out $30 billion in data center plans, and take down Amazon in the ME
- Zionist billionaire pressure to silence Macklemore sparks exodus from Ed Sheeran tour
- House Votes to End Iran War for Third Time
- If Americans Knew
- Biden’s Genocide Accomplices Targeted by New Accountability Campaign
- AIPAC’s Network Has Already Spent $67.2 Million to Shape the Midterm Elections
- Jewish Supremacist Manufacturing a Civilizational Threat to License Bigotry
- US bans Palestinian president from speaking at the UN
- Israeli Forces Detain Journalist Alaa al-Rimawi amid Widespread West Bank Raids
- Even a pro-Israel Congress member has put a hold on 40,000 one-ton bombs to Israel
- As Gaza crumbles, Israel preps new ground invasion – Daily Update
- ‘We are not like everyone else’ laws that bind other nations do not apply to Israel, says Likud lawmaker
- Trump’s govt makes ‘treasonous’ claim of weapons shortages
- Palestinian-American Journalist Naqaa Hamed Imprisoned by Israeli Forces After Settlers Targeted Her
- No Tricks Zone
- New Study: ‘Global Drought Shows No Detectable Recent Acceleration Under Climate Warming’
- Economic Masterminds: German Socialists Suggest Taxing Productivity Gains Stemming From Using AI
- The South China Sea Has Not Been Cooperating With The Climate Change Narrative
- Energy Crisis: Germany Enters Heating Season With Historically Low Gas Reserve Fill Levels
- New Study: The Antarctic Ice Sheet Gained Mass From 2020-2024 Due To Staggering Snow And Ice Accumulation
- Study: Ocean Heating Rates From Thousands Of Years Ago ‘Dwarf’ Modern Ocean Heating Rates
- Climate Extremists Target, Attack Large-Scale Power Grid Infrastructure In Germany!
- New Study: Antarctic Ice Melt Has Contributed Less Than 1 Centimeter To Sea Level Rise In The Last 30 Years
- Fear Of Debate: Alarmist German Climate Scientist Calls On Mainstream Media To Discredit Skeptic Voices
- End-Of-August Arctic Sea Ice Extent Hasn’t Fallen In 20 Years, Official Data Show!
Aletho News 