WHY IRAN’s NOT STRIKING ISRAEL /Prof Seyed Marandi in Tehran
Daniel Davis / Deep Dive – July 23, 2026
By Robert Inlakesh | Al Mayadeen | July 24, 2026
While the US president continues to lie to his people about imagined victories over Iran in West Asia, the arguments fall flat amongst the vast majority of Americans who see through his tired rhetoric. Unlike past military blunders, Washington has not and will not be able to pull the wool over its people’s eyes.
Some analysts have attempted to compare Donald Trump’s failure to effectively combat Iran with defeats and strategic mistakes that ruined the reputations of past presidents; this one is very different.
To go through all US wars of aggression is simply too steep a task to take on in a single article, but there are a few different comparisons that are going around which deserve to be analyzed: they are the Iraq War, the Vietnam War, and even Operation Eagle Claw.
All the above-noted comparisons are very much different in their nature from the large-scale air campaign, turned stop-start battles that the Trump administration has engaged in. If we first look at the Vietnam War comparison, this is often said as a figure of speech – “it is so and so’s Vietnam” – which is the way in which some analysts have chosen to apply Vietnam to what we see today.
Although there is something to be said about how the US is being bogged down in the Iran War, it is a totally different ball game to what occurred in Vietnam. At the beginning stages of the escalation, in October of 1965, a Gallup poll recorded a 64% public approval rating of US intervention in Vietnam, which by 1970 had shifted to around 55% of the US public stating that they sought a return of the troops.
At the time, the US had sold its population the need to fight Communism and that the Vietnam War was necessary, as the fall of South Vietnam to a Communist government would lead to a slippery slope whereby governments across Asia would fall to the ideology. The Communist boogeyman captured the imaginations of those living in the West, who opposed the Soviet Union and Chairman Mao’s China.
In Trump’s case, the approval rating for the Iran war was never there. Ipsos polling data from the beginning of the war suggested that 58% of Americans opposed a war with Iran, with only 38% expressing approval. Two weeks into the conflict, Pew Research polling data then revealed that 61% of the country disapproved of the war. Now, even Trump’s own cult-like fan base is turning on the war, with Politico polling data suggesting that little more than a third of MAGA supporters believe the economic costs of the Iran war have been worth it.
In the Vietnam War case, public opinion at its worst was more favourable than it was at the beginning of the war on Iran. When it came to the disastrous 2003 Iraq invasion, a Gallup News poll recorded a 72% approval rating for the war, with only 25% of Americans opposing it.
Then there is the comparison with Operation Eagle Claw, which refers to the disastrous mission that was ordered by former US President Jimmy Carter – aimed at seizing back American citizens held by the Islamic Republic at the time. The reference is now being made to Jimmy Carter and his failed operation, resulting in the deaths of 8 US service members, because of President Trump’s own comments about the Carter administration.
In the event of a ground invasion that seeks to seize Iranian territory – Kharg Island being the most publicly discussed target to occupy – the US president will almost inevitably be in a position where a number of American soldiers could be captured.
All of the above-noted cases have a shared difference that separates them from what the Trump administration is doing today, that being that they were not operations launched solely for a foreign country’s interests.
Although the Israelis certainly played a role in pushing the US toward launching the Iraq War, it was a conflict that did assert Washington’s dominance over the region, further bringing the Arab Gulf States under their control, and was evidently winnable. The consequences of the invasion were not immediate; the American public believed in the new “Islamic enemy” that had replaced the Red Scare narrative sold to populations across the collective West during the Cold War.
The Vietnam War also had the Gulf of Tonkin incident false flag that helped justify the war, while Iraq had the September 11 attacks. The Iran War didn’t even bother to use any incident as an excuse; it was rushed and sloppy.
This time, Iran has managed to use the closure of the Strait of Hormuz as leverage against the US, while Yemen’s Ansar Allah is now tightening the noose by imposing a counter-blockade on Saudi Arabia in the Red Sea. If the Yemeni Armed Forces choose to do so, they can totally block the Bab al-Mandab Strait also, choking off two of the world’s most important trade routes. Iran has demonstrated its ability to continuously pound US military bases and embarrass the US Navy’s attempts to coordinate the passage of ships out of the Gulf.
The US’ military industrial complex is also getting slapped around, as Iran has managed to shoot down at least one F-15 fighter jet, even locking on and striking an F-35 that was forced to do an emergency landing.
US allies in the Gulf, which have pledged to invest trillions in the American economy, are taking an economic beating, with the possibility that some could even be rendered uninhabitable if the war escalates. From power projection to the sale of weapons, seizure of resources, and an image of victory, there is nothing to gain.
Only the Israelis are set to gain anything from this deeply unpopular war. They seek to use the United States military to do their dirty work of degrading Iranian infrastructure and dealing an economic blow to the Islamic Republic. This is because Tel Aviv understands that the job cannot be performed by them alone and that as long as they can take the punishment dished out against them, they are willing to continue using the Trump administration to do their bidding.
Never before has a war of this nature been fought by the United States, where it loses in every category, with the conflict being fought solely for the purpose of fulfilling the expansionist desires of a foreign rogue regime. Donald Trump is not Jimmy Carter or George Bush Jr.; he will be remembered as the president who launched an offensive war of aggression on behalf of a genocidal regime that couldn’t care less how the US and the rest of the world are impacted, as long as they continue to get propped up to forward their goals of creating a regional empire premised on a supremacist ideology.
By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | July 24, 2026
The excitement over the US-Saudi nuclear deal has proved to be short-lived. Apparently, the US President Donald Trump himself poured cold water into it by adding a caveat on Thursday that in order for the deal to be advanced, Saudi Arabia must first join the Abraham Accords. That is, as things stand, may seem like asking for the moon.
However, it’s all but certain that Trump allowed the Saudi deal to be signed after consulting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as a last throw of dice to pin down Saudi Arabia as a participant / collaborator alongside Israel (and the UAE) for an all-out war against Iran that might at some point entail ground operations, which is not possible without first getting Riyadh on his side firmly, irrevocably.
If Saudi Arabia dissociates from Tump’s upcoming war and disallows the US to use the Saudi bases or work out the logistics accordingly, Pentagon generals will be hard-pressed to conduct the war. In political terms too, the Saudi stance will influence other regional oligarchies in the Persian Gulf in their own attitudes towards Iran, which is astride the Arab street like a colossus. The timing of the July 15 meeting of Trump with the visit of the pro-American prime minister of Iraq Ali al-Zaidi also needs to be factored in here. Simply put, Iraq has become a frontline in the US-Iran conflict.
Saudis won’t like the prospect of Iran emerging as a towering regional power. On its part, Iran is also closely watching the Saudi mood swings stemming out of its compulsions not to annoy Trump who is in a position to to play a helpful role in the event of the succession issue coming to the fore in Riyadh at any time. Of course, this is apart from the profound petrodollar linkages critical to both protagonists.
Meanwhile, the recent Pakistani advisory to Tehran to steer clear of targeting Saudi Arabia, the Houthi threat to Saudi Arabia and the potential closure of Strait of Bab el-Mandeb are tell-tale signs of latent tensions between Tehran and Riyadh, although both sides are maintaining a semblance of normalcy.
Most certainly, Trump’s remark on Thursday making the nuclear deal conditional on the Saudis normalising relations with Israel has thrown the deal as such into question barely 24 hours after it was signed. Is it a U-turn or is the episode just another confusing rollout that has become the trademark of Trump’s presidency? The truth could be somewhere in between.
According to an AP report, the White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters in a briefing yesterday that Trump has said if the Saudis don’t join the Abraham Accords, “the deal is off.” When asked why the condition wasn’t mentioned Wednesday when the Energy Department announced that the deal was signed, Leavitt said it was because Trump “is always the final dealmaker.”
My own reading is that Trump is backtracking according to a script. He could have taken credit for the condition on Abraham Accords, had it been a part of the deal. But it is within his ingenuity to try to increase his leverage with the Saudis by adding the caveat openly: that might even improve the deal in certain respects such as enrichment or verification clauses, for instance.
The Saudis appear to have been taken by surprise on Wednesday when US Energy Secretary Chris Wright signed the decades-long, multibillion-dollar deal with his Saudi counterpart, Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman, Saudi Arabia’s Minister of Energy but that doesn’t have to be taken at face value. The deal reportedly includes a “123 Agreement” and an accompanying “bilateral safeguards agreement,” and the two agreed to a two-year study to see whether enrichment is necessary. This seems like kicking the can down the road. Interestingly, Netanyahu’s office said Saudis joining of the Abraham Accords “would be an historic leap forward for peace in the Middle East.”
On the whole, Trump has a deal here. The caveat of Abraham Accords may serve to delay the agreement from coming to fruition unless and until the Saudis jettison their bottomline [a Palestinian state] linking normalisation with Israel. On the other hand, Trump has the leverage insofar as the Saudis now have to address whether they want to normalise relations with Israel.
Indeed, the Saudis too are getting an optimal deal here, which doesn’t expressly block reprocessing and enrichment and doesn’t allow for the International Atomic Energy Agency to do its inspections. The Saudis have apparently got away with not having a customary additional protocol, which would have ensured there is no cheating, and it will stay a peaceful programme. On Truth Social, Trump maintained on Thursday that “there will be no enrichment of material,” but added that the US is “not opposed to Civil (Non-Enriched) Nuclear Facilities.” Conceivably, the US may have control of a Saudi enrichment facility and keep a military / security presence.
The Congress will be able to review the deal in a 90-day window. Lawmakers do not need to approve it, but they could oppose it, although that is unlikely. (See a Congressional Research Report Prospects for U.S.-Saudi Nuclear Energy Cooperation, March 11, 2026) All in all, the chances are of the agreement “staying in place and nothing substantive happening until Saudis agree to something” regarding Israel, as [per] Bryan Clark, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, an influential pro-Trump DC-based think tank.
The most bizarre coincidence of the entire sequence of developments since Wednesday is the shadow this deal could potentially cast on the US-Iran agreement that is on the horizon. But that is only hypothetical. If Trump intends to launch an all-out war with Iran, there will be no more negotiations to be had on a nuclear deal.
Saudis, being stakeholders, may no longer resist Trump’s entreaties to collaborate with the war effort going forward, whose objective would be to destroy Iran comprehensively with all the military might at Washington’s command. The Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has said in the past that if Iran obtained a nuclear weapon, the kingdom would have to follow suit.
In such a scenario, there will be no conceivable reason for Israel at the present juncture to try to kill the US-Saudi deal that is struggling to be born.
Al Mayadeen | July 24, 2026
Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IRGC) announced on Friday that its forces have destroyed the remaining building of an Amazon company data center and a large ammunition depot at a US base, as part of ongoing operations against American military assets in the region.
In a statement, the IRGC said its fighters, in the 27th wave of Operation Nasr 2, targeted the remaining structure of an Amazon data center, which plays a primary role in completing intelligence for the US military.
“The fighters of Islam, in the 27th wave of Operation Nasr 2, in completion of their previous operation against the data intelligence center of the American company Amazon, which plays the main role in completing the intelligence of the US child-killing army, targeted and destroyed the remaining building of this center,” the IRGC said in a statement.
The IRGC added that “punitive operations” by its fighters are continuing.
Heavy drones strike Ali al-Salem Base
In a separate statement, the IRGC reported that its forces targeted a US base in the region. The statement said that one hour earlier, also as part of the 27th wave of Operation Nasr 2, fighters launched ultra-heavy and advanced destructive drones to target a very large ammunition depot at the US base of Ali Al-Salem.
“A very large ammunition depot in the Ali Al-Salem US base was targeted and completely destroyed with successive explosions,” the IRGC said.
The statement added that barracks housing personnel at the same base were also attacked, with six large structures destroyed and three others sustaining significant damage, while several troops were killed and wounded in the strikes.
US hiding true casualties
Regarding US casualty figures, the IRGC stated that the American military has suffered hundreds of deaths and a significantly higher number of wounded during the five-month war. The statement said the daily evacuation of large numbers of wounded via ambulance aircraft to an American hospital in Germany is clear evidence of high casualties.
The US military, which has suffered hundreds of fatalities and many more wounded during the past five months of the war, is lying to its own people by claiming it has sustained fewer than 20 deaths.
The IRGC cited the daily evacuation of large numbers of wounded by medical evacuation aircraft to a US hospital in Germany as clear evidence of the scale of its casualties.
It is the responsibility of the American media to investigate the realities of this war, the heavy casualties suffered by the US military, the extensive damage it has incurred, and the true financial costs that have been concealed from the public, the IRGC’s statement read. It added that the media outlets are responsible for exposing the real figures and the methods of censorship employed by the “deceptive rulers”.
US attacks 16 cities in Iran in 13th consecutive night of aggression
The United States launched a new wave of attacks on Iran, marking the 13th consecutive night of US attacks, according to US Central Command (CENTCOM). The campaign, which Washington said aims to target Iranian military capabilities and threats to commercial shipping, began at 6:45 pm Eastern Time.
Iranian media reported explosions in multiple locations throughout the country. Local officials confirmed strikes in Bandar Abbas, Jask Port, Konarak Port, Ahvaz, Omidiyeh, Andimeshk, Khorramabad, Anarak, Nain, Borujerd, Taft, Shirkuh, Firuzabad, near Khondab in Markazi Province, and on Qeshm Island. Al Mayadeen’s correspondent reported that the US attacked 16 Iranian cities in total.
In Hormozgan Province, the deputy governor for political and security affairs said several civilians were injured during the attack on Bandar Abbas Port. IRNA reported power outages affecting parts of the port following the strikes, with provincial emergency officials later stating electricity would be restored within an hour. Iranian state television reported that air defenses were activated in Tehran as explosions were heard elsewhere.
The Khuzestan Province Council reported that four people were killed and five others were injured in attacks targeting the vicinity of Ahvaz.
Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IRGC) announced that its forces intercepted and destroyed a US Tomahawk cruise missile over Kahnuj in Kerman Province. According to Fars News Agency, the IRGC commander in Kahnuj said the missile was detected and destroyed while still in the city’s airspace.
Daniel Davis / Deep Dive – July 23, 2026
Daniel Davis / Deep Dive – July 23, 2026
Press TV – July 22, 2026
A senior Iranian military source has warned that any attack by the United States on Iranian bridges or power plants will face a devastating response targeting multiple infrastructure and energy facilities across the region where America has interests.
The warning came after US President Donald Trump threatened to destroy one Iranian bridge or power plant for each Iranian attack on a ship in the Strait of Hormuz.
“From this point forward, any time the Islamic Republic of Iran shoots at a ship in the Strait of Hormuz, whether it be by Missile, Rocket, Drone, or any other device or weapon, the United States will bomb and destroy ONE BRIDGE OR POWER PLANT,” Trump wrote on social media.
In response, the Iranian military source told Tasnim News Agency that Tehran has an “iron will” in exercising its sovereignty over the strategic waterway and will never allow the Strait to once again become a threat against Iran.
The military source said vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz will only be safe if they coordinate with Iran and operate under Iran’s arrangements.
“If the Americans target a bridge or power plant in Iran, Iran will in turn strike infrastructure and bridges in the region, including energy facilities in which America has interests.”
The source said the Americans should have become fully convinced over the past ten days that Iran can strike wherever it deems necessary, warning that any gamble by Trump would once again lead to his humiliation.
Trump escalates threats as war costs mount
Trump’s latest threat came as the war enters its fifth month, with the Pentagon confirming that the conflict has already cost Washington $37.5 billion.
The United States has launched 11 consecutive nights of strikes against Iran, targeting military sites to “further degrade Iran’s ability to threaten commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz.”
Fighting over the Strait has led to the collapse of a preliminary deal between the United States and Iran, and Tehran has re-imposed its blockade on the strategic waterway for oil and gas shipments, firing on vessels that seek to transit without coordination.
The blockade has rattled markets and sent oil prices climbing, adding to the pressure on Trump to find an off-ramp to a war that has hit Americans’ pocketbooks heading into closely-fought midterm elections.
Brent Crude, the global benchmark, briefly topped $95 a barrel for the first time in six weeks on Wednesday.
Despite the pressure, Trump has so far resisted calls for a swift end to the war.
“We’re not finished at all… we’re not leaving right now,” he said on Tuesday.
The threats came as Tehran continued offensive operations against American assets in the US-allied Persian Gulf states.
The Iranian military said it targeted assets in Kuwait and Bahrain, including air defence systems, radar installations and administrative buildings. Iran’s IRGC also said it had targeted US bases in Jordan.
By Elfadil Ibrahim | Responsible Statecraft | July 22, 2026
Four weeks ago, Pakistan looked like one of the biggest winners of the U.S.-Iran war.
Its army chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir, shuttled between Washington, Tehran and Gulf capitals for months. As part of his efforts, Pakistan hosted the first face-to-face U.S.-Iran talks in years and helped broker the Islamabad memorandum of understanding that Vice President JD Vance signed in June, thanking Munir and calling him one of the “very, very important people” in his life.
Islamabad hired a Washington lobbying firm to convert that goodwill into defense cooperation and minerals investment, and Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif spoke of a “sun of progress and prosperity” for Pakistan’s chronically stressed economy after the MoU between the U.S.and Iran brought an end to major military operations.
Pakistan’s fortunes have since reversed. Fighting between Washington and Tehran has resumed, and Islamabad’s dual goals of being Iran’s trusted interlocutor and the Arab Gulf states’ security guarantor are once again at odds.
President Donald Trump declared the deal was “over” in early July, after which the U.S. struck civilian and military targets in Iran. Iran, for its part, declared on July 18 through its deputy foreign minister, Kazem Gharibabadi, that it was “suspending all obligations” under the framework. The war has since widened into exactly the kind of multi-front regional conflict Pakistan spent the spring trying to prevent.
The clearest new exposure for Pakistan is in Saudi Arabia, where Iran struck Prince Sultan Air Base at al-Kharj — its first direct hit on Saudi territory since March — just days after the Houthis, Iran’s Yemeni ally, fired missiles on the kingdom, hitting Abha airport in the country’s south. That escalation occurred after Saudi-allied forces hit Sanaa airport in Yemen to prevent the landing of an Iranian airliner; the U.S. Treasury alleged without providing evidence that the plane is linked to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corp. The strikes effectively enforced Riyadh’s airspace veto over the Houthi-controlled capital.
Pakistan signed a mutual defense pact with Riyadh last year. It deployed fighter jets and thousands of troops to the kingdom after earlier Iranian strikes on Saudi energy infrastructure. More recently, Islamabad has reportedly communicated to Tehran directly that attacks on Saudi Arabia will be treated as attacks on Pakistan itself. Sharif’s own statement in the aftermath called the Houthi strikes on Saudi Arabia a violation of the kingdom’s sovereignty that Pakistan “strongly condemns,” pledging “unwavering support” for Riyadh’s security.
The tone is notable given that Pakistan’s parliament explicitly refused to get entangled in Yemen over a decade ago. In April 2015, faced with a nearly identical Saudi request to join the Saudi-led coalition against the Houthis, Pakistan’s National Assembly voted unanimously to “maintain neutrality.” Islamabad’s calculus has not changed. If anything, recent events have sharpened Pakistan’s desire to broker a lasting peace.
Pakistan is home to the world’s second-largest Shia population after Iran, and the killing of Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, in February set off deadly unrest in Karachi and Islamabad; Munir himself had to intervene to calm a wave of processions and pledges of allegiance to the new supreme leader across Shia neighborhoods.
Significantly, Munir and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif attended Khamenei’s funeral in July, and Sharif posted after that “the late Supreme Leader’s wisdom, leadership and profound influence on Iran and the wider region will be remembered for generations” — a demonstration of the fine line Pakistan’s leadership has to walk, one no doubt delivered with a domestic audience in mind as much as an Iranian one.
That fine line becomes impossible to walk when a defense pact, triggered by Saudi-Houthi fighting or by further Iranian strikes on Saudi Arabia, would ask Pakistan to do the exact thing its parliament explicitly refused a decade ago: take a military side against a Houthi-Iran axis, and do so at a moment when its domestic Shia politics is highly combustible
Kuwait is now reportedly asking for the same kind of commitment that Saudi Arabia already has. Reuters reported last week that Islamabad is in early-stage talks with Kuwait — which has absorbed repeated Iranian strikes on its infrastructure in recent days — over an expanded defense agreement that would include “thousands of Pakistani troops on the ground, fighter jets, drones, an air defence system, and other defence-related facilities,” according to an anonymous Pakistani government official cited in the report.
Another anonymous Pakistani security official said the country “cannot consider a deployment of combat troops at this stage.” That hesitation suggests that stacking multiple defense commitments across Gulf states in Iran’s crosshairs makes Islamabad’s balancing act much harder to sustain. Each new pact narrows the room to claim neutrality the next time Tehran calls.
During this war, Pakistan discovered what happens when Gulf partners doubt its ability to balance between Tehran and the Arab Gulf states. The United Arab Emirates recalled a $3.5 billion loan in April and quietly began deporting Pakistani Shia workers by the thousands. The move was widely read as retaliation for Islamabad’s perceived tilt toward Tehran during the mediation. Saudi Arabia stepped in with $3 billion to cover the gap, but the lesson was clear: Pakistan’s neutrality satisfies no one fully, and the cost of disappointing any single Gulf patron is measured in the billions of dollars.
Economic self-preservation has been Pakistan’s primary motive for steering mediation and ending a war that has hobbled the economies of its creditors and choked the trade routes that power its own electric grid. Pakistan is on its 25th International Monetary Fund program; more than half of its tax revenue is put towards servicing its debts. It had barely stabilized its inflation before the Strait of Hormuz’s closure sent rates back into double digits.
In March, as the war’s first phase disrupted energy flows out of Hormuz, Islamabad ordered a two-week school closure and imposed a four-day work week to conserve fuel — measures the government has now indicated it may need to revive.
A parallel disruption to the Red Sea, like the blockade of Saudi Arabia declared by the Houthis Monday, would be highly disruptive to Pakistan’s energy security, and by extension, its economy. While Pakistan imports the overwhelming majority of its fuel from the Gulf, the closing of another critical chokepoint would simultaneously tighten global tanker capacity and insurance costs everywhere, pushing the same spot-market prices Pakistan is already struggling to afford even higher.
It would also add further pressure on Pakistan’s defense commitments to Saudi Arabia, given that Riyadh will not tolerate such a closure. In a recent statement, Riyadh pledged to deal with “Houthi threats against transiting vessels… firmly and swiftly.” The stakes for Saudi Arabia are high: Since the Strait of Hormuz was blocked, Saudi Arabia has relied on its East-West pipeline to divert roughly 5 million barrels per day of crude to the Red Sea Port of Yanbu — its only viable export outlet while Hormuz is all but closed.
None of this means Pakistan’s mediation was a mistake, or that its diplomatic capital has evaporated. Kuwait’s foreign minister still thanked Pakistan last week for its “constructive and mediatory role,” and Islamabad remains one of the few channels through which Washington and Tehran would resume talks, when the time comes. But the specific bet Pakistan made — that ending the war would allow it to bank the goodwill through commerce and financial aid — has not yet paid off.
Instead, the restart of the war has brought Saudi Arabia back into Iran’s crosshairs. At the same time, the Saudi-Houthi front has reopened, the Strait of Hormuz has been closed again, and a blockade of Saudi-linked ships on the Red Sea has been formally declared.
Each of these factors adds immense pressure on Pakistan, which now has every reason to double down on diplomacy, lest it be drawn in as a combatant.
Elfadil Ibrahim is a writer and analyst covering the politics of the Middle East and Africa, with a special focus on Sudan. His work has been featured in The Guardian, Al Jazeera, The New Arab, Open Democracy and other outlets.
By Martin Jay | Strategic Culture Foundation | July 22, 2026
The coming days and weeks will see Trump lower himself in the acid bath of what analysts call the ‘escalation trap’. Many analysts comment that he has already fallen on his sword in the Iran war, as his fantasy of bringing Tehran to its knees – served up by Israel’s PM Netanyahu – has proved to be the greatest deception in U.S.-Israeli relations since the birth of the entity in 1948. He has, to many, lost the war, which was really the essence of him signing the MOU on June 17th, agreeing in principle to all of the points of unconditional surrender, making Iran a bigger, bolder regional power which now controls the Straits of Hormuz and is revered by the GCC elites like never before.
Yet his own lack of diplomatic verve both with Western leaders, NATO and above all Benjamin Netanyahu made his signature worthless, and his only recourse was to continue the war, to at least make it look like he is still relevant.
But this gambit, which is foolish on so many levels – not least of all because the U.S. is very low on military hardware used up between February 28th and April 7th – is more reckless than he understands and will soon destroy him.
Just recently, GCC countries’ elites frantically called him to tell him to stop bombing Iran’s civilian infrastructure, as, unbeknown to him, the capability of Iran to completely wipe off the surface of the map the same infrastructure in the Gulf countries is within arms’ reach. It is one thing to have your U.S. air base bombed, but quite another for your schools, hospitals, bridges, power plants and water facilities to be blown up with a handful of hypersonic missiles. And it is hard to imagine how those elites would rebuild their countries if Iran chose to retaliate in such a fashion.
The call seems to have done the job. But Trump is a mercurial man-child who understands little and only cares about nursing his ego, and so there is no telling what he might do in the future if pushed, or if he simply fails to take the warning seriously.
And yet, whichever route he chooses, it all ends badly for him, and the Iranians are taking the time to remove entirely the U.S. presence in the region. If Trump persists in hitting their infrastructure, one move which Iran is mulling is destroying the oil shipments presently coming out of the UAE and Saudi Arabia outside of the Persian Gulf – in other words, oil which the Saudis send via pipeline to the Red Sea and oil which is sent to Fujairah port, currently being expanded. The 7 million barrels of oil each day which together these two countries export could easily be stopped by Iran, and so it is hard to see what strategy Trump thinks he has with his bombing, other than he believes that this will soften the Iranians up for coming back to the MOU.
What Trump doesn’t understand is that the hardliners in the Iranian government never believed he was serious about the MOU and saw it as a ruse to buy time before continuing with a bombing campaign. Now that they have been proved right, any return to an MOU will be much harder on Trump, as the demands from Tehran will be higher than the first time around.
Top of that list will be Lebanon, and this is where Trump’s problems start, as the position that he will be in if an MOU 2.0 is put together will be very weak, while Netanyahu’s will be very strong. Bibi is never going to pull Israel’s troops out of Lebanon, and so a peace deal will be impossible, leading Trump to only one recourse: the mother of all maddest ideas, which is the land invasion of Iran – which he might be thinking about around November when the weather is cooler. But the U.S. doesn’t have either the number of men required, the stockpile of weapons, or even, frankly, the competence to carry out such a remarkably risky venture. The casualties would be incredibly high, and Trump would go down in history as the egghead U.S. president who fell into Israel’s trap and got the ultimate lesson from Iran. The humiliation Jimmy Carter had to endure after a failed rescue mission of U.S. embassy workers in Iran in 1980 will pale into insignificance in comparison to what the Iranians have lined up for Trump.
Trump’s problem is credibility. No world leaders respect him nor trust him, and this is a major factor now with the Iranians, who simply consider Trump to be a clown at best or a dangerous, insecure child at worst – ready to burn the family house down just to get the attention that he craves. Nothing he says is taken seriously, as Tehran knows all along that Trump is always creating distractions while he is listening to his generals’ latest crackpot ideas about invasion. While Trump panics, Iran moves at a painfully slow, measured pace – confident about itself, its history and its destiny. Iran thinks long term and about how the world will judge it, also keeping in mind negotiating with the next U.S. administration. As an ancient civilisation, they are used to thinking in terms of decades and centuries. Trump only thinks about this week’s coverage in the Wall Street Journal or New York Times. His gate-crashing of the World Cup and having the president of FIFA actually manhandle him out of the Spanish team’s photo shoot must have been very embarrassing for many Americans.
Sputnik – 21.07.2026
Any threat to the Kingdom’s stability is a threat to Pakistan’s strategic and economic interests, experts stress.
Pakistan is grappling with the potential fallout from a Houthi threat to blockade Saudi Arabia’s Red Sea coast, a development that could activate one of the region’s most consequential defense agreements.
“For Pakistan, the implications are direct and serious,” Abdullah Khan, director of the Pakistan Institute for Conflict and Security Studies, tells Sputnik.
The reason is a binding defense pact signed in September 2025. Under its terms, an attack on Saudi Arabia is treated as an attack on Pakistan and vice versa.
“Pakistan’s interest lies in preventing further escalation through restraint and diplomacy while remaining fully committed to Saudi Arabia’s security under the mutual defense framework. Any threat to the Kingdom’s stability is a threat to Pakistan’s strategic and economic interests,” Khan stresses.
The Houthi threat is no bluff, according to Khan. They possess ballistic missiles, long-range drones, and explosive-laden unmanned boats. They have already hit Saudi oil facilities and struck commercial ships in the Red Sea. Their capabilities allow them to choke energy exports, spike insurance costs, and force billions in defensive spending – a reality that extends far beyond Yemen’s borders.
The economic consequences for Pakistan could be severe also, Ali Ehsan, an economic policy analyst, warns. With Bab el-Mandeb now under threat, Pakistan loses its alternative route for Saudi oil shipments. That means higher petrol and electricity prices, disrupted textile exports to Europe, and mounting pressure on an already fragile economy.
“Pakistan’s trade with Europe, which is an export market, will get highly affected by this situation and Pakistan’s economy will come under more pressure,” Ehsan says.

By Larry C. Johnson | SONAR21 | July 21, 2026
Tehran delivered to Washington via Pakistan in early April, a formalized demand for the withdrawal of US combat forces from military bases across the region. It sat in a package alongside the lifting of all sanctions and UN resolutions, the release of Iranian assets held overseas, reparations, and Iran’s right to nuclear enrichment.
Instead of waiting for the US to agree to the demand, Iran has launched targeted attacks during the past two weeks on key US bases in Kuwait, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. This has produced a de facto evacuation of US forces and equipment from most of these bases. The US Navy’s Fifth Fleet Headquarters in Bahrain is in shambles; the Combined Air Operations Center (CAOC) at Al Udeid in Qatar has been closed and moved to Shaw Air Force Base in South Carolina. And Iran continues to pound bases in Bahrain, Kuwait and Qatar to ensure that no US aircraft or missile launchers remain intact at those locations.
Besides the bases in the Persian Gulf nations, Iran also has pummeled the Muwaffaq Salti Airbase and the Prince Hassan Airbase in Jordan. There are grainy satellite images showing that the United States has removed all aircraft from the open-air parking lot at the Muwaffaq al-Salti airbase, fearing that they would be destroyed by Iranian missiles.
The US also has relocated the $250 million MQ-4C Triton. In early May 2026, the US dispatched the MQ-4C Triton drone to Jordan:
The second US Navy MQ-4C Triton (reg. 169804) drone has yesterday departed from Naval Air Station Sigonella and relocated to Al Hussein Air Base in Jordan, further reducing the US Navy’s high-altitude ISR presence in Sicily. The aircraft involved is the Triton that had arrived in recent weeks to replace the drone lost in the Gulf area during operations linked to the regional crisis. . . .
The MQ-4C Triton is one of the US Navy’s most important intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance assets, designed for long-endurance maritime monitoring over vast operational theaters. From Sigonella, the platform has regularly supported surveillance missions across the Mediterranean, Black Sea, North Africa and the Middle East.
Relocating both surviving Tritons to Jordan suggests a clear operational reprioritization. By operating from Al Hussein, the drones gain shorter transit times toward the Red Sea, Arabian Peninsula, Iraq and Iran-related operational areas, allowing longer on-station persistence and more responsive ISR coverage during a period of continued regional instability.
Following massive missile strikes by Iran on 11 and 12 July on Jordan’s two airbases hosting US combat aircraft, including the MQ-4C Triton, the US pulled the plug on keeping the Triton in Jordan. Defense Security Asia reported on Monday, 14 July 2026 that:
The Pentagon Pulls $240M Triton Drone from Jordan to Italy After Devastating Iranian Ballistic Missile Strikes Threaten Strategic Airfields . . . . According to regional military planners, the strategic redeployment of the multi-million dollar maritime surveillance platform from forward-deployed hubs in Jordan to permanent facilities in Italy reflects an urgent effort to mitigate severe attrition risks.
The repositioning directly follows a series of sophisticated adversarial long-range strikes that successfully breached localized air defense networks and targeted high-value infrastructure. Open-source intelligence analysts observed that specialized hangar facilities designed to shield premium unmanned platforms sustained direct impacts during these intense bombardments.
In response to these escalating kinetic vectors, the United States Navy chose to pull back its premier intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance assets to the safer sanctuary of southern Europe.
During the first 43 days of the 2026 Iran war (Operation Epic Fury, beginning 28 February), Iran systematically targeted the sensor and communications layer of the US military’s integrated air defense architecture across the Persian Gulf. Rather than simply overwhelming interceptors with mass drone and missile barrages, Iran prioritized destroying the radars and SATCOM terminals that make the entire network function — a strategy described by analysts as “blinding US eyes in the Middle East.”
By the end of the first 43 days, Iran had hit at least 12–19 radar and SATCOM systems across seven countries, with total damage estimated at $3.15 to $5+ billion. The targeting pattern revealed a sophisticated operational concept:
The destruction forced interception duties onto already-depleted Patriot systems, compounding a crisis that saw the US and GCC allies burn through 86% of their combined Patriot inventory within five weeks.
Now, with the MoU dead, Iran is focused on making life on the bases that are still hosting US troops and aircraft a living hell. It is no longer up to the US to decide to leave the Persian Gulf… Iran is making that decision for them.
By Kevin Barrett | American Free Press | July 20, 2026
Israel has been the world’s worst international outlaw since 1948. That year, the Zionists used terrorism—mass rape and the slaughter of thousands of men, women, and children—to murder or expel 750,000 Palestinians from their homeland. When Palestine’s outraged neighbors tried to protect the Palestinian genocide victims, the Zionists attacked them and blamed them for the violence!
On December 11, 1948, the United Nations passed Resolution 194 ordering Israel to allow surviving genocide victims to return and reclaim their homes and be compensated for their suffering. Israel thumbed its nose at the law, murdering Palestinians who tried to return. Since then it has continued violating Resolution 194 along with dozens of other UN resolutions.
Every year, more and more Palestinian property is stolen by greedy Jewish squatters. Murder and terrorism are their instruments. And woe to anyone who tries to interfere! Rachel Corrie, the brave young American who lay down in front of a Zionist bulldozer in Rafah in 2003, was blithely crushed to death by Israelis who know that in today’s Holocaust-narrative-brainwashed world, Zionist criminals enjoy near-complete impunity. The bulldozer driver was never punished. To this day, Israelis continue to celebrate the murder of Rachel Corrie in myriad ways, including feasting on pancakes bearing her name.
Israel is a fundamentally lawless state. It refuses to even declare official borders, because it is stealing more land and property every single day.
As a world leader in organ trafficking, child trafficking, cybercrimes, false flag terrorism, assassination, blackmail, and other illicit pursuits—and a haven for wanted pedophiles from other nations—Israel is so lawless that many see it as an organized crime hub masquerading as a state. But that kind of extreme lawlessness does not bode well for Israel’s future.
In early July, Netanyahu’s ultra-extremist cabinet announced that it would no longer obey the Israeli Supreme Court. A group of high-tech entrepreneurs critical of Netanyahu had been trying to buy out a media outlet, Channel 13, and the cabinet had blocked the sale. The Supreme Court ordered them to let the sale go through. The Netanyahu regime refused, announcing that it would henceforth flout Supreme Court rulings it disagreed with. The Israeli media is calling it a full-blown “Constitutional crisis.” Is civil war looming?
The Zionist regime’s flagrant disregard for the rule of law was also on full display in its ongoing violations of “ceasefires” in Gaza, Lebanon, and Iran. Every day, Israel exterminates more Palestinian civilians, despite the Trump-brokered “ceasefire” that went into effect last October. And it continues to occupy Lebanon, slaughter Lebanese people, and genocidally destroy entire Lebanese towns and neighborhoods, in blatant violation of the ceasefire imposed by the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between Trump and Iran.
The MOU’s very first provision states:
“1. The Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States of America, and their allies in the current war, by signing this MoU, declare the immediate and permanent termination of military operations on all fronts, including in Lebanon, and undertake from now on not to initiate any war or any military operation against each other, and to refrain from the threat or use of force against each other, and ensuring the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Lebanon. The final Deal will confirm the permanent termination of the war on all fronts, including in Lebanon, and other provisions of this paragraph.”
Lebanon is explicitly mentioned three times in that opening paragraph. Ordering “the US and its allies” (beginning with Israel, the “ally” that dragged the US into the war) to “ensure the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Lebanon” clearly requires Israel to withdraw from all Lebanese territory it has been occupying. But Israel has been flouting the MOU, insisting it won’t withdraw while continuing to murder Lebanese people as it genocidally demolishes their towns and neighborhoods.
Israel’s lawlessness has torpedoed the MOU and reignited the war on Iran. The whole world is being dragged into a catastrophic depression because Israel refuses to play by the rules.
This won’t end well for Israel or the Jews it claims to represent. Over countless millennia, humanity has evolved ways of removing disruptive psychopaths from its midst. The psychopathic Bushman would be poisoned. The psychopathic Eskimo would be pushed off the ice. In modern times, a more expensive alternative—a life sentence in a high security prison—is preferred.
Countless high-profile figures, including Iran’s martyred leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, have called Israel a cancer that desperately needs to be excised from West Asia and the world. And just as cancer cells that violate the “cellular law of the greater good” must be removed before they kill the whole organism, Israel’s outrageous flouting of the rule of law will likely force humanity to terminate the bloody Zionist experiment.
Subscribe to American Free Press, America’s last real newspaper, to get early access to articles like this (and much more).
Sputnik – 20.07.2026
While the US does retain an enormous offensive capability, which allows it to conduct an intense wave of attacks against Iranian facilities, it can only weaken Iran, veteran war correspondent Elijah J. Magnier tells Sputnik.
The US has plenty of offensive weapons to attack Iran, but at the same time has a limited supply of interceptors needed to repel Iranian counterattacks against US assets, allies and Israel.
“The United States could therefore launch a major campaign, but sustaining it would force difficult choices: which bases to protect, which cities to defend, which incoming threats to intercept,” Magnier explains.
In the meantime, Iran will likely seek to widen the “geography of the conflict, multiplying the number of targets Washington must defend, and raising the political and above all economic costs of an additional American strike.”
Using concentrated ballistic and cruise missile attacks to saturate enemy air defenses, and forcing the US and its allies to expend their interceptors on decoys, Iran can unleash hell upon US bases, logistics hubs, ports, radar installations, and fuel storage facilities in the region.
Attacks upon the US allies in the Gulf can ramp up domestic pressure on local governments, which could prompt them to demand the US to back down.
The Iran also maintains its hold on the Strait of Hormuz, requiring very little resources to ensure that “no insurance company will accept to insure a tanker navigating in a war theater, and no ship owner will take the risk of jeopardizing his asset in that area.”
US media earlier reported that the growing American military presence in the Persian Gulf may signal preparations for a major confrontation.