Recent Items

Breaking: Fordow Attacked Again; Trump Talks Up Regime Change, Brays About Iran Nuclear Site Success as Israel Taking Increasing Toll from Attacks, Iran Puts Pieces in Place for Strait of Hormuz Closure; UPDATE: Iran Media Claims Attack on US Base in Syria

Posted on by

Trump’s “Mission Accomplished” after US strikes on Iran’s nuclear development sites is already not aging well. Trump was apparently looking forward to a repeat of the ego high he got after launching his Liberation Day “shock and awe” tariffs: “I am telling you, these countries are calling us up, kissing my ass.”

The fact that (reported by Associated Press just now, as of 5:20 AM EDT) Fordow is again under attack proved that the initial strike was not “successful” even in US terms:

Iran’s underground facility at Fordo again attacked, Iranian state TV says

Iran’s underground enrichment site at Fordo was again attacked Monday, Iranian state television reported.

The report, also carried by other Iranian media, offered no word on damage, nor who launched the assault.

However, Israel has been conducted airstrikes throughout the day in Iran.

BBC tells us 6:55 AM EDT) that Iranian media now says the strike came from Israel, but I don’t yet see a corresponding story at PressTV or Tasnim.

This repeat attack given widespread expert assessments that nothing of importance was in the three nuclear sites is a bizarre, obsessive-looking spectacle.

We’ll return to our original version of this post and will provide updates in comments. This action, if confirmed, looks like a desperate US effort to assert that it dominates Iran when nothing of the kind has happened and even if these salvos had been winners in narrow terms, they have not impeded Iran’s strikes on Israel.

* * *

As we’ll discuss, his fantasy that this would be a one-and-done operation has already backfired spectacularly. Israel no doubt hoped this attack would draw the US in deeper, and that trajectory seems baked in.

But events are not playing out according to Israel’s plan. The immediate result was a fierce attack by Iran, with evidence bleeding out despite Israel’s censors that damage to Israel is serious and mounting. The Washington Post reported as of about four days ago that Israel only had enough air defense missiles to last ten to twelve days on then-current trajectories (note the IDF denied these reports). Perhaps Israel will husband them, but that means more damage in the meantime. As we will discuss later in this post, the Western and even Israeli media is admitting to destruction in the latest wave of attacks.

So Israeli air defenses are being degraded even as the Trump Administration is busy flogging its claims to have “obliterated” the three nuclear sites. As we pointed out yesterday, it appears that nothing or virtually nothing of much import remained in them; that has been reconfirmed longer-form by Scott Ritter in a Sunday interview with Judge Napolitano. So the Trump Administration media high is going to get in the way of having to admit that Iran is undeterred and it will have to Do Something More. The time it takes for this reality to penetrate the Administration’s own messaging fog machine and then figure out how to change the propaganda spin so as not to finesse the failure of the initial attack will add days to the timetable, when every day of delay means more infrastructure loss in Israel.

Of course, a false flag attack in the US or on a US base overseas could dramatically change the equation. But the possibility of a false flag has so often been discussed that a much of the war-opposed MAGA base may be immune to the claim that Iran dunnit. After all, 20% believe that 9/11 was staged by the government.

In the meantime, Trump is making maximalist claims and demands, undercutting top members of his security team. Recall after the June 13 Israel attacks, Secretary of State, Marco Rubio maintained Israel had engaged in “unilateral action“. But less than 24 hours later, Trump was loudly taking credit for them. He soon escalated to demanding that Iran make an unconditional surrender.

Over the weekend, as was picked up by many media outlets (including a full page wide banner headline in Bloomberg), Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth dutifully maintained that he US objective had been to end Iran’s nuclear enrichment capability. See for instance in The Hill: Hegseth says ‘Iran has a choice,’ US not seeking regime change.

Today from Daily Mail in Trump reveals where most of ‘monumental damage’ was done in Iran nuclear ‘obliteration’ as he calls for regime change:

The US president wrote on his Truth Social page that satellite images he obtained showed the Iranian nuclear facilities were ‘obliterated,’ and noted that the most damage ‘took place far below ground level.’

‘Bullseye!!!’ he declared, hours after he suggested Iran’s current regime ‘is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN.’

‘Why wouldn’t there be a regime change,’ Trump asked, rhetorically – even though he and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer had earlier urged Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khameini to ‘return to the negotiating table as soon as possible.

In a talk with George Galloway, Colonel Douglas Macgregor summed up the current US position:

Even though this [attack] had been rehearsed for innumerable times over many years, even though they’d rehearsed it and practiced it, what they ultimately did was harm nothing and accomplish nothing. They hit the equivalent of empty buildings, empty targets and then after doing so he
announced that he [Trump] was now ready for peace which is the ultimate expression of self-delusion…

We don’t understand what we’ve walked into because we’re not informed. We still think this is 1991.

Listen to the rhetoric: “I’m ready for peace now. We’ve made our point. We hope the Iranians understand us and will make peace.”

Have you lost your mind?

And the Western media is starting to cast doubts on the extent of US success in its weekend Iran bombing, even narrowly defined (as in the destruction of the sites). For instance:

Satellites show damage to Iran’s nuclear program, but experts say it’s not destroyed NPR

The Three Unknowns After the U.S. Strike on Iran New York Times

Contrast the giddy, swaggering posture of the Administration with evidence that Israel is taking body blows, particularly in the retaliatory strike after the US hit Iran. From Times of Israel in 86 wounded by Iranian missile attacks on Israel after US strikes 3 Iran nuclear sites:

An Iranian ballistic missile barrage injured dozens of people in Israel on Sunday morning as nearly 30 projectiles targeted the country, causing widespread destruction to residential areas in Tel Aviv and the central town of Ness Ziona.

An air defense interceptor, meanwhile, malfunctioned and impacted the northern city of Haifa, causing damage and slightly wounding three people. No sirens had sounded in the city during the incident….

The first salvo consisted of at least 22 missiles, and the second was made up of five, according to IDF assessments.

See also:

That was as of yesterday. FirstPost as of now (5:40 AM) has a live stream of new attacks in Israel:

I do wonder, now beyond the Indian media, why videos giving the impression that Israel is now taking serious damage are public, including from foreign newscasters filming in Israel. If the military censors have now decided images of destruction will elicit sympathy, they are deranged.

Or perhaps it is worldwide opposition that has emboldened at least non-US outlets to show this part of the picture. See for instance from the BBC: US strikes on Iran trigger protests internationally

Perhaps we will be proven incorrect, but our belief is the US has gotten itself so badly knotted up it its narrative fantasies that it will take longer than it ought to to recognize that Israel is in serious trouble. It’s hard to see how the US fails then to try to come to the rescue….unless it achieves a new Mission Impossible and keeps the American public in the dark about Israel’s increasingly sorry state.

In the meantime, Iran is also moving the pieces in place so as to be able to close the Strait of Hormuz. As we indicated, this is its best escalatory move if it feels it must go beyond doing a mini-Gaza to Israel. One assumes the very cautious Iranian leadership recognizes that attacking a US base would give the uber-hawks the bloody shirt they need to attempt the folly of a full-bore war with Iran. There is no way the US could win, as our failure to subdue the Houthis illustrates. Many military experts have pointed out that the only way ex nukes is to invade and occupy Iran, and that is well beyond current US capabilities.

As we described yesterday, the Iranian parliament has approved closing the Strait of Hormuz, but it is not the ultimate decider. From PressTV:

In a decisive response to the US aggression against Iran’s peaceful nuclear facilities, the Iranian parliament has voted to close the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz.

A senior Iranian lawmaker, Esmaeil Kowsari, said on Sunday that the Majlis (Iranian parliament) has agreed to close the key artery for global energy trade in response to the American aggression and the silence of the international community.

“The parliament has come to the conclusion that it should close the Hormuz Strait, but the final decision lies with the Supreme National Security Council,” Kowsari stated.

Mind you, one never knows the veracity of what comes from Trump Administration spokes-critters, but this reaction by Vance may demonstrate that the US deems a closure of the Strait of Hormuz to be an impossible action:

The argument made by many, backing the Vance view, is that Iran would not dare hurt its biggest oil buyer, China. But not everyone is so chill:

And flip side is that if Iran were defeated, China would surely lose that supply permanently, or at least as fully as the US and its allies could make happen. Plus China also has incentives to support Iran so as to drain US capabilities so as to make it unrealistic for them to attempt military action by China.

This is admittedly a boosterist take, but it’s not entirely wrong. Perhaps readers have insight as to how quickly China might be able to stabilize if it lost Iranian oil supplies:

Note that Goldman Sachs, in a new forecast publicized at OilPrice, has Brent crude rising to as high as $110 and then settling to $95 in the fourth quarter. But its scenario seems a bit cheery:

The investment bank said this price could materialize if oil flows via the vital chokepoint were cut by half for a month and remained 10% lower than normal over the next 11 months.

My best guess would be a much tighter initial constriction. What tank operator is going to send vessels through, given the certainty that there will be no insurance? And then the blowback might lead to big changes in what the US side accepts. Or at least that would be the Iran and friends demand.

A new Nikkei report describes Asian exposure:

Asia’s dependence on oil and gas from the Middle East makes it highly vulnerable to any closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a vital waterway for oil and gas shipments that is now in Iran’s crosshairs….

Asian economies would be hugely affected by a closure, given their dependence on what comes through the waterway, analysts said. For crude oil shipments, the region receives 80% of the nearly 15 million barrels per day of oil that transits through the strait.

“Asia would be most impacted by the lack of crude exports,” analysts at Rystad Energy said.

And comic relief, Kaja Kallas again playing barking chihuahua:

Reuters reported yesterday that Maersk was still sending ships through the Strait of Hormuz. Reader Acacia later found a Bloomberg report of a first sign of concern. From Bloomberg in Two Supertankers U-Turn in Strait of Hormuz After US Strikes:

Ships’ electronics and signals have increasingly been jammed in the Persian Gulf since Israeli airstrikes on June 13, but the two vessels’ arrivals — and subsequent turnarounds — have the hallmarks of normal tanker movements.

Even with jamming and vessels attempting to sail further from the Iranian coast, oil and gas tankers have been moving through the strait after the US strikes. The turning oil carriers offer the first signs of re-routing.

The other US hope, as Trump has made all too clear, is regime change. But the best chance for that was in the immediate wake of the initial attack. Nothing even remotely like an uprising occurred. The more the US and Israel shell Iran, the more its citizens will rally around the nation. Yes, Israel may keep up terrorist attacks using internal networks. But to a degree, that will be a wasting asset as some of those networks get burned in the course of executing missions.

And Israel is not the only party with some hacking chops:

We continue to think that the most likely escalation against Iran would be large and largely indiscriminate attacks on Tehran to effect its regime change fantasy. That is the tactic Israel used against Beirut to bring Hezbollah to heel. So far, Israel keeping up the pretense that it is hitting kinda-sorta military targets. But pray tell, how does bombing a prison qualify? From France 24, in a live blog update in the hour before posting time:

Israel says it struck targets in Tehran, including prison housing Islamic Republic opponents

Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz said the military was carrying out strikes on Tehran, including on the Evin Prison, which he said holds political prisoners and opponents of the Islamic Republic.

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar had earlier shared footage of the prison being targeted on his X account and wrote “long live freedom” in Spanish.

So as Lambert would say, this is an overly dynamic situation, made more so by Trump’s detachment from reality. Stay tuned.

UPDATE 8:30 AM. Hoo boy. We need to see if confirmed:

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Subscribe to Post Comments
182 comments

  1. Samuel Conner

    Perhaps a silly idea, but could Iran selectively close the Strait, vessel by vessel, letting through vessels that paid a “toll”.

    Call it a “tariff”.

    Sauce for goose and gander.

    Reply ↓
    1. ChrisFromGA

      Just boarding every other ship, inspecting all the cargo, asking for paperwork, etc. would slow down global commerce to the point where Wall Street scum would squeal like pigs.

      Reply ↓
    2. ISL

      You mean implement the winning Houthi tactics and strategy? I would imagine so. Iran-friendly countries can inform Iran to avoid targeting. One or two demonstrations will stop shipping through the Straits. China is good at long-term planning, and there have long been reports that it has been filling its strategic reserves – I imagine they are quite adequate (whereas US reserves are the lowest in decades).

      Reply ↓
      1. tegnost

        As an example of your good points, when biden came into office the spr had 638 h.t.b.(thats hundred thousand barrels ), drawn down at the end of his term to 393 htb. trump has limply boosted that to 403 htb, I think emptying the reserve was unwise. My priors lead me to the opinion that biden (or whoever the actual president was then) sold off the reserve to hide his/their grifter pals inflation and overall just being wasted on exceptional kool aid.

        Reply ↓
        1. Rip Van Winkle

          At some point when the reserve level is drawn down quite a bit, doesn’t it compromise the structural integrity of the underground cavern to the extent where subsidence may occur?

          Reply ↓
        2. Old Jake

          This makes me ask for what purpose the SPR was created. I always assumed it was to make certain the military had what it needs if supplies from other regions were cut off. Biden’s use, in that light, was almost treasonous. But I could be wrong from the initial assumption.

          Reply ↓
    3. Carolinian

      This was suggested in the Baud/Diesen talk that AG had linked–that Iran might selectively restrict traffic as the Houthis have done in the Red Sea.

      At any rate thanks to Yves for the above which seems to nix the last night Simplicius suggestion that the whole war has been theater and that the US and Iran made a back channel deal that Fordow would be the only US strike in exchange for not getting our planes shot down. By this theory Iran/Israel would now stop shooting at each other. Simplicius did say however that Netanyahu would want it to look like an Iran surrender and Netanyahu has always been the spider at the center of this particular web.

      Or alternately, as once suggested by Alastair Crooke, the Israeli leader is floundering as much as Trump. He is in poor health and his legal trouble at home may be real.

      Reply ↓
      1. Yves Smith Post author

        How does Iran selectively restrict traffic when traffic in the Strait is normally HUUGE? Go search for a real time tracker. This is not like the Houthis shooting from afar at certain carriers.

        The only way is have ships parked there and try to interfere. Or perhaps shoot from the shore, but if they set a tanker alight, that would be a very bad look.

        Way more work and risk than a few mines or maybe even just firing a couple of test shots into the drink, making sure the media gets wind, and letting insurer freakout do the rest.

        The real point is that no one will insure if Iran does any sort of blockage, and so it will be a de facto full restriction. I can’t see an insurer relying on the kindness of strangers like the IRGC.

        Reply ↓
    4. jrkrideau

      Ansar Allah was selectively allowing Russia and Chinese ships through the Bab Al Mandab.

      The real problem would be loading at Iranian ports. Still, Israel might not want to be seen as blowing up oil shipments to China?

      Reply ↓
    5. John k

      I was thinking that, but even if it was feasible it wouldn’t cause maximum pain to the west. If most of Asia can’t get oil from the gulf they’ll bid on the world market, and the higher the price the gteater the pain for those at the pump. Us oil corps will make a lot of money, but the public will be pissed – and high oil price can cause recessions. Plus, China can maybe get more from Russia, and Iran can still sell to China on the new rail link.

      Reply ↓
      1. Kilgore Trout

        How long before the new rail link between the Pacific and west Asia is a target for terrorism, most likely by CIA-trained functionaries drawn from one of the many ethnic minorities there?

        Reply ↓
  2. ChrisFromGA

    Thanks for this recap. It seems to me that China could replace Iranian oil with Russian oil, but I have no idea on the difference in terms of heavy vs. light crude. The sanctions screamers would probably raise a fuss, but with a huge land border there is really nothing they can do save make fools of themselves.

    The bigger issue I suspect is that China may not want to become so dependent on Russian oil, because there could be strings attached.

    Reply ↓
    1. Yves Smith Post author

      Iranian is VERY heavy sour.

      Urals crude is mid grade distillates (US and Saudi Arabia are light sweet crude) Generally more useful than heavy sour. Very good for producing diesel, which is why the EU has mainly diesel-fueled internal combustion engines.

      China would have to re-tune its refineries for any change in feedstocks. The US bitches like that’s a huge task when the idea comes up. I suspect this is is a matter of cost more than difficulty.

      Reply ↓
      1. Adam1

        China would only need to re-tune it’s refineries if they were making a long term switch in feedstock and wanted to maintain the current existing ratio of outputs over the long term as well.

        If you have a refinery that is currently optimized for heavy sour crudes, and you start inputting lighter crudes what will happen is that you will get a higher percentage of outputs that are lighter grade products – for example more gasoline and less asphalt tar and gear grease. If your down stream market can’t absorb that change in gasoline volume and needs more heavier outputs, it’s at that point you have a problem that can only be solved with either sourcing the heavier inputs or investing in the refining technology to reform some of those lighter distillates into heavier outputs.

        China probably has more wiggle room than most people assume when it comes to it’s crude oil input needs, at least in the short to medium term.

        Reply ↓
      2. Stev_Rev

        Iranian crude typically has API of 29-33, with some production of very heavy grades in 15 API range. Urals crude is typically API 32-33, so on the heavier side as well.

        And european diesel car sales have been on a rapid decline since dieselgate, now are only about 10% of car sales, having been displaced by EV’s and gasoline hydbrids.

        Reply ↓
        1. Revenant

          But diesel cars have longer lives than petrol and the switch to diesel was pronounced, glutting Europe with petrol. I will try to find a European figure for the stock rather than flow of diesel engines but I suspect it is still substantial. As a household we are hedged, one petrol and one diesel….

          Also, all of the important functions of an economy rely on diesel (haulage, generators, construction and farming equipment, rail, shipping when not bunker fuel). Jet fuel is also heavier than petrol.

          If you have to pick one to optimise, pick diesel.

          (Although you can make biodiesel, so you still have choices if you optimise petrol).

          Reply ↓
          1. Tom67

            Diesel engines are more economical. Period! Fuel taxes in Europe have been higher than anywhere in the world ever since 1973. The drawback of Diesel engines has always been their lower acceleration. With the advent of common rail (injection) this advantage vanished and Diesel gained higher and higher market share in Europe. Europe (Renault and the Germans) had a lead in small Diesel engines so the Japanese switched to Hybrids to counter the fuel efficiency of EU DIesel engines. It was a purely political decision (climate warning) that mandated Diesel engines to disappear in Europe.

            Reply ↓
          2. Stev_Rev

            Diesel is still the predominant fuel of choice for road transport, mainly due to the oversized consumption from road freight relative to personal transportation. But total diesel demand has been slowly declining since 2021.

            Reply ↓
      3. Old Jake

        Someone commented – in response to one of the bloggers that I have seen linked here (I’ll take some time to find it if anyone is interested) that the belt and road rail connection between China and Iran was inaugurated only a week before all this foofarah started. The gist being that a sea route between Iran and China is no longer critical. I have no idea if that link would have the capacity to make a difference but it’s not nothing.

        Reply ↓
  3. The Rev Kev

    Apparently it is the Israelis that are attacking this time but if they want to waste bombs on an empty facility, then that’s OK. But there may be another sinister motive. Israel may be telling Trump that his attack there was not effective and that it is still up and running. That they tried their own attack on this facility but could not scratch it. Therefore, the only thing that Trump can do is drop a nuke on the place to finally destroy it and end Iran’s nuclear program. After that Iran will capitulate, he can impose any agreement on the Iranians that he wants to and he will be a hero to the American people for winning this war. Thing is, he might even buy it. But there would be so many consequences to this that I will only list one – a lot of counties will go ahead and get nukes themselves as they have seen that the US does not attack countries like North Korea as they have nukes. And there goes nuclear non-proliferation.

    Reply ↓
    1. MooCowsRule

      Medvedev suggested that there are countries prepared to provide Iran with nuclear weapons, temporarily negating their need for a homegrown program. Not that we’re living in a rational world, but in that scenario, it seems unlikely that Iran would surrender to US/Israel demands.

      I agree with your non-proliferation point. One of the takeaways from this seems to be that being a non-nuclear weapon state and having signed the NPT is meaningless. You’re better off developing a program and relying on that as a deterrence strategy rather than submitting to IAEA inspections and global agreements.

      https://www.newsweek.com/russia-says-countries-now-ready-supply-iran-nuclear-weapons-2088979

      https://www.foxnews.com/politics/russian-leader-claims-multiple-countries-prepped-provide-iran-nuclear-weapons-following-us-strikes

      Reply ↓
      1. NakedEmperor

        I’m of the view that the world will be safer with more nations possessing nuclear weapons. After all, the only use for nuclear weapons is as a deterrent. More deterrence is better than less deterrence in every situation. Had Iran possessed 50-100 nuclear warheads Israel’s freedom of action in the region would be greatly diminished. That would be a benefit to all since it is Israel that is the rogue state in the region (fully supported by another rogue state – the United States).

        Reply ↓
    2. Samuel Conner

      > waste bombs on an empty facility,

      Perhaps it’s grading the gravel of an “off ramp”: “we’ve accomplished our mission of degrading the Iranian weapons program and we are now ready for a cease-fire and negotiations.”

      Trumps 6/21 language of having “obliterated” the facilities strikes me as an appeal to Israel to “declare victory and go home.”

      Reply ↓
      1. Yves Smith Post author

        But the US idea of negotiation is that Iran gives up its sovereignity, as in all nuclear enrichment AND its missile defenses. So the US does not want to negotiate. It wants Iran to capitulate, as Trump even said (“unconditional surrender”). So this off ramp goes off a cliff.

        Reply ↓
        1. hk

          So, in an odd wsy, the raid(s) at the nuclear sites is (are) another form of the West negotiatibg with itself? US and Isr negotiating terms of exit with the assumption that Iran will just let them do what they want?

          The interesting thing here is that Iranian FM did say, if Israel stops, Iran will stop, too. But I wonder if thst ship has already sailed…or not: if the price exacted will be limited to al Ubeid bsse tsking a symbolic hit….

          Reply ↓
          1. Yves Smith Post author

            As we said repeatedly, Iran’s position since the shooting started was that Iran would stop when Israel stopped attacking. So this is not a concession or even a change.

            Reply ↓
    3. flora

      re: “After that Iran will capitulate, he can impose any agreement on the Iranians that he wants to and he will be a hero to the American people for winning this war. ”

      T might think so if the Isr tell him so (the chump), but the American people voted him in as the peace candidate. Now his support is dropping every day. That might be not obvious in Oz but it’s obvious here in the US. His admin is effectively over.

      Reply ↓
      2. NakedEmperor

        I disagree. Trump still has the support of the majority of the Congress. That’s all that matters. Public opinion polls are meaningless and will not deter Trump whatsoever.

        Reply ↓
          1. ambrit

            So, as per Jay Gould, Israel, or more correctly, the Zionists, will hire one half of the Congress to kill one half of the American public. That’s quite the example of ‘asymmetric warfare’ there.
            Phyl and I have been “arguing” about if the Zionist Movement was an example of Globalism in action or not. We agree that Globalism per se is an example of unfettered Capitalism on a world wide scale, but are still wondering about Zionism. It fills all of the criteria of a religious cult. Strictly speaking, a Theocracy is the antithesis of a “rational actor” on the world stage. Its very basis rests upon magical thinking. Then I think on the ideological underpinnings of the Mises Institute and its fellow travelers.
            We live in “interesting times.”

            Reply ↓
        2. bertl

          There may be enough Republicans in the House and Senate willing to jump the broomstick with the Democrats and impeach Trump. Of course, that may cause problems for the Democrats in future, but Vance seems to under stand how politics works, is probably more attuned to the interests of the MAGA base than Trump, and former Democrats may decide it is time to take their party back and make it truly competitive by primarying every Democrat in office who’s taken money from AIPAC or voted consistently in line with Israeli interests as agents of a foreign power using American taxpayers to finance and entangle the US in foreign wars in which America has no interests at stake.

          Isn’t that how American politics works by a process of self-renewal when the macro and micro-worlds it operates in begins to change?

          Reply ↓
          1. ambrit

            The problem with your proposed electoral remedy for our present woes is that American Politics, like almost everything else of value in America has been financialized. At the very least, AIPAC has shown itself to be a consummate manipulator of money. Until the ‘Power of Money’ is stripped out of American Politics, nothing will substantially change.

            Reply ↓
    5. Cat Burglar

      If Israel is bombing Fordow, how are they doing it? They don’t have aircraft with the capability to drop bunker busters, and even if they could, it is not clear that Iranian air defenses are degraded enough that they could do it. So far, they have only used missiles and drones.

      As some have pointed out, it is likely that, if B-2s did the first strike on Fordow, then it was likely done from a very high altitude, which could have affected the accuracy of the strike. Not clear yet what is going on.

      Reply ↓
      1. Acacia

        Approaching Iranian air space, firing guided missiles, and then doing a hard turn to avoid the AD system? And the US maybe has done the same. Cruise missiles from a sub. No B-2s entered Iranian air space. Then they lie about making a real air strike while chuckling about how clever they are to not risk any aircraft.

        That’s the only thing I can figure.

        Reply ↓
  4. Safety First

    Couple of things from the Iranian side. Specifically Pars Today. My “editorializing” in [brackets].

    1. The thing that caught my eye yesterday is a part of a report published yesterday on Pars Today about the Iranian government’s response to US strikes. The statement is not attributed to a specific individual, but rather to “the Republic of Iran”. Also, the word “Israel” throughout is deliberately not capitalized.

    Iran has announced that israel is the “primary base” of the US in the region. Consequently, the best answer [to US strikes] must be the continuation of war against israel. They cannot simply leave [the conflict] whenever they want…

    …We must…continue the war against istrael, escalate the situation, possibly close the Strait of Hormuz. When israel suffers – the US will suffer. And continue until the last bullet is fired into the forehead of this evil regime.

    So while everyone is waiting for an attack on US bases, I actually think Iran may forego this in favor of continuing to pound Israel. They apparently have just hit a part of their nuclear power plant, from the photographs it looks like a structure next to the reactors and waste storage, maybe the relay station or some such.

    2. And then they published the following, also yesterday:

    According to an estimate by the EIA, in the event of closure of the Strait of Hormuz the UAE and Saudi Arabia will be able to transport only 2.6 million bpd of oil out of the region via pipeline.

    This is while the volume of oil going through the Strait of Hormuz exceeds 20 million bpd. The Strait of Hormuz cannot be replaced.

    According to a report by the Kepler Istitute and Vortexa, Iran presently has 70 to 120 million barrels of floating oil [i.e. in tankers] in East Asia, and for the next two months its oil exports will not depend on the Strait of Hormuz.

    I have not tried to track down the underlying report, but if true, then Iran gets the option of temporarily or partially closing the Strait. Especially as I doubt they wish to hurt their new Saudi “friends” overly too much. Basically make a show of it for a week, maybe two, then relent in a display of magnanimity. Or announce that only tankers bound for the West will be attacked, just like the Houthis weren’t attacking every ship that went through the Red Sea.

    —–

    So on the basis of these two items, I am getting the feeling that Iran will continue to be very, very measured in its response, and the US will be the one making the choice to escalate. [Because if the US just sits there, Israel gets gradually pounded into the Stone Age.] Maybe they are hoping that TACO will TACO, declaring a false victory, just as with Yemen. Or maybe they are cognizant of Chinese and Russian sensibilities, paint the US as the aggressor at every step. Or I could be completely wrong, I mean, I have a very surface-level knowledge of Iranian internal politics and decision-making…

    Reply ↓
    1. Samuel Conner

      The thought occurs that Iran may find itself in a position to retaliate not only for strikes on its own territory, but also for strikes on Gaza and Lebanon, something that has never previously happened.

      Perhaps a comprehensive cease-fire in Middle East is actually on the horizon.

      It would be profoundly ironic if it were Khamenei, rather than Netanyahu, who engineered the release of the remaining hostages in Hamas’ hands.

      Reply ↓
      1. Carolinian

        From what I read the Iranians have hit a few military installations in the West Bank but what if they open the gates of starving Gaza with a few strikes?

        Today Israel said they hit the gates of a prison where–they say–Iran tortures people. What about all those Israeli prisons where the Israelis torture people?

        And if Trump decides to do more then what exactly? In the Baud/Diesen talk Baud suggests the obvious target would be American ships–Navy ships.

        Reply ↓
    2. Revenant

      Decapitalising Israel and denying her her sovereign typology is a direct mockery of the decapitalisation of Russia that some Western media have adopted. LOL.

      Closing the Strait of Hormuz is cheap and easy and does not use up valuable missiles so I understand why Iran would choose it.

      If Iran had the missile stocks, however, it would be far better to repeatedly strike every port, airport and border crossing and deny Israel her imports and exports. A stand-off siege. Saladin would be proud….

      My bet is that a hybrid option is possible, where Iran guarantees safe passage only for oil cargoes whose importer is also blockading Israel. That would be interesting. Doubtless the US would countersanction any BDS effort with expulsion from SWIFT and the dollar zone. But that is simply accelerating US decline.

      The US has Syria in its pocket and Iran has Iraq. Perhaps Lebanon and Jordan can be peeled away by BRICS…?

      Egypt is probable a lost cause but who knows…?

      Reply ↓
  5. Steve H.

    A lens for a particular perspective:

    Why are the other Gulf states being relegated to flyover status in all this narrative mess? They are completely dependent on oil for their economies, and they are not capable of regression to lower technology status without collapse. And in the mix, they seem fine with targeting the religious leader of the Shia, for whom those oil states are apostates.

    There are pipelines, but I remember Russia putting a bomb ten meters on the other side of a major pipeline, perhaps during a Georgia fracas.

    We are amazed at the … patience of the Eastern cultures for nonescalation and the inexorable grind. And ken our own internal ticking on climate change, affecting future discounting in the face of the ratchet only turning one way. But the oil infrastructure is fragile, and as Qiao Liang noted in 2015:

    > As long as [x] does not want a particular place to have capital, a missile can get there in … minutes. And when the missile goes down, capital can be still quietly and nicely withdrawn.

    Reply ↓
    1. Yves Smith Post author

      Because they are flyover. They have no meaningful militaries, and to be very crude about it (pun intended) are the US’ bitches. To quote Stalin: “How many divisions does the Pope have?”

      Professor Marandi repeatedly points out that they are family dictatorships, dependent on US support. Jordan is the most extreme example but the characterization is generally apt. They are making hostile noises about Israel to appease their “street” but not stopping the US from using their bases. Admittedly everyone save Turkiye has in their agreements effectively ceded sovereignity over any US bases.

      Reply ↓
      2. NakedEmperor

        There is also the financial factor. The Middle East oil states have hundreds of billions of dollars invested in US assets. If they were to “stray” they would forfeit all of those assets as the US would seize them. No more mansions, super cars, and super yachts. And no more Nvidia GPUs for their AI dreams.

        Reply ↓
  6. AG

    Nitter:
    Clash Report
    https://nitter.poast.org/clashreport

    -an hour ago
    Israel dropped more than 100 munitions on Tehran in the last two hours.
    Source: Israeli Channel 12

    -29 min. ago
    Iran’s leadership has fast-tracked succession plans for 86-year-old Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei amid escalating threats from Israel and the U.S., according to insiders.

    A three-man committee within the Assembly of Experts, quietly working for two years, has intensified efforts following Israeli strikes and assassination threats.

    Khamenei, now in hiding and guarded by elite forces, is regularly briefed on deliberations.

    Two main contenders have emerged: his son, Mojtaba Khamenei, favored by hardliners for continuity, and Hassan Khomeini, the late revolutionary founder’s grandson, seen as a more moderate figure palatable to both clerics and the public.

    Source: Reuters

    Reply ↓
    1. Trees&Trunks

      “Two main contenders have emerged: his son, Mojtaba Khamenei, favored by hardliners for continuity, and Hassan Khomeini, the late revolutionary founder’s grandson, seen as a more moderate figure palatable to both clerics and the public.”

      – so Iran is degenerating to a trust fund kids run country? Fresh blood is needed because these nomenklatura kids are only interested in protecting their position, not the country.

      Reply ↓
        1. Vicky Cookies

          Spent some time looking through the index of Robert Fisk’s Great War for Civilization, but couldn’t find the direct reference. It’s in there somewhere. Regardless, during the Iran-Iraq war, the previous Ayatollah, Kho, not Kha, made it policy to imply that he was the twelfth Imam, fueling national-religious fanaticism. During that time, middle class citizens of Tehran donated their treasure to the state to fund the war effort, and thousands of children were enlisted to serve in ‘martyrdom brigades’, including as one of their duties the clearance of minefields, by walking or driving motorbikes through them. I don’t know if Iran is as religious as it was then, but there were deep veins of fanaticism to mine, which seem to have been successfully channelled through the mullahs and the Ayatollah to support state policy. Such things happen when you’re invaded, or otherwise attacked. Such things are also made the more likely when political alternatives are disappeared. Unlike the rest of the region, in which secular, nationalist, or left-wing political movements were subverted or destroyed by Americans and Israelis, in Iran, the left contributed greatly to the revolution of 1979, before being suppressed and then purged by the Iranian religious establishment during the war with Iraq. Tudeh, the communist party of Iran, was dismantled, and much of the left was liquidated on the order of the Ayatollah. In the aforementioned Fisk book, there’s a chapter in which the author goes to rural Iran, in the 80’s, and asks the locals about the revolution and its effects; they thought he was talking about what was called the ‘White revolution’, which were agrarian reforms enacted by the Shah to secure support from the lower classes. The Islamic revolution had no need for class in its weltanshauung, because it had the Koran.
          Now, like in Syria, you have a heavily sanctioned economy and a bourgeois government, one of the results of which is working class people in Tehran so desperate that some take pictures of air defenses for Mossad in exchange for crypto. I apologize for getting so off-topic.

          Reply ↓
      2. Anonted

        Sometimes trust fund kids are both competent and patriotic. See Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Wealth does not negate virtue, it just distances one from the consequences of its absence.

        Reply ↓
    2. Thuto

      The gross tonnage of propaganda being unloaded as “journalists” get their marching orders to open the firehoses is “up and to the right” so I’m taking a lot of things with fistfuls of salt.

      Reply ↓
    3. Acacia

      I saw some video of the attacks on Tehran and what I noticed right off was that the smoke cloud over the city is much larger than anything I’ve seen in many clips on social media, both from Iran and from Israel. So perhaps the IDF is trying to really pull out the stops now.

      Today, there is also footage on Sabereen News of another drone shoot-down in Iran, allegedly a Hermes. I’m still wondering if the IDF is actually flying many planes over Iranian airspace, but I haven’t seen clear indications of this yet. Iran claims an Israeli fighter jet was shot down over East Azerbaijan Province, but as before there are no images of wreckage. It feels like this is still pretty much a drone and missile conflict, with fighters mainly launching missiles from just outside Iranian airspace.

      Likewise, it seems like the US just used cruise missiles in their attack. Do we have any credible confirmation of Trump’s claim that B-2s flew over Iran and actually dropped bombs?

      I agree with several other commenters that the level of pain being inflicted on Israel is probably going to have to increase before there is any local pressure being focused on the Zionist regime. Iran now claims to be sending more serious missiles, with the IRGC reporting that Shekan, Emad, Qadr, and Fatah missiles were used in the latest wave, as well as the multi-warhead Khaybar (Ghadr-H) ballistic missile, which was used for the first time.

      Reply ↓
    4. NotThePilot

      Anything’s possible, but I’ve said several times before that especially in re Iran, you have to assume Reuters is a mouthpiece for what Western (specifically British?) intelligence wishes reality was. I think it goes all the way back to the Reuter concession.

      The second you hear anyone mention Mojtaba Khamenei too, I assume you’re dealing with some sort of fringe propaganda. AFAIK Mojtaba is just a teacher in Qom and he may run a decent-sized bonyad, but that’s about the extent of his influence. I’ve never once seen him even brought up in an actual news piece verifiably sourced to people in Iran. The whole “Khamenei is going to king his own son” meme is literally something I’ve only ever seen in more fantastic Western or diaspora anti-gov propaganda.

      Reply ↓
  7. ISL

    A yesterday comment bears on today’s discussion – once Israel runs out of interceptors, cheap, easy-to-produce, long-distance drones will largely reach their targets – a video above showed drones being used to deplete Israeli A/D, followed by the ballistic missile penetration and success.

    Yesterday, I watched a video of a drone targeting an Israeli refinery cooling tower (and Iran understands refineries). This will be a massive-force multiplier, particularly for eliminating infrastructure, as drones are far cheaper and quicker to manufacture en masse (and Iranian industry already ramped up for the Ukraine SMO) and use image correlation to target within meters.

    Also, Kevin Walmsley* points out that without China’s rare earths (not currently licensed for US MIC export), the anemic missile and other production rates will slow and shift to cannibalization of existing weapons systems. Note that the US airframes need are mostly old, and replacement parts—my swag is JIT (higher profits!!)—are not just for the civilian economy. Replacement parts will need to be manufactured (at a glacial rate), many requiring rare earths.

    *https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_4Y5yXr8-4

    – “Inside China Business” mainly reviews and discusses various media reports on Chinese business-related subjects.

    Reply ↓
    1. Carolinian

      The electronics of Israeli Arrow missiles are made by Boeing and depend on rare earths. The technowarriers who want to rule the earth are dependent on their claimed enemies!

      Reply ↓
    2. Samuel Conner

      There are reports of testing of a directed-energy weapon against drones. If this works well, it may be that drones will remain much less effective than high-speed missiles.

      Reply ↓
      1. Polar Socialist

        I think they have been working on those since mid-1990’s with very limited success. They’re usually cumbersome and unwieldy, require a lot of power and the performance seriously deteriorate in rain, smoke, fog or dust. Also, best ones still seem to take their time destroying a single target (8 seconds).

        We’ll probably see the advent of mini anti-air missiles and opto-electrically guided heavy machine guns before directed energy weapons will become prevalent enough to matter.

        Reply ↓
  8. flora

    Macgregor’s comment “We don’t understand what we’ve walked into because we’re not informed. We still think this is 1991.”

    The same could have been said about Europe’s 5 great powers in 1914, imo. Maybe they thought it was still 1884 and war was simply putting down colonial uprisings. I don’t know.

    Reply ↓
  9. Adam1

    First off… “20% believe that 9/11 was staged by the government,” I believe that’s a national number, so I’d suspect it’s probably 40% of MAGA voters!

    I agree, China is likely willing to take some pain for Iran especially if it causes the US even more pain militarily and economically. Get the US bogged down in another Middle East war and Tiawan become an even more simple exercise.

    Also, does Iran have to totally shut down the straits? Can they not operate like the Houthis and selectively shut down tanker traffic… embargo all tankers bound for the US or its allies.

    It’s also been mentioned that a new rail line has been completed which connects Iran to China. While it can’t replace the full volume of oil, it would help. I remember during the height of oil rail back in the early 2010’s when US pipelines were maxed that the trains pulling hundreds of oil cars passed through our town about every 20 minutes for weeks on end.

    Reply ↓
  10. Polar Socialist

    Many sources are saying that Iran has floated it’s oil storage, meaning that there’s an extra 40 to 70 million barrels loaded onboard tankers on their merry way out of the troubled areas already. That’s about 4 to 6 weeks worth of Iranian oil exports.

    Of course, Iran can always allow it’s own tankers trough, but the assumption is that Israel will eventually hit the oil loading facilities. An oil pipeline to Chabahar port would come handy right about now, but Iran has to play with the cards it has.

    To me the best play they have is to keep hitting Israel until Netanyahu begs for peace. Iran has stated that hitting US bases in the area are within it’s rights according to the UN charter, but that would be taking their eyes of the goal – tame Israel, and US will be tamed, too.

    Reply ↓
  11. Yves Smith Post author

    Hoo boy. A report that Iran media is reporting an attack on a US base in Syria:

    We’ll see if confirmed, but if so, this is a biggie.

    Also a fresh report on AlJazeera of unprecedented air alerts all over Israel, both in geographic scope (including now Jerusalem for the first time, where Israel has a lot of military installations). It says Iran has apparently sent far fewer missiles. This suggest that Iran has so degraded Israel’s air defenses that it can send in smaller numbers yet achieve more effect.

    Reply ↓
      1. Yves Smith Post author

        You didn’t listen to the video.

        This is a covert base. It’s for the US to control Syrian oil.

        The video also points it out the attack might be by Iranian proxies or friends.

        Reply ↓
        1. flora

          Thanks. I did listen but found it very hard to understand the on-the-ground reporter’s talk. Your synopsis helps.

          I’ll use closed captions ‘on’ next time.

          Reply ↓
          1. Scott M

            flora,
            Thanks for the suggestion to use subtitles. I was mostly understanding the speaker and paying attention to the audio, but the subtitles helped in a few places. At least until the subtitle text showed something about the “whole moose”.
            What?? Moose in Syria? That took a few seconds to translate and gave me something to laugh at that I really needed.
            Thanks again. :)

            Reply ↓
  14. les online

    The Zionist Only Democracy In The ME may be getting low on missiles, but,
    the US’ next step will most likely be based on US assessments of “What has
    Iran got left to fight it with ?”
    Iran is in a pickle: Use its best missiles against the Zionist Genocidal Only
    Democracy In The ME, or husband them for its defence against US’ next
    round ?
    The US-Zionists have been planning Regime Change in Iran for too long for
    to the attacks to be called off… And, anyway, The US will fight to the last Israeli
    to bring about Regime Change in Iran…
    A slow war of attrition…

    Reply ↓
  15. Unironic Pangloss

    AP’s headline is odd (editorially, linguistixally) but not surprising…..

    “Alarm grows after the U.S. inserts itself into Israel’s war against Iran with strikes on nuclear sites”

    I’m old enough to remember when laconic headlines got to the point: “US Bombs Nuke Site–Situation Tense”

    Reply ↓
    1. Acacia

      Odd indeed. “the U.S. inserts itself” sounds kind of… um… how shall we put this on a family-friendly blog? ;)

      Reply ↓
              1. NakedEmperor

                Yes, we can always count on the NC commentariat to keep things on an even keel. :) Just to even things out a bit – in the northern hemisphere the days are getting shorter.

                Reply ↓
            2. The Infamous Oregon Lawhobbit

              Ooooh BABY!!!!

              “Performative theater” by both Trump and Iran.

              Theoretical satisfaction due to the mutual [family blog]ging.

              And then the proxies step in…..

              Reply ↓
  16. vao

    “So far, Israel keeping up the pretense that it is hitting kinda-sorta military targets. But pray tell, how does bombing a prison qualify?”

    That would not be a first:

    1) On the 28th April 2025, the USA bombed a detention centre in Yemen where illegal migrants were held.

    2) On the 21st January 2022, Saudi Arabia bombed a prison in Yemen where illegal migrants were detained.

    I honestly cannot figure out why the Israelis, the Americans, and the Saudis bomb places were people tending towards being inimical to the regime they want to overthrow are jailed.

    Reply ↓
    1. ChrisPacific

      I don’t understand it either. Why strike political prisoners and enemies of the regime?

      Tinfoil hat theory: Israel thinks that Iran has captured some of the perpetrators of the undercover drone attacks and imprisoned them there, and wants them silenced.

      Reply ↓
  17. Acacia

    Trump: Everyone keep oil prices down, I’m watching
    https://www.forexlive.com/news/trump-everyone-keep-oil-prices-down-im-watching-20250623/

    Careful out there if you’re buying oil futures — Trump will send you to Guantanamo :)

    […]

    Jokes aside, all this shows that the US won’t fight Iran on the ground and will protect their oil exports. He can’t take the pain of a war that spikes crude oil to +$100.

    In terms of drilling, US oil production is on track to be flat this year at best.

    Reply ↓
      1. Adam Eran

        My bet is that between price rises and Trump’s petroleum-friendly administration, the increases in fracking and deep water drilling will accelerate. Gotta have expensive oil if you’re going to frack or drill offshore.

        Reply ↓
    2. juno mas

      The US produces less than 40% of the crude oil it refines into finished product. Mexico and Canada are the major source of crude oil inputs. (Add on tariffs to that and the price of gas rises at the US pump.)

      Reply ↓
      1. hk

        I always wondered about this: so who’s refining US oil? I’d heard that we “need” Venezuelan or Ural oil because that’s the kind of infrastructure we got. (I think I heard that Venezuelan and Ural are both heavy/sour, so if Iranian oil is like that, too, China probably could sub the Russian for the Iranian, I imagine…)

        Reply ↓
  18. farmboy

    Nima Shirazi
    @WideAsleepNima
    ·
    11h
    Former CIA Director John Brennan confirms on MSNBC:

    – Iran has no nuclear weapons program.
    – Iran posed no imminent threat to anyone.
    – Iran was nowhere near producing a nuclear warhead.
    – Iran wouldn’t even use one in a first strike if it did.

    Reply ↓
    1. ChrisFromGA

      I apologize as I haven’t read every single comment in all of the threads (I did make it through this one, though.) So, it is possible someone else already made the point I am about to make.

      Iran doesn’t have to get to 90% enrichment to be a nuclear threat. A fission-bomb, yes. But a “dirty” bomb consisting of a bunch of U-235 dispersed through the air on impact would actually have a worse result for Israel. That’s because the half-life of U-235 is measured in millions of years.

      Contaminate a site like downtown Tel-Aviv, and it’s off the game board for all intents and purposes eternity. The entire city would be a no-go zone that would make Chernobyl look like a mild case of bug spray.

      Iran has the ability to do this right now. And now Iran is angry and looking for revenge. My baseline theory is this is all about regime change and the world is much more dangerous now than before Trump’s murderous acts.

      Reply ↓
      1. TimH

        “angry and looking for revenge” is more the Western + Israel style. Russia, Iran, and China have all behaved like the only adults in the room over all the provocations with measured responses.

        Reply ↓
      2. NakedEmperor

        The proxy Israelis (and the proxy Ukrainians) are far more likely to use a dirty bomb than are the Iranians.

        Reply ↓
  19. mrsyk

    Music to consider war by, a tonal experience. The Kiss, The Cure, 1987.
    Works for me because I’m angry beyond words. Angry at “team red”, angry at “team blue”, constructs of a colonial empire.
    I’m spending the day spoiling the pants off my six year old nephew. I am near tears. This timeline didn’t have to happen.

    Stay safe.

    Reply ↓
  21. upstater

    Qatar closed its airspace. Flights bound for Doha have been rerouted to third countries. Comments on onemileatatime.com said Qatar F15s have taken off then shut off transponders.

    Reply ↓
  22. farmboy

    Progressive International
    @ProgIntl
    ·
    2h
    BREAKING 🇵🇸 Maersk to cut ties with companies linked to West Bank settlements. The move follows the #MaskOffMaersk campaign by
    @progintl
    member
    @palyouthmvmt
    .

    “Doing business with Israel’s illegal settlements is no longer viable,” said PYM’s Aisha Nizar.https://t.co/RNsGxNnQX2

    Reply ↓
  23. hazelbee

    Iran has fired missiles at the US airbase in Qatar: at US-run Coalition Air Operations Centre at Al-Udeid in Qatar,
    multiple sources showing this. BBC, Aljazeera, axios

    Reply ↓
    1. ChrisFromGA

      I guess we’re about to find out how good those Patriot systems really are … unless this is more Kabuki Theater and the operators have already been evac’d to a bunker.

      Reply ↓
      1. Michaelmas

        I guess we’re about to find out how good those Patriot systems really are

        They’re cr*p.

        But short of a smoking hole in the ground a mile wide at Al-Udeid, with the control tower and a dozen planes taken out of commission, we’ll still get the usual story about the impenetrable supremacy of Western weapons systems .

        Reply ↓
        1. Polar Socialist

          They’ve said to have been SM-3 interceptors. 6 Iranian missiles (for six bunker busters) and according to the initial reports 3 of them got trough.

          Not necessarily blaming the system (which in tests has achieved 84% success rate), defending against salvos is downright impossible for the fire-control radars. Counting the incoming warheads, their separated booster stages, possible decoys, the outbound interceptors (two per target) and the debris from successful intercepts it’s just not possible for the system to sort “the wheat” out of the chaff in the short time they have and keep assigning targets.

          Reply ↓
    2. Unironic Pangloss

      yes. if runway/taxiways Kabuki theatre/tit-tat.

      if actual buildings……paging Marcus Licinius Crassus to the courtesy phone

      Reply ↓
    3. hamstak

      This appears to be a symbolic attack. Iran didn’t appear to send its “A” material as there were reportedly no impacts/multple interceptions.

      According to a commenter on Aljazeera, the US (as well as Qatar, which itself was not the target of the “attack”) was informed in advance. I believe that some number of assets at the base had been re-positioned prior to the US assault on the Iranian nuclear facilities — possibly to Saudi Arabia.

      Qatar airspace has been reportedly re-opened.

      Markets are brushing it off, for whatever that is worth.

      Reply ↓
      1. Hazelbee

        Yes it does look like that now it is over and more reported.
        There were “shelter in place” recommendations throughout the afternoon appearing on Al Jazeera and BBC news.
        Let’s see what the white house makes of it.

        Reply ↓
  24. Ignacio

    The US and more generally the CW and their “rules based order” are turning fast into a tragic farce as this article describes recent events in Iran. It looks as if the CW supposedly knows what is the desired outcome which might be described as a return to the previous “status quo” of total world dominance (economic, financial, industrial, diplomatic etc.). The only problem is that the rewind switch does not work in historic terms and the West seems unable to imagine any sensible way forward in the current situation. Mismatches can be seen everywhere: between realities and narratives, between strategic goals and the means to achieve them etc. PR, at least regarding Western populaces, was the only thing left under control but there are many signs indicating this is also faltering. The only “solutions” left are destruction and more destruction. Everything looks poised to go in the wrong direction and pathetic Kallas is still talking “diplomacy” when this route was long ago abandoned precisely by people like the very same Kallas.

    Reply ↓
  25. MicaT

    Iran is playing smart. Don’t attack the American planes and bases unless you don’t have a choice so as to not give the us a reason to attack.
    Wait until absolutely necessary to shut the straight.
    In the mean time just keep pounding Israel. It’s actually the weakest link.

    In the meantime, Iran seems to have linked a deal for weapons (S400’s)from Russia and they probably already have them enroute and possibly Chinese equipment anti aircraft as well.

    Reply ↓
      1. MaryLand

        I read somewhere the US had evacuated the base in Qatar a few days ago. It was a large base I believe.

        Reply ↓
        2. The Rev Kev

          This is going to force the US to keep a lot of anti-missiles for itself and not send them all of to Israel. Smart move.

          Reply ↓
  26. flora

    an aside: donning my foil bonnet.

    The creation of Isr as what it is began in Great Britain in 1917 with the Balfour Declaration during WWI when the Ottoman Empire was collapsing.

    From Al Jazeera about the UK political calculations at the time:

    ‘In mainstream academia, however, there are a set of reasons over which there is a general consensus:

    -Control over Palestine was a strategic imperial interest to keep Egypt and the Suez Canal within Britain’s sphere of influence

    -Britain had to side with the Zionists to rally support among Jews in the United States and Russia, hoping they could encourage their governments to stay in the war until victory

    – Intense Zionist lobbying and strong connections between the Zionist community in Britain and the British government; some of the officials in the government were Zionists themselves

    – Jews were being persecuted in Europe and the British government was sympathetic to their suffering’

    https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2018/11/2/more-than-a-century-on-the-balfour-declaration-explained

    Given this history, I wonder if Isr’s real political controller is still the UK working behind the scenes to keep virtual control of its old empire holdings in the ME. The US is useful for money and military might but little else. If so, and there’s no open evidence of this, but if so it might explain the tortuous US-Isr relationship.

    Foil bonnet off.

    Reply ↓
    1. AG

      fwiw:

      Although I personally am still sceptical over Israel controlling US (I am siding here with Finkelstein/Chomsky faction vs. the Mearsheimer et. al.) I would guess Craig Murray would suggest it is Zionists conrolling British politics yet not without GB with its very own interests being satisfied:

      On the appointment of the new head of MI6 which Colonel Smithers was commenting too, Murray:

      War With Iran
      June 20, 2025
      https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2025/06/war-with-iran/

      “(…)
      It is worth noting – and a prime example of how the neoliberal world works – that the next head of MI6, Sir John Sawers, is now an executive of British Petroleum. That company controlled Iran for decades, installed the fake Pahlavi “Shah” in 1921 and engineered and financed the coup that ended democracy in Iran in 1953. The appalling dictatorship of the Shah after that led directly to the theocratic revolution.

      BP desperately want Iran’s oil back, so ex MI6 Head Sawers has been all over the airwaves advocating war on Iran. Meanwhile it is not an accident that two days ago, a new Head of MI6 was chosen and installed. Starmer has found his Dearlove.

      The appointment was made by David Lammy. Blaise Metreweli was chosen ahead of more obvious candidates, who had served longer in MI6, had more operational experience, and were better analysts or better managers. However Metreweli – who spent much of her career in the Middle East – is a fanatical Zionist. She worked closely with Israel on technologies for surveillance and assassination.

      Metreweli developed projects with both Pegasus and Palantir and was intimately connected to Israel’s use of new forms of attack in Lebanon and Iran. She was strongly endorsed to Lammy by Mossad as the next MI6 head. MI6 and the FCDO are inextricably connected. They work literally cheek by jowl in Embassies around the world, and MI6 HQ staff in London have cover jobs in the FCDO.
      (…)
      FCDO officials are extremely unhappy with the UK’s cooperation in Genocide in Gaza, with hundreds of them having been told by Lammy to shut up or resign. There is consternation at Mossad having designated the next Head of MI6. I asked my contact – a senior FCDO figure – whether Metreweli had involvement in the pager attacks in Lebanon. The reply was “Not 100% sure, but probably yes.”
      (…)”

      He would add that the British government is controlled by Zionists in all these matters.
      I can´t find one single quote now but he has been stressing this repeatedly.

      So both countries´ interests, England and Israel are currently served under the label Zionism-controlled.
      But that is also only as far as their interests converge under the neo-colonial project.
      I wonder what would happen were interests in the ME diverging?

      I still cannot believe that “Zionism” would be of significance then. Or if so, only as a PR term to simulate an alliance. But of course this latter point is pure fiction.

      p.s. As I have had doubts that Pakistan would in fact supply Iran with WMDs Craig Murray has this phrase:

      “The decision of nuclear-armed Pakistan to stand behind Iran was extremely helpful.”

      I am not sure how far he thinks that would go or what in detail it means.

      Reply ↓
  27. Kouros

    From indi.ca

    What can you, as Americans, do?
    About the problem that is America, through and through?
    In a perversion of the old saying,
    do onto others as you would have done unto you,
    go fuck yourself, the way that you fucked others too.

    Take the bitter medicine you prescribe for every other country,
    why is it proscribed for you?

    Change your own regime, as you always plot and scheme,
    and casually discuss in your magazines.

    If regime change is good for every place you gander, bring it home to the goose. To start with, sabotage, strike, and direct direct action to turn the screws.

    Organize and militarize as is your Second Amendment right to.
    Tell them you’re cosplaying and form a militia with your crew.
    You don’t have to do anything, but be ready to.
    There’s lots of stuff you can do.
    Indeed, under your own founding fables, it’s your duty to.

    As your declaration of inter-white Independence goes, “When a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government.”

    Even a hypocrite is right twice a day, now the bell tolls for you. Not for creating the United States out of stolen land, but for dissolving it before it nukes the earth. Again. Again again.

    Americans ask me what they can do, and I’m telling you.
    Take your own advice, what you tell other populations to do, and we’ll support you.

    Every accusation is a confession from Empire, and every command abroad should be run as root, on your own localhost.

    So overthrow your own government, change your own regime, and toss us some flowers when you’re through.

    Reply ↓
  28. Anthony Martin

    Assymetrical warfare: The editors of the Tehran Times advised those in the Gulf Region who were hilding US Treasuries to dump their bonds becasue they were funding the joint US/Israeli war effort. I thought the US used up most of its weapon supply in Ukraine. What is left? The only surprising thing is that Trump & Team didn’t rioll out Buash’s:Mission Accomplished Banner.

    Reply ↓
  29. Yves Smith Post author

    Just in from guurst:

    Reply ↓
  30. Acacia

    Sabereen News is reporting “Operation ‘Bashaer Al-Fatah’ against US bases begins.”

    “Air raid sirens sound at Ali Al Salem US base in Kuwait”

    “Bahraini authorities: Sirens sound, citizens and residents urged to head to the nearest safe place.”

    “Ministry of Transport: Iraqi airspace closed to aircraft, including the southern region.”

    “Turkish Airlines suspends scheduled flights today to and from Bahrain, Dammam, Doha, Dubai, Kuwait, Abu Dhabi, and Muscat.”

    Meanwhile, crude oil futures have dropped sharply to $68.81. 🤷

    Reply ↓
  31. stickNmud

    Monday the US stock market and Treasuries closed up, and oil down by nearly 7%, so markets seemed to discount risk of Hormuz Straits closure or disruptive escalation.

    Clearly, regime change is the goal of the four-decade long narrative snare using (alleged) immanent risk of Iran building a nuclear weapon. On Sunday morning video from Consortium News, Scott Ritter stated that US policy has always been that Iran can’t ever have a nuclear weapon. Btw, Palantir Mosaic AI was used by the IAEA to generate a ‘pre-crime’ report that Iran was moving toward building a nuclear bomb, which gave the US/Israel a facile pretext to ‘bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran’ (yet again)– with little effect.

    So how to actually accomplish regime change? Nuclear escalation (by either side) would be a political, economic, environmental, and even civilizational disaster. Tried and true ethnic ‘divide and conquer’ color revolution(s) not likely to succeed either. Both approaches may tend to further advance regional anti-US/Israel realignment. Recent article from the Cradle offers one example: https://thecradle.co/articles/pakistan-breaks-ranks-backs-iran-in-war-with-israel

    Reply ↓
  33. Old Jake

    As GramSci says, Kayfabe. Why? Who is fooled? JustTrump (/s)? Just a chance for the mic to pick up a few bucks? I doubt the Israelis are fooled, and those in the u.s. who are paying attention are not, while the rest don’t care anyway. So, what was the purpose of this kabuki show?

    Reply ↓
    1. Samuel Conner

      To my eye, it looks like the USians and Iranians are trying to avoid taking gloves off between each other while managing internal political constraints.

      Perhaps Israel (or, more precisely, the Israeli Prime Minister) will be hung out to dry.

      Reply ↓
      1. GramSci

        That’s my take as well. I never watch MSM ‘news’, but I couldn’t resist peeking at how the talking heads were handling this. They were like WWE color commenters, trying so, so hard to be earnest and dramatic.

        How will the war lobby recover? Which Senator will stab Trump first for having failed to roll out the nukes??

        The warmongers might regain their momentum, as NotThePilot worries, below. A false flag could help them. But for the moment, Mr Market, at least, seems happy. Bibi, maybe not so much.

        Reply ↓
    2. nyleta

      Both sides playing for time. Mr Trump needs the debt limit to go to $ 41.2 trillion and some people are trying to put a spanner in the works. Once he gets the $ 5 trillion he will be once again uncontrollable.

      Iran needs time to mobilise as well as it can, this will never be over because Israel will bomb Iran whenever it like from now on, just like Lebanon. Only a land army sent to Israel can stop that. Agreements and ceasefires mean nothing with the West now, Russia is showing the way.

      Reply ↓
      1. urdsama

        “Israel will bomb Iran whenever it like from now on”

        With what? They are rapidly running out of options and weapons, and I doubt Iran will allow the US or NATO to simply drop off a shipment of whatever they want. And to make matters more complicated, Russia is more than willing to backfill Iran, if they ask.

        Reply ↓
        1. hk

          Plus, given the distances involved, I don’t think it’s possible for Israel to pull off anything approaching that.

          Reply ↓
    3. ocypode

      The problem with kayfabe in war is that everyone needs to be on the same page; while it does seem like this ended up working as an off-ramp for Trump, the reporting has taken a strange, delusional character, as with this bit on axios in which Trump apparently announced a ceasefire that neither party has agreed to.

      This isn’t an official source (it’s FotrosResistance, AryJeay on twitter), but I like that he gives an Iranian perspective to events as they unfold. From his telegram:

      Weird… Axios says Israel & Iran have agreed to a ceasefire that will begin in 6 hours.

      This makes no sense. No iranian source have said anything.

      and

      🇮🇷🇮🇱| CNN now claims that a senior Iranian official told them that Tehran has not received any ceasefire proposal.

      According to CNN, the senior Iranian official said Iran will continue to fight until a lasting peace is achieved, and considers Israeli and American statements to be “deception” to justify attacks on Iranian interests.

      The official said: “At this very moment, the enemy is attacking Iran, and Iran is on the verge of escalating its retaliatory attacks and does not have a listening ear to listen to the lies of its enemies.”

      Feels as if Trump’s pretending he’s running a reality show and not a country.

      Reply ↓
      1. Samuel Conner

        > Trump apparently announced a ceasefire that neither party has agreed to.

        A very strange development. Perhaps DJT is angling for that Peace Prize — DJT declares that the war is over and both sides dutifully lay down arms.

        I think that Iran probably would like to see the Netanyahu government fall, and continuing attrition may accomplish that. And if there are actual peace talks while the conflict continues, Iran can press for an end to the siege of Gaza — “we’ll stop tormenting you when you stop tormenting the people of Gaza.”

        Reply ↓
        1. Samuel Conner

          It sounds like DJT is proposing that Iran stop shooting first; Israel completes the strikes it wants with no Iranian riposte, and Netanyahu declares victory.

          Somehow I doubt that the Iranians will go for that.

          My perception of an Iranian proposal from a few days ago was that Israel would stop striking, and Iran would stop retaliating. IOW, Israel stops shooting first.

          Reply ↓
  34. NotThePilot

    A general reply to the assumption that this is kayfabe or symbolic: Is it? Or is that just what everyone in the West keeps interpreting into it?

    If I were a strategist moving things into place for a major campaign, I’d want to be able to neutralize the single largest enemy airfield in the theater. And if I were doing it in a very Iranian way, I wouldn’t actually even try neutralizing it to start. I would prove to myself (and any enemy staff clever enough to tease out implications) that I can “get over the hump” at will, i.e. reliably achieve the actual, operational task that would decide such a move.

    While everyone keeps arguing over the number of missiles or hits, it seems pretty clear that the US & Qatar had to send their AD pretty hard. If the Pentagon quietly reads the message and Al-Udeid stays largely empty, Iran achieves its goal and everyone gets to go home. And (God forbid) if the Pentagon doesn’t, then Iran can plan to achieve its goal the painful way at the opportune moment.

    Reply ↓
    1. Acacia

      Persuasive reading of the situation. Re: kayfabe, the latest news certainly has that vibe:

      Trump claims ceasefire reached between Israel and Iran
      https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/6/23/trump-claims-ceasefire-reached-between-israel-and-iran

      Except that the Iranians are saying something different:

      “A senior Iranian official said that Tehran has not received any proposals for a ceasefire.”
      https://t.me/SabrenNews22/160607

      And after all, why should Iran listen to anything Trump says now? He would just stab them in the back again and then laugh about it.

      Reply ↓
      1. NakedEmperor

        Iran may be in worse shape from the bombings than they are letting on. Israeli strikes have inflicted major damage in Iran. So, Iran may be open to a ceasefire.

        Reply ↓
        1. Samuel Conner

          It’s Netanyahu who is talking about nearing fulfillment of war objectives, after which Israel would be willing to end the tit-for-tat.

          I can’t believe he believes the “Iranian nuclear program obliterated” rhetoric; I interpret his language to be a signal that he wants the fighting to stop — for obvious reasons; running low on air defense consumables.

          Presumably the Iranians also want to stop being shot at, but if they perceive the situation shifting to their advantage, they might want to continue in order to wring concessions from Israel.

          Reply ↓
        2. Carolinian

          The Iranians have always said that they will cease their retaliatory attacks when Israel ceases it’s illegal attacks. So perhaps the person we need to hear from would be Netanyahu–the organ grinder, not the monkey.

          And Israel is censoring all the damage done there and they have far less capacity than the much bigger Iran to absorb damage. If anyone is desperate for a ceasefire it is probably them. In another week or so they will be out of missiles and defenseless.

          Reply ↓
      2. stickNmud

        Based on reports from MSM/Israeli sources, I graphed the declining– ~90-100 daily for four days, down to ~30-45 for the last seven days– number of Iran missiles launched versus the increasing — from 5% to 35-40% in about a week– percentage of hits, and guesstimated that the 50% Iranian missile hits mark could be reached as soon as tomorrow. So great timing (for Israel) with Trump cease fire!

        And funny how Israeli censors did 180 on coverage of successful strikes after Trump said it would be hard for him to ask Israel to stop attacking Iran while they were still “winning”?

        In fact, Iran appears to be exhausting Israel’s ‘invincible’ air defenses, while I’ve yet to see a single video of any USAF/IAF aircraft in Iranian airspace, even ten days after Israel claimed to have total air superiority over Iran.

        If Iran is only launching 35 missile daily, based on low estimate of a 2,000 long range missiles in their inventory, Iran may still have 5-6 weeks worth of long range missiles. So Trump ceasefire might be tough sell to Iran!

        Reply ↓
        1. Yves Smith Post author

          Bad metrics, big time.

          Iran makes 300 missiles a month and is increasing production.

          When Iran engaged in a negotiated attack (pre-set times and targets) on Israel last fall, it started with a wave of slow-moving drones to deplete and confuse Israel air defenses and gather more info re how they worked.

          The reports from Iran is they were deliberately holding back their modern missiles and were using older ones in a similar manner.

          Iran did far more damage in its last big strikes than in its earlier round, so pray tell, why are you preoccupied with the missile count?

          And as a reader pointed out, once Iran largely or fully depleted Israel’s air defenses, it does not need missiles. It can break things aplenty with mere drones.

          Reply ↓
      3. johnnyme

        It doesn’t look like Iran is onboard with Trump’s ceasefire:

        Iran warns Ramat Gan

        Iran, mirroring the language and maps of the Israeli military, put out a warning telling people in Ramat Gan it would target “military infrastructure” there.

        Reply ↓
    1. Samuel Conner

      re inserting links, highlight the text that you want to embody the link, click on the “link” button, and paste or type the link URL into the window that appears, and the click “OK” in that window.

      You could highlight your bolded text before clicking the “link: button to make that embody the link.

      Reply ↓
    2. Samuel Conner

      I think your red text is the text that “contains” the link. I think you did it right initially. It looks like you now have the link there twice, once contained within your “Sorry not sure …” link and the 2nd time explicitly.

      Reply ↓
    3. stickNmud

      But no direct response from Israel or Iran, according to US military website TheWarZone, as of 8:13p EDT:

      A senior Iranian official told CNN that no such deal had been reached.

      “The official said Iran would continue to fight until it achieves lasting peace and that it would view remarks from Israel and the US as ‘a deception’ intended to justify attacks on Iran’s interests,” the network wrote.

      “At this very moment, the enemy is committing aggression against Iran, and Iran is on the verge of intensifying its retaliatory strikes, with no ear to listen to the lies of its enemies,” the official said.

      https://www.twz.com/news-features/trump-claims-israel-iran-ceasefire-deal-reached

      Reply ↓
      1. johnnyme

        Tehran will stop its attacks if Israel does, Iran’s foreign minister says

        Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi says Tehran will stop its attacks if Israel stops its airstrikes by 4 a.m. local time.

        The comment marked the first official remarks by Iran to Trump’s claimed ceasefire between Iran and Israel.

        Araghchi sent his message on the social platform X at 4:16 a.m. Tehran time.

        “As of now, there is NO ‘agreement’ on any ceasefire or cessation of military operations,” Araghchi wrote. “However, provided that the Israeli regime stops its illegal aggression against the Iranian people no later than 4 am Tehran time, we have no intention to continue our response afterwards.”

        Reply ↓
  36. Acacia

    Another attack, now in Iraq.

    An “unidentified drone” has hit a radar installation at Camp Taji in the capital, Baghdad.

    Photos show the antenna array on fire.

    A security source told Sabreen News:

    “The targeted radars were monitoring Israeli enemy aircraft over Iraqi airspace.”

    https://t.me/SabrenNews22/160638

    This, followed by reports of explosions near Baghdad Intl. airport.

    Over the past week at least, there have been large anti-ZATO street protests in Iraq, so this could(?) be some local actors joining in support of Iran.

    Reply ↓
  37. stickNmud

    https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/514877/Iran-has-not-agreed-to-a-ceasefire-Trump-is-lying-again

    TEHRAN – The Tehran Times understands that Donald Trump’s claim of an incoming ceasefire between Iran and Israel is another one of the American president’s lies aimed at pressuring the Iranians.
    —
    Mahdi Mohammadi, advisor to Iran’s parliament speaker, was one of the first figures reacting to the the fake announcement. “The U.S. and Israel are lying. They want Iran to put down its guard so they can escalate the tensions,” he wrote on X.
    —-
    https://nitter.poast.org/DD_Geopolitics/status/1937300400601989434#m
    —
    Residents of Tehran are reporting that this is the worse night of Israeli strikes since the onslaught began.
    —
    https://x.com/s_m_marandi/status/1937273861424189741
    —
    No ceasefire. Fake news.

    Zionists are in trouble.

    [Draw your own conclusions!]

    Reply ↓
    1. NakedEmperor

      Your post is contradictory.

      “Zionists are in trouble”

      “Residents of Tehran are reporting that this is the worse night of Israeli strikes since the onslaught began.”

      Apparently, Iran has little in the way of air defenses as Israel can strike any targets they choose.

      Reply ↓
      1. mahna

        It’s not madness, it’s show business! It’s Wrestlemania on steroids (or, more than the regular one). Bad script, bad acting, but real blood.

        Reply ↓
        1. Old Canuck

          Show business is exactly what it is. I wouldn’t be surprised if there was an agreement that the US would only do cosmetic damage to the nuclear bases in exchange for not having any planes shot down. Then the Iranians stage a choreographed missile attack on the airbase. Everybody’s “honour” is served. Now we have to see what the Israelis will do.

          Reply ↓
    4. The Rev Kev

      Does he think that there will be a ceasefire by just pretending that there is an agreement? That Israel and Iran will fall in line and go along with it? Have a ceasefire and then do negotiations like he demanded of Russia in the Ukraine? Children do this sort of thing.

      Reply ↓
      1. Rolf

        As ocypode notes above,

        Feels as if Trump’s pretending he’s running a reality show and not a country.

        He’s not really pretending. I often find myself forgetting how limited an individual Trump really is: this reminds me. This fantasy theatre is all Trumps knows how to do, in the end, reality TV was the only thing he was successful at; as pressure mounts to resolve a disaster of his own creation, he becomes essentially a child. What an utter effing sh*tshow.

        Reply ↓
    5. Samuel Conner

      There is an assertion at Al Jazeera that Aragchi has stated that if Israel stops by 4AM Tehran time, Iran will not retaliate, so there may be something to these reports. Iran will be the first to stop shooting (not responding to the latest Israeli strikes).

      If these are indeed unusually heavy, as suggested by your comment, it might be for Israeli domestic consumption — “we hit ’em hard and they caved.”

      —
      In Alexander Mercouris’ latest commentary, he speculates that Russia will help Iran improve its air defenses. This may be the end of Israeli impunity, at least toward Iran.

      Reply ↓
  38. urdsama

    Supposedly Iran launched missiles toward Israel, about 10 minutes ago.

    Does this break the ceasefire deadline (the wording is so family blog confusing)?

    Reply ↓
    1. Acacia

      It really sounds like this whole “ceasefire” was cooked up just to be able to say that the US and the Zionists respect a ceasefire, while the Iranians don’t. I.e., just pure bad faith (tho why should we expect anything less?).

      OSINTdefender reporting that a fourth U.S./Iraqi military base has come under attack by drones, and two radar installations in Iraq have been destroyed.

      Jerusalem Post reporting that an Iranian official says Tehran never received a ceasefire proposal, and they will continue the war, with remarks from Israeli and US leaders henceforth viewed as “deception”.

      As @AG remarked yesterday:

      America’s credibility as a negotiator and mediator is completely ruined, since Trump hit Iran in the midst of negotiations, which a reader reminded me is a violation of the Hague Regulations of 1907 and was held against Japan in the attack on Pearl Harbor.

      It baffles me that oil prices actually came down to $65 while all of this is happening, plus the Iranian Parliament vote on closing the Strait of Hormuz, plus tankers doing a U-turn, plus giant shipper Maersk going frosty on deliveries to the Zionists. Oil is now inching back up to $67, so maybe(?) the bottom is in.

      I have one friend who watches markets much more closely, but when I queried he is convinced that Israel had “air superiority” and Q.E.D. Iran will be toppled.

      **shrug**

      Reply ↓
      1. Yves Smith Post author

        There is no Iranian media acknowledgement of the ceasefire. Araghchi has apparently said Iran would stop shooting if Israel stopped shooting, which is just a reiteration of Iran’s existing position. Israel apparently delivered a salvo right before the ceasefire time and Iran fired back. So the action confirms your Jerusalem Post recap.

        Reply ↓
          1. Acacia

            I gather it’s what Yves mentioned, above, i.e., that Iran has previously said they will stop firing missiles at the Zionists if they in turn stop attacking Iran. I’ve not heard of this 4 AM deadline before, but as a rolling deadline it would be consistent with previous public statements.

            This situation is indeed very confusing, tho that’s how Trump rolls.

            Reply ↓
          2. Yves Smith Post author

            Israel struck right before the deadline and Iran shot back.

            This looks like Araghchi trying to spin this as not breaking the fake ceasefire so as try to deny the West a talking point…as if the West has any interest in veracity.

            The Global South would like see retaliating v. a “in spirit if not in fact” violation of a one-sided ceasefire as OK. But if you are ‘splaining, you are losing, which would argue for a less than precise tweet.

            Reply ↓
        2. hazelbee

          is this just more theatre? not quite a false flag but…

          DJT declares ceasefire.
          iran reiterates position – stop firing at us and we stop firing back.
          Israel says there will be a ceasefire.
          small time passes.
          Israel declares missiles launched from Iran – one or two depending on source.
          Iran does not acknowledge this despite announcing each and every previous wave
          Israel and DJT now get to say “they violated the ceasefire” and that gives pretext for more US action?

          not quite a false flag but potentially a big fat lie . a way of manufacturing consent for more action?

          The timings are very confusing right now though – went from ceasefire to not in the space of my morning school run

          Reply ↓
          1. Polar Socialist

            USA and Israel have agreed on ceasefire, Iran has stated that it stops when Israel stops. So, after Israel bombed Iran right up the the self-declared ceasefire, Iran still retaliated to that, as it promised.

            It’s up to Israel now to keep the ceasefire. Or, given that none of the pre-existing reasons for this conflict have been solved nor any agreements made, probably a short breather between the renewal of the “kinetic phase”. Unless Iran develops and demonstrates
            to possess nuclear weapons before Israel restocks it’s armory.

            Reply ↓
  39. NakedEmperor

    There is no way that the US and Israel will truly honor a ceasefire. Both are seeking regime change in Iran as their primary goal. That cannot be achieved with a ceasefire or any “deal” that Trump cooks up. Minsk 2 all over again. If Iran falls for it that’s on them.

    Reply ↓
  40. Skippy

    In the gist of all this its interesting to note Israel targeted Indian operated Chabahar Port, Chabahar southern coastal city of Iran – with kamikaze drones. The strikes come as retaliation against Iranian strikes on Haifa port which was also operated by Indian businessman Adani.

    Could not happen to a nicer … /s … sort of bloke …

    Wellie time to wait 24 hr and see how reality manifests …

    Reply ↓
  41. skippy

    I ponder who or what was at the destroyed residential building in Be’er Sheva. High rent sort of area and the missile used was top shelf terminal velocity.

    Reply ↓

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *