Category Archives: BRICS

Iran threatens to sink American ships in Strait of Hormuz

Warships exchanging missile and gunfire amid explosions in the Persian Gulf

And more war news from Iran, Russia, Ukraine and NATO! DUCK AND COVER!

Day 48: Iran Flips the Ultimatum Game on America’s Head

FLASH: RUSSIA SAYS BEING ATTACKED BY DRONES FLYING-IN FROM FINLAND AND BALTIC STATES

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so now we have PayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The buy me a coffee link is below.

Free Ebook on Spiritual Warfare

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

Iran Is Winning the War

iran flag and toy soldiers on map

7,000 Years of Civilization Against 250 Years of Empire

Editor Note: This is an excellent, detailed explanation of why Iran is winning the war and how their history of 7,000 years shows them (the Persians) to be indomitable. We’ve explored the Biblical side earlier today with Leeland Jones’ post and now we have this post to explore the physical and historical side of things. As a history buff this was very enjoyable to read! I hope you enjoy it as much as I did.

By Laala Bechetoula at Global Research. Reposted with permission.

The conqueror need not be stronger than the conquered. He need only be more willing to endure.” — Ibn Khaldun, Muqaddimah, 14th century

“No people has ever been liberated by a war it could not endure.” — Frantz Fanon, The Wretched of the Earth, 1961

“All human beings are members of one frame, since all, at first, from the same essence came. When time afflicts a limb with pain, the other limbs cannot at rest remain. If thou feel not for other’s misery, a human being is no name for thee.” — Sa’adi Shirazi, Bani Adam, 13th century — inscribed on a rug offered by Iran to the United Nations, New York, 2005

Prologue: The Clock that Never Started for Washington

On the morning of February 28, 2026, the United States of America and the State of Israel launched one of the most concentrated aerial campaigns in the history of modern warfare. In twelve hours, nearly 900 strikes rained down on the Islamic Republic of Iran — on its missile sites, its air defenses, its nuclear facilities, its military command centers, and on the compound where its Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, was assassinated along with members of his family.

Donald Trump predicted it would be over in “two or three days.”

Twenty-four days later, the Strait of Hormuz is still closed. Oil is above one hundred dollars a barrel. The global economy stands at the edge of recession. The International Energy Agency has declared the situation worse than the two oil crises of the 1970s combined. The Islamic Republic of Iran — battered, wounded, its navy decimated, its leaders assassinated, its nuclear installations struck three times — is still governing, still fighting, and still dictating the terms of every international conversation.

On March 22, Trump issued a 48-hour ultimatum in capital letters on Truth Social: reopen the Strait or face the obliteration of Iran’s power plants. Iran responded by threatening to mine the entire Persian Gulf and strike every energy installation in the region. Twelve hours before his own deadline expired, Trump announced that the United States and Iran had held “VERY GOOD AND PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS” and that strikes were postponed for five days.

“No negotiations have been held with the US. Fake news is being used to manipulate the financial and oil markets and escape the quagmire in which the US and Israel are trapped.” — Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Speaker of Iran’s Parliament, March 23, 2026

“There is no dialogue between Tehran and Washington. We are not the party that started this war.” — Iran’s Foreign Ministry, March 23, 2026

The empire launched its missiles. The civilization endured. And when the empire blinked, the civilization named it for what it was.

This is the story of why.

Part One: The Deepest Asymmetry — 7,000 Years against 250 Years

Before America Was Born, Persia Had Already Given the World Its Rights

To understand why Iran will not collapse under American and Israeli bombardment, one must first understand what Iran is — not in the geopolitical sense measured in GDP and missile inventories, but in the civilizational sense measured in millennia.

The Iranian plateau has been continuously inhabited for approximately 7,000 years. The Elamite civilization arose there around 3200 BCE, contemporaneous with the earliest Mesopotamian city-states. By the 6th century BCE, the Achaemenid Persian Empire under Cyrus the Great had become the largest empire the world had ever seen, stretching from the Aegean Sea to the Indus Valley — encompassing modern Greece, Egypt, Turkey, Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan — governed not by terror but, remarkably for antiquity, by a philosophy of tolerance and pluralism without parallel in the ancient world.

.

Elamite reliefs at Eshkaft-e Salman. The picture of a woman with dignity shows the importance of women in the Elamite era.[opinion]

Elamite reliefs at Eshkaft-e Salman. The picture of a woman with dignity shows the importance of women in the Elamite era. [Opinion] (CC BY-SA 2.0)

.

In 539 BCE, after conquering Babylon without a battle — the population reportedly opened the gates willingly — Cyrus issued a decree inscribed on a baked clay cylinder in Akkadian cuneiform. That cylinder, now housed in the British Museum in London — preserved in the very civilization that today bombs Tehran — was recognized by the United Nations in 1971 as the world’s first charter of human rights. A replica stands in the lobby of the United Nations headquarters in New York. Its provisions parallel the first four articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in 1948 — more than two and a half millennia after Cyrus had already enacted them.

The Cyrus Cylinder records that the King freed all slaves, declared that all people had the right to choose their own religion, established racial equality, and allowed exiled peoples to return to their homelands — including the 50,000 Jews held in Babylonian captivity, whom he freed at Persian state expense and helped fund the reconstruction of the Temple in Jerusalem. Cyrus is the only non-Jewish figure in the Hebrew Bible to be called Mashiach — the Anointed One.

This is the civilization that the United States of America — founded in 1776, 2,315 years after Cyrus issued his human rights charter — is trying to destroy from the air. This is the civilization that the State of Israel — established in 1948, when the Cyrus Cylinder was already 2,487 years old — claims the right to bomb into submission in the name of its own security.

A civilization with 7,000 years of memory — of invasions survived, of empires absorbed, of conquerors who came and went while Persia endured — does not experience a 24-day aerial campaign the way a 250-year-old nation experiences it. For Iran, this is not existential rupture. It is a chapter. A painful one, but a chapter. For the United States, which has never in its history been bombed on its own soil by a foreign power, which has never had its capital struck, its president killed, its cities reduced to rubble — this kind of war is unimaginable. For Iran, in the darkest sense, it is familiar.

Alexander the Great burned Persepolis in 330 BCE. The Mongols sacked Iran’s cities in the 13th century CE with an annihilating thoroughness estimated to have killed up to three-quarters of the population of some regions. The British engineered a coup in 1953, overthrowing the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh because he had dared to nationalize Iranian oil — a coup documented in detail by the CIA itself and acknowledged formally by the United States government in 2013. Iraq, armed and intelligence-supplied by the United States, invaded Iran in 1980 and fought an eight-year war that killed an estimated half-million Iranians, including through chemical weapons supplied with Western intelligence cooperation.

Iran is still here. Persia has always been still here.

The Intellectual Inheritance That No Bomb Can Touch

The civilization being bombed is the civilization of Avicenna (Ibn Sina, 980–1037 CE), whose Canon of Medicine was the primary medical textbook in European universities for six centuries. It is the civilization of Al-Biruni (973–1048 CE), whose calculation of the Earth’s circumference was accurate to within one percent. Of Khayyam, who produced algebraic solutions to cubic equations while Europe was burning books. Of Hafez and Rumi, whose poetry remains among the most widely read in the world — in Persian, Arabic, English, German, Hindi and dozens of other languages. Rumi’s Masnavi has been translated into more languages than almost any literary work in history outside of religious scripture.

When the bombs fall on Tehran, they fall on the city built by the inheritors of this tradition. That tradition does not die in an airstrike. It is, if anything, summoned by it.

Malek Bennabi — the Algerian philosopher whose thought has most profoundly shaped my own intellectual formation — argued in his concept of colonisabilité that civilizations are not conquered by superior weapons alone. They are conquered when they lose the internal will to remain themselves — when their cultural production collapses, when their intellectual class surrenders to the colonizer’s self-image. No such collapse is visible in Iran. The regime may be contested internally. But the civilization it governs is not.

Part Two: The Human Cost — Voices from under the Bombs

Before the geopolitics, before the cost-exchange ratios and the strategic analysis, there are the people.

According to the NGO Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA), by March 17, 2026 — the 17th day of the war — 3,114 people had been killed in Iran by US-Israeli airstrikes, including 1,354 civilians and 1,138 military personnel. UNICEF reported that by March 12, more than 200 children had been killed in Iran alone, with hundreds of thousands displaced and millions unable to attend school. The Iranian Red Crescent reported over 6,668 civilian residential units targeted. A US strike on a girls’ school adjacent to a naval base in Minab killed approximately 170 people on the first day.

.

Rescue workers and bystanders at the school after the attack (Mehr News Agency / CC BY 4.0)

.

These numbers have faces. These faces have voices. And those voices refuse to be reduced to the binary that Western media imposes on them — either celebrating the bombs or defending the regime. The truth they speak is more complex, more human, and more devastating than any geopolitical narrative.

A Tehran journalist in her late twenties, keeping a diary shared with NPR under conditions of anonymity — publishing her name risks arrest by the IRGC — wrote on the first day of the war, when Khamenei was killed: “People came to the roofs and watched and clapped when they hit a target we know. We chanted a lot last night.” She had been arrested twice at the IRGC base that was now bombed. She celebrated the strike.

But as the war entered its second week, her diary changed register. The bombs were no longer selective. The dead were no longer only those she had reason to hate.

A Xinhua correspondent based in Tehran wrote on March 3: “Missiles fell like falling stars, slicing through the darkness before detonating with a force that made the night flinch. The blasts were so violent that they seemed to split the sky at its seams.” In a taxi afterward, the driver shook his head: “Tehran used to be a peaceful city. Some thought the Americans would bring opportunity. Look at what they’ve brought — nothing but bombs.”

From the Iran-Turkey border, NPR’s Emily Feng reported on refugees crossing on foot. An Iranian man showed journalists oil stains on his jacket — residue from burning oil droplets that fell on Tehran’s neighborhoods when Israel struck fuel depots in early March. His 26-year-old cousin, who had risked his life protesting against the government in January, was among the civilians killed. “When he said that to me,” Feng reported, “he paused, like he almost couldn’t believe what he was saying out loud.”

“If the main power plants are bombed, it’s not going to be just a brief disruption; it could stop the flow of everything from water to gas. It would be foolish to just punish the population like that.” — Tehran resident, Al Jazeera, March 21, 2026

These testimonies share one thing: they refuse simplification. They contain simultaneously opposition to the Islamic Republic and rejection of the bombardment. They are not the testimonies of a broken people. They are the testimonies of a people absorbing an enormous blow and remaining, defiantly, themselves. That is what 7,000 years of civilizational memory looks like from the inside.

Part Three: 50 Years under Siege — The Sanctions that Forged the Weapon

The Most Sanctioned Nation in Modern History

Before a single Tomahawk missile was fired on February 28, 2026, Iran had already been fighting the United States for nearly half a century — not with drones and missiles, but with its sheer capacity to survive.

The first American sanctions were imposed in November 1979. Executive Order 12170, signed by President Carter, froze approximately $8.1 billion in Iranian assets held abroad. That was 46 years ago. Through eight consecutive American administrations — through Republican and Democratic presidencies alike, through periods of Iranian nuclear compliance and non-compliance — the sanctions regime has never fundamentally lifted. It has only expanded.

1979 — First sanctions. $8.1 billion in assets frozen. Trade embargo.

1987 — Reagan bans all Iranian goods and services from the US market.

1995 — Clinton prohibits all US trade with and investment in Iran.

1996 — Congress penalizes foreign firms investing more than $20M/year in Iranian energy.

2006–2010 — Four rounds of UN Security Council sanctions targeting Iran’s nuclear program.

2012 — EU bans Iranian oil exports. SWIFT disconnects all Iranian banks. The rial loses 80% of its value in months.

2018 — Trump withdraws from the JCPOA — which Iran had been complying with, as IAEA-certified. Standard Chartered fined $1.5B; JP Morgan pays $5.3M for 87 violations.

The crowning irony came just days before the war. US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent testified before the Senate Banking Committee in February 2026: “What we have done is created a dollar shortage in the country. It came to a swift and grand culmination in December, when one of the largest banks in Iran went under. The central bank had to print money. The Iranian currency went into free fall. Inflation exploded, and hence we have seen the Iranian people out on the street.” He said this as justification for the coming war. Three days later, his government began bombing the country whose suffering he had just catalogued.

The sanctions did not destroy Iran. They forged it.

The Weapon Born of Embargo

Because Iran could not import spare parts, it learned to manufacture them. Because it could not access Western technology, it reverse-engineered it. The Shahed-136 suicide drone was born directly from the crucible of American sanctions — a product of necessity, of engineering ingenuity applied under conditions of enforced isolation, using Chinese components and reverse-engineering. Its unit cost: $20,000 to $50,000.

The United States spent 50 years trying to economically strangle Iran into military inferiority. It instead forged the weapon that is now draining its own interceptor stockpiles at a rate no factory on earth can replenish in time.

Part Four: The Arithmetic of Empire — Dollars against Drones

Strip away the presidential declarations and the satellite images of burning Tehran, and what this war ultimately comes down to is an equation — the most consequential military-economic equation of the 21st century.

On one side: the American Patriot PAC-3 MSE interceptor missile. Unit cost: approximately $4 million. The THAAD interceptor: $12 to $15 million per shot. The ship-based SM-3: $10 to $28 million. On the other: the Iranian Shahed-136 loitering munition. Unit cost: $20,000 to $50,000. The cost ratio: between 80:1 and 200:1.

Kelly Grieco of the Stimson Center has calculated that for every dollar Iran spends manufacturing a Shahed drone, the UAE spends between $80 and $200 to intercept it. Lockheed Martin produces approximately 600 Patriot interceptors per year. Iran launched more than 2,000 drones in the first week of this conflict alone.

In the first 100 hours of Operation Epic Fury, the United States fired approximately 170 Tomahawk cruise missiles — nearly three times the number the Pentagon had ordered from Raytheon for the entire fiscal year 2026. The Center for Strategic and International Studies estimated the value of interceptors expended in those first 100 hours at approximately $1.7 billion.

“The US, Israel, and Gulf countries are largely relying on US-made systems, which means they are all drawing from the same production lines. You can’t replace those kinds of missiles overnight. It would take years.” — Kelly Grieco, Stimson Center, March 2026

The June 2025 twelve-day war had already consumed an estimated 150 THAAD interceptors and 80 SM-3s — roughly a quarter of the entire US THAAD stockpile — in under two weeks. The Houthi Red Sea campaign the year before had burned through an additional 200 Standard Missile interceptors. By July 2025, Patriot stockpiles had fallen to 25 percent of the volume the Pentagon deemed necessary.

The Heritage Foundation warned in January 2026 that high-end interceptor stockpiles could be exhausted within days of sustained combat. The Wall Street Journal reported that the United States is “racing to destroy Iran’s missile and drone assets before it runs out of interceptors.” That sentence contains the entire strategic situation of this war: the world’s preeminent military power is racing against an economic clock it does not control.

Iran’s entire 2025 defense budget was approximately $23 billion — roughly 2.5 percent of the American defense budget of $900 billion. The Shahed drone was designed specifically to exploit the fatal flaw at the heart of Western high-technology defense: the catastrophic cost ratio between precision interceptors and cheap, mass-producible swarm weapons. This is not improvisation. It is strategy.

Part Five: The Two Chokepoints — Oil and Water

The Strait of Hormuz: Where Geography Becomes a Weapon

At its narrowest, the Strait of Hormuz is 33 kilometers wide. Through this channel passes approximately 20 percent of the world’s total petroleum supply — roughly 21 million barrels of oil and liquefied natural gas per day. More than 25 percent of global LNG trade transits here. Saudi Arabia’s primary oil export route. Iraq’s economic lifeline. Qatar’s gas, which heats European homes.

.

Strait of Hormuz (Public Domain)

.

Iran has closed it. Not with the naval fleet that American and Israeli strikes have largely destroyed — over fifty Iranian naval vessels now rest on the sea floor. But with mines, drone swarms, ballistic missile threats, and the invisible weapon of risk: no insurance underwriter will currently cover a vessel transiting a strait where Iranian weapons continue to operate.

IEA Director Fatih Birol has been explicit: the situation is “very severe — worse than the two oil crises of the 1970s and the fallout from the Ukraine war put together.” At least 40 energy facilities across nine countries have been severely damaged since February 28. Global oil prices surged from under $60 per barrel in January 2026 to $113 on March 22.

A third of the world’s fertilizer trade also passes through the Strait. Shipping lines have rerouted. Aviation across the Middle East has collapsed. The war sold to the world as a campaign for the “rules-based international order” is systematically destroying the supply chains that order was built to protect.

The rhetorical question worth inscribing at the entrance of every foreign ministry: Who, exactly, is blockading whom?

Water: The Existential Lever Not Yet Fully Pulled

The Gulf states account for roughly 60 percent of global desalination capacity. The dependency figures tell the story of existential vulnerability:

  • Kuwait: 90 percent of drinking water from desalination
  • Bahrain: 90 percent
  • Oman: 86 percent
  • Saudi Arabia: 70 percent
  • UAE: 42 percent

Critically, more than 90 percent of the Gulf’s desalinated water comes from just 56 mega-complexes — geographically fixed, technically complex, energy-intensive facilities in close proximity to Iran. A CIA analysis classified in the 1980s and made public in 2010 already identified this vulnerability explicitly.

On March 7, a drone caused material damage to a desalination plant in Bahrain — the first confirmed strike on Gulf water infrastructure in this conflict. Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated: “Attacking Iran’s infrastructure is a dangerous move with grave consequences. The US set this precedent, not Iran.”

“If attacks on desalination plants are the beginning of a military policy and not just mistakes or collateral damage, this is both illegal — a war crime — and a very concerning development, as Gulf countries have only a few weeks of water storage.” — Laurent Lambert, Doha Institute for Graduate Studies

A few weeks of water storage. That is the margin between the current situation and a humanitarian catastrophe of unprecedented scale — 100 million people without regular access to drinking water. That margin is held not by American air defenses or Gulf state diplomacy, but by an Iranian decision not yet taken. The Gulf states that have quietly allowed American operations from their territory know this. That knowledge is its own form of Iranian strategic victory.

Part Six: The Matrix that Does Not Fall

Washington went to war with a theory: kill the leadership, paralyze the command structure, trigger popular uprising, produce regime change in days. Trump predicted “two or three days.” His military launched 900 strikes in 12 hours. Khamenei was killed on day one. Ali Larijani was assassinated on March 17. Dozens of IRGC commanders have been eliminated.

Twenty-four days later, the Islamic Republic is governing.

“It’s not like we finally found the one leader who, once we kill that leader, the whole house of cards comes apart, because it’s not a house of cards. This is more of a matrix — a flexible matrix.” — Robert Pape, University of Chicago

Kill the apex of a matrix, and you eliminate the layer requiring the most real-time communication between senior leadership and mid-levels. The mid-level commanders do not pause. They reorganize laterally, often with greater aggression and less political restraint than before. Pape’s structural diagnosis: “The new politics triggered by the bombing work to the disadvantage of regime change. What you’re getting instead is negative regime change: leaders from the second generation who are more anti-American, more dangerous, more willing to take costs in order to punish America.”

The historical record is not ambiguous. It is overwhelming.

Vietnam (1965–1973): The most bombed country in the history of aerial warfare did not capitulate. The government the US sought to destroy united the country in 1975. It is still there.

Iraq (2003): The regime fell in 21 days. The state destruction produced fifteen years of insurgency, sectarian civil war, the rise of ISIS, and a regional catastrophe still unresolved.

Libya (2011): Seven months of NATO air campaign. Gaddafi killed. The state dissolved into permanent civil war, still ongoing fifteen years later.

Afghanistan: Twenty years. Over $2 trillion. The Taliban returned to power within two weeks of American withdrawal.

In each case: tactical destruction, strategic failure. The assumption that the targeted society was brittle was catastrophically wrong. Every time. Without exception.

Part Seven: Faith as a Strategic Variable

Western strategic analysis has a structural blind spot. It can model military capability, economic leverage, and political will in the terms familiar to liberal democratic systems. What it cannot model — because it has no conceptual vocabulary for it — is the role of faith as a strategic variable.

Shia Islam’s foundational narrative is the Battle of Karbala, fought on October 10, 680 CE. Hussein ibn Ali, grandson of the Prophet, chose death rather than submission to illegitimate power. Surrounded by seventy companions against thousands, knowing death was certain, Hussein did not surrender. He was killed. His head was severed and sent to Damascus.

That day — Ashura — is the most important day in the Shia calendar. Not as a day of defeat. As a day of witness: the theology of the victory of principle over power, of the testimony of the righteous over the triumph of the unjust. In the Shia eschatological framework, every Iranian soldier who dies in this war is a shahid — a martyr and witness whose death carries divine meaning. Every bombed city block is not evidence that God has abandoned Iran. It is evidence, within this framework, that Iran stands on the side of righteousness.

No Patriot battery can intercept that. No THAAD system can neutralize it. No Tomahawk missile can destroy it.

Robert Pape identifies “strategic culture” — a population’s cohesion and tolerance for suffering — as the decisive variable when military force is sufficient to destroy but insufficient to conquer. Iran’s strategic culture of endurance is theologically produced, historically reinforced across seven thousand years, and politically mobilized by every bomb that falls on Tehran. The Shahed drone carries a $35,000 warhead. It also carries, in the consciousness of the millions who watch it launched, the weight of Karbala, the memory of fifty years of embargo, the dignity of civilizational continuity. That is not a weapon the United States knows how to defeat.

Part Eight: Sun Tzu and the Strategic Bankruptcy of Trump and Netanyahu

Image: Qing-era representation of Sun Tzu (Public Domain)

A statue of Sun Tzu

There is a text that every military academy in the world assigns. Written approximately 2,500 years ago in China by a general named Sun Tzu, The Art of War is the most influential strategic treatise in human history. Its central thesis: victory belongs to the one who has thought before striking, not the one who strikes hardest. Every principle it establishes, Trump and Netanyahu have systematically violated.

First Principle

1. “Know your enemy and know yourself; in a hundred battles you will never be defeated.

What did Trump and Netanyahu know about Iran before launching 900 strikes in 12 hours? That its economy was fragile from sanctions. That its population had been in the streets protesting in December 2025. What they did not understand: that a civilization of 7,000 years does not measure its will to resist in GDP or inflation rates. That the ʻasabiyya of which Ibn Khaldun wrote is activated, not destroyed, by foreign bombardment. That the Iranian woman who had been arrested twice for not wearing a hijab, who celebrated the first strikes, would — as her neighborhood was blanketed by burning oil droplets from Israeli strikes on Tehran’s fuel depots — end her March 16 diary entry with: “In the final battle I will burn every single one of these psychopathic murderers” — meaning the regime. But she was writing from a city under foreign attack. The distinction, under bombs, dissolves.

Sun Tzu’s Verdict: They did not know their enemy. They had already lost.

Second Principle

2. “The supreme excellence in war is to break the enemy’s resistance without fighting.

On February 27, 2026 — eighteen hours before the first bomb fell — Oman’s Foreign Minister Badr Al-Busaidi confirmed that a diplomatic breakthrough had been achieved: Iran had agreed to never stockpile enriched uranium, to permit full IAEA verification, and to irreversibly downgrade its existing enriched uranium to the lowest possible level. Peace was, in his words, “within reach.” Negotiations were scheduled to resume March 2. Eighteen hours later, the bombs began to fall. A negotiated solution — Iran denuclearized by agreement, Strait open, markets stabilized, American hegemony preserved without a single casualty — was sacrificed.

Sun Tzu’s Verdict: The victory without combat was available. They chose war. This is the foundational strategic error from which all subsequent failures flow.

Third Principle

3. “He who has not reflected on difficulties will not be able to take advantage of his strengths.

A war without a defined victory condition is a war lost before it is begun. The official record of Trump administration war objectives, in chronological order: Hegseth (Feb. 28) — ending “47 long years of war.” Rubio (Feb. 28, hours later) — pre-emptive defense of US forces. Trump (Mar. 2) — regime change in “two or three days.” Trump (Mar. 9) — “I think the war is very complete, pretty much.” Hegseth (Mar. 11) — “This is only just the beginning.” Trump (Mar. 21) — 48-hour ultimatum. Trump (Mar. 23) — five-day delay for “productive” talks. Tehran (Mar. 23) — “There is no dialogue between Tehran and Washington.” Ten incompatible war aims in twenty-four days.

“Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” — Sun Tzu, The Art of War

Sun Tzu’s Verdict: No definition of victory. No strategy. Campaign lost structurally.

Fourth Principle

4. “Appear strong when you are weak, and weak when you are strong.

Iran practices Sun Tzu. It closes the Strait but maintains deliberate ambiguity about its capacity to keep it closed indefinitely, forcing the adversary to exhaust resources against contingencies that may never materialize. It denies negotiations while allowing regional intermediaries — Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt — to carry messages sufficient for Trump to construct a narrative of “productive conversations” allowing him to retreat without formal capitulation. It strikes near Dimona without destroying the reactor — demonstrating existential capability while withholding its use. Trump, meanwhile, announces his threats in capital letters on a public social media platform. He sets deadlines in specific hours. He retreats from those deadlines before his own stated expiration time. Iranian state television broadcast the verdict without ambiguity: “Trump, fearing Iran’s response, backed down from his 48-hour ultimatum.” Every strategist on earth — in Beijing, Moscow, Pyongyang, Caracas — read that broadcast. Its lesson: American ultimatums can be waited out. In deterrence theory, this is credibility degradation — each capitulation makes the next threat easier to ignore.

Sun Tzu’s Verdict: Iran practices the master’s art. Trump and Netanyahu violate every chapter.

Fifth Principle

5. “In war, the victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won.

Trump and Netanyahu launched their campaign and then looked for what victory might mean. They have been looking for twenty-four days. They have not found a stable answer. Iran, by contrast, had its victory condition defined before the first American missile fell: survival. Remain standing. Keep the Strait closed. Force economic pain on the global system. Demonstrate that the most powerful military alliance in history cannot achieve its stated objectives against a determined adversary. Let the world draw its own conclusions. Sun Tzu would recognize the Iranian strategy immediately. He would struggle to find the American one.

Sun Tzu’s Verdict: They fought first and looked for victory afterward. Iran had its victory condition on day one.

Sixth Principle — The Paradox of Sanctions

6. “Turn the enemy’s own strength against him.

Forty-six years of American economic warfare designed to prevent Iran from developing military capability directly produced the military capability now bankrupting Western defense budgets. Every sanction that forced Iran to innovate domestically, every technology embargo that compelled reverse-engineering, every financial exclusion that drove self-reliance — collectively forged the asymmetric arsenal that is today draining Raytheon and Lockheed Martin production lines at a rate no factory on earth can replenish in time. The sanctions were intended as a stranglehold. They became a forge. Sun Tzu could not have designed a better trap.

Sun Tzu’s Verdict: The enemy’s weapon was built by his own hand. Fifty years of sanctions forged the drone.

Part Nine: The Third Winner — Beijing’s Silent Harvest

While Washington burns through missile interceptors, carrier group logistics, and political capital in the Persian Gulf, China is quietly consolidating the strategic architecture of the 21st century.

To sustain Operation Epic Fury, the United States has redeployed advanced missile defense systems from the Indo-Pacific to the Middle East — THAAD batteries and naval interceptor platforms whose Pacific positioning most directly threatened Chinese security interests. Melanie Hart of the Atlantic Council’s Global China Hub is precise: “It is impossible to overstate the degree to which those movements are a massive win for Beijing. And if the United States ends up stuck in another Middle Eastern quagmire that cedes the Indo-Pacific to China, the wins will keep coming.”

Russia is the clearest immediate beneficiary: oil above $100 a barrel has replenished Moscow’s war chest and reduced Ukrainian leverage in any future peace negotiation. The war the Trump administration was supposed to prevent — Russia’s slow conquest of Ukraine — is being financed, in part, by the economic disruption of the war the Trump administration chose to start.

China alone entered this crisis with genuine strategic depth: the world’s largest strategic petroleum reserves outside the United States, Belt and Road energy supply chains diversified against Gulf disruption, discounted Iranian oil throughout the conflict, and the patience to dominate Gulf state reconstruction contracts when the shooting stops.

The 2026 Iran war may be remembered as the moment the American Pacific Century began its terminal phase — not in a confrontation over Taiwan, but in a miscalculation over a nuclear facility in the Iranian desert.

Part Ten: The Global South Is Watching

This war is not only about Iran. It is about what Iran’s performance means for every non-Western state calculating its strategic options in a world still structured — for now — by American military primacy.

For seventy years, the fundamental premise underwriting that structure has been: no state that directly confronts American military power can survive the confrontation with its government intact. Vietnam cracked that premise. Afghanistan confirmed it required extended occupation to fail. Iran, in 2026, is demonstrating something new: that a non-Western state can absorb sustained American bombardment, maintain its institutional functions, weaponize the global economy through geography and cheap technology, and force the aggressor into public strategic incoherence — all without nuclear weapons.

The Shahed drone that costs $35,000 and forces a $4 million Patriot intercept is not merely a weapon. It is a political statement: the technological and financial gulf between the imperial center and the periphery is no longer sufficient to guarantee compliance.

The Global South is watching from Caracas, Pyongyang, Harare, and Algiers. What it is watching — in real time, measured in the smoking debris of interceptors that cost $4 million to stop a drone that cost $20,000 — is the demonstration that the age of uncontested American military omnipotence is ending.

Malek Bennabi argued that civilizations are not defeated by superior weapons. They are defeated by the internal exhaustion of their own will to be. The civilization that forgets why it exists is already dying, regardless of its arsenal. Seven thousand years of Persian civilization have not forgotten why they exist. Two hundred and fifty years of American power, increasingly incapable of naming what it is fighting for, may be in the process of that forgetting.

Conclusion: The War that Time Cannot Win

Napoleon invaded Russia in June 1812 with 600,000 soldiers. He reached Moscow in September. The Russians burned their own capital rather than surrender it. The Grande Armée, designed for decisive engagement, had no strategic answer for a people willing to accept unlimited suffering in preference to submission. By December, fewer than 100,000 of those 600,000 men had returned.

The lesson was not about military technology. It was about will, time, and the asymmetry of what each side had to lose.

Twenty-four days of the most sophisticated aerial campaign in the history of warfare. The supreme leader, dead. The secretary of the National Security Council, assassinated. Fifty naval vessels on the ocean floor. Natanz struck three times. At least 1,354 civilians killed, 200 children among them. Billions of dollars of military infrastructure destroyed.

And yet: the Islamic Republic governs. Its drones are flying. The Strait of Hormuz is closed. Oil is above $100. The global economy is hostage. Trump invents negotiations that Iran denies in real time. His ultimatums expire un-executed. His war has no articulated end state. Sun Tzu, reading the record from twenty-five centuries away, would close his treatise and say: this campaign was lost before the first missile was fired.

There is a final fact that history will not overlook. On February 27, 2026 — the day before the bombs began to fall — Oman’s Foreign Minister confirmed that a diplomatic breakthrough was within reach. Iran had agreed to full nuclear transparency. Peace was available. The decision was taken to bomb rather than negotiate.

Sa’adi Shirazi wrote, in 13th-century Persia, the verse that hangs today at the entrance of the United Nations: “All human beings are members of one frame, since all, at first, from the same essence came.” Iran sent that poem to the United Nations. The United States sent it cruise missiles.

The empire has more weapons. Iran has more memory.

Memory, in the long run, wins.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article. Follow us on Instagram and X and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost Global Research articles with proper attribution.

Laala Bechetoula is an Algerian journalist and writer, author of “The Book of Gaza Hashem: A Testament Written in Olive Wood and Ash”. She is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Sources

Persian Civilization and the Cyrus Cylinder

British Museum, London (permanent collection, Room 52)

UN Human Rights Programme: History of Natural Law & Basic Freedoms

Facing History & Ourselves: From Ancient Persia to a Global Declaration (2024)

Sa’adi Shirazi, Bani Adam (13th c.) — official UN display, New York lobby, 2005

Ancient Origins: The Cyrus Cylinder and the Ancient Proclamation of Human Rights

Iranian Civilian Testimonies

NPR / Ruth Sherlock: Life under bombing in Tehran: The diary of an Iranian writer (March 13, 2026)

NPR / Emily Feng: Fear, defiance, and anger: Iranians describe life under bombardment (March 19, 2026)

NPR: The latest updates on the Iran war after three weeks (March 21, 2026)

Xinhua: Letter from Mideast: Heart on fire — Tehran under bombs (March 3, 2026)

Al Jazeera: Our hearts were shaking: Tehran endures night of heavy bombing (March 10, 2026)

Civilian Casualties

HRANA (Human Rights Activists News Agency): 3,114 deaths by March 17, 2026, incl. 1,354 civilians

UNICEF report of March 12, 2026: 200+ children killed in Iran

Iranian Red Crescent Society: 6,668+ civilian units targeted

Wikipedia: 2026 Iran War (updated March 24, 2026)

Iran Sanctions — Full Historical Record

Wikipedia: International Sanctions Against Iran; United States Sanctions Against Iran

Al Jazeera: Timeline: Sanctions on Iran (2012, updated 2026)

US Library of Congress / Congress.gov: U.S. Sanctions on Iran (CRS Report IF12452)

European Parliament Research Service: EPRS Brief 777928 (2025)

Senate Banking Committee, Scott Bessent testimony, February 2026

Laudati et al., Journal of Applied Econometrics (2023): Identifying the effects of sanctions on the Iranian economy

Military Cost Asymmetry

Northeastern University / Stephen Flynn: US-Israeli war on Iran enters fourth week, costs come into focus (March 23, 2026)

The Dupree Report: Iran’s $20K Drones vs America’s $4M Missiles (March 2026)

Middle East Eye: Iranian drones cost a fraction of air defences (March 2026)

Globe and Mail: The high price of intercepting Iran’s low-cost drones (March 2026)

Kelly Grieco, Stimson Center (multiple citations, March 2026)

Heritage Foundation: stockpile warning, January 2026

Strait of Hormuz and Economic Impact

IEA Director Fatih Birol, statements March 22–23, 2026 (Australia National Press Club)

Al Jazeera: Iran war updates, day 23 (March 22–23, 2026)

Centre for European Reform: War in Iran: Who wins and who loses? (March 2026)

Britannica: 2026 Iran War (updated March 24, 2026)

Desalination Vulnerability

Al Jazeera: How targeting of desalination plants could disrupt water supply (March 8, 2026)

Atlantic Council / Ginger Matchett: Attacks on desalination plants forecast a dark future (March 18, 2026)

CSIS / David Michel: Could Iran Disrupt the Gulf Countries’ Desalinated Water Supplies? (March 2026)

Foreign Policy: U.S. Strike on Qeshm Island Risks Spiral of Retaliation (March 9, 2026)

CNN: Water is even more vital than oil and gas — and it’s at risk (March 11, 2026)

Laurent Lambert, Doha Institute for Graduate Studies

Zane Swanson, CSIS Global Food and Water Security Program

Air Power and Regime Change

Robert Pape, University of Chicago: An air power expert explains why Iran is more powerful now, MS.NOW (March 21, 2026)

Robert Pape: The Escalation Trap (newsletter, 2026)

Atlantic Council: Twenty questions about the Iran war (March 2026)

Washington Institute for Near East Policy: Assessing U.S. Progress in the Iran War (March 2026)

The Ultimatum and Fake Negotiations (March 22–23, 2026)

CBS News live updates: Trump calls off Strait of Hormuz ultimatum (March 23, 2026)

NPR: Trump says the U.S. is in talks with Iran, which Iran denies (March 23, 2026)

Al Jazeera: Iran denies any talks with US after Trump claims productive discussions (March 23, 2026)

ITV News: Trump says Iran wants very much to make deal, as Tehran calls talks fake news (March 23, 2026)

Iran Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, official statement (March 23, 2026)

Hassan Ahmadian, University of Tehran (cited by Al Jazeera, March 23, 2026)

China and Geopolitical Implications

Atlantic Council / Melanie Hart: Twenty questions about the Iran war (March 2026)

Centre for European Reform: War in Iran: Who wins and who loses? (March 2026)

Sun Tzu

Sun Tzu, The Art of War (c. 500 BCE), tr. Lionel Giles (1910); tr. Samuel B. Griffith (Oxford University Press, 1963)

B.H. Liddell Hart, Strategy (1954)

Colin Gray, Modern Strategy (Oxford University Press, 1999)

Philosophical and Intellectual Framework

Ibn Khaldun, Muqaddimah (1377 CE)

Frantz Fanon, The Wretched of the Earth (1961, Présence Africaine; English tr. Grove Press, 1963)

Malek Bennabi, Vocation de l’Islam (1954); Le problème des idées dans le monde musulman (1970); Les conditions de la renaissance (1949)

Sa’adi Shirazi, Bustan / Bani Adam (13th century)

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so now we have PayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The buy me a coffee link is below.

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

Three Takeaways From The US’ Seizure Of A Russian-Flagged Tanker In The Atlantic

Guest Post by Andrew Korybko

The overarching trend is that the US is militarily reasserting its historical “sphere of influence” over the Americas, and enforcing the maritime component of “Fortress America” is so important for Trump 2.0 that it’s willing to rubbish the “rules-based order” over it and even risk an accidental war with Russia.

The Russian-flagged Marinera tanker was just seized by the US in the Atlantic. It was earlier named the Bella 1 and is under US sanctions due to connections to Hezbollah. It sailed under the Guyanese flag from Iran to Venezuela and attempted to break the US’ blockade. It failed, turned around, changed its name to the Marinera, and received a temporary permit to sail under the Russian flag before being seized. Russian then demanded that its citizens on board be treated humanely and returned home.

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth posted that “The blockade of sanctioned and illicit Venezuelan oil remains in FULL EFFECT — anywhere in the world.” This preceded Attorney General Pam Bondi threatening that criminal charges might be pursued against the crew. Her tweet and Hegseth’s other one about how the US will only permit “legitimate and lawful” energy commerce with Venezuela shows that it’s once again assuming so-called “police” functions. Here are three takeaways from this incident:

———-

1. The US Is Surprisingly Nonchalant About An Accidental War With Russia

It was brazen even by the US’ standards to seize a Russian-flagged tanker, especially after Western media reported that Russia had dispatched ships and a submarine to escort it, which Russia didn’t confirm and none were nearby during the seizure. Nevertheless, Trump 2.0 calculated that there’d be no retaliation despite the deputy chairman of Russia’s parliamentary defense committee warning that “any attack on our carriers can be regarded as an attack on our territory, even if the ship is under a foreign flag.”

This incident interestingly occurred in parallel with the US backing European ceasefire guarantees for Ukraine that include British and French commitments to deploy troops there during that time even though Russia has repeatedly warned that they’d be legitimate targets. Quite clearly, the US is now surprisingly nonchalant about an accidental war with Russia, whether over seizing one of its flagged ships at sea or over NATO allies getting killed in Ukraine. This observation won’t be lost on Russia.

2. “Fortress America” Also Includes An Important Maritime Component

The goal of restoring the US’ unipolar hegemony over the Americas, which is described as the highest regional priority in its new National Security Strategy, can be referred to as building “Fortress America”. This isn’t being pursued just for reasons of prestige but also pragmatism in the sense of enabling the US to survive and even thrive if it’s ever expelled from the Eastern Hemisphere or decides to retreat from there since control over the hemisphere’s resources and markets would all but ensure this outcome.

As can be seen by this incident as well as Hegseth’s and Bondi’s posts about it, there’s also an important maritime component related to controlling the export of oil from Venezuela, which has the world’s largest reserves. This can only be achieved by maintaining the unilateral blockade and seizing all ships that violate it, both on law enforcement pretexts that embody the concept of extraterritoriality. Without this maritime component, “Fortress America” could never truly be built, but it’s not without some costs.

3. The US Is Dismantling The “Rules-Based Order” That It Built Over The Decades

The abovementioned point segues into the last one about how the US’ militarily enforced extraterritoriality vis-à-vis Venezuela dismantles the “rules-based order” that it built over the decades for maintaining its unipolar hegemony over the world after the end of the Old Cold War. This violates the international laws that the US used to selectively police across the world according to its arbitrary standards. Instead of international ones, the US is now policing its own, but also in pursuit of hegemony.

International law has increasingly become illusory due to the UN’s innate dysfunction, which is related to the deadlock among the UNSC’s five permanent members, with one usually vetoing significant proposals from the others. Even so, if the Great Powers abided by it in their ties with one another, then there’d be more predictability and less risk of war by miscalculation. The US is no longer interested in even that as proven by this incident, however, since building “Fortress America” now takes precedence over all else.

———-

The trend connecting the three aforementioned takeaways is that the US is militantly reasserting its historical “sphere of influence” over the Americas, and this is so important for Trump 2.0 that it’s willing to rubbish the “rules-based order” over it and even risk an accidental war with Russia. The maritime component off of Venezuela’s Caribbean coast that’s been built before all else is justified by the administration as a law enforcement operation that prioritizes domestic laws over international ones.

Since this is taking place on the other side of the world where neither half of the Sino-Russo Entente has any military bases, they can’t challenge this even through indirect means, unlike how the US challenged Russia’s reassertion of its own historical “sphere of influence” in Ukraine through the ongoing proxy war. This doesn’t mean that the US’ grand strategic goal of restoring its unipolar hegemony over the Americas will succeed, just that if it doesn’t, then it’ll be due to intra-hemispheric reasons and not external forces.

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so now we have PayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The buy me a coffee link is below.

Free Ebook on Spiritual Warfare

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

The Stage Is Set For A US-Instigated Security Dilemma Between The Eurasian Rimland & Heartland

Guest Post by Andrew Korybko

US-backed NATO, Pakistan, and the “Asian/Containment Crescent” of Japan, Taiwan, and the Philippines are poised to respectively face off against Russia, India, and China across this century.

The US is sending mixed signals about the SinoRusso Entente, which was strengthened by the Power of Siberia 2 gas pipeline deal, after Trump said in September that he’s “not concerned” about it while Secretary of War Pete Hegseth claimed that he ordered him to “re-establish deterrence” against them. As was argued here, “Trump 2.0’s Eurasian Balancing Act Has Failed” largely as a result of this development, which importantly involved India’s tacit approval amidst its rapprochement with China.

Far from remaining divided, principally as regards China and India with all the complications that their continued rivalry would entail for Russia’s own balancing act, Eurasia’s three most powerful civilization-states are increasingly coming together to revive their dormant Russia-India-China (RIC) format. This platform is significant on its own but it’s also crucially the core of BRICS and the SCO, which play complementary roles in gradually transforming global governance as explained here.

These RIC-accelerated multipolar processes can’t be countered through direct military force, however, but the way in which the Pentagon might try to slow everything down is through provoking arms races. NATO’s, Pakistan’s, and the “Asian/Containment Crescent’s” (Japan-Taiwan-Philippines) US-backed military buildups (partial in Pakistan’s case) could help achieve this vis-à-vis Russia, India, and China as could reinforced US military presences (or a formal return in Pakistan’s case) in each.

Likewise, the “Golden Dome”, intermediate-range missile deployments in their regions, and more militarization of outer space can place additional pressure on Russia and China to this end, though these moves could also backfire by enhancing those two’s military-technical coordination too. To be clear, Russia and China aren’t allies that would go to war for one another, but their shared military-security and strategic interests raise the chances that they’ll provide support for the other during wartime.

China has thus far eschewed sending military-technical aid to Russia due to its complex interdependence with the West, but Trump’s tariff war, his accusation that President Xi Jinping is “conspiring” against the US, and the Pentagon’s plans for the “Asian/Containment Crescent” might prompt a recalculation. In a similar spirit, Russia might become comfortable sharing cutting-edge military-technical knowledge with China to counterbalance US moves in Japan, which could extend to their shared North Korean ally too.

Although the lion’s share of Pakistan’s military-technical equipment comes from China, the US might break into this market if Chinese exports decrease due to the Sino-Indo rapprochement, which could also lead to a decrease in American exports to India and the need to replace them with exports to Pakistan. Russia might even regain its traditional role as India’s top supplier by far if exports to it spike in response to more US exports to Pakistan in a de facto revival of the region’s Old Cold War-era military dynamics.

All of these strategic dynamics set the stage for a security dilemma between the Eurasian Rimland (NATO, Pakistan, and the “Asian/Containment Crescent”) and the Eurasian Heartland (RIC) instigated by the US in order to “re-establish deterrence” vis-à-vis the Sino-Russo Entente. The purpose is to pressure one of them or their shared Indian partner into capitulating to the US so as to then more effectively divide-and-rule the supercontinent. This hegemonic plot will define Eurasia’s 21st-century geopolitics.

Andrew’s Website

EMERGENCY FUNDING! 1 DAY LEFT!

Trump’s Bogus Drug War Targets Colombia

By Kurt Nimmo at Global Research. Reposted with permission.

On October 19, President Donald Trump added Colombia to the target list of Latin American countries he insists are behind drug production.

“President Gustavo Petro, of Columbia, is an illegal drug leader strongly encouraging the massive production of drugs, in big and small fields, all over Columbia,” Trump posted on X. “The purpose of this drug production is the sale of massive amounts of product into the United States, causing death, destruction, and havoc.”

Not only did Trump cancel “large scale payments and subsidies from the USA” slated for Colombia, he also ordered his War Department to destroy, in violation of international law and the US Constitution, what he described as a drug-carrying submarine “navigating towards the United States on a well known narcotrafficking transit route.”

He said US intelligence “confirmed this vessel was loaded up with mostly Fentanyl, and other illegal narcotics,” and two of four “terrorists” were killed, while two survivors were returned to Ecuador and Colombia “for detention and prosecution.”

The day after a million or more Americans took to the streets to protest the policies of the Trump administration, including that of his foreign policy, Trump posted from his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida that Colombian President Gustavo Petro “better close up” alleged drug operations “or the United States will close them up for him, and it won’t be done nicely.”

Pedro Sánchez, the Colombian defense minister, refuted Trump’s unverified remarks.

“If there’s a country that has used all its capabilities and also lost men and women fighting drug trafficking … it’s Colombia,” he said. The baseless allegations are “disrespect from Trump to Colombia,” Sánchez added. 

Petro weighed in on the claim Colombia is a narcoterrorist state.

“I ask President Trump to contain his oil greed, to think about humanity, to think about the effectiveness of a greater America,” he said. 

After the War Department targeted a fishing boat in Colombian territorial waters on September 15, Petro accused the US president of murdering fisherman Alejandro Carranza and two crew members from Trinidad and Tobago.

“The boat was adrift and had its distress signal up due to an engine failure,” he explained.

Petro said Carranza did not have a connection with drug traffickers.

“His daily job is just fishing. Colombia is waiting for an official explanation from the US side.” 

The elected government of Gustavo Petro (he won 50.44% of the popular vote), like that of Nicolás Maduro in neighboring Venezuela, is the target of US regime change actions. In January, Petro refused to allow a US military aircraft carrying deported Colombian nationals to land in Colombia. In response, Trump threatened to impose a 50% tariff on the country and implement travel bans and visa revocations for Colombian government officials. In response, Colombia backed down and allowed the deportees to return.

The Pink Tide vs. The Monroe Doctrine

The Trump administration is targeting Colombia and other Latin American countries in response to a so-called “pink tide” (marea rosa) or “turn to the left” (giro a la izquierda). Latin American countries have rejected the “Washington Consensus” of economic “policy prescriptions” (trade liberalization, privatization, and finance liberalization) imposed by the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the US Treasury. The austerity of these “prescriptions” resulted in social mobilization and a turn toward leftist government. 

“The U.S. Government’s aggressive push to expand free trade in Latin America,” writes Nadia Martinez, “helped catapult… new leaders into the presidential palaces,” most notably Hugo Chávez in Venezuela, Evo Morales in Bolivia, and Luiz Inácio “Lula” da Silva in Brazil. The rise of socialism in Latin America drew a sharp response from the United States.

As of 2006,  approximately 300 million of Latin America’s 520 million citizens lived under governments that wanted out from under the Washington Consensus that produced “staggering levels of poverty and inequality.” The landslide victory of Hugo Chávez in Venezuela in 1998 resulted in a move to the left by a number of  Latin American countries.

“Latin America’s new leftists have produced over the last couple of years their own consensus, a common project to use the centrifugal forces of globalization to loosen Washington’s unipolar grip,” writes Greg Grandin

Soon after Trump was elected for a second term, Secretary of State Marco Rubio visited El Salvador, Guatemala, Costa Rica, Panama, and the Dominican Republic. Although the administration said the primary reason for the visit was related to immigration and security arrangements, the primary reason was economic: China is the number one trading partner for South America. 

“For more than two decades, China has developed close economic and security ties with many Latin American countries, including Brazil, Peru, and Venezuela,” notes the Council on Foreign Relations. “But Beijing’s increasing sway in the region continues to raise concerns in Washington, prompting greater U.S. engagement.”

For Trump, that engagement is murdering fishermen in the territorial waters of Venezuela and Colombia, illegal acts designed to elicit a response. 

“While U.S. President Joe Biden saw China as a ‘strategic competitor’ in the region, the reelection of Donald Trump has marked a shift in U.S. policy toward Latin America, characterized by assertive economic measures that experts say could push countries further toward China.” 

undefined

Image: Official portrait of Kash Patel, director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. (Public Domain)

In response to the “threat” of China in Latin America, the Trump administration has tried to implicate it in its drug trafficking scenario. In June, FBI Director Kash Patel accused China of intentionally exacerbating the fentanyl crisis in the United States as part of a scheme to weaken America by targeting its youth. Patel went on the Joe Rogan podcast and said China is engaged in “chemical warfare” against America. “This isn’t accidental poisoning. This is strategic lethality,” he said. On October 19, Trump told reporters he wants China “to stop with the fentanyl.”

For decades, the so-called “war on drugs” has served as a justification to intervene in Latin America, most notably through Plan Colombia and the Mérida Initiative.

“Bolivian President Luis Arce became the latest regional leader to denounce the United States’ actions, accusing it of disguising geopolitical ambitions under the cloak of narcotics enforcement,” Damsana Ranadhiran wrote in August. 

“We know that behind this failed international war on drugs lies the real objective to geopolitically control Latin America for its natural resources and to dismantle organized peoples, so that we cannot follow our own sovereign path,” declared Arce.

On October 19, Trump called Petro a “lunatic” and the “worst president [Colombia] ever had.” The president said Colombia has “no fight against drugs, and I’m stopping all payments to Colombia because they don’t have anything to do with their fight against drugs.” 

“President Gustavo Petro, of Columbia (sic)… a low rated and very unpopular leader, with a fresh mouth toward America, better close up these killing fields immediately, or the United States will close them up for him, and it won’t be done nicely,” Trump tweeted.

In response to Trump’s caustic remarks, Colombia recalled its ambassador to the United States, Daniel Garcia-Pena. Trump’s response came the day after Petro accused the United States of murdering fishermen in the Caribbean.

Trump has made no secret of his support of autocrats in Latin America, most notably the disgraced former president of Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro, in addition to Nayib Bukele in El Salvador, and the “libertarian” president of Argentina, Javier Milei.

“Donald Trump’s authoritarian style and policies have energized the right and the far right across the hemisphere,” writes Jeff Abbott. The United States “has revived the Monroe Doctrine, which holds that the United States has the right to intervene in Latin America to prevent other countries from gaining influence.”

Trump Sends the CIA to Undermine Venezuela

The Trump administration continues to increase pressure on Venezuela. In an unprecedented move, Trump publicly stated that he has ordered the CIA to conduct subversive operations in the country.

“I authorized for two reasons really,” Trump told reporters. “Number one, they have emptied their prisons into the United States of America… they came in through the border. The other thing are drugs.” In addition to CIA subversion, Trump floated the idea of “land strikes” in Venezuela. Asked for clarification, the president said “we are certainly looking at land now because we’ve got the sea very well under control.”

The CIA has worked to undermine governments in Latin America since the early 1950s. It organized coups and terror operations in Guatemala, Guyana, Cuba, Ecuador, Brazil, Peru, the Dominican Republic, Uruguay, Chile, Bolivia, Argentina, Nicaragua, Honduras, Grenada, El Salvador, Haiti, Panama, and Venezuela.

“The clandestine operations, espionage, secret missions, covert funding, psychological warfare and regime change tactics the U.S. has employed in Latin America for decades, continue today overtly and covertly,” writes Eva Golinger

Trump has taken this sordid history of subversion and murder to the next level. His maritime strikes likely serve as a precursor of things to come, possibly including a full blown invasion of Venezuela. The US buildup of guided-missile destroyers, F-35B jet fighters, MQ-9 Reaper drones, P-8 Poseidon spy planes, assault ships and a secretive special operations ship, in addition to more than 10,000 troops, may be nothing more than an expensive show of force in an attempt to intimidate Maduro. 

However, considering Trump’s aggressive rhetoric and a military buildup that rivals the firepower the US committed to the Battle of Midway during World War II, an invasion is a distinct possibility, if not a foregone conclusion. 

RUMORS OF WAR! US deploying thousands of troops to Caribbean

Now the Dimitru Duduman prophecy about America being attacked by countries in Latin and South America is making a lot more sense as it begins to come true. Of course Iran, China and Russia will be in on the attacks on the USA as well. Who do you think supplied countries like Venezuela with missiles? What missiles you ask? The ones that Russia, China and Iran have been sending over for years now. Here’s a link: https://www.newsweek.com/iran-russia-venezuela-china-military-1390583 That’s just one of many articles you can find on the subject.

When we consider that China, Russia and Iran won’t spill the beans about everything they’ve sold to Venezuela and other countries south of the US there is reason for concern.

According to reports around the internet as of Saturday, October 11, 2025 at 9:11 PM eastern US time, over ten thousand (10,000)  US troops have been deployed to Puerto Rico and elements from the 82nd Airborne Division have deployed to Trinidad and Tobago near Venezuela.   

Earlier this week, numerous military aircraft were reportedly seen flying almost non-stop into Trinidad.  There were so many military planes that the local population started gossiping about it, and worrying that war might come to their part of the world.

I don’t believe that this is about illegal drugs as the 3 letter agencies in the West make tons of money on them for their covert ops. No, I believe this is about going after the missile systems Russia, China and Iran have positioned against the US. There’s also probably Russian fighters and bombers stationed down there as well as Newsweek reported back in April of 2019.

The presence of Russian, Chinese and Iranian planes in Caracas has outraged the U.S., which already has troops based in neighboring Colombia and in other countries across a region long targeted by Washington’s efforts to halt the spread of leftist ideologies.

Another report from January of 2021 show how Iran and China have been supplying missiles of various types to Venezuela as well.

Here’s What You Need to Remember: Caracas and Tehran have also established a reasonably close relationship including bilateral cooperation that includes trade agreements. Iran has also been a major supplier of weapons—including various missiles—to Venezuela.

The Venezuelan Navy likely hasn’t been a top concern for the Pentagon, but if reports are true the Armada Bolivariana de Venezuela will be equipped with some rather powerful weapons that could shift the balance of power in the region. Last month, the Venezuelan government under President Nicolás Maduro released propaganda videos that suggest its warships have been armed with new Chinese-made C-802A anti-ship missiles, which could target enemy vessels from over 100 nautical miles away.

The sea-skimming missiles are generally analogous to the American-made Harpoon, H I Sutton for USNI News reported.

The acquisition of the C-802A missiles was first announced by the Venezuelan Navy on September 25 in Caracas during the commemoration of the fifteenth anniversary of Venezuela’s Strategic Command Operations. President Maduro said that his country is planning to manufacture its own weapons and announced the establishment of a special military and scientific system for that purpose. Source National Interest

Now let’s take a quick peek at what Iran, Russia, and China have been doing in Nicaragua recently.

On June 9, 2022, Nicaragua’s Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN) government renewed the authorization of Russian military forces to operate in the country. In doing so, it reminded the United States and the hemisphere that the dictatorial regime of Daniel Ortega not only continues to abrogate the rights of its own people for democratic choice, free expression, and other fundamental human rights, but also serves as an entry point for the projection of threats into the region by extra-hemispheric rivals of the United States, such as RussiaIran, and the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Source: CSIS

Like I said those stories are just the tip of the iceberg. The nations south of the USA have been built up militarily more than people realize and now the plan of the so called elites is about to come to fruition. The USA has been very slack in looking at the buildup in its own backyard while being more concerned about being the world’s police force. All of that is going to come back and bite them in the butt as other nations have been plotting its demise for quite some time now.

It’s almost time for Revelation 18:19 to happen to Mystery Babylon America as in one hour she is made desolate! As I said earlier in the post there is much more going on here than drug cartels. Stay ready, prayed up and prepped up at all times!

Watch therefore, and pray always that you may be counted worthy to escape all these things that will come to pass, and to stand before the Son of Man. Luke 21:36

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so now we have PayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The buy me a coffee link is below.

Free Ebook on Spiritual Warfare

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

The SCO & BRICS Play Complementary Roles In Gradually Transforming Global Governance

Guest Post by Andrew Korybko

The processes that are unfolding will take a lot of time to complete, perhaps even a generation or longer, so expectations of a swift transition to full-blown multipolarity should be tempered.

The recent SCO Leaders’ Summit in Tianjin drew renewed attention to this organization, which began as a means for settling border disputes between China and some former Soviet Republics but then evolved into a hybrid security-economic group. Around two dozen leaders attended the latest event, including Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who paid his first visit to China in seven years. Non-Western media heralded the summit as an inflection point in the global systemic transition to multipolarity.

While the SCO is more invigorated than ever given the nascent Sino-Indo rapprochement that the US was inadvertently responsible for, and BRICS is nowadays a household name across the world, both organizations will only gradually transform global governance instead of abruptly like some expect. For starters, they’re comprised of very diverse members who can only realistically agree on broad points of cooperation, which are in any case strictly voluntary since nothing that they declare is legally binding.

What brings SCO and BRICS countries together, and there’s a growing overlap between them (both in terms of members and partners), is their shared goal of breaking the West’s de facto monopoly over global governance so that everything becomes fairer for the World Majority. To that end, they seek to accelerate financial multipolarity processes via BRICS so as to acquire the tangible influence required for implementing reforms, but this also requires averting future domestic instability scenarios via the SCO.

Nevertheless, the BRICS Bank complies with the West’s anti-Russian sanctions due to most members’ complex economic interdependence with it, and there’s also reluctance to hasten de-dollarization for precisely that reason. As for the SCO, its intelligence-sharing mechanisms only concern unconventional threats (i.e. terrorism, separatism, and extremism) and are hamstrung to a large degree by the Indo-Pak rivalry, while sovereignty-related concerns prevent the group from becoming another “Warsaw Pact”.

Despite these limitations, the World Majority is still working more closely together than ever in pursuit of their goal of gradually transforming global governance, which has become especially urgent due to Trump 2.0’s casual use of force (against Iran and as threatened against Venezuela) and tariff wars. China is at the center of these efforts, but that doesn’t mean that it’ll dominate them, otherwise proudly sovereign India and Russia wouldn’t have gone along with this if they expected that to be the case.

The processes that are unfolding will take a lot of time to complete, perhaps even a generation or longer, due in no small part to leading countries like China’s and India’s complex economic interdependence with the West that can’t abruptly be ended without dealing immense damage to their own interests. Observers should therefore temper any wishful thinking hopes of a swift transition to full-blown multipolarity in order to avoid being deeply disappointed and possibly becoming despondent as a result.

Looking forward, the future of global governance will be shaped by the struggle between the West and the World Majority, which respectively want to retain their de facto monopoly and gradually reform this system so that it returns to its UN-centric roots (albeit with some changes). Neither maximalist scenario might ultimately enter into force, however, so alternative institutions centered on specific regions like the SCO vis-à-vis Eurasia and the AU vis-à-vis Africa might gradually replace the UN in some regards.

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so now we have PayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The buy me a coffee link is below.

Free Ebook on Spiritual Warfare

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

PayPal Link

SCO+ Summit 2025 – Towards a New Global Reality. Towards A Multipolar World Order?

What the 20th Century was to the West — the next 100 Years will be to the Global South *Editors note* That’s assuming we have 100 years left, we don’t. Time is short! That being said the power structure of the world has shifted from the West to the East, just I’ve been saying for years! JS

By Dr. F. Andrew Wolf, Jr. Reposted with permission by globalresearch.ca

History will record the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Tianjin, China this year as a pivotal moment in the evolution towards a new world order.

The SCO’s burgeoning role as a critical player in the development of a multipolar world was demonstrated this week. It illustrated the Global South’s solidarity with its defining principles: the recognition of sovereignty, non-interference and a rebuttal to the West’s hegemonic model of globalization under the guise of ‘liberal democracy’.

Significance of the event was also connoted through its symbolism —its proximity to the September 3 military parade in Beijing, marking not just the end of World War II but the 80th anniversary of China’s victory in the Sino-Japanese War.

Russian President Vladimir Putin was conspicuous as an omnipresent figure at both the summit and parade events – carrying both symbolic weight and strategic meaning.

Moscow continues to advance its role as a reliable interface between nations across Asia and the Middle East – a role of consequence, especially today, given the shifting center of gravity in geopolitical affairs toward Asia and the Global South.

The Russian president’s remarks at the summit were characteristic of his vision of the future; he reiterated the import of adopting and implementing the SCO Development Program through the remainder of the decade. It defines the group’s strategic path towards establishing a carefully-conceived foundation for orchestrating economic and infrastructure initiatives.

Perhaps of equal significance was Moscow’s enthusiastic support for Beijing’s proposal to establish an SCO Development Bank. In addition to financing infrastructure projects, it would assist member countries in reducing their dependence on Western financial institutions and lessen the impact of Western sanctions – pressures which – with varying degrees of severity — Russia, China, Iran, India and others continue to experience.

The imagery from China indicates how the Russian president’s attendance at the summit carried both concrete and symbolic significance: As occurred previously in May, Moscow and Beijing continue to signal their determination to defend historical – not revisionist – truth.

The arrival in Tianjin of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi brought into specific relief New Delhi’s strategic flexibility and willingness to revisit and advance its relationship with China. In the face of unmitigated pressure from US President Donald Trump, the visit amounted to a definitive statement of India’s shift from historical non-alignment to strategic autonomy.

Modi’s talks with Xi Jinping – his first visit to China in seven years – symbolized their intent to resolve differences. Their continuing border dispute notwithstanding, the countries signaled a willingness to remove obstacles – and move closer. 

Xi remarked to the Indian prime minister that true ‘normalization’ between their nations had actually begun last year at the BRICS summit in Kazan, when both nations deescalated a tense situation. The two sides should “not let the border issue define the overall China-India relationship,” Xi said, adding that economic development should be their main focus.

Modi, referring to relations with Beijing as a ‘partnership’, announced the resumption of direct flights and even voiced an intent to reduce India’s trade deficit with China. 

A priority for India lies in multilateral relationships that augment a multipolar system concerning geopolitical affairs. New Delhi has consistently defended its right to pursue a multi-directed, autonomous foreign policy, viewing Global South initiatives (e.g. SCO and BRICS+) as pivotal in strengthening its sovereignty, pragmatism of strategic autonomy and global relevance.

While India attempts to eschew diplomatic issues with the US, its message is categorical: New Delhi will not accept ‘bullying’, especially with issues impacting national and regional priorities.

The symbolism of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, also being present at the gathering, was evident. The leader of a NATO-member state attending the SCO summit connoted to the Western alliance that Ankara intends to assert a more sovereign, self-defined foreign policy. 

This reflects Türkiye’s concept of ‘strategic flexibility’, in which the SCO is viewed as more than a forum for regional cooperation; rather, it is a platform for extending Turkish influence and securing access to key assets – from transport corridors to energy markets.

The Tianjin summit welcomed as well the presidents of Belarus, Iran and Pakistan along with Malaysia, Armenia and Azerbaijan signaling their interest in full membership. The wide geographical mix of attendees illustrates that the SCO is moving beyond Eurasia — developing toward a nucleus of an alternative global order.

The Tianjin Declaration, delineating the principles uniting SCO member states was a pivotal outcome of the summit – delineating non-interference in internal affairs, respect for sovereignty, rejection of the use or threat of force and opposition to unilateral sanctions as instruments of coercion. It expressed the common vision of the organization.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov commented:

“The main outcome of the SCO and SCO+ summits is the shared determination to uphold our rights, without yielding to provocations, in full compliance with international law, the UN Charter, and the principles of the international monetary, financial, and trade systems – the very principles once promoted by the West itself.”

The summit in China manifested more than imagery and words – it confirmed the reality of a multipolar world order – a concept Putin has advanced for years. One thing is certain — it can no longer be treated theoretically. The SCO has given ‘multipolarity’ institutional integrity – steadily expanding, gaining influence and authority throughout the Global South.

The organization is reviewing applications from some ten countries seeking observer or dialogue partner status – indicating a burgeoning interest in the SCO as an alternative center of power in geopolitical affairs.

And one must not overlook rising interest in the SCO from the Arab world. Bahrain, Egypt, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the UAE are already SCO dialogue partners – nations central to the Middle East’s energy and investment hierarchy. This indicates that a new geopolitical axis linking Eurasia and the Middle East is becoming a reality – with the SCO emerging as a viable alternative to the West’s hegemonic model.

The SCO today is no longer a regional structure; rather, it is a strategic center of gravity in geopolitical affairs. What was once disparaged by the West as a mere ‘regional club’ has matured into a meaningful platform for the Global South – a geopolitical entity with expanding membership, burgeoning economic vigor and a shared political horizon – a new political reality.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article. Follow us on Instagram and X and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost Global Research articles with proper attribution.

F. Andrew Wolf, Jr. is director of The Fulcrum Institute, a new organization of current and former scholars, which engages in research and commentary, focusing on political and cultural issues on both sides of the Atlantic. After service in the USAF (Lt.Col.-Intel) Dr. Wolf obtained a PhD-philosophy (Wales), MA-theology (Univ. S. Africa), MTh-philosophical theology (TCU-Brite Div.). He taught philosophy, humanities and theology in the US and S. Africa before retiring from university.

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so now we have PayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The buy me a coffee link is below.

Free Ebook on Spiritual Warfare

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

PayPal Link

American Manufacturing Declined as Financial Wealth Revved. “China Is the Largest Debt Collector.” Helena Glass

Guest Post by By Helena Glass

Global Research, July 29, 2025 Reposted with permission

I was listening to a podcast with Col. Douglas MacGregor and he made a comment that was so simplistic and so spot on – I felt it needed more attention:

America is not the ‘manufacturing hub’ it once was post WWII. The decline was slow until the 1970’s when it sprinted ever closer to a failed economy but was firmly destroyed between 2000 and 2010 when 1/3 of manufacturing jobs disappeared.  Blame hits squarely on America and our government policies. We were no longer competitive, and the tortoise loped ahead.

The graph that realizes this fact would follow the rise of negative trade with China. The other graph that would follow this trajectory is the rise of ‘financial wealth’ on the back of zero production or benefit to society. Add to this diaspora Trump’s tariffs and America debt, and we have a collapsed society. IF we have nothing of value to sell, these countries will simply buy and sell elsewhere and the Trump Trade Deal will implode. What is agreed to in this moment, does not mean other countries can consolidate and provide everything America manufactures.

Placing sanctions on countries to destroy their ability to survive will simply ‘shift’ the global trade leaving America in the dust – forever the BULLY. 

The concept is no different than upwards taxation of billionaires – they will simply move their money where it isn’t taxed and the lose/lose destroys the middleman – us. Where are the bankers moving their money? China. The same country they routinely demonize. The same country that Trump keeps deferring tariffs – calling it a 90-day truce. Why? Because China is the global manufacturing hub. And without China, the US is twalette water. Giving the Empire baton to – China.

China is the world’s largest debt collector. China’s infrastructure is unmatched as America’s crumbles. China’s AI far surpasses America. China does not participate in global wars – thereby keeping its tortoise plod steady and strong. China is stockpiling. While the financiers and bankers have destroyed America’s ability to compete, in order to expand the 1%. Self-service is the end game. When America falls, the bankers will move to their next victim.

The Big Three Financial Institutions, BlackRock, Vanguard and State Street, all invest in the same stocks. They create wealth where it doesn’t exist. Apple: buying back shares. Good for shareholders such as BlackRock, etc…, not so good for company growth. March 29, 2025 — Financials: Cash generated by operation was down 15%. They cut their purchases of marketable securities in half! 

The real reason Trump is afraid of putting tariffs on China is simply rare earth minerals which are essential to ‘everything’.  Without which America’s economy would come to a screeching halt within a week. To think China is unaware of this magic act is naïve. China’s place as the world’s largest manufacturing source was 31.6% as of 2024 compared to the US at 15.9% – or nearly half. The amount of US Treasuries held by the Federal Reserve between 2008 and 2022 increased by 1000%. Given that Social Security invests only in Treasuries, when Americans die the federal obligation to repay SS is voided. Because Social Security and Medicare are incorrectly accounted for on the Treasury books as an expense – as opposed to a liability or debt owed to recipients. By contrast, federal pensions are considered a debt. Biggest ponzi scheme of the century!

The smugness with which Trump declared that he was pushing Russia’s deadline from 50 days to 10 or 12 was certainly not lost on any world leader. The end result being 100% tariffs, more sanctions, including on anyone caught trading with Russia. Those trading partners would include; China, The Netherlands, Germany, Turkey, Belarus, India, Kazakhstan, Brazil, Italy, Iran and Korea. 

Russia’s exports include: crude and refined oil and gas, coal, gold, fertilizers, wheat, fish, and nuclear reactors.  Trump is giving Russia an ultimatum – either accept that the entirety of the West’s weapons inventory will be transferred to Ukraine – or Ukraine and all Ukrainians are to be eliminated. Of course, the ultimate underscore is that if Russia were to eliminate Ukraine, Trump would call for WWIII against the ‘pariah’ Russia. In the melee, Israel would nuke all Palestinians and possibly Iran. And the Middle East would implode.

This is the brainchild of bankers and finance elites who have already stashed away their gold in bunkers. Not fully cognizant of the stage play’s final act because it is predicated on the minds of slothful ignorant men who would rather see WWIII than their names splashed across flashing billboards of Epstein complicity. Backed in a corner.  They are the hyenas.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article. Follow us on Instagram and X and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost Global Research articles with proper attribution.

Helena Glass is Former CPA & Series 7, with emphasis in Real Estate and Financial Planning. Two brains in one: former Bronze Sculpter and Danseuse. She is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Is President Trump a War Criminal? If Iran Falls, What Is Next? The Future of Our Planet. Peter Koenig

By Peter Koenig

6-25-25

Reposted with permission from Global Research.

For the world at large, President Trump may be a war criminal.

He campaigned as a Peace President – but knowingly lied, because with all evidence coming to the fore now, he knew what he was going to do… everything that the Deep Warrior State wants him to do, what the Zionist financial oligarchy around the world prescribes him to do, what the war industry needs him to do.

He has betrayed people not only in the United States but in the world.

President Trump has sided with Israel in ethnic cleansing of Gaza, in an illegal attack on a sovereign country that posed no nuclear risk to anyone – many times confirmed by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), least to the US.

Mr. Trump has unilaterally on his own –on advice of his criminal advisers– taken illegal actions according to the US’s own Constitution, bombing a sovereign country without approval of Congress. By doing so, targeting Iranian nuclear research sites, Trump puts the entire region, possibly beyond, at risk of contamination by radiation. And this, although the IAEA has said there was no risk. Wind does not know borders, as Chernobyl and Fukushima have proven.

The IAEA had no choice in discarding the radiation dangers. The agency’s directors were all chosen for their western stance.

The US and Israeli bombing of Iran’s three principal nuclear sites, Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, have killed targeted nuclear scientists and high-ranking military officers, plus thousands of civilians, the majority women, and children. Trump has clearly teamed up with another war criminal, his buddy, Benjamin Netanyahu. But they do not care.

They are sick, dreaming of a Las Vegas-type Gaza beach resort, with casinos and high-life.

They know western “rules-based orders” cover all their criminal actions – besides, the rules are now made to suit their purpose.

Judge Napolitano says it clearly here:

If the US Constitution and International Laws, the UN Charter still have some meaning, Mr. Trump should be impeached immediately.

That is the world we have become. Nobody seems to care. That is how our minds have been manipulated. We do not care for each other anymore. We care about the little smart-phone screen and the stupidities and lies it emits. We are glued to these gadgets, day-in and day-out.

Unless a drastic awakening happens, our next generations are totally addicted to these enslaving machines. They are like our closest companions, without which we cannot imagine life. This, of course is no coincidence. Remember, coincidences do not exist. All and everything is planned and has a purpose. And the purpose becomes ever more obvious. Is it already too late to stop it?

*

People in the west have become self-centered materialists. They could hardly care about the future of our planet. What must come, comes. No efforts for real Peace, for lasting Peace, are made. Because in our absurd world, War is Peace and Peace is War.

It is a material world, where even spirituality is explained with Darwinian-type material reasoning. High-ranking politicians and strategists in Russia, China, the US, Europe, instead of seeking ways to Peace, they debate what is next. What if Iran falls?

Washington calls for regime change, as Trump may call it, “Make Iran Great Again” – of course, a US puppet. Anybody in his clear mind will know this is not going to happen. Iran is not Iraq, and is not Syria, and is nobody’s puppet.

Before “falling,” Iran has a myriad of options on the table, not least closing the Strait of Hormuz, where more than 20% of the world’s energy in the form of oil and gas passes through, and attacking the US bases in the Gulf States, from where the devastating Iran bombing took place.

To forego such steps, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the “regime change” champion, and Vice President J.D. Vance, warned Iran already against making the “big mistake” of closing the Strait of Hormuz.

Similarly on earlier occasion, Trump in one of his pompous talks, said something to the extent, if Iran dares attacking US bases in the region – they would be bombed to ashes, so that the earlier US bombing of the three nuclear sites looks like a walk in the park.

Earlier this evening, the Financial Times reported (see this), Iran fired missiles at the  sprawling Al Udeid American military base, just outside of Doha, Qatar. This is in retaliation of the massive US bombing of the three nuclear sites in Iran over the weekend. Usually, some 10,000 US troops are stationed at the base, but Trump evacuated most of them before his attack on Iran.

 Al Udeid, also serves the Royal Air Force as regional headquarters, risking dragging also the UK into the conflict. On Monday UK foreign secretary David Lammy said the UK was ready to defend its personnel and assets in the region and that “of its allies and partners.”

Details as to Iranian missile damage are not yet known.

Does this indicate a further escalation? Maybe already as of tomorrow?

What’s next? West Asia is rapidly converting into a major war zone, as hostilities escalate in warp speed. Will Trump make good on his promise to “wipe out” Iran?

Could he?

Did Russia and China finally warn Trump – not crossing a “red line”?

Russia is not likely. Putin has too often shifted his own red lines. And President Putin has too often been seen and photographed shaking hands with Netanyahu. A strange, very strange, brotherly relationship.

But China?

China has been deploying naval ships to the Gulf of Aden since December 2008 as part of an anti-piracy mission authorized by the UN. These deployments are within a larger effort to protect Chinese shipping interests and extend China’s naval presence in the region. Their presence now cannot be ignored. Iran, together with China and Russia, is a key BRICS member, and since 2023 Iran is also an adherent to the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO).

It looks like Iran is not totally alone, even though none of the BRICS states have so far raised their fist in protest. But maybe in their pockets they did, for now invisible to the western world. After all, Iran is a key player in the Global South.

And looking closer, isn’t this unfolding war theatre perhaps not so much an attack on Iran as a military target, but having a dual purpose: an attempt at breaking up the BRICS and the associated Global South, which is becoming fast an economic danger for the west? And on the other hand, Iran is one of the few countries whose central bank is not privatized as a member of the Bank for International Settlement (BIS – in Basel, Switzerland) which is controlled by the Rothschild clan – and has oversight over more than 90% of all central banks and about 97% of all the world’s tradable currencies.

Iran escapes the BIS supremacy, as well as the dollar-sanction SWIFT banking and transfer system and trades her hydrocarbons in local currencies with Russia, China, the BRICS, and their associates.

This monetary independence is dangerous for the Zionists control over world finances which is almost perfect and complete. An outcast like Iran could pull along others, influence other BRICS countries, their associates, and the Global South at large.

The Global South accounts for 85% of the world population and for about 40% of world GDP, exceeding the G7 – which have become nothing more than a group of un-funny gnomes.

This should be remembered when the talk is about strategic actions, bombing and sub-doing Iran’s military danger to the region and the world – beware of Iran becoming a nuclear power in no time.

The major reason for the assault on Iran, may be monetary, because that is and has been for centuries the Zionist’s bread and butter and the instrument to control and starve the rest of the world. They will not give it up.

The rogue state Israel is right there, with hundreds of nuclear warheads, outside the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) – never mentioned as the real military and nuclear danger in the region. What a strange surprise!

Iran shall not fall. God forbid!

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article. Follow us on Instagram and X and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost Global Research articles with proper attribution.

Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst, regular author for Global Research, and a former Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he worked for over 30 years around the world. He is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020). 

Peter is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). He is also a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so now we have PayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The buy me a coffee link is below.

Free Ebook on Spiritual Warfare

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

PayPal Link

« Older Entries