I thought the best part of President Trump’s offer to the US people was No more foreign wars. The results of US led interventions in the Middle East in recent years have been poor with the exception of the successful liberation of Kuwait. Biden’s over hasty retreat from Afghanistan leaving the UK and other allies in the lurch was a disaster, throwing away 20 years of fighting and giving full victory to the Taliban. Lebanon, Libya and Syria have struggled to recover from their bitter civil wars. Iraq has managed to establish a more stable government.
His decision to take on Iran seems to have been based on the idea that US/Israeli intelligence and smart weapons were so good that they could kill the leaders of the regime, leading to a change of government and policy more to the liking of the West. This might come about from popular uprising or from the successors to the dead leaders wanting to live and seeing the need to do a deal with the US. The President seemed to think it would be a few days of bombing followed by change.
Instead so far the killing of leaders has led to new leadership as determined to fight and to resist US/Israeli force. The leadership killed many of their own citizens to make it less likely there would be a sustained popular revolt.They decided on the high risk strategy of hitting back at US allies in the Gulf, threatening their oil and gas installations when Iran’s were threatened. They adopted the strategy of controlling the Straits of Hormuz, so Iran could get her oil and gas out and let through oil and gas for her allies, but could throttle the rest. Iran continues to use her proxies and terrorist groups around the Gulf area to attack the US and her allies. So far the US has not come up with an answer to this obvious strategy.
It looks as if the President would like a negotiated settlement where both sides would claim a win. It looks as if Iran has sensed the opportunity to squeeze more out of the US by hanging tough. The US is looking at further military options. Could they get the enriched uranium out in a daring snatch raid? Could they get in to blow up more of the remaining missiles which bombing has been unable to reach? Could they seize Kharg island, Iran’s oil export point, to throttle Iran’s revenues? Could they seize the Iran coast by the Straits and hold it to allow safer passage of ships? Would commercial ships take the risk of passage if convoys were organised? There may be other options. Clearly if one is adopted it needs the element of surprise to give the US a greater chance of success. All of them are high risk, and a failure with one would be a further set back to the idea of getting a sensible negotiated settlement. Reports of troop and naval movements imply there is no thought of a major invasion of Iran as that would take many more soldiers than have been seen on the move.
Running a war to tv schedules from the Oval Office is proving more difficult than the President hoped. The sooner he finds a way out for himself and the US the better. The war is unpopular at home and the mid terms beckon. If he loses the Senate as well as the House as a result of another foreign war he may face an impeachment and a final two years of law fare all the way to his exit. The war is also getting in the way of his major drive to boost the US economy with massive new investment, lower taxes, digital dominance and cheap energy.
March 31, 2026
As with all so-called Wars, truth and reality leave the room. We know the consequence of the manoeuvres but not the real picture.
Before it kicked of we know, or seem to know about the suppression off the people in Iran by its leaders.
As an aside isn’t that what is happening in the UK by the UK Parliament heading off in directions they have not sort approval for and have no mandate for?
We also have indications that Iran was seeking to arm its self with Nuclear Weapons, they had employed the guy that furnished Pakistan with the nuclear weapon capability A.Q. Khan. Since then there has been IAEA reports of the lack of openness to the directions that Iran is taking. Do we want or need nuclear proliferation in such a volatile part of the world? It would appear POTUS was armed with the information that this was now a serious situation. Someone had to act.
Those that talk as if there is International Law, just talk and talk until the rubicon has past. Because they make money pretending there is such a thing as International Law they crucify whole nations for their own ego.
Now that money. the world economy, is involved due to the blocking of an international seaway(were is the International Law now?) positive action will have to take place from all those affected and not expect the USA to be the Worlds Policeman. Iran just maybe(a big might) if positive action is seen to be happening from a large spread of nations want to create a way our.
March 31, 2026
In any situation the UK Parliament has made the UK ineffective, it has no effective defence force. As such cant project power. At best it can use mealy mouthed words to suggest it will support others, ‘working-with-our-partners’. These partners now know the UK is the weak link in any arrangement, and at the end of the day will extract an enormous price from the UK.
As 2TK is as weak and indecisive a leader(he is not even the leader that is Miliband) as we have ever seen in the World he will steal more money from the hard working UK people to give, suck up to his imaginary partners elsewhere
March 31, 2026
‘ How does the Iran war end?’
Trump states that the new Iranian leaders are much more prepared to reach a perfect agreement.
On Easter Sunday, Trump says the war is over . He repeats his claim for a Nobel peace prize and adds that perhaps he should now be canonised by the Pope – even though he is not Catholic.
It all ends happily ever after.
March 31, 2026
I am not convinced that Trump and his advisors were so naïve as “to think it would be a few days of bombing followed by change”. I think they regarded it as a better option than doing nothing until Iran completed their nuclear weapon developments and attacked Isreal.
I am still optimistic that a satisfactory agreement will follow as it is in everyone’s interests but perhaps I am being too naïve!
In the UK it is not the war that is getting in the way of cheap energy it is the moronic policies of Ed Miliband and this government who actually want ever higher prices on fossil fuels so as to phase them out. This will destroy the UK’s economy and ability to defend itself. He seems to think wind and solar) currently supplying about 8% of our total energy) will take over. Even this 8% does not take account the fossil fuels needed to produce and back up (thus running gas less efficiently) this 8% of wind and solar. When you do this then in winter (when most energy is needed) and there is virtually zero solar the figure is more like 4%.
March 31, 2026
+1