"Why doesn't someone call out Trump for the unstable
megalomaniac that he is. Enough of the mealy-mouthed euphemisms!” – NY Times
comment
"Hegseth. Kennedy. Noem. Vance. Johnson. Bondi. Mullin. The
list goes on and on. Bootlicking, ambitious amateurs. People without experience
and without conscience. And a President who starts a war —yes, a WAR— to
distract from his mishandling of the economy and his intimate association with
Epstein. And Congress lets it happen? WHO ARE WE?"- NY Times Comment
“pResident” Bonespurs Trump declared on Friday that he would
settle for nothing short of “unconditional surrender” by Iran, the latest and
broadest expansion of his goals for the conflict, and one that could portend a
much longer conflict if he persists in that aim.
Six days into the Israeli and American bombing campaign, Iran
has shown no interest, at least publicly, in surrendering. Why should it given we now know Putin’s
Russia is giving Iran Intel on targeting American forces, e.g.
Russia is giving Iran intelligence to target U.S. forces, officials say - The Washington Post
Noting:
"Russia is
providing Iran with targeting information to attack American forces in the
Middle East, the first indication that another major U.S. adversary is
participating — even indirectly — in the war, according to three officials
familiar with the intelligence.
The
assistance, which has not been previously reported, signals that the rapidly
expanding conflict now features one of America’s chief nuclear-armed
competitors with exquisite intelligence capabilities. Since the war began
Saturday, Russia has passed Iran the locations of U.S. military assets,
including warships and aircraft, said the three officials, who spoke on the
condition of anonymity because of the matter’s sensitivity."
And a Chinese-Canadian Professor of Predictive History has predicted Trump’s America will ultimately lose this war to Iran.
Professor Jiang Predicts: US WILL LOSE Iran War
Before anyone gasps in shock or disbelief he or she needs to see the full Youtube video of Prof Jiang Xueqin' exhaustive reasoning and why he is referred to as the “Chinese Nostradamus”. This is given he’s already gotten 2 of his three 2024 predictions right (that Trump would win in 2024 and that he’d start a war with Iran.) This war he said in his video discussion was driven by Trump's hubris after taking out Maduro in Venezuela. Sure enough, we read in a piece in the Friday NY Times:
"Trump keeps returning to the goal of regime change. He has
repeatedly cited the model of the American action in Venezuela, where U.S.
forces removed Nicolás Maduro and sanctioned the ascension of his vice
president, Delcy Rodríguez, saying she could run the country as long as she
complied with American demands, particularly access to oil.
Trump has resisted suggestions that Iran — a country with 92 million people, nearly three times the size of Venezuela’s population, and a government run by clerics and the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps — differs in every respect from Venezuela. As the five time draft dodger babbled on in a brief telephone conversation Friday when he told CNN: It’s going to work very easily. It’s going to work like in Venezuela,”
But the man is delusional and indeed, not at all well in his senile orange head. Former Biden National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, appearing on CNN (Fareed Zakaria show) yesterday was blunt: Iran regards this war as "existential" and will pull out all the stops to preserve itself. Given Iran lacks the air power of its two primary opponents (U.S. and Israel) it will resort to a massive campaign of destruction of operations, striking oil and gas facilities, water supplies in the surrounding states. Indeed, the lead story in yesterday's Wall Street Journal ('Attacks on Desalination Drag Water Supplies Into War With Iran') again make clear Iran isn't playing games. And as Prof. Jiang observed, devastation of the Saudi desalination plants means the kingdom runs out of water in 2 weeks.
In other words, as Mr. Sullivan put it, Iran will escalate attacks and devastation across the whole region. This is exactly what Prof. Jiang predicted, as well as Jeffrey Sachs in his own recent take. But the Trumpers and King Orange Fungus himself were too dumb to game plan this "mosaic defense into their gung-ho fantasy. They believed it would be a 'cakewalk' like in Venezuela, just take out the top guy and it's a win. But Iran isn't Venezuela and has the basic firepower to reduce most of the region to ashes if Israel and the Trumpkins keep up their futile bombings. (And recall Iran survived the most one-sided war it had ever fought last June).
Just since these recent Trump incepted hostilities began, Iran has:
- Hit the U.A.E. oil hub of Jebel Ali
-Struck the alternative loading site across the peninsula at Fujeirah
- Struck the critical Qatari liquefied natural gas site at Ras Laffan
- Attacked a number of ships trying to cross the Strait of Hormuz - where a fifth of the world' oil must pass
As for sending the Kurds or the animated anti-regime Iranian protesters in to take down the regime, David Schenker - who served as Trump's top Middle East official in his first term, said (WSJ, Saturday, p. A6):
"You have this euphoria but it will wear of quickly. There's always some irrational exuberance that has to be tempered with the bleak reality."
And what is the bleak reality?
Jake Sullivan spelled it out yesterday to Fareed Zakaria on CNN with a simple observation: These 'irregulars' would have to contend with at least 200,000 well-equipped and hardened Revolutionary Guard as well as 400,000 Iranian army regulars. In other words, it'd be a one-sided slaughter. But neither Dotard or his boy scout DUI former FOX blabber Hegseth is smart enough to factor it in. (I.e. WSJ Saturday: "Trump has reveled in the images and videos of Iranians celebrating after Khamenei's death")
So will these and the Kurds get Trump out of his "improvised, ineffective war plan" (Zakaria's term)? Hardly, because they're outmatched as Jake Sullivan pointed out. Besides, Trump's bestie Putin already has his number – as per the WaPo piece – and Prof. Jiang has forecast an ignominious loss - already unfolding with spiking gas prices. This is what happens when a major war isn't planned for, and the ones at the top managing the attacks and 'strategy' are fools, idiots, lapdogs and incompetents.
See Also
by Heather Digby Parton | March 8, 2026 - 5:05am | permalink
One of the reasons so many Americans never believed Donald Trump’s promise to end the “forever wars” was a simple observation. To all but his most fanatical followers, it’s clear he possesses a megalomaniacal personality and violent temperament. How could someone with such characteristics resist the urge to lead a war? It seemed fundamental to his personality and his desire to go down in history.
During the 2016 campaign the country was still dealing with fairly regular terrorist attacks from followers of ISIS, and despite Trump’s professed disdain for the leadership that took the U.S. into Afghanistan and Iraq, it was clear when you listened closely to him that he was contemptuous of their apparent unwillingness to take the gloves off. He was never some kind of peacenik. After all, Trump confessed to being a big fan of torture, casually saying, “Would I approve waterboarding? You bet your a*s I would. In a heartbeat. I would approve more than that. It works. And if it doesn’t work, they deserve it anyway for what they do to us.”
And:
by Brian Garvey | March 9, 2026 - 5:15am | permalink
We are one week into Trump’s war on Iran. Gas prices are already up more than 11%. The Dow Jones has erased all of its 2026 gains.
These are the real, immediate costs of a new war of choice. Wars in the Middle East are expensive, and ordinary people pay the price.
The War Tax at the Pump — and Beyond
Twenty percent of the world’s oil travels through the Strait of Hormuz. That path is now shut off. The results are predictable.
And:
YOUTUBE videos:
“Israel Will Regret War With Iran” - Israeli Military Expert
And:
Jeffrey Sachs (clip): U.S. War Against Iran Is Doomed to Fail
And:
Missiles Over Tel Aviv: Why Iran at 10% Is Most Dangerous
And:
With Iran, Trump Takes the U.S. to War Without the Public’s Support - The New York Times
Excerpt:
Trump likes to assert that he has accomplished things no
other president has. With the opening of his military
assault against Iran, he has achieved another distinction: He is the first
president in the era of modern polling to take the United States to war without
the support of the public.
Traditionally, Americans stand behind their president when
he first orders troops into battle, generally sticking with him unless it drags
on, casualties mount and victory seems increasingly elusive. With Mr. Trump’s
war against Iran, the public has skipped the rally-around-the-president phase
this time.
Support for his ferocious bombardment of Iran has ranged
from 27 percent in a Reuters/Ipsos poll to 41 percent in a CNN survey, far below the level of public backing that Mr.
Trump’s predecessors initially enjoyed when they used force overseas. Given
that wars tend to grow less popular over time, the initial negative response
portends political challenges for Mr. Trump and his fellow Republicans the
longer the fighting continues.
No comments:
Post a Comment