The end of US dominance
We're gonna have oil at $40 dollars a barrel or we're gonna have oil at $150 a barrel. And if that happens, option number two, he he said it, you know, bluntly, straight to the point, it's going to be a global recession. So where we are now, we are not going towards option number one. We are fast advancing towards option number two. Because oil is now over 100. It's not coming down. It's between 100 and 110.
[. . .]
the best strategic analysts in Tehran, they are reviewing everything that the UAE did even before the war. What they have done this past three weeks and the conclusion is practically inevitable. They are already part of the wars side by side with the US and Israel. So there will be a counter punch. And for the moment, Iran has been very discreet. They only hit a few selective targets in the UAE uh in Dubai, Jabel Ali, the port, hotels where American troops were staying. But now it's a completely different story. So if the UAE if there is this attempt of let's say the beach head not a ground invasion and it's certified that UAE is part of it MBZ better be ready because Iran could turn his bling bling money laundering machine into a parking lot easily easily if they want to. So, the Dubai model as we know it is already dead. But then we're going to get to the Abu Dhabi energy export model and the artificial intelligence that the Emirates facilitates to Israel and to the US. So then it's going to be all out war Iran and UAE. This is extremely serious and everybody already knows that the UAE is part of it.
[. . .]
Qatar and Oman they have been very very clever. They are the only ones among the GCC that disassociated themselves on the war and being on the side of US Israel. So for all practical purposes, Oman and Qatar are neutral from now on and Iran recognizes that. But the other GCC's, especially Saudi Arabia and UAE, it's a completely different story. And we know that there was a document released by five of the GCC's without Oman plus Jordan, with the little king, condemning Iran which is a way of saying look we are siding with the Epstein syndicate.
he [President Trump] is seen to have blown it, to missed a terrific opportunity to change the direction that American foreign policy was going in. And if anything, he's on the old path. I think the key issue today is the Iran war. And all I can say is it's truly remarkable that he allowed himself to fall into this trap. This is much worse than Afghanistan, much worse than Iraq.
[. . .]
if you look at the 15point plan that he's now putting forward to the Iranians uh as the basis for working out a deal, it looks like unconditional surrender. And when I first saw the 15-point plan, I thought it was a joke. I thought that, you know, this was disinformation that the Iranians or the Israelis had put out. I couldn't believe this was a serious plan.
[. . .]
the United States and Israel started this war thinking that they could employ a shock and awe strategy uh built around decapitation. We decapitate the regime. we'd shock and awe the Iranians and people would rise up in the streets, they'd overthrow the regime and we would live happily ever after. This was the basic strategy. We had to win a quick and decisive victory for this to work and it failed. And by the way, anybody who has a basic understanding of international relations should have understood that this would fail from the get-go. it was just not going to work. And it didn't work. But then we found ourselves in a protracted war. Here we are. And I don't think most people fully realize it, but the Iranians hold almost all the cards in a protracted war.
[. . .]
Iran is dealing with an existential threat here. The Israelis especially, but also the Americans want to wreck their state. They talk about regime change, but the Israelis are interested in more than regime change. They want to destroy Iran. They want to do to Iran what happened to Syria. They want to break it into pieces. They want to make Iran a number of states or one single state that is remarkably weak. This is an existential threat. And when you face an existential threat, and as you pointed out, they've faced this existential threat for a long period of time. They know they can't trust the Americans and the Israelis. Given that dimension of the equation, they have a deep-seated interest in continuing this war and pushing the Americans and the Israelis to make huge concessions to them.
[. . .]
as the Iranians, the North Koreans, the Chinese, and the Russians have demonstrated, there's only one way you deal with President Trump, and that is you stand up to him. If you behave like Mark Ruter, he's going to walk all over you. He's a classic bully. Everybody should have figured that out by now. If you show weakness, as the Europeans consistently do, with the exception of the Spanish prime minister, if you show weakness, if you behave like Mark Ruter, President Trump is just going to slap you around and continue to slap you around because again, he's a bully.
Russia has a lot of equities on the table with respect to Iran and I do not believe that Russia is going to stand by and let Iran be destroyed. It doesn't necessarily mean that Russia is going to rush into war, but you know, the Russians and Chinese, they're recognizing we're at a transition point in history now, much like what happened at the end of World War II. You know, those institutions that came into being, including the United Nations, most people don't realize that the League of Nations had continued to exist through World War II, it was just irrelevant. Well, guess what? the United Nations is no longer relevant because the Trump administration has declared we don't respect international law. There's no such thing as international law. So I think Russia and China are looking actually to towards the future where we're going to need a new infrastructure, a new economic infrastructure where the United States can't hold countries hostage. a new international law infrastructure that's actually going to have some teeth to it to prevent nuclear powered countries like the United States and Israel from attacking a country that doesn't have nuclear weapons.
[. . .]
Trump faces two two choices. He either doubles down, escalates, and launches an operation to topple the regime. And you're not going to do that without an extraordinary massive land force marching on Tehran, which I think is inconceivable. The other alternative is Trump says, "I've declared victory. I'm going to walk away from this." But that's not going to fool anyone. Trump will be humiliated in doing so.
I knew that the Neocons were using Netanyahu to manipulate Trump for he assumed he was responding to a head of state when in fact he grew up in Philadelphia and hung out with the Neocons. I know of a private phone call in which Netanyahu manipulated Trump, stressing that he could “make history” by toppling the Ayatollah regime and taking revenge for Iranian efforts to assassinate him, which was central in Trump’s decision to strike when he did.
It appears that Trump was not fully briefed because the Neocons wanted this war. Yet, the intelligence community is now covering their ass claiming Trump was brief on the fact that Tehran would likely seek to close the economically vital Strait of Hormuz. That I can confirm. As Reuters reported that pre-war intelligence assessments did not say that Iran’s response was “a guarantee, but it certainly was on the list of potential outcomes.” This is clearly a cover-your-ass position.
[. . .]
The computer has shown this war in everything from interest rates, holding of US debt, to all of the arrays on the Gulf States aside from the oil markets, commodities, and the war cycle. Our War Index targeted March last November with rising volatility from January into April ’26 where we do have Panic Cycles in many markets. The second array is the current one showing a Directional Change in March ’26 escalating into April with a Panic Cycle in July.
Everything is running low. What are we [the US] going to do if we get into just a few months of this and we've exhausted all of our key assets? And they haven't
[. . .]
All the things we have historically done before we engage in a large seal operation, none of them have been done. And I fear that in desperation, because believe me, I ain't the only one doing this missile math that I just described to you. Obviously, the Iranian side did beforehand. The the Houthies did beforehand. And now then they're playing their cards in a pretty carefully crafted way and in a way that is really starting to be a problem for the United States. And we may take a bad decision out of desperation and go forward and try and do something that doesn't make any sense that could make it enormously worse. If we go in on the ground, the chances of taking high casualties, because again, like all these other things, the Iranian side has foreseen all this and they have a plan to defeat it. They have a resource plan. They have foreseen all of these reactions that we've done and they have had resource plans that up to this point have been very effective in countering us. Now, if you go in and you put infantrymen, especially light infantrymen or marines on the ground, folks, they're going to suffer huge number of casualties, and the chances of them succeeding even tactically, is very remote and strategically or even operationally is off. There's just not any, the chances in my view don't even exist. And if we try that, that's going to be a real real problem. Now, all of this is having an impact on the Iranian side because they see all they see this missile math. They see it going negative in our direction. And now they see the joining of of the Houthis, Hezbollah, Kib Hezbollah in Iraq. And they're feeling a little bit more cocky and confident.
[. . .]
if you if you don't get the oil, the food, the fertilizer, the natural gas problems open up pretty soon, uh then then the pressures will just mount from all over the world on the United States and Israel to bring this to an end because most people recognize that this was a world of choice. It should never have happened. It would there was no imminent threat at all. And even though President Trump last night uh bragged on himself about how he had saved the world, as he put it, from this entrangence entrangent Iraq, uh Iran, most of the world doesn't see it that way. In fact, very few people actually see it that way. And they see all these problems that I just described to you, none of them existed prior to us choosing to start this conflict that by all rights nobody thought there was even any kind of a need for.
Donald Trump has said he wants to “take the oil in Iran” and could seize the export hub of Kharg Island, as the US sends thousands of troops to the Middle East.
The US president told the FT in an interview on Sunday that his “preference would be to take the oil”, comparing the potential move to Venezuela where the US intends to control the oil industry “indefinitely” following its capture of strongman leader Nicolás Maduro in January.
The president’s comments come as the US-Israeli war against Iran has thrust the Middle East into crisis and sent the price of oil surging by more than 50 per cent in a month. Brent crude rose above $116 a barrel on Monday morning in Asia, near its highest level since the conflict began.
Trump said: “To be honest with you, my favourite thing is to take the oil in Iran but some stupid people back in the US say: ‘why are you doing that?’ But they’re stupid people.”
Such a move would involve seizing Kharg Island through which most of Iran’s oil is exported.
Trump has been beefing up US forces in the region, with the Pentagon ordering the deployment of 10,000 troops trained to seize and hold land. About 3,500 troops arrived in the region on Friday, including roughly 2,200 Marines. Another 2,200 Marines are en route, while thousands of troops from the 82nd Airborne Division have also been ordered to the region.
www.ft.com - Donald Trump says US could ‘take the oil in Iran’
Related
Articles:
Forum post:
