Tag Archives: Iran

Is Pickaxe Mountain Next?

Posted on by

An article posted at Breitbart on Tuesday reports that Israeli intelligence believes that Iran moved its nuclear centrifuges into the underground Pickaxe Mountain facility near Natanz last fall. President Trump is still determined to end Iran’s nuclear program.

The article reports:

President Donald Trump declared Tuesday that the United States is “not finished at all” with Iran, warning U.S. forces would strike the regime’s heavily fortified Pickaxe Mountain nuclear site “pretty soon” while signaling his administration was prepared to expand military operations rather than return to negotiations.

Trump made the remarks while meeting Lebanese President Joseph Aoun at the White House after being asked about a Wall Street Journal report that Israeli intelligence believes Iran moved thousands of advanced centrifuges into the underground Pickaxe Mountain facility near Natanz last fall.

“I think that they may have,” Trump said when asked about the reported transfer, while stressing that the centrifuges alone would not allow Iran to revive its nuclear program.

“It doesn’t mean anything unless they have the material. They don’t have it. We follow the material. That’s where the action is.”

“We’ll be hitting that area probably pretty soon. There’s not a thing they can do about it,” he said. “Normally, I wouldn’t say that. If I thought they could do something about it, I would never say that. But we’ll be hitting that area pretty soon, and very heavily.”

It is quite possible that what is left of the rulers of Iran believe that the existence of nuclear capabilities (or at least the illusion of that existence) may be the only thing keeping them in power and keeping their country from being destroyed.

The article notes:

Trump’s remarks came as U.S. forces continued striking Iranian military infrastructure, with U.S. Central Command announcing additional operations targeting missile and drone capabilities, military command centers, maritime assets, air defense systems, and other facilities tied to Tehran’s efforts to disrupt commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. Trump has repeatedly argued the campaign is intended to prevent Iran from rebuilding its nuclear program while maintaining military pressure on the regime.

Asked about Iran’s remaining capabilities, Trump maintained the administration would continue applying military pressure while monitoring Tehran’s nuclear assets.

“We’re degrading them at levels that nobody thought was possible,” he said, adding that U.S. officials continue to track Iran’s nuclear material rather than focusing solely on centrifuges or infrastructure.

We need to end this quickly, and the current regime of Iran needs to leave the country!

Sometimes The Double Standard Is Amazing

Posted on by

Last week, President Trump made a speech about Chinese interference in the 2020 election and provided links to the evidence. Two networks refused to air the speech and one network only aired the criticism. It was as if it was no big deal to have another country interfere in our elections. The mainstream media worked hard to play down the importance of the interference. Just for the record, it wasn’t always this way.

On Monday, Just the News reported:

When the Biden Justice Department announced that Chinese hackers had gotten their hands on Great Britain’s publicly available voter files in 2024, American news media clamored with stories claiming it was a “dangerous” breach. The same, too, when U.S. officials announced Russia and Iran had hacked small numbers of U.S. voter files in 2020 and 2021.

The reason was simple: U.S. intelligence agencies believe the targeting and acquisition of voter registration files is an act of election interference. “Election interference is a subset of election influence targeted at the technical aspects of the election, including voter registration, casting and counting of ballots and reporting of results,” an October 2020 National intelligence Council report on election interference explains.

In other words, the compromising of election voter registration data, is, by the definition of intelligence agencies, an act of election interference.

When President Donald Trump presented confirmed evidence last Thursday night that China had compromised and obtained 220 million American voter registration files, the news media swung 180 degrees in the opposite direction. They argued it was old news (it was not) and not a big deal because you can buy limited data in America related to voter registration commercially. According to security experts, that limited data accessibility is not the same thing.

…In 2021, the Biden Justice Department indicted two Iranian hackers for accessing just 100,000 voter files from a single state where it is also commercially available. They were charged with criminally interfering in the 2020 election even though voter files are commercially available in limited form.

Hopefully the people who actually see the double standard outnumber the people who still either have their eyes closed or suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Negotiating With A Two-Year Old

Posted on by

When your child is standing in front of you with his face full of chocolate, it is pretty obvious who got into the cookie jar. He can blame the dog, his sister, or his brother, but the truth is still obvious. Someone got into the cookie jar, and he looks like the obvious culprit.

On Friday, Breitbart reported the following:

Iran reportedly told Trump advisers the Strait of Hormuz attacks were the work of a rogue hardline group and not a deliberate government decision.

Iran has reportedly told the Trump administration behind closed doors that the attacks on commercial vessels in the Strait of Hormuz were not intended as official government action and were instead carried out by a rogue hardline faction seeking to derail ongoing negotiations, according to senior U.S. officials cited by CBS News senior White House reporter Jennifer Jacobs.

The White House, however, is pushing Tehran to publicly admit it was responsible, arguing the incident breached the ceasefire agreement. Despite the incident, President Donald Trump has instructed Vice President JD Vance, Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio to press ahead with diplomatic talks, which are expected to take place in Oman.

And what about the other attacks by Iran on their Arab neighbors? Was some rogue group responsible for those attacks also? If the government of Iran was not responsible for those attacks, wasn’t it still their responsibility to control the people doing the attacking? Who is actually in charge in Iran?

The article notes:

U.S. officials also warned that Washington is prepared to use both military force and economic pressure if Iran launches further hostile actions.

The United States and Iran appear to be steering back toward the Memorandum of Understanding despite recent military action, after U.S. forces struck Iranian military targets following Trump’s confirmation that the ceasefire had ended.

I am not convinced that anything good is happening here. I believe Iran wants to drag out negotiations until November in the hope of influencing the American mid-term election. They seem to want to talk to America only after we remind them that we have attack capabilities.

A Very Strategic Strike

Posted on by

On July 9th, The Times of Israel reported:

Overnight US strikes on Iran hit the Aq Taqeh Khan railway bridge in northern Iran’s Golestan province, Fars news agency says, a trade link to Tehran’s strategic partners China and Russia.

Fars says the route that goes on to pass through Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan has been an important land link to China that gained further relevance during this year’s blockade of Iran’s Gulf ports by the US.

It adds that the route has also been used by Russia for cargo shipments to Iran since late 2025.

A friend on X posted:

This wasn’t just a random target; it was the bypass valve for the “North-South” transport corridor, which Tehran has been desperately relying on to move goods while its maritime ports remain under U.S. blockade. By vaporizing this rail link, Washington has signaled that it’s not just squeezing Iran’s navy in the Strait of Hormuz—it’s systematically strangling the regime’s entire land-based logistical network. ​

This strike is a masterclass in American strategic dominance. For months, the regime in Tehran has tried to use land routes through Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan to circumvent the U.S. naval pressure, hoping to keep its economy on life support despite the blockade.

Fars News Agency is Iran says that the bridge will be repaired quickly. If it is repaired quickly, we will have to bomb it again–it is Iran’s route around the blockade.

Everyone Eventually Runs Out Of Patience

Posted on by

On Wednesday, Zero Hedge posted an update on what is happening in Iran and the Strait of Hormuz.

The article reports:

  • US strikes on Iran announced, as ‘heavy costs’ for earlier targeting of multiple commercial vessels
  • Oil rises as Treasury revokes June 21 Iran oil waiver
  • Hormuz Threat Level Raised To “Severe” 
  • Three maritime incidents reported on Hormuz in last 24 hours 
  • Another unidentified vessel hit by a Drone
  • IRGC forces hit a Saudi Tanker 
  • IRGC forces hit a Qatari LNG tanker

These are the actions of a cornered animal fighting for its life.

The article concludes with a summary of the impact of the current situation:

Diplomatic Developments

• Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi warned on Tuesday that negotiations on a final deal will not commence if threats continue, referencing a memorandum of understanding with the US

• Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian will travel to Iraq on Tuesday to attend funeral processions for former Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, scheduled for Wednesday in Najaf and Karbala

Market Impact

• European natural gas prices surged as much as 6% on Tuesday, the most in a month, following the attacks on ships in the Strait of Hormuz

• Oil prices climbed on Tuesday, with Brent trading near $73 a barrel, as the attacks highlighted continued risks to vessels in the critical waterway

• Gold fell for a second day on Tuesday, dropping as much as 1.2% to below $4,120 an ounce, as the Hormuz attacks rekindled inflation concerns

• France lowered its 2026 GDP growth forecast to 0.7% from 0.9%, citing the Middle East conflict as a factor holding back output

Oil Trade Developments

• India’s state-run refiners are in talks with traders marketing Iranian crude and preparing to buy barrels if the US extends waivers beyond August or eases restrictions

• Two supertankers hauling Saudi crude are heading to the US for the first time since February, following the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz

• Russia’s Urals crude price averaged $41.66 a barrel at western ports in early July, falling to pre-Iran war levels and less than half the level during the height of oil market turmoil in April

There are a lot of moving parts here.

For instance, according to Artificial Intelligence (AI):

To understand the price of oil needed to sustain the Russian economy today, consider the following factors:

    1. Budget Breakeven: The Russian government requires oil prices to be around $40-$50 per barrel to balance its budget.
    2. Economic Stability: Prices above $60 per barrel are generally needed for economic stability and growth.
    3. Inflation Control: Higher oil prices help manage inflation and support the ruble’s value.
    4. Social Spending: Sustaining social programs and pensions often requires oil prices to exceed $70 per barrel.
    5. Global Market Influence: Fluctuations in global oil demand and geopolitical tensions can impact the necessary price for sustainability.
    6. Long-term Investments: To fund future projects and infrastructure, prices above $80 per barrel are preferable.

Russia is an ally of Iran. Russia needs high energy prices to sustain its economy. Did Russia play a role in encouraging the attacks in the Strait of Hormuz?

It’s Time To Stop Being Patient

Posted on by

On Tuesday, Yahoo News posted a Reuters post about recent attacks on shipping in the Strait of Hormuz. I don’t think Iran is behaving very well, and I think it’s time for Iran to be held accountable for its bad behavior.

The article reports:

Three tankers were hit in the Strait of Hormuz on Tuesday, including an LNG carrier at risk of explosion, as huge crowds mourned Iran’s slain Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in the holy city of Qom.

Qatar blamed Iran for the attack on a huge Qatari liquefied natural gas tanker, the Al Rekayyat, which reported being struck overnight by a drone that caused a ‌fire in its engine room.

The crew were safe and being evacuated, but maritime security sources told Reuters the fire could put the ship at risk of explosion.

A Saudi-flagged crude oil tanker, believed to be the ‌supertanker Wedyan, was also damaged off Oman, maritime security sources said. The cause was not immediately clear.

The article concludes:

In a CNN interview, Netanyahu said it was too early ‌to say how negotiations with Tehran will play out, but hinted at a continuing divergence ​with the White House over whether diplomacy can ultimately neutralize Iran’s ​nuclear program.

“The President believes that he can stop Iran’s nuclear program,” Netanyahu told CNN, adding that he has his doubts.

Nevertheless, Trump should be “given the chance” to achieve that goal, Netanyahu added, insisting the two governments were aligned on Iran strategy. “On the big things we see eye to eye, and occasionally we don’t, but we’re true allies,” he said.

Oil prices, which have returned to around the prewar level since last month’s interim deal, rose ​more than 2% on Tuesday following the incidents in the waterway.

In launching the war ‌four months ago, Trump said his aims were to destroy Iran’s nuclear and missile programmes, end its ability to threaten its neighbours and create conditions for Iranians to topple their leaders.

None of those goals ​has been met, although Washington says a permanent deal will halt what it says is an Iranian programme that could make a nuclear bomb, which Iran says it never sought.

At some point you have to stop negotiating with the neighborhood bully and simply punch him in the face!

UPDATE: I think President Trump has run out of patience.

Who Is In Charge?

Posted on by

On June 19th, The New York Post posted an article with some concerning news about Iran.

The article reports:

Traffic through the Strait of Hormuz was flowing Friday — under Iran’s monitoring — after a radio message to vessels in the region suggested the waterway had been closed over tensions with Israel and the US.

“The armed forces of Iran, in accordance with the memorandum of understanding [MOU] to end the war dated June 18, 2026, have taken the necessary measures to ensure the safe passage of commercial vessels through the Strait of Hormuz, and shipping in this route is currently underway,” Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei said Friday, according to Iran’s Fars News Agency.

Earlier, an Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) statement read over maritime radio channels warned vessels from entering the strait because the US was in violation of the MOU between Washington and Tehran, which President Trump and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian signed Wednesday.

I suspect that this is only the beginning of the problem of knowing who is in charge in Iran. We took out the first two tiers of leadership, and now the Iranian elites are fighting among themselves for control. That is a good thing for America and a bad thing for Iran.

The article concludes:

Meanwhile, Iran’s Persian Gulf Strait Authority (PGSA) — which Tehran recently formed so it could control the strait and, critics say, charge fees — released a set of new “terms and conditions” for ships passing through the vital waterway.

While the MOU requires Iran to hold off demanding payment from shipping firms for the next 60 days, the document explicitly states Tehran “reserves the right to introduce” new fees in the future.

The document also requires all ships to get a permit from the PGSA to pass through the strait, which was not required before the war began Feb. 28, as the strait is considered international waters.

The White House and State Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Frankly, I will be surprised if the Iran deal lasts for two weeks. I am not sure it was meant to last. I believe it was meant to illustrate the character of those currently in charge in Iran.

The Long-Term Consequences Of Closing The Strait Of Hormuz

Posted on by

On Wednesday, The Liberty Daily posted an article detailing some of the plans to Middle Eastern countries to avoid the problems of a shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz in the future. This is called good planning. I remember Pat Robertson being concerned about the possibility of a blockade in the Strait of Hormuz back in the 1990’s. Iran’s using the closing of the Strait as a weapon should really have not surprised anyone.

The article reports:

The shuttered Strait of Hormuz is expected to reopen within days, though conflicting reports suggest the US-Iran memorandum of understanding could be formally signed as early as today, Thursday, or Friday. Either way, the interim peace deal appears likely to be signed within the next 48 hours, setting the stage for energy flows through the critical maritime chokepoint to begin normalizing, a process that could take many months.

The broader takeaway is that buyers of crude, refined products, and LNG now have to rethink their sourcing stack after the US-Iran conflict effectively shut Hormuz for several months. That means diversifying supply chains and reducing exposure to single-point maritime chokepoints. For Gulf energy producers, the Hormuz disruption will accelerate a massive push toward alternative export channels that bypass Hormuz entirely, potentially reducing Tehran’s ability to use the strait as a lever in future conflicts.

The article includes the following map:

The article concludes:

The UAE can reroute more crude through pipelines to eastern ports, but LNG, aluminum, container imports, and other commodities are harder to shift. Dubai’s Jebel Ali remains the world’s largest container hub outside Asia, and moving more cargo through eastern ports would raise inland transport costs and boost shipping times.

In recent weeks, the Iraqi cabinet approved plans to accelerate crude exports through the Kurdistan-Turkey pipeline network, which would more than triple its existing shipments from 220,000 barrels per day to 770,000.

“Iraq is in a much more complicated situation because we know that most, if not all, of its oil transits through Hormuz,” Alan Lemangnen, senior economist at QuantCube, told CNBC in an interview.

What is becoming increasingly clear is that the Hormuz squeeze is rewiring the Persian Gulf’s energy map. Over time, that shift could render Iran’s leverage over the Hormuz chokepoint far less effective, if not obsolete.

Perhaps Tehran has already read the writing on the wall. That may help explain why Iranian officials are now willing to play ball with the Trump administration through an MoU to reopen Hormuz and eventually enter talks over the country’s nuclear ambitions.

I am not sure how many countries in the Middle East believe that the Strait will remain open permanently.

A Few Observations On Iran

Posted on by

On June 18th, Victor Davis Hanson posted an article about the war in Iran at American Greatness. The purpose of the article is to clear up some of the current misconceptions about the war and the agreement to end the war.

The article begins with addressing the mistaken idea that the Strait of Hormuz was open before the war and is now closed, so the war was a failure.

The article notes:

The Strait was open because an appeased Iran had no reason to close it—given that no nation on earth dared to end its nuclear dreams of dominating the Middle East, funding anti-Western terrorists, and threatening Europe and the U.S.

So the rub was always disarming Iran and then dealing with its inevitable desperate strategy of closing the Strait.

The second misconception is that Trump’s agreement will simply be a copy of Obama’s earlier Iran deal.

The article notes:

Obama dealt from a position of abject weakness. Iran assumed correctly that Obama would offer endless concessions and cash, while never considering force.

Does Obama really believe that Iran in 2015 was stronger than it is now after 40 days of intense American, Israeli, and Gulf state bombing?

Trump is dealing with a bankrupt Iran, a neutered military, a restive Iranian street, a wounded regime, and the specter that the U.S. can do whatever it wishes militarily to a shattered Iran for the foreseeable future.

The next misconception is that the U.S. is bereft of allies and strategically isolated in the war.

The article notes:

During the war, the unthinkable occurred when Israel de facto became an ally of the Arab Gulf monarchies. Other than a few rogue nations and Arab terrorist clients—the weakened Hezbollah, the crushed Hamas, and the wary Houthis—Iran has zero friends.

Neither China nor Russia offered Iran much in the way of aid, other than satellite imagery and some smuggled supplies. Both lost their once-prominent positions among clients in the Middle East who deeply resented their siding with Persian Shiite theocrats over Arab oil suppliers and arms buyers.

Israel has more combat aircraft than the United Kingdom, France, and Germany. The Gulf monarchies do so as well. Both Israel and the Gulf states have been flying bombing missions against Iran. There is a far greater chance of Arab-Israeli rapprochement after the war than before it.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. It explains exactly where we are right now.

Confronting Fake News

Posted on by

On Tuesday, Townhall posted an article about President Trump’s debunking some recent fake news.

The article reports:

President Donald Trump went scorched earth on reports that the Iranian regime cut off contact with the U.S. over Israel’s recent military action against Hezbollah in Lebanon.

In a post on Truth Social, the president wrote, “Fake News Reports that the Islamic Republic of Iran, and the U.S.A., stopped speaking a few days ago are false and erroneous.”

This is what the President posted on Truth Social:

The conversations between us have been going on continuously, including four days ago, three days ago, two days ago, one day ago, and today. Where they lead, one never knows, but as I told Iran, “It’s time, one way or another, for you to make a Deal. You’ve been doing this for 47 years, and it cannot be allowed to go on any longer!”

The Iranian state media has claimed that Iran suspended the talks because of Israel’s activities in Lebanon.

The article notes:

However, he (President Trump) also stressed that he had not heard this directly from the regime and posited that the reports were meant for media outlets to pick up. Trump on Tuesday said he believes Washington and Tehran could come to an agreement that would reopen the Strait of Hormuz while pushing Iran toward giving up its nuclear program.

…Trump has consistently demanded that Iran abandon its stockpile of highly enriched uranium, material that can be used to manufacture nuclear weapons. Iran has rejected full concessions on the nuclear matter, but expressed willingness to draw down its program in exchange for the lifting of sanctions and other demands.

Meanwhile, Americans are dealing with heightened gas prices as a result of Iran’s blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, which it started shortly after the war started.

It really is time for this to be over, one way or the other.

This Is One Weird Cease-Fire

Posted on by

On Tuesday, Breitbart posted an article about U.S. attacks on Iranian missile sites and mine-laying boats in the Strait of Hormuz.

The article reports:

Fresh strikes on southern Iran were launched by U.S. military forces early Tuesday morning targeting Iranian missile sites and vessels attempting to lay anti-shipping mines in the contested Strait of Hormuz.

The targeted strikes were done “to protect our troops from threats posed by Iranian forces,” but the military was “using restraint during the ongoing ceasefire,” Capt. Tim Hawkins, the spokesman for the U.S. military’s Central Command, said in a statement as reported by AP.

Following the strikes, the BBC reports U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said a deal was still possible and pointed to talks on Tuesday between Iran’s top negotiator and foreign minister and Qatar’s prime minister.

The article concludes:

Capt Hawkins said the U.S. strikes targeted an area near Bandar Abbas, a southern port city and the site of one of Iran’s largest naval bases, that sits on the Strait of Hormuz, according to the New York Times.

Iranian state media had earlier reported local officials in Bandar Abbas were investigating after explosions were heard.

As I have previously stated, I don’t think this war ends without a total defeat of Iran. A total defeat could bring regime change, although that is not a guarantee, but a total defeat could end the threat. We will have to find a way to stop Iran from re-arming and re-developing its nuclear capabilities. World War II ended because Germany and Japan were thoroughly defeated. I don’t think the war with Iran ends any other way. A total defeat is the only way to bring peace to the region. It should also be considered that there are countries that do not want peace in the Middle East–it is to their advantage to promote unrest in the region.

I Am Not Optimistic

Posted on by

I really don’t expect a deal with Iran. I think that if they can they will delay until the midterm elections hoping President Trump will not have the support of Congress to continue the war. I also believe that President Trump is not naive about who he is dealing with.

On May 24, NewsMax reported:

The United States is close to reaching a deal with Iran that would end the war, reopen the Strait of Hormuz and see Iran give up its stockpile of highly enriched uranium, regional officials told The Associated Press on Sunday. They said details and timelines would be worked out later.

“If I make a deal with Iran, it will be a good and proper one, not like the one made by Obama, which gave Iran massive amounts of CASH, and a clear and open path to a Nuclear Weapon,” President Donald Trump wrote in his latest post on Truth Social Sunday afternoon.

“Our deal is the exact opposite, but nobody has seen it, or knows what it is. It isn’t even fully negotiated yet. So don’t listen to the losers, who are critical about something they know nothing about. Unlike those before me who should have solved this problem many years ago, I don’t make bad deals!”

The article notes:

“The negotiations are proceeding in an orderly and constructive manner, and I have informed my representatives not to rush into a deal in that time is on our side,” Trump said on social media Sunday. He said the U.S. relationship with Iran is becoming “much more professional and productive.”

The strait’s (Strait of Hormuz) reopening would begin to ease a worldwide energy crisis sparked by the surprise U.S. and Israeli bombardment of Iran on Feb. 28, which led Tehran to effectively close the crucial waterway. Prices have spiked for oil, gas and several downstream products, jolting the world economy. Experts say it would take several weeks or even months for shipping and prices to recover to prewar levels.

The U.S. has blockaded Iranian ports for over a month, and Trump on Sunday said the blockade “will remain in full force and effect until an agreement is reached, certified, and signed.”

I really don’t trust the current government of Iran (whoever that might be) to make and keep a reasonable deal with America.

This Seems To Be A Strange Sort Of Ceasefire

Posted on by

On Thursday, Breitbart posted the following headline:

Trump: Iranian Attackers ‘Destroyed’ After Firing on U.S. Destroyers — Ports Struck; Ceasefire Holding

I don’t mean to be picky, but if people are firing weapons at each other, how is it a ceasefire?

The article continues:

President Donald Trump said Thursday that Iranian attacking forces were “completely destroyed” after Tehran fired missiles, drones, and fast attack boats at three U.S. Navy destroyers transiting the Strait of Hormuz, prompting U.S. Central Command to carry out retaliatory “self-defense strikes” on Iranian military targets and port areas as the fragile ceasefire between Washington and Tehran again came under strain.

U.S. Central Command said its forces intercepted what it described as “unprovoked Iranian attacks” as the USS Truxtun, USS Rafael Peralta, and USS Mason transited the Strait of Hormuz toward the Gulf of Oman.

The article reports:

“Our three Destroyers, with their wonderful Crews, will now rejoin our Naval Blockade, which is truly a ‘Wall of Steel,’” he wrote.

Trump also warned Tehran that if it does not quickly agree to the broader framework deal now under discussion, the United States would respond with far more severe military force in the future.

“A normal Country would have allowed these Destroyers to pass, but Iran is not a normal Country,” Trump wrote, blasting Tehran’s leadership as “LUNATICS,” who “would” use a nuclear weapon “without question” if given the opportunity.

“But they’ll never have that opportunity and, just like we knocked them out again today, we’ll knock them out a lot harder, and a lot more violently, in the future, if they don’t get their Deal signed, FAST!” Trump warned.

I am hoping that soon the Iranian tyrants will turn the government and the military of Iran back to the Persian people of Iran.

A Quick Look At The Moving Parts

Posted on by

As I write this on Thursday morning, crude oil futures are roughly $90 a barrel and trending lower. According to AI, Russia needs oil at $100 a barrel to continue the war in Ukraine. My earlier research said $80 a barrel, but evidently $100 a barrel is needed to cover some accumulated debt that Russia has taken on because of the war.

Saudi Arabia is limiting America’s use of the Prince Sultan Airbase southeast of Riyadh and is not allowing American planes to fly through Saudi airspace to support the efforts to escort ships through the Strait of Hormuz. One guess as to why Saudi Arabia is doing this is that the Saudi’s don’t want to attacked by Iranian missiles or drones. They do not want to be collateral damage in the war in Iran.

The United Arab Emirates (U.A.E.) has left The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) (and OPEC’s limits on U.A.E. oil production) and has an oil pipeline that avoids the Strait of Hormuz. Look for an increased use of that pipeline.

One of the current leaders of Iran has met recently with China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi (days before President Trump is scheduled to meet with Chinese Communist leader Xi Jinping). China does not want Iran destroyed or the current government of Iran overthrown. China has major investments in Iran. Is China putting pressure on Iran to make a deal? If Iran agrees to give up their nuclear program and enriched uranium, can we trust them to do it?

Aren’t you glad that you are not President Trump who has to sort all this out?

It Really Is Always About The Money

Posted on by

On Sunday, The Conservative Treehouse posted an article about a recent reversal of Germany’s position on Iran.

The article reports:

Six days ago, in Marsberg, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz criticized the U.S. approach to Iran, saying Washington was being “humiliated by the Iranian leadership” and demanding the conflict end “as quickly as possible.”

Three days ago, President Trump responded with an announcement that U.S. troops in Germany would be drawn down, and there would be a 25% tariff on all imported European autos.  {GO DEEP}

Suddenly, Friedrich Merz reverses his position:

Imagine that.

But seriously folks, when people argue that it’s not about the economics of the thing – remind them, it’s always about the economics of the thing.

Germany is facing a perfect storm of economic consequences following their decision to chase the climate change agenda (Build Back Better) and eliminate their coal and nuclear power plants.  Combine the German/EU policy to stop purchasing cheap LNG and oil from Russia, in addition to skyrocketing energy costs from oil/gas flows from the Middle East, and the outcome is rising manufacturing costs leading to massive layoffs.

The German industrial economy is the heart of the EU economy, and President Trump is now hitting them both right where it hurts.

The tariffs will have an impact, but the long-term impact of drawing down the troops we have in Germany will be greater. Although having thousands of America troops in Germany does stretch the infrastructure in some areas, the presence of the troops adds to the local economies. Soldiers eat at local restaurants, shop, and attend local events. Removing five thousand troops from the country is going to have a long-term economic impact.

Did They Really Do That?

Posted on by

On Tuesday, The Gateway Pundit reported the following:

The United Nations elected Iran as one of 34 vice presidents of the 11th Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference, which opened April 27 at UN headquarters in New York. Iran was nominated by the Non-Aligned Movement, representing 121 largely developing nations.

The appointment drew immediate objections from the United States, Australia, the UAE, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany. Christopher Yeaw, U.S. Assistant Secretary for Arms Control and Nonproliferation, called Iran’s selection an “affront” to the NPT, saying it was “indisputable that Iran has long demonstrated its contempt for the non-proliferation commitments of the NPT,” and declared it “beyond shameful and an embarrassment to the credibility of this conference.”

The UAE called the appointment “antithetical to the values of the NPT,” warning: “If a state party can disregard its obligations, undermine verification, destabilize its region, threaten international waterways, and still be elevated to a leadership position in this process, then we must ask what message this conference is sending.” Russia defended Iran and accused the objecting nations of “political attacks.”

The basis for the objections is extensive. Iran ratified the NPT in 1970 and concluded a comprehensive safeguards agreement with the IAEA in 1974. In 2002, the agency began investigating allegations of clandestine nuclear activities, finding that some had violated Tehran’s safeguards agreement.

Considering where we are right now–with Iran having admitted it was weeks away from 10 nuclear bombs and what followed–this is amazing. Notice that Russia is supporting the election of Iran to an office in the Conference. I wonder what deals were made behind the scenes.

The article concludes:

Regarding the current U.S.-Iran conflict, Iranian officials have demanded that restrictions on its nuclear program be omitted from any peace talks or agreements.

The NPT vice presidency is not an isolated case. In February 2026, Iran was elected vice-chair of the UN Commission for Social Development, a body focused on democracy, gender equality, and non-violence, and vice-chair of the UN Charter Committee. In April 2026, ECOSOC nominated Iran to the UN Committee for Programme and Coordination, which shapes policy on women’s rights, human rights, disarmament, and terrorism prevention, with Western democracies including the UK, France, Germany, Canada, and Australia voting in favor. Iran had been removed from the UN Commission on the Status of Women in 2022 following its violent crackdown on protesters after the death of Mahsa Amini in police custody.

I have a feeling that if Iran continues on its current path of delay, delay, lie, delay it may not like the end result.

Yes, Iran Was Very Near To Having Ten Nuclear Bombs

Posted on by

On Monday, Red State posted an article about a “60 Minutes” report that confirms the risk of continuing to negotiate with Iran without eliminating its nuclear program.

The article reports:

We heard a lot from the Democrats and media when the Trump administration launched Operation Epic Fury, arguing that there was no real threat. 

Now, there’s a story from “60 Minutes” that actually points to how real the threat was because of the concern about the highly enriched uranium (HEU).

60 Minutes posted on X:

It’s believed Iran currently has enough HEU to eventually make 10 atomic bombs. But international inspectors have not been allowed to verify Iran’s stockpile since last June, when the U.S. and Israel struck three nuclear sites.

The article notes:

Dr. Matthew Bunn, a Harvard Kennedy School professor and former White House nuclear advisor, said that almost 1000 pounds would be “enough material, if you enrich it just a little bit more, for 10-11 nuclear bombs.” 

He also explained how “Iran has been lying about its nuclear weapons effort for over 20 years now.” He said their claim that they weren’t working on pursuing a weapon was a lie. 

…Now, the “60 Minutes” story speaks about a prior operation to secure HEU in Kazakhstan. It seemed to be pushing the merits of cooperation to secure it, versus a military operation. That’s all well and good if you have a cooperative or trustworthy country, which you don’t in Iran. They had on Vice Admiral Robert Harward, who was a deputy commander of U.S. Central Command. He said that if you tried to seize it, it could take weeks and take a lot of personnel on the ground. 

But it would be a lot more challenging, one would think, if you just let it go unchecked, didn’t deal with the problem, and the unhinged regime with the terrorist proxies used it. 

Iran wants nuclear weapons in order to insure that the current regime stays in power. They have seen what  has happened to some dictatorships who don’t have nuclear power. I seriously doubt anything acceptable will come from the current negotiations–the Iranian Republican Guard and the political types can’t even agree on their talking points.

Changing The Face Of The Middle East

Posted on by

The Lebanese civil war began in 1975 and ended in 1990. Up until that civil war, Lebanon was the garden spot of the Middle East and was a major tourist destination. After a clash between Jordan and the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) in the 1970’s, many of the PLO members moved to Lebanon. The PLO and other organizations like them did not exist peacefully in Lebanon. After the Iranian revolution in 1979, Hezbollah began aligning itself with Iran and was responsible for terrorist attacks and car bombings in Lebanon. In 1983, Hezbollah carried out a terrorist attack on the Marine barracks in Beirut. Today, Hezbollah operates a terrorist stronghold in southern Lebanon which sends rockets into Israel on a regular basis. The major part of the funding of Hezbollah comes from Iran. Hezbollah does not represent the Lebanese government, but they have a lot of influence. They essentially hold parts of Lebanon hostage.

On Thursday, The New York Post reported:

Israel and Lebanon have agreed to a 10-day cease-fire beginning at 5 p.m. ET, President Trump announced Thursday.

Trump wrote on Truth Social that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Lebanese President Joseph Aoun had settled on the pause “in order to achieve PEACE between their Countries.”

“On Tuesday, the two Countries met for the first time in 34 years here in Washington, D.C., with our Great Secretary of State, Marco Rubio,” he added on Truth Social.

However, there are a few obstacles:

A Hezbollah official previously told NBC News that “if Israel is fully committed to a complete cessation of hostilities … then this matter would be subject to consideration” by the terror group. Trump insisted to reporters as he left the White House Thursday “they’re going to be having a ceasefire, and that will include Hezbollah.”

Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam welcomed the pact in a social media post, noting that the pause in fighting “is a central Lebanese demand we have pursued since the first day of the war.”

Netanyahu confirmed in a video statement that Israel had agreed to the cease-fire but isn’t withdrawing its forces from southern Lebanon yet. 

“We are remaining in Lebanon in an expanded security zone,” Netanyahu said, citing the “danger of an invasion.”

During trilateral cease-fire talks between Rubio, Lebanon’s ambassador, and Israel’s ambassador, Beruit acknowledged that Hezbollah is a mutual problem for both nations, a White House official said.

How much funding has Hezbollah lost because of the current situation in Iran?

Whatever happens with this ceasefire, I think we are watching some major power shifts in the Middle East. I am sure the Lebanese would like to see Hezbollah either destroyed or removed from their country.

It’s Really All About Perspective

Posted on by

Over the past few years, the Coastal Carolina Taxpayers Association has hosted a number of critical thinking classes. It is always a good idea to brush up on critical thinking, particularly if you watch the mainstream media. At one of those classes we were shown the video below:

Sometimes we are so focused on one thing that we can’t see the whole picture. That is my feeling about recent statements by Pope Leo.

The Encyclopedia Britannica defines just war theory:

The four most important conditions are: (1) the war must be declared openly by a proper sovereign authority (e.g., the governing authority of the political community in question); (2) the war must have a just cause (e.g., defense of the common good or a response to grave injustice); (3) the warring state must have just intentions (i.e., it must wage the war for justice rather than for self-interest); and (4) the aim of the war must be the establishment of a just peace. Since the end of World War II it has become customary to add three other conditions: (1) there must be a reasonable chance of success; (2) force must be used as a last resort; and (3) the expected benefits of war must outweigh its anticipated costs.

I believe that the previous actions of the Iranian government combined with their quest for a nuclear weapon resulting an an attack by America and Israel meet the criteria for a just war. The Iranian government’s slaughter of their own people should also be considered. Evidently Pope Leo does not share this belief.

There are many things that Pope Leo could be commenting on at this moment–the slaughter of Christians in Nigeria, abortion in America, and the killing of Christians by Islamists. Somehow he is quiet on these things.

There are some other aspects of the Pope’s recent comments. Is he aware the God definitely answered the prayers of David in the Old Testament? Is he meddling in the American midterm elections? If so, why? The Democrat party stands for many things that are contrary to Catholic teaching. According to one of my sources, there is a money component to this related to the petrodollar and audits that may occur if the Strait of Hormuz remains closed. Keep your eyes open, and don’t forget how the Iranian people feel about the war–they want their country back!

(Past) Time To Leave The United Nations

Posted on by

On Saturday, U.N. Watch posted an article about some of the members recently appointed to various United Nations human rights groups.

The article reports:

On Wednesday, the UN’s 54-nation Economic and Social Council nominated the Islamic Republic of Iran to the UN’s Committee for Program and Coordination, which meets next month to shape policy on women’s rights, human rights, disarmament, and terrorism prevention. ECOSOC’s nomination is effectively decisive, as the UN General Assembly customarily rubber-stamps such nominations without a vote.

In addition, ECOSOC by acclamation elected China, Cuba, Nicaragua, Saudi Arabia, and Sudan to the influential Committee on NGOs, which oversees the work, accreditation and UN access of thousands of human rights and civil society groups that enjoy consulative status at the world body.

The United States was the only ECOSOC member to object, saying that Iran, Cuba and Nicaragua were “unfit.”

UN Watch today called on all democratic ECOSOC member states — Canada, France, Spain, Norway, the Netherlands, Australia, the UK, Finland, Switzerland, Austria, and Finland — to explain why they joined in the election of serial abusers of human rights to key UN bodies that oversee human rights.

“Appointing China, Cuba, and Saudi Arabia to oversee the work of human rights activists is like putting Al Capone in charge of fighting organized crime,” said Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch. “It’s truly indefensible, and puts lives at risk.”

“As an organization accredited with special NGO consultative status at the United Nations, and which regularly gives a platform to dissidents from China, Cuba, Sudan, Saudi Arabia and Nicaragua, we are gravely concerned that brutal dictatorships were elected to oversee our work and credentials — and it is scandalous that Western democracies put them there.”

“This means dictatorships will have a majority on the committee in order to deny United Nations accreditation to independent organizations that call out their human rights violations, and to accredit more fake front groups created by the regimes,” Neuer said.

This makes about as much sense as asking a fox to design a security system for a chicken coop. Remember, many of the men involved in the October 7th massacre in Israel were United Nations employees. I think it’s time to disband the organization.

Avoiding Ground Troops

Posted on by

On Tuesday, Breitbart posted an article about a recent bombing attack on Iran.

The article reports:

The recent massive U.S. strike near Iran’s central city of Isfahan likely sought to render Tehran’s remaining highly enriched uranium stockpile inaccessible by burying it deep underground — a strategy that would negate the need for a prolonged and risky U.S. ground operation to extract the material, according to an Israeli military analyst writing Tuesday.

Writing in Ynet on Tuesday, Israeli military analyst Ron Ben-Yishai — a veteran Yediot Ahronot correspondent and Israel Prize recipient — assessed that the strike reflects a deliberate U.S. effort to neutralize Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile by entombing it beneath rock, soil, and collapsed tunnel infrastructure rather than attempting to remove it by force.

The article notes:

Ben-Yishai said recent discussions had centered on two possible ways of addressing the stockpile: a ground operation to extract it from Iran or a negotiated arrangement under which Tehran would transfer it abroad.

He suggested the first option would be extraordinarily difficult.

A ground operation, he wrote, would likely require more than 1,000 troops, the establishment of airstrips at sites such as Natanz and Isfahan to sustain the force, and heavy engineering equipment capable of opening sealed tunnels — all while exposing U.S. personnel to casualties and requiring a sustained American military presence inside Iran.

The alternative, he argued, is to neutralize the uranium by burying it so thoroughly that Iran would need at least a year to locate and recover it, buying the United States and Israel time to detect and disrupt any such effort.

In Ben-Yishai’s telling, that appears to be the course Washington chose.

“It can be assessed with reasonable confidence,” he wrote, that the United States opted to bury the material rather than attempt a ground extraction or rely on Iranian cooperation. He said U.S. forces struck the area surrounding the uranium storage site at Natanz in March and likely carried out a similar operation overnight in Isfahan.

The article concludes:

Most importantly, Ben-Yishai wrote, U.S. operational activity points to a decision to bury the enriched material rather than undertake the kind of prolonged ground mission that would have required a sustained American military presence on Iranian soil.

That, he suggested, may be precisely why Trump chose to publicize the footage.

Trump has also suggested the broader campaign may be nearing its conclusion, saying Tuesday the United States is “ahead of schedule” and has largely eliminated Iran’s military capabilities, adding in separate remarks that “we won’t have to be there much longer” as U.S. forces continue targeting what remains of Tehran’s offensive infrastructure.

I don’t want to see  American ground troops in Iran. Hopefully we can destroy enough of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard and police force to allow the Iranians to take back their country. I have no idea who the next leader of Iran should be, but it needs to be someone who promotes freedom for everyone.

The Negotiators Lied

Posted on by

It isn’t really a surprise that the Iranians trying to get President Trump to agree to letting them have a nuclear program lied, but now we have further proof.

On Saturday, The Jerusalem Post reported:

Iran fired two ballistic missiles at a joint US-UK military base, Diego Garcia, the Wall Street Journal reported Friday night, citing multiple US officials. 

One of the missiles failed in flight, and a US warship fired an interception at the other. At this time, it has not been determined if an interception was made, but neither missile hit the base, officials told WSJ. 

Diego Garcia is located about 4,000 kilometers from Iran, double the 2,000-kilometer range that Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Iran’s ballistic missiles had last month. 

According to a report published by Israel’s Alma Research and Education Center at the start of the war, Iran’s missile inventory primarily consists of short-range ballistic missiles, which reach up to 1,000 kilometers, and medium-range ballistic missiles, which can reach as far as 3,000 kilometers.

However, the Center added that “according to various reports, long-range ballistic missiles are currently in advanced stages of development.”

Note that during the negotiations with Iran, the Iranian Foreign Minister claimed that Iran only had missiles with a 2,000 kilometer range. What else was he lying about?

If we had waited to attack Iran until after they had developed long-range missiles, the world would have been blackmailed by Iran. A country constantly yelling “Death to Israel” and “Death to America” would have been a worldwide threat if they had nuclear missiles and the capability to deliver them. Thank God for a President with the courage to attack them when he did–time was running out.

Seems A Little Ungrateful

Posted on by

It is very disheartening to some Americans that when the members of the  North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) were asked to help secure the Strait of Hormuz they seemed disinterested. America has been the main funder and defender of NATO since it was formed, and the lack of support for America in ending Iranian terrorism was disappointing. However, things happen, and NATO members seem to be changing their tune.

On Wednesday, Red State reported:

As we reported, President Donald Trump asked our NATO allies and others to help contribute to a coalition of escort ships to help ensure safe passage in the Strait of Hormuz.

But he was rebuffed by some of the NATO allies, like Germany, who said that they didn’t start the military action, so why should they be involved? These are some of the same folks who thought the United States should pay endlessly for Ukraine, despite that not being “our war.’

They had a bit of a karmic wake-up call when the hotel where their European Union Advisory Mission is housed was hit by an Iran-backed drone in Baghdad.

But now Trump is also calling their bluff, because the bottom line is that the U.S. ships very little through the Strait — it’s far more important to others. So Trump posted on Truth Social that if allies want to play the weak-kneed weasel game, maybe the U.S. should just not provide any escorts, and just let the countries that use it be responsible for it.

The article notes:

“I have been in contact with many allies,” Rutte (NATO SecGen Mark Rutte) said during a NATO exercise in Norway.

“We all agree, of course, that Strait has to open up again. And what I know is that allies are working together, discussing how to do that, what is the best way to do it. They’re working on that collectively to find a way forward.”

Rutte also explained the ballistic missile and nuclear capability had been “severely degraded.”

Gee, what happened to “We didn’t start it”? Sounds like Trump shamed them into movement. Rutte gets Trump, so he knows they have to pony up.

Others are showing up some of our European allies. As we reported, India is providing warships to protect their own ships; it is one of the biggest shippers through the Strait, along with China.

…The United Arab Emirates may join a U.S.-led effort to protect shipping in the Strait of Hormuz after Iran all but shut the vital waterway to ships as Tehran wages war with Israel and ‌the United States, a senior Emirati official said on Tuesday.

Anwar Gargash, the diplomatic adviser to the UAE president, said talks were ongoing and no formal plan had been agreed, but that “big countries” in Asia, the Middle East, and Europe bore responsibility for ensuring the flow of trade and energy.

Iran has made a number of strategic mistakes during this war. One of those mistakes was attacking their neighbors who were attempting to remain neutral. I see good things in the future for the people of Iran, but not so good things in the future for the current leaders of Iran.

The Long Road To War

Posted on by

On March 10th, Victor David Hanson posted an article at American Greatness detailing how we got involved in a war with Iran.

The article reports:

Until last year, for some 46 years, Iran enjoyed a North Korea-like reputation in the heart of the Middle East: always unpredictable, reckless, dangerous, inevitably to be nuclear, self-destructive, and nihilistic.

All that said, was it really ever all that formidable?

The mullahs came into power after the removal of the Shah and, subsequently, the interim secular socialists. They did so by taking American hostages, murdering opponents, executing former supporters, and transforming the most secular and modern of the Middle East Muslim nations into the most medieval that routinely hung homosexuals, adulterers, and almost anyone who questioned the authority of the ayatollahs. In other words, these were gruesome people, but they didn’t necessarily have a competent military.

The theocracy’s only constant with the prior monarchical Iran was that it inherited near limitless oil and natural gas reserves, sophisticated arms, and the Shah’s modernized cities. It controlled the key strategic chokepoint at the Strait of Hormuz and enjoyed a geostrategically critical location between Asia and the Middle East. It fueled Iran’s historical chauvinism and pique that the millennia-long historical preeminence of Middle Eastern Persia was not fully appreciated by its Arab neighbors. So there were lots of natural advantages—and all for the most part squandered.

The article concludes with what the author suspects is the strategy of the people who currently control Iran:

The remnants of the theocracy intend to ride out the bombings and, at some point in extremis, expect an armistice from “negotiations.” Their ultimate strategy is to wait out the tenures of both Trump and Netanyahu and hope for another sympathetic president like Obama, or a non compos mentis Biden, or someone ideologically akin to Mamdani or AOC.

When Trump and Netanyahu are out of office, they dream of using their oil to rearm and resume their role as Chinese and Russian proxies, eventually getting the bomb, and the second time around, perhaps using it.

Theocratic Iran, in its fantasies, still believes that if it ever destroyed Israel with a bomb or two, the world, especially given the recrudescence of Western antisemitism, would be appalled—for a day or two.

Then it would resume business with it. And with a dozen or so deterrent nuclear-tipped missiles, the Iranian ritual boilerplate of crazed pronouncements would follow of supposedly welcoming a nuclear pathway to an eternal virginal Paradise.

And thus, we would go full circle back again to a “crazy” Iran, its murderous clients, and its unhinged—but effective—threats.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. The war started 47 years ago. We need to finish it.

When Someone Doesn’t Follow The Script

Posted on by

One of the rules for trial lawyers is never ask a question you don’t already know the answer to. Generally, the left-wing media also follows that rule, but sometimes they get answers they are not prepared for.

On March 6th, Townhall reported on one example of a very quick ‘cut to commercial’:

Kian Tajbakhsh appeared on CNN last night to discuss the Iranian operation. It wasn’t confrontational like Scott Jennings, Kevin O’Leary, or Ben Ferguson; he simply presented facts. He should know, as a former political prisoner. We discussed how liberals are trying to frame Operation Epic Fury as a new endless war, but it’s not new: Iran has considered itself at war with the United States since the Iranian Revolution. Tajbakhsh was present when officials stated this—we’ve been at war with the Islamic Republic since 1979.

This is the quote that caused a very quick cut to commercial:

TAJBAKHSH: “What happened with President Obama, I’ll just say this very quickly.”

“And I was in the State Department in the 2000s when we implored the Bush administration not to restrict the engagement with Iran simply to the nuclear file.”

“What happened with president Obama is that, for better or worse — and I’m not going to litigate that here — he decided that given the four big problems that have always been on American objectives with Iran, that is enrichment, ballistic missiles, proxies and democracy inside Iran, that he would put all the last three aside and focus only on the nuclear deal.”

“Now, I’m not going to say that was good or bad. I don’t think it was a great idea, but what we have seen and this is also maybe controversial and I think a lot of my liberal friends are going to hate me for this…”

“Is that unfortunately you can draw a straight line from the 2015 nuclear deal to October 7th.”

“I think that what the Trump administration is—”

PHILLIP: “We…we…we do have to go to a break here.”

TAJBAKHSH: “Okay.”

Thank you, President Trump, for putting an end to a terrorist state that unfortunately had the money to export its terrorism.