JUDGE NAP—Trump appears to be losing control over the conflict, with escalating military deployments (e.g., 82nd Airborne, Marine Expeditionary Units) but no clear exit strategy.

Any attempt to seize strategic points like Qeshm Island would be logistically and militarily extremely difficult due to Iranian control, terrain, and defensive capabilities.

The existing topography and Iranian artillery, drones, submarines, and missile coverage make such operations highly risky and possibly futile.

G GREENWALD—Statements from Iranian officials suggest confidence in their military capabilities and a readiness to escalate the conflict further if necessary. Their emphasis on air defense vulnerabilities in Israel and plans for “next phases” of battle signal a willingness to engage in sustained asymmetric warfare rather than a quick resolution.

SABBY SABS—The discussion with Professor Marandi provides a detailed critique of the current Middle East conflict from an Iranian perspective. It underscores the centrality of US military presence in escalating regional tensions, the unity and determination of the Iranian people, and the severe global risks posed by continued warfare, including nuclear escalation and economic collapse. It also highlights the role of media manipulation and political deceit in shaping public narratives about the war.

EI—Jon Elmer, contributing editor, covers the third week of the war across the region, including developments in the Strait of Hormuz and Lebanon. This is a segment from The Electronic Intifada’s livestream on day 895 of the Gaza genocide. Ali Abunimah, Nora Barrows-Friedman and Jon Elmer were joined by Iranian scholar Setareh Sadeqi.

GER—A top advisor to Donald Trump, billionaire venture capitalist David Sacks, warned that, if the war on Iran continues, “Israel could just be destroyed”, or it could even use a nuclear weapon. Ben Norton explains how Washington sabotaged multiple peace deals and negotiations with Tehran, putting the world on the path toward catastrophe.

INDRAJIT—Now let me offer my own opinion, which is that I support Iran. I do not try to map Western views onto them, and I try to understand them on their own terms. I approach them with respect and try to learn from them, especially if I don’t immediately understand what they’re doing. The first point is that Iran obviously takes their faith seriously and I agree with Khamenei that nuclear weapons are bad, I think everybody does. This is both a Quranic imperative and a Kantian categorical imperative. I don’t know when everybody got so cynical, but Iran is showing in many ways that taking a moral stand is possible and I support this wholeheartedly.

OLIVER BOYD-BARRETT—The damage to the global economy caused by the closure of Hormuz is hardly limited to oil and gas, but also extends to fertilizer (manufactured from natural gas), shortages of which will decrease food production in coming months and increase food prices and, therefore, hunger, something of concern to Iran too, given that it has faced food and water shortages for quite some time in advance of this war, which is why it is allowing some grain ships through the Strait. Just as the shortage of oil is benefiting Russia, so also is the shortage of fertilizer, as Russia is a preeminent supplier worldwide.

EDITOR—A playground for the sociopathic global rich, and a den of hypocrisy and appalling depravity, Dubai, the hyper-Las Vegas of the Middle East, is now collapsing from within in the wake of Iran’s righteous assault.

MOATS—Joe Kent’s outspoken resignation is not merely a personal act but a symbolic protest against an unjust war. His military background and direct connection to battlefield losses lend credibility and weight to his dissent. Such resignations can catalyze further dissent within the military and intelligence communities, potentially undermining the administration’s war efforts from within. This shows the deep fractures and moral conflicts faced by those serving in the US government and military apparatus.

RON UNZ—Although Iran definitely seems to be winning the war, the continuing conflict does pose major risks to everyone in the world. This certainly includes China, which has carefully avoided any direct involvement.

The Chinese have allowed the Iranians to use their satellite positioning system and have also probably provided some important intelligence and reconnaissance information, crucial contributions that help to explain the excellent targeting of the Iranian missiles. But I believe that it is very much in China’s interests to do far more than this, and bring the conflict to a speedy conclusion, involving what amounts to an American surrender.

If the war goes on, there’s a good chance that the cycle of attacks and retaliations will destroy much of the energy infrastructure of the Gulf, leading to long-term losses of supply, hurting the Chinese along with everyone else. Probably China would suffer relatively less than Europe, Japan, or most other parts of the world, but it could hardly escape very substantial economic damage, as well as the loss of markets as most of its customers became impoverished.

Even more importantly, I’m deeply concerned over the possibility that Iran’s continuing success might result in either America or more likely Israel taking the conflict nuclear, with incalculable dangers for everyone in the world, including China.

M.K. BHADRAKUMAR—The bottom line is that the Gulf states’ core position toward Iran has not fundamentally changed — maintaining dialogue while strengthening deterrence — but the conditions under which it operates are shifting rapidly. Clearly, the Gulf region’s serious collective action problem needs to be overcome first before making a quantum leap toward developing a ‘NATO-like force’ as an alternative deterrent to the US security umbrella, which the war exposed to be to no purpose. 

The significance of Pakistan’s participation remains unclear and lends itself to interpretation as the nascent thinking apropos a formal military alliance  riveted on ‘Islamic partnership’ that takes strategic coordination beyond the Gulf region to contain Iran. Suffice it to say, Israel’s focus on energy and infrastructure as a new template of the war was anything but  incidental. 

PHIL. GIRALDI—And finally, for a bit of what just might turn out to be good news! The reports of the misfortunes of the world’s largest warship, the aircraft carrier USS Gerald R Ford, have been circulating for the past couple of weeks, starting with malfunction of the ship’s toilets, requiring repairs and maintenance. According to one report, it may have been due to deliberate clogging of the ship’s plumbing by crew members flushing and otherwise jamming clothing and other “indigestible” items into the pipes. There has also been a large 30-hour fire reported in the ship laundry room which has required returning to Crete for major repairs. The Ford has now left the operational area linked to Iran.