U.S. submarine torpedoes Iranian tanker, killing 100+ sailors. Trump or Netanyahu? As allies flee and oil hits $4/gal, America’s depravity hits a new low.
Is Donald Trump gearing up to escalate the conflict with Iran? It’s now clear that the talks held in Islamabad served only as a distraction for Iran, which they realized from the start, and that Trump never intended to pursue peace. Contrary to popular belief in American mainstream media across political lines, the notion that Trump urgently wants to exit the war appears misguided. Instead, he seems captivated by the allure of military posturing, truly convinced that amid a series of failures, a successful strike against the regime remains possible.
It’s crucial to note that Trump’s actions are fueled by greed and manipulation of the markets. The fluctuations from crisis to brief calm seen in recent weeks suggest that Trump and his associates have profited greatly from trading oil. Ultimately, oil lies at the core of this conflict. Should the regime collapse, Iran’s oil reserves would represent a substantial prize.
Watching events unfold feels like witnessing a slow-motion disaster. Trump appears increasingly disconnected from reality, his “escalate to de-escalate” tactics relentlessly draining resources and costing more lives while benefiting him and his circle financially.
Since the onset of the war, reports claim 415 American soldiers have died. Though heartbreaking, some doubt even this figure and suspect the casualties are higher.
The recent assault on the Iranian tanker, resulting in the death of over 100 crew members after a second unnecessary torpedo was fired by a U.S. submarine, reveals the depths of depravity reached by Trump and Israel. Such an action is beyond desperate, exceeding the moral boundaries of any previous U.S. president.
This offensive targets not only Iran but also China. The clash between emerging powers Iran and China and the sinking influence of the U.S. is on full display. As America’s dominance fades—with gasoline prices hitting $4 per gallon, economic stagflation, and widespread desertion by allies—Trump seemingly embraces global ridicule.
Who convinced Trump that attacking tankers bound for China was wise? Does he fail to understand that this represents an act of war that Beijing will not overlook lightly? At best, China might respond by arming its vessels with anti-helicopter missiles to prevent future incidents. At worst, China could increase its military backing of Iran, encouraging it to wait for the opportune moment to retaliate by sinking an American warship.
The number of experts voicing concern over Trump’s mental state in mainstream U.S. media has surged. Rumors even suggest White House officials worry about his psychological health. Iran, having restrained itself thus far, will undoubtedly react strongly to the tanker attack, especially since the second torpedo struck after the ship was already incapacitated. This cowardly strike aimed to maximize casualties and provoke Tehran into escalating the conflict.
But who really controls these decisions? It seems doubtful that Trump alone is responsible. The pattern points to Netanyahu orchestrating events. Bibi shows no regard for global economic turmoil or the chaos that looming shortages and corporate layoffs will bring. His sole focus appears to be his disturbing ambition to provoke a world war with Iran, exploiting American troops as expendable pawns. Iran must respond with a clear message that this brutal attack crossed all lines of international law and decency, violating the Geneva Convention and sinking to unprecedented depths of cruelty.
This strike fits into a broader strategy where Trump presses one button and Netanyahu escalates the response. It’s likely that Netanyahu ordered the tanker attack, fully aware it would force Iran’s hand. This exemplifies the “escalate to de-escalate” tactic’s dark side. Determined to drag the U.S. into full-scale war with Iran, Bibi’s provocations are meant to elicit a reaction. When Iran retaliates, media operatives will portray it as an unprovoked, bewildering assault by “fucking savages” (Apocalypse Now), ignoring Israel’s prior attack on schoolchildren who were children of active Iranian military personnel.
The logic behind this assault is one of brutal provocation, meticulously framed by Trump and Netanyahu on the media front but politically unprepared. Despite substantial Jewish financial support for Republican candidates in November, a massive backlash against Trump and the war effort is likely when hundreds of thousands rise in protest following Iran’s retaliation.
Tehran might decide to strike Saudi Arabia’s oil infrastructure in response. Regardless, Trump is inching closer to Netanyahu’s goal of a “final solution” for Iran. Reports reveal Trump had considered a nuclear strike but was blocked by U.S. Air Force General Dan Caine, who refused to grant presidential access to nuclear codes during an emergency White House meeting. According to CIA podcaster Larry Johnson, this incident is both alarming and enlightening, illustrating that Trump lacks control over major military decisions. Other sources confirm Trump has been excluded from the “situation room” multiple times due to concerns his erratic behavior could worsen crises. While some see this as prudent, it raises a pressing question: if not Trump, who truly commands these monumental choices?
About the Author
