Jim Rickards’ Most Surprising Iran Takes
I have admired Jim Rickards’ insights for roughly a decade.
He entered my awareness in 2016 when he foresaw Donald Trump’s electoral victory, pointing out that the polls were flawed. That prediction proved to be remarkably accurate.
Jim consistently expresses bold opinions, and his contrarian forecasts often prove to be spot on.
I have been tracking his analysis of the Iran situation with great interest. Just today, he published a new report filled with unexpected and even unsettling perspectives.
This is characteristic of Jim’s approach. While his findings can be unsettling, they are invariably grounded in thorough research and clear reasoning.
Today, we will highlight several key points from Jim’s latest report, supplemented with contextual maps and visuals.
Let’s dive in…
Can Iran Wait it Out?
In the section titled Can Iran Win?, Jim acknowledges that the U.S. and Israeli militaries have delivered far greater damage so far:
Notwithstanding Iran’s limited success in counterattacks, it’s clear that the U.S. and Israel have inflicted far more damage on Iran than Iran has inflicted on the region.
That asymmetric damage ratio will continue to grow. The U.S. and Israeli attacks will expand even as Iran’s capacity to strike back is being heavily degraded.
Still, there are more nuanced aspects to consider. For instance, while eliminating the 86-year-old Ayatollah Khamenei pleased many, it also gave the Iranian regime a propaganda boost. Here’s Jim’s take:
Martyrdom – The first point is that the deaths of Ayatollah Khamenei and many of the top leaders of Iran may not have been unwanted by them. This is something the Western mind can barely comprehend.
In Islam, martyrdom is considered a blessing from Allah. It guarantees the martyr a place in paradise.
Is it possible that Khamenei and other leaders gathered in one place intentionally knowing that they would eventually be hunted down and killed by the U.S. and Israel? Why not gather in one place and become martyrs together?
This idea of martyrdom applies to the successors and replacements of those killed on day one. Many of those successors have been killed also. To the secular West, this is counted as a military victory.
But to the theocratic Muslim, martyrdom is the victory. This process unites almost all of Iran in a celebration of Allah’s divine will. The more martyrs we create, the stronger Iran becomes as an Islamic Republic.
Again, this is hard for the Western secular mainstream to grasp, but killing their leaders is making Iran stronger. There’s an almost Nietzschean vibe for the Iranian survivors.
This kind of insight is rarely seen in mainstream media. Martyrdom holds immense significance in the Islamic context, and it is quite possible that Khamenei embraced the inevitability of death. Whether or not this is objectively true, the critical factor is how it resonates with the world’s 230 million Shia Muslims, who take such matters very seriously.
The elimination of the Ayatollah might foster greater unity within Iran and potentially influence Shia communities in Bahrain, Iraq, and nearby regions.
Challenging Topography
Jim further explains why a land invasion would prove extraordinarily difficult due to Iran’s geography:
The Terrain – Westerners also have little idea just how big Iran is. It’s the 17th largest country in the world by area out of 195 countries. It also has the 17th largest population in the world with 86 million people.
Iran is not a giant like India or Brazil, but it is far larger than Americans realize. The terrain is challenging with large mountain ranges and deserts. This is not a country ripe for a land invasion like Iraq or Syria.
Iran is far larger than Ukraine, which is still holding out against Russia after four years of war. Iran has what military strategists call strategic depth, which offers the ability to retreat without surrender. Iran isn’t going anywhere and it will not easily be subdued.
Below is a topographical map illustrating Iran’s terrain. Notice how mountainous it is compared to Iraq to the West.
Relative to Iran, Iraq is roughly as flat as Illinois, which would make a ground invasion especially arduous. Nevertheless, President Trump has not dismissed the possibility of deploying troops on the ground.
How Long Will U.S. and Israeli Munitions Last?
One of the most pressing challenges Jim addresses is the dwindling supply of critical munitions.
A U.S. Munitions Problem – Most importantly, the U.S. and Israel are running low on offensive and defensive bombs and missiles. This is the result of the massive bombing attacks on Iran, the need to fire thousands of anti-missiles to shoot down thousands of incoming drones and missiles, the fact that the U.S. has allowed its military industrial capacity to atrophy, and the large number of weapons wasted in Ukraine.
The U.S. sent seven Patriot anti-missile batteries to Ukraine at about $1 billion each. All seven were destroyed by Russian hypersonic missiles. I’m certain the U.S. wishes it had those batteries today to protect U.S. bases and troops near Iran. The senile Biden and neocon warmongers may be to blame, but the damage is done.
The U.S. and Israel have inflicted enormous damage on Iran and will continue to do so in the short run. But within weeks, the magazines will run low, and the U.S. will be scrounging around in South Korea and Japan for replacements.
Good luck with that.
U.S. industrial output of 800 cruise missiles per year cannot keep up with Israel and the U.S. launching 100 per week. Ships need to reprovision. Repairs cannot be neglected. Diego Garcia is days away from the battlespace. The U.S. will be badly stretched.
Jim estimates the U.S. manufactures roughly 800 cruise missiles annually, while firing approximately 100 each week—potentially more. This is a troubling imbalance. Though stockpiles exist, they are intended for emergencies. Does this situation qualify as one?
Moreover, many U.S. bases near Iran have sustained missile and drone assaults and are largely abandoned. While U.S. troops have mostly avoided casualties, these setbacks complicate resupply and refueling efforts.
Here is a map from the Wall Street Journal showing approximate locations of U.S. bases and naval forces in the region:
Source: WSJ
(Note: Since the release of this map, the U.S.S. Gerald Ford carrier strike group has transited the Suez Canal, entering the Red Sea, presumably headed toward the Arabian Sea.)
Typically, the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group would refuel and rearm at Bahrain or another proximate base. However, those locations have endured heavy damage, likely forcing the group to rely on Diego Garcia, thousands of miles away. See the map below:
Source: RT
Jim finishes his report by highlighting the unpredictable nature of a protracted conflict.
Iran has a united population; reports of internal protests are greatly exaggerated, especially after the ayatollah ordered the killing of 5,000 protestors just weeks ago.
It has a robust political system despite decapitation strikes. Drones are cheap and easy to manufacture. They can do just as much damage as an F-15 strike when targeted properly.
Iran has strategic depth, allies in Russia and China, and a strong survival instinct.
In a war of attrition, really a war for survival, victory goes to the last man standing. That may be Iran.
This is precisely why we value Jim Rickards’ perspective. His savvy, dissenting viewpoints rarely appear in mainstream outlets.
Underestimating one’s adversary is history’s top error in warfare. We must take this warning seriously.
The conflict carries profound risks of escalation across economic, geopolitical, and military fronts.
More updates to follow.
About the Author
