Israel vs Palestine/Lebanon/Iran/Yemen/Syria: a New Middle East War

[Tintin]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Posted by Raskolnikov (here)
The power of art. Beautiful and haunting. Where are our new poets and visionaries?

But the post now says

This media has been disabled in response to a report by the copyright owner.

Does anyone have a link to the original??

A 2 minute version which I've found via X:



According to Steven Donziger I think May 10th (tomorrow) is an official release date.

[rgray222]

This is a short 2:30-second video which gives a fairly clear and accurate assessment (in my view) of the Iranian predicament when it comes to their relationship with China, especially about oil.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=d2kXgm14aww

[Ravenlocke]

🅰pocalypsis 🅰pocalypseos 🇷🇺 🇨🇳 🅉 reposted

Seyed Mohammad Marandi

https://x.com/s_m_marandi/status/2053092554204213518

[Ravenlocke]

Posted by Ravenlocke (here)
Iran Observer

⚡️JUST IN

Iran plans to take control of the undersea cables in the Strait of Hormuz, vital for internet and financial exchanges – Fars News

The Iranian government plans to charge fees for the use of the cables and entrust their maintenance to Iranian companies

These cables carry over 97% of global internet traffic passing between Europe, Asia, and the Middle East

https://x.com/IranObserver0/status/2053105531779199473

🅰pocalypsis 🅰pocalypseos 🇷🇺 🇨🇳 🅉 reposted

IRIB (Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting)

Companies that have long denied service to Iran due to U.S. sanctions—like AWS, Google Cloud, Oracle Cloud, PayPal, Stripe, Apple Dev, and many global payment networks—now claim to care about internet access in Iran.

https://x.com/iribnews_irib/status/2053002527722160629

[Ravenlocke]

Press TV 🔻

The City Council of Abasolo, Mexico, has unveiled a plaque honoring Iran, featuring an excerpt from the Cyrus Cylinder, an ancient Iranian emblem of human rights and respect for human dignity.

Follow Press TV on Telegram: http://t.me/PressTV

https://x.com/PressTV/status/2053154481483776143

[Rizotto]

George Galloway describes the uncovering of Israel's nuclear weapons program, in 1986 by by Mordecai Vanunu, the Israeli whistleblower who had been working as a nuclear technician at Israel's nuclear site in Dimona, and who brought the evidence to UK media mogul Robert Maxwell (father of Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's colleague). However, Robert Maxwell betrayed Mordecai Vanunu, and had him kidnapped by the Mossad, and eventually thrown into solitary confinement in Israeli jail for decades.

https://www.facebook.com/reel/1478934613962391

[Szymon]

Here is the latest news.

[shaberon]

Posted by Kryztian (here)
You can see this by whom Epstein was trying to control: Bill Clinton, John Kerry (who, per this video, would have become the Presidential hopeful candidate if Hillary Clinton got impossibly caught up in scandals), Ehud Barak and Terje Rod-Larsen. Rod-Larsen and his wife Mona Juul were the Norwegian diplomats who brokered the Oslo Accords.

On a relevant note, the son of Terje R-L committed suicide about a week ago, being a few days after some Norwegian implication from the Files. If I remember rightly, he was young, maybe not even 30.

What they seem to be saying in these reports is basically what we were saying while it was going on.

[shaberon]

Posted by Vicus (here)
What Iran Contributes to International Law- by Thierry Meyssan

The current war has given all United Nations member states the opportunity to observe that, on numerous occasions since its creation, the UN has violated international law. It has also reminded them that international law defines an attack, such as that by Israel and the United States against Iran, as an "aggression." Furthermore, 193 states (including Israel and the United States) have recognized the right of the attacked state to consider as co-aggressors those states that host military bases of the aggressors.

Returning to the topic that the Charter is not really a "law", the difference is made on the international level by a Treaty.

The difference in Treaties is that once they are ratified in a country, then it is law. NATO is a Treaty. I've looked into how it works and admit I can't stand it.

On the other hand, I'm not particularly familiar with the European Union or how it works. So I don't know what kind of gravity this has, but is an example of taking at least one thing seriously in an international body:

The US and Israel launched an unprovoked war on Iran on February 28, killing 168 children and teachers in airstrikes on the Minab School in southern Iran on the first day of the war.

The attack on the school in Minab must be investigated, said Milan Uhrik, a member of the European Parliament.

Speaking at a funeral rally titled Angels of Minab, held outside the Iranian embassy in Brussels, the MEP said he suspected that the attack was carried out deliberately.

Uhrik said it is obvious to everyone what the Israeli regime is capable of doing.

He cited the Israeli genocide of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip as an example of what the Israeli regime forces are doing to civilians.

Uhrik said the attacks targeting Lebanese children, women, and the elderly are other examples of the Israeli forces' brutality.

The Israelis are capable of attacking civilians, intimidating people, spreading fear among the population, and thus trying to win the war by any means, Uhrik said, reiterating that the attack on the Minab school could well have been a planned strike that should be investigated.

According to Uhrik, the Minab school airstrikes constitute a war crime, and the European Union and European countries should not be involved in such criminal actions.

He said that he had sent a letter to the European Commission in this regard.

The Slovak politician slammed the European Commission and European leaders for applying double standards to such crimes.

He said the Europeans try to avoid probes into these crimes because they are weak, adding that European leaders are not capable of showing resistance against the aggressive policies dictated by Washington and Tel Aviv.

However, the war on Iran is triggering widespread international condemnation and exposing deep cracks in the Western alliance.

About 50 activists came to express their solidarity with the people of Iran during the funeral rally in Brussels.

Here is another mini-invasion courtesy of the US taxpayer:

Israel established a hidden military base deep in Iraq’s desert region to support its air strikes against the Islamic Republic of Iran, according to a report.

In a damning revelation exposing the depth of Israeli aggression and its blatant violation of Iraqi sovereignty, The Wall Street Journal reported on Saturday that the illegal Israeli outpost was constructed shortly before the US-Israeli war of aggression against Iran began on February 28, with full awareness of Washington.

The base served as a logistics hub for Israeli special forces and the Zionist air force, complete with search-and-rescue teams positioned to extract downed Israeli pilots.

The report detailed how Israeli forces launched airstrikes on Iraqi troops who had nearly uncovered the site in early March, after a local shepherd alerted authorities to suspicious helicopter activity in the remote area.

Iraqi state media had reported the incident, prompting a legitimate investigation by Iraqi security forces. In response, the Israeli regime carried out unprovoked strikes that killed an Iraqi soldier and forced the troops to retreat, preventing any exposure of Tel Aviv’s covert operations on sovereign Iraqi soil.

“This reckless operation was carried out without coordination or approval,” Qais Al-Muhammadawi, deputy commander of Iraq’s Joint Operations Command, told Iraqi state media at the time, condemning the Israeli assault as a flagrant breach of Iraq’s territorial integrity.

The WSJ further revealed that even after a US F-15 fighter jet was downed near Isfahan during the conflict, Israel offered assistance in the rescue.

Nevertheless, Israeli warplanes still conducted additional strikes under the pretext of “securing the mission,” underscoring Tel Aviv’s determination to maintain its illegal footprint inside Iraq.

The revelation of Israel’s secret base highlights the extent of the Zionist regime’s expansionist ambitions and its willingness to endanger the lives of Iraqi soldiers and destabilize the region to pursue its war on Iran.

Iraqi officials have long warned of such covert Israeli activities, which violate international law and threaten the stability of independent nations resisting foreign aggression.

Iran has consistently maintained that its defensive actions were a direct response to unprovoked attacks, and the exposure of this Iraqi base only reinforces Tehran’s position that the Zionist entity and its American backers are the primary source of instability in West Asia.

[Rizotto]

https://www.rt.com/news/639817-israel-secret-iraq-base/

May 9, 2026

Israel built secret base in Iraq to bomb Iran – WSJ
The IDF reportedly attacked and killed Iraqi troops who discovered the outpost

Israel secretly built a military outpost in the Iraqi desert to support its air campaign against Iran and even launched strikes on Iraqi troops who nearly discovered it, the Wall Street Journal has reported, citing US officials familiar with the matter.

The clandestine base was set up shortly before the US and Israel launched their military campaign against Iran in late February, according to the report. The US was reportedly aware of the installation, which housed Israeli special forces, served as a logistics hub for the Israeli Air Force, and hosted search-and-rescue teams in case Israeli pilots were shot down.

The outpost was nearly exposed in early March after a local shepherd noticed “unusual military activity,” including helicopter flights, and alerted authorities. Iraqi soldiers then moved to investigate the site but came under heavy fire. The attack killed one Iraqi soldier and wounded two others.

Baghdad initially blamed Washington after security forces found evidence that foreign military personnel had been operating in the area.

“It appears there was a certain force on the ground before the strike, supported from the air, operating beyond the capabilities of our units,” Lt. Gen. Qais Al-Muhammadawi, deputy commander of Iraq’s Joint Operations Command, told Iraqi state media after the March attack. “This reckless operation was carried out without coordination or approval.”

The base reportedly helped Israel fight a long-range air war against Iran, whose territory lies over 1,600 kilometers (1,000 miles) from Israel. Israeli aircraft carried out thousands of strikes during the five-week campaign, while the Iraqi desert outpost gave Israeli teams a forward position closer to the battlefield.

The IDF did not comment on the latest report, which adds to growing scrutiny of how Israel’s confrontation with Iran expanded into a broader regional conflict and pulled the US deeper into hostilities.

Former US counterterrorism chief Joe Kent, who resigned in protest in March, has accused Israel of driving Washington into a war despite US intelligence assessments that Tehran was not actively building a nuclear weapon.

Kent claimed that US agencies had warned Iran would retaliate by targeting American bases and attempting to shut down the Strait of Hormuz if attacked. He argued that the Israeli narrative about the Iranian threat ultimately “won the argument” in Washington, forcing the US into the conflict.

Trump administration officials have denied that Israel dragged Washington into the war. US War Secretary Pete Hegseth said earlier this week that President Donald Trump acted based on “American interests” and his “America First” policy, dismissing the idea that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had pulled the US into the conflict as a “false premise.”

[shaberon]

Ben Gurion remains largely avoided by international flights, with resumption described as "reluctant."


This is one of the unusual times where there is a mainstream criticism by a Neocon PNAC founder:

US suffers 'total defeat' in war against Iran, faces irreversible strategic collapse: Neocon analyst

In a noteworthy mea culpa from one of America's most influential neoconservative commentators, Robert Kagan believes the United States has suffered a "total defeat" in its ongoing war against Iran, which has permanently shattered its global standing.

Kagan, a co-founder of the Project for the New American Century and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, was a vocal advocate of the war against Iraq and a lifelong champion of American military interventions in West Asia.

But in a recent article for The Atlantic, he offered a grim verdict on the current war of aggression against the Islamic Republic of Iran, launched on February 28.

"The US suffered a total defeat," Kagan writes, describing the loss as having no precedent in American history and one that can "neither be repaired nor ignored."

While acknowledging that previous American military failures carried heavy costs, Kagan insists this war is fundamentally different in nature.

"The defeats in Vietnam and Afghanistan were costly but did not do lasting damage to America's overall position in the world," the prominent commentator writes.

"Defeat in the present confrontation with Iran will be of an entirely different character."

At the heart of this catastrophe, Kagan noted, is Iran's newfound ability to control the Strait of Hormuz, the world's most strategic waterway, without any challenge.

"Iran will be able not only to demand tolls for passage, but to limit transit to those nations with which it has good relations," he writes.

According to Kagan, Iran has no interest in returning to the pre-war status quo. Most Persian Gulf states, he believes, will have no choice but to accommodate Tehran, effectively making Iran the dominant regional power.

"The United States will have proved itself a paper tiger, forcing the (Persian) Gulf and other Arab states to accommodate Iran," Kagan writes.

He also dismisses any notion that a coalition of allies could rectify the situation.

"If the United States with its mighty Navy can't or won't open the strait, no coalition of forces with just a fraction of the Americans' capability will be able to, either," he states.

Kagan frames the collapse not as a regional setback but as a global strategic failure that fundamentally alters America's position in the world.

"America's once-dominant position in the (Persian) Gulf is just the first of many casualties," he warns. "America's allies in East Asia and Europe must wonder about American staying power in the event of future conflicts."

Compounding the strategic humiliation is a staggering depletion of American military resources during the ongoing war, which has been widely documented in the US media.

"Just a few weeks of war with a second-rank power have reduced American weapons stocks to perilously low levels, with no quick remedy in sight," Kagan writes.

He hastens to add that the United States now finds itself unable to control the consequences of a war it initiated – a war it has already lost.

"America's allies must wonder about American staying power in the event of future conflicts," he remarks.

Basically the same as everyone else selse says, but, a bit more satisfying, considering the source.

I consider them largely equivalent to "Epstein class."

As wrong today as they were back in the 90s.

Decades of American development proved to be stagnant if not backwards, dragging it down and managing to mess up the whole world, not just this country.

Please don't let anyone who believes in this stuff anywhere near a podium.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by shaberon (here)
United States has suffered a "total defeat" in its ongoing war against Iran, which has permanently shattered its global standing

Good riddance. The global standing of the United States was as a military-financial-propaganda strong arm of the globalists.

[rgray222]

Posted by shaberon (here)
Ben Gurion remains largely avoided by international flights, with resumption described as "reluctant."


This is one of the unusual times where there is a mainstream criticism by a Neocon PNAC founder:

US suffers 'total defeat' in war against Iran, faces irreversible strategic collapse: Neocon analyst

In a noteworthy mea culpa from one of America's most influential neoconservative commentators, Robert Kagan believes the United States has suffered a "total defeat" in its ongoing war against Iran, which has permanently shattered its global standing.

Kagan, a co-founder of the Project for the New American Century and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, was a vocal advocate of the war against Iraq and a lifelong champion of American military interventions in West Asia.

But in a recent article for The Atlantic, he offered a grim verdict on the current war of aggression against the Islamic Republic of Iran, launched on February 28.

"The US suffered a total defeat," Kagan writes, describing the loss as having no precedent in American history and one that can "neither be repaired nor ignored."

While acknowledging that previous American military failures carried heavy costs, Kagan insists this war is fundamentally different in nature.

"The defeats in Vietnam and Afghanistan were costly but did not do lasting damage to America's overall position in the world," the prominent commentator writes.

"Defeat in the present confrontation with Iran will be of an entirely different character."

At the heart of this catastrophe, Kagan noted, is Iran's newfound ability to control the Strait of Hormuz, the world's most strategic waterway, without any challenge.

"Iran will be able not only to demand tolls for passage, but to limit transit to those nations with which it has good relations," he writes.

According to Kagan, Iran has no interest in returning to the pre-war status quo. Most Persian Gulf states, he believes, will have no choice but to accommodate Tehran, effectively making Iran the dominant regional power.

"The United States will have proved itself a paper tiger, forcing the (Persian) Gulf and other Arab states to accommodate Iran," Kagan writes.

He also dismisses any notion that a coalition of allies could rectify the situation.

"If the United States with its mighty Navy can't or won't open the strait, no coalition of forces with just a fraction of the Americans' capability will be able to, either," he states.

Kagan frames the collapse not as a regional setback but as a global strategic failure that fundamentally alters America's position in the world.

"America's once-dominant position in the (Persian) Gulf is just the first of many casualties," he warns. "America's allies in East Asia and Europe must wonder about American staying power in the event of future conflicts."

Compounding the strategic humiliation is a staggering depletion of American military resources during the ongoing war, which has been widely documented in the US media.

"Just a few weeks of war with a second-rank power have reduced American weapons stocks to perilously low levels, with no quick remedy in sight," Kagan writes.

He hastens to add that the United States now finds itself unable to control the consequences of a war it initiated – a war it has already lost.

"America's allies must wonder about American staying power in the event of future conflicts," he remarks.

Basically the same as everyone else selse says, but, a bit more satisfying, considering the source.

I consider them largely equivalent to "Epstein class."

As wrong today as they were back in the 90s.

Decades of American development proved to be stagnant if not backwards, dragging it down and managing to mess up the whole world, not just this country.

Please don't let anyone who believes in this stuff anywhere near a podium.

Kagan is not an influential neoconservative commentator. Despite his conservative background, Kagan insists he is "liberal" and "progressive," and as Clarence Thomas recently said, progressivism is a step away from communism. He walked away from his tribe the day Trump was elected and has cultivated his TDS in fertile progressive soil ever since.

I do not support Trump's war with Iran, but I am not sure how anyone can pass judgment on the success or failure of the Iranian war at this stage of the game. The blockade is still in place, and most of the lasting effects are still unknown. We do know that the Gulf oil producers are actively investing in permanent alternative export routes to bypass the Strait of Hormuz. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are expanding existing pipeline capacities to the Red Sea and the Gulf of Oman. We also know that Iraq and Qatar are repairing oil and LNG facilities and pipelines. We also know that Russia has significantly increased its oil deliveries to China since the war in Iran began, and experts expect a sizeable portion of those deliveries to be permanent. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stated that Russia is ready to "fill the resource gap" for China and deepen its strategic partnership.

Iran's inflation rate is approximately 70%, and its currency is continuing to collapse. Food prices have risen by over 100%, causing severe economic hardship. The country's economy is contracting, and Iran is losing between $400 million and $600 million daily in oil revenue. Once this conflict is over, the Strait of Hormuz will be seen as a liability for Iran rather than an asset. The longer Iran attempts to block oil flowing thru the Strait the more they self destruct. Kagan or any analyst suggesting this situation signifies success for Iran or failure for the United States is misguided. While I do not wish hardship upon the Iranian people, watching the fall of the oppressive regime of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was a good thing. It continually amazes me how some people, like Kagan, establish their geopolitical commentary on wishful thinking.

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by rgray222 (here)
Kagan is not an influential neoconservative commentator.

He's Victoria Nuland's husband.

(Just reporting a fact! )

[rgray222]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Posted by rgray222 (here)
Kagan is not an influential neoconservative commentator.

He's Victoria Nuland's husband.

(Just reporting a fact! )

That would normally imply their shared neoconservative values, but Robert Kagan has been in a state of evolution since Trump took office. He no longer has strong support for Israel and has increasingly criticised Israeli policies, which is not a hard position to take. especially when you consider what happened in Gaza. His neoconservatism seems to be evaporating rapidly. Don't get me wrong, I think that is a good thing. I have never believed that using U.S. military force around the world as a primary tool of foreign policy benefited anybody except politicians and the government. The problem, as I see it, is twofold: he is often being described by values that he no longer holds onto, and more importantly, he is beginning to self-describe as progressive, which I feel is a very destructive path to be on.

[shaberon]

Posted by ThePythonicCow (here)

Posted by shaberon (here)
United States has suffered a "total defeat" in its ongoing war against Iran, which has permanently shattered its global standing

Good riddance. The global standing of the United States was as a military-financial-propaganda strong arm of the globalists.

I've been trying to figure this out for a long time. "Globalists" are Neocons?

Or the Truman Doctrine? Both?

[Kryztian]

Posted by shaberon (here)

Posted by ThePythonicCow (here)

Posted by shaberon (here)
United States has suffered a "total defeat" in its ongoing war against Iran, which has permanently shattered its global standing

Good riddance. The global standing of the United States was as a military-financial-propaganda strong arm of the globalists.

I've been trying to figure this out for a long time. "Globalists" are Neocons?

Or the Truman Doctrine? Both?

I think "Globalists" are both Neocons and Neolibs. Basically, they are the same wolves, but they wear different sheep outfits. One pretends to care about God, Country, Family Values, The Rights to Life and the other pretends to care about Social and Economic Equality, Poverty and the Right to have an abortion. But underneath, all either of them care about is a form of government that surveils the population like cattle on a feed lot, increases taxes while decreasing actual services to benefit the population, sending your children off to war so that they can bomb countries and corrupt smaller nations, extort their wealth, and then put that wealth in banks in the Cayman Islands. A simpler word might be "elitism" - the 0.001% see the world and 99.999% of the people as theirs to rape and pillage.

The opposite of "elitism" is "populism", that is, government that is their to benefit. The politicians that win the election like Trump and Obama win because they convince enough people that they are "of the people." Then, they get into office and we see that quite the contrary is true.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by shaberon (here)
I've been trying to figure this out for a long time. "Globalists" are Neocons?

Or the Truman Doctrine? Both?

Most large organizations that portend to be world-wide or to unite all nations in global governance seem to be "globalist" in nature. Such organizations are seldom openly and honestly controlled by any particular culture, nation, religion or people, but rather are apparently controlled by the hidden hand(s) of very powerful and wealthy families, who use such "global" institutions as one of their means to colonize humanity and extract this planet's wealth.

So who are these "globalists" really? They don't tells us. They stay hidden. We have no generally and publicly recognized way to determine who "they" are. We are not allowed to have any such clearly reliable and publicly accepted way. We are each empowered, by our own nature and spirit, to have our understandings and speculations. Go for it. Have and develop your own insights. I can not provide the answer to the question "Who are they?" to you, nor expect you to take any insights I might claim as "gospel truth." Nor can you expect me to take your insights on such matters as truth, either.

Even the "answer" I offered in my first paragraph above, such as regarding "the hidden hand(s) of very powerful and wealthy families", might seem foolishly misguided to you, and well my words might be.

[Vicus]

Iran's Strikes Rewrite Washington's West Asia Doctrine: US Bases Are Not Coming Back

NOTE:long post originally posted in : https://thecradle.co/articles/us-bas...-asia-doctrine

Iran's dismantling of the US base shield exposes the central weakness of Washington's regional order: its occupation infrastructure can no longer protect itself.

To riff on Bruce Springsteen's My Hometown: "Tehran says 'These bases are going, boys / And they ain't coming back / To your hometown'."

The Washington Post's 6 May 2026 article, 'Iran has hit far more US military assets than reported, satellite images show,' was an overdue admission - based on leaks from the US Department of Defense (DOD) and Washington's intelligence community - that Iran had inflicted significant damage to US assets. However, The Post only tells part of the story.

The Post examined 109 of the hundreds of satellite images published by Iranian media, whose authenticity could be verified "by comparing them with lower-resolution imagery from the European Union's satellite system, Copernicus, as well as high-resolution images from Planet where available."

The story was curated to reveal damage to 217 structures and 11 pieces of equipment, highlighting the vulnerability of US bases, while at the same time obscuring the magnitude of the losses and ramifications for the US military presence in West Asia.

It did not address the implications of the destruction of radars, the failure of longstanding US doctrine, or strikes against bases in Iraq - more than 600 - that effectively ejected US bases from the country.

The larger story is that these bases may not be rebuilt at all. They are exposed, ruinously expensive, and now sit inside Iran's demonstrated strike envelope.


Map showing the US bases and ports in West Asia that were targeted by Iran.

Force protection failed first

"Force protection" is a military doctrine and is enshrined in the Joint Chiefs of Staff Joint Publication 3-10 that binds the uniformed services. US Army Field Manual 3-19.1 clarifies the doctrine:


"Force protection consists of those actions that prevent or mitigate hostile actions against DOD personnel (to include family members), resources, facilities, and critical information. It coordinates and synchronizes offensive and defensive measures to enable the joint force to perform while degrading opportunities for the enemy. It includes air, space, and missile defense; NBC [Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical] defense; antiterrorism; defensive information operations; and security to operational forces and means."

Casualties lead to public scrutiny and dissent within the Armed Forces. Hence, the inordinate weight accorded to force protection in the early phases of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Iran's Former Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commander Mohsen Rezaei has pressed directly on that vulnerability, warning that renewed US aggression could see American vessels sunk, soldiers killed, and large numbers of forces taken captive.

The takeaway is the imperative to protect personnel and families, on or off base. The US was unable to protect either. US Central Command (CENTCOM) is credited with saving service members' lives by moving personnel off bases and into hotels, but this did not provide much safety. CIA and military were tracked to hotels; Shahid-136 drones made "room service" deliveries in the UAE, Iraq, Kuwait, and Bahrain - as evinced by myriad videos on Telegram.


continue:https://www.sott.net/article/506245-...ot-Coming-Back

[gini]

Who benefits? this is diving deep into the bigger picture...

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=ojn8hMGg_2Q

--- May 7, 2026 Mentor Sessions
Mentor Sessions Ep. 068: Who Really Controls When the Iran War Ends, Why the World Will Be Unrecognizable in Just 3-5 Years, and How Trump Is Long Bitcoin While Asset Stripping America | Alex Krainer & Simon Dixon

The Iran conflict isn't just a military standoff — it's a financial and geopolitical operation with specific power players steering the outcome. Alex Krainer and Simon Dixon name them.

In this conversation, Alex Krainer and Simon Dixon break down the hidden architecture behind the Iran war in 2026 — who controls its escalation, who benefits from its continuation, and why the official narrative misses the real story. You'll learn which financial and geopolitical factions have the most to gain from prolonged conflict, why the war's end date is not determined by military outcomes, and how this connects to the broader global monetary reset both guests have been tracking for years. You'll also see why Simon Dixon argues this is fundamentally a financial operation dressed as a military one — and what that means for Bitcoin as a neutral reserve asset in a world fracturing along these fault lines.

⏱️ Timestamps:
0:00 – Intro
1:07 – Who ultimately controls when the Iran war ends
1:37 – Alex Krainer frames the conflict's true nature
9:59 – The financial powers driving the Iran operation
11:16 – Simon Dixon on the monetary reset connection
22:24 – Which faction benefits most from prolonged conflict
29:33 – Why the media narrative misses the real story
35:26 – The Iran timeline nobody is discussing in 2026
55:56 – What escalation means for Bitcoin and hard assets
1:07:10 – How this conflict ends — and who decides
1:26:48 – Final takes from Krainer and Dixon