Hannes Wessels,
I seem to spend a lot of time swimming against the political tide. Over the years I’ve had countless arguments with people who loathed Donald Trump while I had a contrarian view. Now that he has attacked Iran, I seem to be on the wrong side of the political fence yet again, with most people wholly supportive of his decision.
Whatever else one might want to say about President Trump, his tenure thus far has been far from dull, and to my mind, I believe he has done a lot right.
The president moved swiftly to close the country’s borders and stop the influx of millions of illegals, many of whom have wreaked costly havoc since their arrival.
The White House set about re-calibrating America’s relationship with its trading partners. I agree with those who insist this process has been chaotic and unsettling for a world wanting economic stability, but most admit he was right to try and level the playing field when assessing import tariffs, and it seemed the new regimen was falling into place.
Trump’s insistence that NATO has too long taken US military largesse for granted and that the time had come for European members to start contributing more to their own security has not been disputed. This policy change was long overdue and in the medium to long term, Europe will probably benefit from being better placed to control its own security without over reliance on Washington.
While peace in Ukraine has eluded Trump, he played a decisive role in snuffing out a potential war between Pakistan and India; he managed to get most of the world’s bigger powers to endorse a peace-plan in Gaza; and he has made some progress in stopping the slaughter in eastern Congo through pressure on both Kinsasha and Kigali.
The president can also claim to have been a peace broker in burgeoning conflicts between Armenia and Azerbaijan, Serbia and Kosovo, and Cambodia and Thailand.
Vice-President JD Vance, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio have, I believe, done the real freedom-loving people of the world a great service by speaking out loudly and articulately about the growing tendency of British and European leaders to try and curtail freedom of speech under the guise of protecting minorities and minors, and their ongoing failure to protect Judeo-Christian fundamentals that have provided the political bedrock for the success of the continent.
VP Vance triggered a furious response from the Starmer administration when he suggested the UK might become the first ‘truly Islamist country that will get a nuclear weapon’ – but maybe the truth touched a nerve.
Closer to home Trump’s handling of South African President Ramaphosa’s visit to the White House, while widely condemned as rude and abrasive, may have been to the benefit of most South Africans with their leadership being given unwelcome notice that their actions were under scrutiny and death-chants from powerful politicians and laws designed to violate basic property rights were unacceptable to the American administration. Lots of huffing and puffing from the ANC ruling party ensued, but the coalition government appears more functional and the country more stable.
While sub-Saharan Africa is far down the White House list of priorities, the State Department seems set on following a more sensible approach to poverty alleviation by abandoning the old and abused systems and structures manged (or mismanaged) by USAID, while emphasising the critical role that must be played by the private sector which Trump sought to financially underpin through use of the US Treasury.
On the hustings prior to his re-election, I was particularly drawn to Trump’s promise to put ‘America-First’ and avoid embroiling his country in foreign wars. A long time coming but I was cheered to see at last an American leader who had learned from the folly of multiple foreign military interventions going back to the Bay of Pigs debacle and Vietnam, on through Iraq, Libya, Syria and Afghanistan.
Trump showed commendable restraint and even-handedness in dealing with Presidents Putin and Zelensky in trying to end that war and I held my breath when he went after Maduro in Venezuela but for better or worse, depending on what ones view of the legality of the decision, it was a very slick, quick and minimally bloodless intervention that achieved its objective making it difficult to fault.
Against this backdrop I was very comfortable being a Trump-defender up until the Iranian ‘problem’ presented itself. When the war-drums began beating I believed there were enough wise men and women around the president to convince him of the necessity to resist the pressure coming from Israel and their lobbyists and honour his pledge to his people to avoid more wars.
Unfortunately, I have been proved wrong, he succumbed, and I fear President Trump may have made a terrible mistake. Just like Saddam Hussein had neither the capability, nor the intention to launch chemical weapons into Europe, I believe the same applies to Iran. I do not believe Teheran was poised to launch nuclear weapons at the US.
Just where this escalating conflagration ends up remains to be seen but, while I very much hope I’m proved wrong, it looks like much of the world will be compelled to pay some sort of price for this folly and other than Israel I’m not sure who stands to gain.
As for me there is no relief: most of the erstwhile Trump-haters I have long clashed with have become Trump-lovers over this issue so, as they say – a luta continua!
Discover more from Africa Unauthorised
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
There is nothing complicated about genocide, mass murder and theft. Dividing a A4 page in half on the left side i wrote down which countries committed all three of beforementioned consistently.. On the right hand side i wrote down the countries that committed the least of the three. There was a conspicuous collection of countries that mainly filled the same side of each page. Forget politics, forget preconceived ideas about countries that have been formed by brainwashing from birth, most people on the planet want to live a peaceful life with their families. There is no left or right, black or white, muslim or christian problems, there is only right and wrong. Having had the good fortune of growing up in south africa and rhodesia i know the the slaughter of women and children should be condemned in the strongest possible way, it is an enduring source of shame that we allow it. People are more concerned about the enemy imprinted on us, in my youth it was the rooi gevaar, later weapons of mass destruction shaken in a phial, today it’s as yet non existent nukes. No amount of good actions justify genocide, pedophile priests are not exonerated for their good deeds. The same global entities that destroyed south africa and rhodesia are today causing chaos and mayhem on the planet, truly i am sick and tired of it, 99% of the planet are being terrorised by the remaining 1%, how stupid are we.
I have to agree with you there H, that what we have been allowed to know could easily be utter codswallop. Only time will tell.
How can I not with the historical backdrops of BS WMD in Iraq, and other false flags that previous US Presidents have used to hammer the likes of Saddam, Gaddafi & more, so they have a “credible” sociopolitical reason to unleash hell with their mighty military to change regimes / enact other politically expedient (mainly for America that is) actions.
However. There seems to be some credibility to the nuclear story though. Iran’s foreign minister Abbas Araghchi previously confirmed the existence of 440.9 kg of highly enriched uranium, even offering at one point to dilute or hand over the material. This IAEA report was published mid-June 2025. Much of the stockpile was stored in tunnel complexes at Isfahan, which apparently survived the 2025 strikes. IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi stated that over 200 kg remained at Isfahan during the last inspection, with additional quantities at Natanz. Satellite imagery and intelligence assessments show no evidence that Iran moved the material after the attacks since this date. The million dollar question is: who owns and controls the IAEA???
And multiple independent reports from the IAEA and senior Iranian officials confirm that Iran possessed roughly 440 kg of uranium enriched to 60%, a level just short of weapons‑grade. Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile existed primarily as uranium hexafluoride gas (UF₆) stored in pressurized, sealed cylinders, many of them buried deep underground at sites like Isfahan, Natanz, Fordow, and the Pickaxe Mountain complex. This is the form used for enrichment in centrifuge cascades and is standard for weapons‑relevant enrichment levels.
Has this material ever been found / conclusively destroyed? My research says not – and if not, it is still in play …. and no one can argue that Iran’s inimical idiots were busy developing longe range ICBMs and other delivery systems. IF, and I said IF, this is true (and if we all are skeptical of the news, or bloody well should be) then Trump has done the world a big favour.
As with Iraq’s nonexistent WMDs we may one day learn that we have again been deceived, but my gut tells me that on this occasion at least, the nuclear narrative may indeed be correct.
If not, same shit, different day!
Hannes I have opened the link you posted today and read the article which raised some interesting points but I am still not getting it. I read things like “destruction of peace talks” and “negotiation process” and “this war was preventable”, etc, etc.
Well the war was most definitely preventable had western politicians not sat and gawked while the Iranian regime took over the country in a coup in 1979 and done nothing about it.
Same story after WW1 when the world sat and gawked at the Germans building up their military in spite of the mandates of the League of Nations under the Treaty of Versailles.
Of course this all boils down to politicians making stupid decisions but be that as it may, just imagine if someone during the latter stages of WW2 had called for “negotiations” and “peace deals” with Hitler? They would have been laughed out of the room. Complete victory by the allies over the axis powers was the only thought that was entertained so I am battling to understand why this war against these unspeakably evil people should be any different?
As I have mentioned before I think time will tell. If the American intervention proves beneficial to the majority of Americans and Iranians then this will go down in history as a good decision.
Good article Hannes but I think Trump made the right decision on Iran. The regime is a nasty piece of work and would think nothing of launching a few nukes at USA and Israel.
No one likes war. That’s a given, but Trump’s intervention goes into my “All that evil needs to prosper is that good men do nothing” folder. At last someone has stepped in to annihilate this evil bully. To my way of thinking, this should have been done 40 years ago. Yes there will be backlashes, yes there are dodgy skanky undertones in terms of political fuel control, old vendettas invoked, old scores settled etc etc. Will it be worth it? I believe so …
Nobody wants war except the military industrial complex that is! This one has been great business and the bill is likely to reach 400 billion US beaver pelts IF it ends soon. However you want to slice and dice it, there really is no upside to war… Rhodesians now understand that the protection we tried to provide for our families and friends was complete and tragic waste of time. And irreplaceable Rhodesian lives. The West’s relentless agenda to remove successful and responsible governance in Africa made sure of that. By November 1965, the main reason why Ian Smith was so reluctant to accede to the destructive demands of Britain and other countries (including the USA), every single African country that had previously been given its independence by the “colonialist oppressors” that had spawned those formerly successful productive had failed, or was soon to fail. At great cost to all Africans. We now realise that this was all part of the globalist plan, to weaken and destroy the post-independence poorly run African countries, so that they could be effortlessly manipulated, and their resources plundered for cents in the dollar.
My support for the long overdue taking out of a dreadful bunch of bad actors is mainly humanitarian, and it is a stupid or muisguided person (likely a Trump hater with the usual cognitive dissonance) that can’t see and admit that the world should and probably will be a better, safer place once the dust has settled. There IS a cost, but cheap at the price if this menace was allowed to continue their appalling trajectoryinto chaos, in the name of Allah. No one can deny that catastrophic nukes are best left as an unsused deterrent in their silos, and there is the rub. There is no doubt in my mind that these religious fanatics are more likely to resort to nuclear warfare than anyone on this planet.
This conflict may be a real, dyed in the wool exception to the war is a seriously shite solution to anything rule.
Eradicating a cruel and unbelievably savage Iranian regime that has removed pretty much denied tens of millions of Iranians a decent life for 47 years, is comparable to lancing a massive, deep, painful, disgusting, festering abscess that was allowed to remain upon the face of this earth for too long, when cowardly world “leaders” looked the other way. Starmer and some European “leaders” have kept quiet, purely because the would lose the Muslim vote. Ongefokkenlooflik.
Well over 90% of all terrorist actions over the last 4 decades have been perpetrated by radical Muslim jihadists, mainly Hezbollah. And all were funded by this disgusting regime under Khamenei and his henchmen. Terrorist actions in the coming years are likely to drastically lessen, and return to pre-1980 levels.
Iran was not even favoured by neighbouring Muslim states, who openly opposed the “Palestine” myth, actively stopping the passage of “Palestinians” across their borders. Iran’s current roll out of hostilities against these hitherto nonpartisan (but wary) states underpins the fact that no love was lost between Iran and its neighbours. They too seem to give Trump the thumbs up.
DJT is in my opinion the most courageous American patriot that has ever lived, and here he has done the world a massive favour. At great personal political risk too. His presidency is on the line, and he knew this and pressed on regardless. There is something very fishy about Israel’s role in all of this, but lets not go there for the time being. Maybe a good topic your next blog H?
The debate will likely rage on for decades, or less once the truth comes out. but I firmly believe the likely positive results of this intervention will show he acted humanely and correctly. I hope that he will be thanked for the overall improvement we will likely see resulting, but am not holding my breath. He does seem to get under everyone’s skin doesn’t he?
Recent American polling shows (very surprisingly) that the majority of US citizens unequivocally endorse Trump’s decision to remove the fingers of dangerous religious fanatics from buttons that send ballistic missiles carrying nukes to all parts of the globe. So, even the Yanks are in the main satisfied that they have used their tax dollars to fund something worthwhile for a change.
The vast majority of Iranians wanted this war. The celebrations by deliriously happy Iranians after the rabid Khamenei was sent to that virgin hostel in the sky are testimony to this fact. The response by all affected by this Draconian abuse of power has been overwhelming, and even the most dedicated TDS arsehole should grudgingly agree. The recent massacre of over 30,000 innocent protesters (the tip of the iceberg of discontent grown these last 40 years) by this regime again unequivocally demonstrates that the world is much better off with these ruthless careless maniacs kicking up the daisies. This surely is the acid test. We look and listen to the news, but these poor long-suffering people have had to live there, wondering every day if they would fall foul of the whims of the fanatic arseholes running that government, and be tortured, raped, shot or hung on a crane.
I still love you Donnie boy. But please, FFS, read that book by Dale Carnegie sometime, won’t you?
Thanks for this Johnny but I must confess we will have to agree to disagree on some of it. Have a look at this link and let us know what you think?
https://www.sott.net/article/505228-Destruction-of-peace-by-killing-the-diplomatic-negotiators-and-with-endless-mayhem-in-sight
Yup, its not often we are not on the same page bru, but this war is very complicated, and seems to be having a significantly polarising effect. And the quality of news broadcasting these days leaves much to be desired, further muddying these turbulent waters, and I sometimes wonder if we know enough to even have a relevant argument. I am battling to remember anything I have read recently that I am certain wasn’t fake news!!!
I read another article detailing Larijani’s part in the now decapitated regime, and it sounds like he too was a seriously bad actor. Definitely not a friend of Iran’s embattled population. One of the things he allegedly did was to help orchestrate the recent killing of tens of thousands of innocent civilian protestors. Either way, he was complicit and has bloodied hands as he watched his team behead, rape, torture and kill those peacefully protesting Iranian citizens. People whose only crime was that they bravely dared to show their discontent with the way their country has been captured, and its fanatical abuse by murderous zealots. People irretrievably hell bent on the destruction of the infidel, wherever he or she might be. I find the recent hanging of 3 young Iranian athletes yesterday, for ridiculous perceived crimes against the state particularly galling and shameful. Reminding me why I am so glad these people are being called out for their complete disregard for common decency / the rule of law / human rights and all the rest…
And history shows if you live by the sword … So their sticky end is hardly surprising, and well deserved. Fun fact: pretty much EVERY Muslim leader since Islam was concocted from fresh air in the eighth century has been murdered. And always by other Muslims! Peace loving religion, my aching arse.
It will be interesting to see who puts their hand up to negotiate some sort of way out of this war on Iran’s behalf. We know anyone left of the old guard has a life expectancy measured in days. But there is some logic there as I would think all of the old guard agreed 110% with Khamenei, and would likely continue to do the same – and we would be back to square one again. Trump and Israel are going for the whole snake, not just the head, it would seem. The vast majority of Muslims are wonderful, kind people. I really hope they get a turn, and soon, so Iran can get on with a happy, productive existence as before, without bloodthirsty lunatics running the show. We will soon know – apparently Qatar has last night brokered some sort of ceasefire. Crossing fingers then.
One thing we do know, and dit gaan altyd my verstand te bowe, is that people do not seem to get their heads around jihadist psyche. Muslim fanatics will NEVER, EVER, EEEEEVER make a deal with Israel. It is after all, written into ALL of the charters of Iran’s proxies, that jihadists will / CAN NEVER rest until the state of Israel ceases to exist, and the last Jew is dead. With this mindset, peace in the Middle East is a pipe dream for as long as diehard Islamic extremists are in positions of power.
From the river to the sea or bust. The circa seven times Israel has tried so diligently to achieve this peace, the negotiation has always ended in failure, even though Israel bent over backwards, and made huge concessions, which were all turned down flat by Palestinian representatives. The quintessential Gordian knot with no sword in sight. Israel would have to agree to their own annihilation. Ja right, like that’s gonna happen!
These fanatics must go. All of them, as happened with Nazi Germany.
As for Israel’s latest war effort taking out the Pars gas field. Again, I don’t comprehend the undercurrents that shape what Bibi and his boys do, but this was OTT in my view – Trump correctly rapped Israel’s knuckles for that one. I just know I do not trust Netanyahu as far as I can throw him (and I have a weak back). This is an excessive response with genocidal fanatical overtones, the very thing that started all of this shite in the first place. I think the debts of October 7th and other terrorist atrocities have now been paid in full and Bibi should back off.
Over 90% of Muslims are wonderful, peace-loving people, so let’s hope they soon get a turn at Iran’s helm. The old Shah, Pahlavi seems keen to be the interim leader until some sort of democratic process, or whatever the Iranian PEOPLE want, can be formulated. Western democracy is not everyone’s dream after all. Hopefully soon. Enough now people. Objectives achieved, let the healing begin.
All the above is noted but we were told this intervention was in order to stop a nuclear attack on the US. It looks to me like a lie; just as we were lied to about Saddam Hussein.
One of Donald Trump’s main objectives has been the draining of the ‘deep state’, and in this he has made significant inroads, not only in the US but globally. So much so that the globalists are panicking. Witness the replacement of Loyd’s of London, a global financial bastion with US insurance; the creation of ‘The Board of Peace’, at Davos nogal! Notice also the non-participation of the Europeans in the invitation to assist in the straits of Hormuz. So now we, and especially those in the US, are questioning – Is the UN still relevant? Is NATO still relevant? Is the WHO still relevant? All pillars of the globalist deep state.
One of the main currencies of the deep state is human trafficking, with Israel having a notorious record in this regard. It was rated by the US State Department as one of the worst countries for human and sex trafficking in the world in the early 2000s. With the Epstein saga, it has become clearer that Israel/Mossad are deeply involved. As we all know, the US taxpayer is a major funder of Israel and, little by little, for many of the above reasons, people are starting to ask WHY?
Taking a step back and looking at the Iran war, it does appear that there are much bigger issues at play.
And taking the flak for orchestrating and exposing hidden agendas, often to his disadvantage, is Donald J Trump.
Hannes, a few things stick in my mind which absolutely convinces me that Trump has made the right call in attacking Iran. They are:-
1) The 6th President of Iran, (2005 to 2013) Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced to America these words, “We love death more than you love life.”
2) The barbaric attack made by Hamas (an Iranian proxy) against Israeli civilians, ie, babies, children, young and old, etc, etc (beheadings included) on October 7th, 2023. Israeli pathologists examining the bodies of the victims were emotionally affected and had never seen anything like it before such was the savage and barbaric mutilation they saw on the bodies.
Those radical islamist jihadis are a death cult and have no right to be left alive. Civilised people with an intact moral compass have a moral duty to wipe them off the face of the earth otherwise they will all live to regret it.
I believe America has every right, even an obligation to rid the world of those rabid animals once and for all and give them their wish of “we love death more than we love life.” To me it’s a no brainer!
Also remember the jihadi slogan, “Once we have finished with the Saturday people (the Jews) we are coming after the Sunday people” (the Christians which includes everyone who does not comply with the demands of their death cult), and we have seen they mean what they say by simply watching the news to see the endless incidents of shootings, bombings, car rammings, stabbings, etc, etc, in every corner of the globe.
Alistair I agree the people who run Iran are repugnant to us just like we were taught to hate Gadaffi, Saddam, and Assad but where does this all end? Is North Korea next? Or maybe China? Is American foreign policy now based on a commitment to remove undemocratic governments in which case whose next? Trump led the electorate to believe he would worry about ‘Americans First’ and I think he’s broken that promise.
Definitely not China, Russia or North Korea. Bullies respect bullies.
America (under Trump or others) always picks a fight with nations weaker than itself. That is written in the DNA of bullies.
Venezuela emboldened the US, and Iran looked like a repeat. How wrong they were. So they will lick their wounds and look about for the next.
But who?
Cuba? Greenland? South Africa, Canada? All will be push-overs, simple training exercises.
You can never tell which way a bull in a china shop will go.
Hannes, although the bloated little rocket man of North Korea is a dictatorial maniac, I don’t see that the damage he has done or is able to do comes anywhere close to what has been caused by the Iranian regime who have their tentacles everywhere including Mozambique and South Africa. You ask about China. I think the folly of trying to bring China down is obvious. Both North Korea and China have and ideology of worship of the state. They certainly have no respect for any religious ideology at all outside of blind compliance and worship of the state which brings me back to Iran and America.
You say Trump has broken his promise to the American electorate of “America first”, yet what I am observing are endless, rabid rantings (followed by barbric action IN AMERICA on the ground) of “America, the great satan” and the statement by Ahmadinejad to Americans of “we love death more than you love life” and “first we are coming after the Saturday people and then the Sunday people”, blah, blah, blah, and in respect of the Saturday people (the Jews) we know they are dead serious in their “river to the sea” rantings and aspirations and they have made it plain and are on public record of stating that not only do they want to conquer Israel completely but they want to utterly annihilate Jews as an ethnic group wherever they are living in the world. This is chilling stuff and to me fits in very well with Trump’s “America First” policy as America and Americans have very definitely been on the receiving end of these maniacs countless times for many decades. North Korea and China have never to my knowledge made statements of wanting to blot out an entire ethnic group yet we see millions of useful idiots spitting and foaming at the mouth about what terrible people the Israelies are who are committing “genocide” in Gaza, but they never mention the atrocities of October, 7th!!
Winston Churchill had much to say about this islamic death cult, ie, “a militant and proselytizing faith” and “a retrograde force” and a “fatalistic apathy” and “a fury of intolerance.” He would turn in his grave if he saw what had become of his country.
Well Alistair if this intervention brings clear benefit to the people of Iran and America I will be very happy to admit I was wrong. From what I see this benefits only Israel but maybe I’m missing something?
What makes your argument compelling is the consistency with which you have supported a doctrine of restraint, and it is precisely that consistency that gives weight to your discomfort over the decision to strike Iran. However, there is a risk in moving too quickly from that discomfort to the conclusion that a grave mistake has been made. The central difficulty is not whether one prefers non-intervention to intervention; it is whether the intelligence picture available to decision makers justified a departure from that principle. On that point, we are operating with only fragments. It is one thing to assert, as you do, that Iran neither possessed the capability nor the intent to strike; it is quite another to sustain that assertion in the absence of access to classified assessments that may indicate timelines, thresholds, or concealed developments not visible in the public domain.
Any serious appraisal must also take into account the probability that Israeli intelligence penetration of Iranian military and nuclear structures is both deep and persistent. Israel has demonstrated, repeatedly and over many years, an ability to act with precision inside Iran, which implies a level of access and insight that few other states possess. If that apparatus indicated that a critical threshold was approaching, then the decision taken in Washington may have been driven less by ideological pressure and more by a perception of narrowing strategic options. That does not prove the correctness of the decision, but it does materially weaken the argument that it was taken on false or exaggerated premises. The comparison with Iraq is therefore not conclusive; intelligence failure and intelligence asymmetry are not the same phenomenon.
At the same time, the caution you express is not misplaced. As Robert Pape has argued in recent analysis, the use of force in such contexts rarely produces straightforward compliance and often generates escalation dynamics that are difficult to control. Even where the intelligence is sound, the translation of that intelligence into effective policy is uncertain. Military action can delay or disrupt capabilities, but it can also harden resolve, accelerate programmes, and broaden the theatre of conflict. In that sense, the real question is not simply whether Iran posed a threat, but whether this particular response reduces or amplifies that threat over time.
The most defensible position, therefore, is one of restraint in judgement rather than certainty in criticism. Without full visibility of the intelligence that informed the decision, it is not possible to conclude with confidence that the action was either necessary or misguided. What can be said is that the decision marks a departure from a previously articulated doctrine, and that such departures carry both potential justification and significant risk. The debate should therefore remain anchored in that uncertainty. It is not a matter of endorsing or condemning the action outright, but of recognising that the information required to do so authoritatively is not available in the public domain.
Andrew you are quite right, I certainly don’t know the details but I do note restraint from Marco Rubio and VP Vance; I don’t think they were very enthusiastic about this decision to attack.
This is what Tulsi Gabbard, who as head of National Intelligence should have the information you and I lack, has just told the US Senate: “As a result of Operation Midnight Hammer, Iran’s nuclear enrichment programme was obliterated. There have been no efforts since then to try to rebuild their enrichment capability, ….” I have little doubt she is at odds with the president on this issue and quite surprised she has not resigned.
If you haven’t already, and I am sure you have, watch the Carlson/Kent interview…. It persuades one, including me, to follow your thinking
Thanks Andrew yes I did and I believe he’s a very credible witness. The fact they’re trying to prosecute him tells you he’s telling the truth. I’m hanging on to hope that Trump will come out of this having made the world a better place but I’m pessimistic.
Watch from 59 minutes – just 3 months ago Kent says Iran is a threat: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyMIif7oUC4
Watch from somebody who was the deputy director of the FBI for the last year and knows Kent and what his security clearance is: https://rumble.com/v77bubc-something-serious-happened-last-night-ep.-2476-03192026.html?start=259
See VDH on this topic https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kofze3vzVb0
I posted earlier but this comment has yet to appear .. Please delete if duplicated
Nice piece Hannes.
I think there are probably more than a billion people around the World that view President Trump (“DJT”) as a brave and fearless, yet sensible man who has been prepared to take on the “establishment”.
He appears to be a true patriot who is prepared to lay his life on the line.
He and many in his cabinet take no salary.
What he has done in carrying out his mandate has probably indirectly benefitted a large proportion of the World population, especially the poor around the World.
There are a couple of facts that one has to consider when one judges the actions of his administration in targeting the leaders and the war infrastructure of the (undemocratic, fascist) Islamic Regime in Iran:
1. The Iranian Islamic Regime took power in a revolution. It is a dictatorship.
2. The Iranian Islamic Regime is populated by really bad people, by any yardstick. Their stated policy is “Death to America (and the West?) and all Jews”. They have tortured, raped and slaughtered tens of thousands of their citizens. They train and fund radical Islamist groups who carry out acts of violence and atrocities outside of Iran.
3. There must surely be no doubt that by virtue of the fact that Jews hold influential positions in the US, there are pressure groups that influence US policy concerning Israel. But Israel is an ally of the USA and that is a fact.
4. The existence of Israel is under threat from the Iranian Islamic Regime.
5. Like all the presidents in modern US history, DJT views Israel as an ally, and supports Israel with funding, intelligence etc.
6. DJT is provided with intelligence at the highest level in connection with the position on the ground in Iran, in connection with the plans of the Iranian Islamic Regime, and concerning related issues.
7. Dealing with the threat posed by the Iranian Islamic Regime probably involves “unlawful” action on the part of the US. Unlawful because when one looks at international law it is apparent that it could be argued that the US (and Israel) are not entitled to attack the Iranian Islamic Regime without a declaration of war based on sound legal principles. The reality is that around the World, every day, regimes carry out acts that are technically unlawful under international law. These acts range from funding and supporting insurgencies into other countries to invasions without lawful cause, etc. The US is a superpower, and as we know, does exactly that on occasion. At least they claim some justification!
8. Until now, DJT has been a peacemaker, and unlike previous presidents, has not invaded any countries to start a conventional “boots on the ground” war likely to continue for decades. His declared intention is to destroy the Iranian Islamic Regime and facilitate the assumption of power by a moderate, sane government that is not a terrorist regime. He has stated emphatically that his government will not do another “Iraq” in Iran.
9. The actions of DJT’s administration appear to have widespread support from exiled Iranians as well as tens of millions who still live in Iran. The attacks on Iran are also supported by many influential and powerful countries around the World.
10. The mainstream media is anti-Trump. The elites that opposed DJT’s rise to power and their allies in the mainstream media oppose anything that he does, and attempt to use the media to discredit him and undermine his actions.
I have been accessing what I believe to be a fairly accurate source of information concerning the Iran conflict, which is https://www.iranintl.com/en It provides coverage from various angles.
Let’s pray for the people of Iran. May their hardships be alleviated soon…
A lot of what you say is true.
Equally, a lot of what you say is nonsense.
One in particular is the assertion that Trump is brave and fearless.
He dodged the draft no less than five times to avoid Vietnam.
As has been said. For that conflict he had an exit strategy. For his personal war, Iran, he has none.
He is the typical school playground bully. Sneaks up on his victim and hits them hard. When they turn around and hit back, he does what all bullies do….. demands that his friends defend him.
A disgusting bit of human garbage.
Oh. Ok.
Hello Hannes,
Excellent post and spot on.
Trump is doing what he promised, regardless of the nay sayer wingers out there.
Thanks for being spot on as usual.
Regards
Alan Balson
Hello Hannes. As an orphaned South African aged 80 years, now living in Europe, I have followed your thoughts for many years with great interest and with, in the main, much agreement.
Like yourself I have had a positive opinion of Trump’s programmes, social, political and economic. To this I must add that I would not necessarily invite him to socialise with me. I find his narcissism a bit too blatant.
But…. in response to your negative view of the US actions in Iran I must, with respect, disagree.
Since 1979 the Islamic Iranian theocracy has directly and indirectly waged war against the entire non-Islamic and non-Shia world. It requires little stretch of the imagination, after following the utterances of Khomeini and a reading of the quran, to conclude that the use of thousands of centrifuges would lead to a particular outcome, one not conducive to friendly usage on the international stage.
The demonstrations by and slaughter of thousands of unarmed Iranians by their own government has been a stark indication of the murderous nature of that regime; and in the midst of the carnage, those citizens, in the streets of Tehran and other cities, were extolling the name of Trump.
Does one act as a bystander if one sees crimes being committed? Someone raised a question in a commentary: “If the Hitler cabal had been taken out in 1940, would it be fair to say that tens of millions of lives would have been saved?”
Hindsight always has 20/20 vision.
Starmer is stammering about legalities, much in the same way as that other British prime minister who returned to Britain waving a piece of white paper in 1938.
I believe that if there is a malignancy it should be excised with little delay.
So is this a ‘regime change’ exercise or an attempt to prevent a nuclear attack on America? If the former it looks like a failure?
” I do not believe that Teheran was poised to launch Nuclear weapons at the USA “!
I respect your views and always look forward to your posts . But, this statement of yours above….I do not agree with .
There is far too much at stake to trust that evil Regime with Nukes….think about it !
This is from Joe Kent, former counter terror chief who recently resigned: “I’m no fan of the former supreme leader, you know, Ali Khamenei, however, he was moderating their nuclear program. He was preventing them from getting a nuclear weapon. If you take him out, if you kill him aggressively, people are going to rally around that regime.” Asked if Iran was on the verge of getting a nuclear weapon, Kent replied, “No, they weren’t.
Dan Bongino’s response to the utterances from Joe Kent https://rumble.com/v77bubc-something-serious-happened-last-night-ep.-2476-03192026.html?e9s=src_v1_sa%2Csrc_v1_sa_o%2Csrc_v1_ucp_a
Hannes – my commendation for an honest article, as I know you’ve long admired and hoped for the Donald … but I must agree with your understated assessment of this debacle; it cannot end well for him. And possibly, it cannot end well for us either. Sweet karma come round for Russia now doubling its prices and sales for gas and oil and having the last laugh on a dumbed-down Europe still backing that grifter Zelensky, now without the USA which is packing it all instead into the Israel-generated war with Iran.
You’re correct in alluding to the fake-MWD argument used to launch the Iraq war, which prewarned the Irani’s long ago that they were next. Not to put too fine a point on it, but the late, quadrilingual Imam Khamenei, knowing that the Palestinians lived in the contested area also, did not want to contaminate the area with radiation and issued not one, but TWO fatwas, prohibiting Iran acquiring a nuclear bomb. The Americans, never ones to investigate foreign nuance, have thus killed the prohibitive force for a nuclear bomb in Iran. His successor, a son who has seen his father, mother, wife, brother and child, slaughtered by the same Tomahawk missile, may understandably become more hardline.
Iran has used the time wisely since the contrived Iraq2 invasion, to prepare, particularly in the military sense. As you know, the ancient Persians invented algebra among other mathematics, and the country is highly sophisticated in the technical sense. Their hypersonic rockets, capable of Mach 13 speeds with zig-zagging capacity before striking a target, are unstoppable. Their drones are not only jet-propelled but can strike underwater. They’ve closed the Straits of Hormuz because they can and the so-called “greatest navy the world has ever known” can do nothing to stop it. Boots on the ground, in a country twice the size of Ukraine with with 90million people, would catastrophize and backfire even more. We don’t have to get into the implications of oil shortages for the global economy. Point is, the decapitation strikes that have killed their various leaders, did not take into account that layers of succession are in place, that regional leaders have fully autonomy to resist the aggressor, and that these killings create martyrs and have unified the nation to turn this into a long war with the end objective of clearing the entire region of its American foothold. It is clear as day the analysis preceding the attack was simplistic and that they have come against an determined enemy with real teeth.
All this is grist for Trump’s domestic enemies, but the thing that will kill him and the Republicans in the mid-term is increased living costs – getting hit in the wallet is something unforgiveable for America’s electorate. Trump’s biggest weakness, which I flagged in these columns at the start of his second presidency, is that he doesn’t read at all – so has to rely on the intellect of others and that too often he couldn’t tell the good ones (Gabbard, Vance) from the bad ones, in this case Lindsay Graham and Bibi Netanyahu. I’ll be surprised if DT is still in charge this time next year. You mentioned his achievements but not that he’s alienated the USA’s goodwill for the rest of the planet.
It’s frustrating when you find yourself disagreeing with the prevailing opinion, especially on something so complex. The Iran situation really does highlight how polarized things have become, doesn’t it?
I always enjoy reading your perspective, Hannes. If it’s true that Iran is and has been a major sponsor of terrorism, regardless of the potential current nuclear threat, and that any sort of diplomatic solution would be at best, kicking the can down the road, what would you suggest would be the best course of action?
If you asking how does one turn Iran into a flourishing ‘liberal democracy’ I simply don’t know the answer but I suspect it is well-nigh impossible. Will the Americans ever understand their view of the world and how a country should be governed is not always shared. As mentioned I was hoping cooler heads had prevailed and military intervention had been avoided.
As I say to most right now “What don’t you understand about the frequent slogans and rhetoric coming out of Iran “Death to America” and “Death to the West” The Muslims have been quite clearly advocating their intention toward the west and that is to eliminate it. The well over 7000 now strikes on huge weapon caches and manufacturing,is a true indication of this. They have never hidden this clear aggression and intention. 95% of all aggression and barbaric political murders in the UK and elsewhere have come from declared terrorist alignment with Sharia laws and they do not seperate religion from politics, which is the standard for the West.. The price of oil etc is a small price to pay to ensure this threat is eliminated for good, and the regime change forced to stay on a peaceful non-prolific war alignment. It really is a no brainer in my opinion. Peace CAN only come from Strength, which we have proven to ourselves, over and over again.
Good afternoon, Hannes…….Yes unfortunately or fortunately I totally agree with you. I have had to defend Trump quite a few times, even against close family, whereas we have agreed to disagree, but the Iran story I think he miscalculated very badly and who knows who else is going to have to pay for that mistake UNLESS Trump back’s down on some pretext.
I think the Iranian people gain Hannes. Don’t you? We have to take it from them, and they have said as much. So apart from making sure the IRGC doesn’t ever have nuclear weapons, which supposes most of the western world gains, no one but Israel gains?
The lack of a personally endorsed Trump exit strategy from Iran is causing real problems.
He made sure he had one for Vietnam…..I think he exercised that to avoid at least 5 drafts.
>
There is a fundamental lack (or wilful ignorance of) of the reason NATO exists.
It is a defensive alliance… not, as Trump and the drunk, Hegseth, believe, a back-up solution for a bully-boy attitude to all other nations.