Boggart Abroad: iran

Showing posts with label iran. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 28, 2026

Is Europe Going To Be Written Off As Collateral Damage In Trump's Plan For World Domination?

The almost complete closure of the Strait of Hormuz is really starting to bite in the wider world as oil stocks dwindle, prices rise and disruption in supply chains threatens shortages of food and other vital commodities.

Negotiations between the US and Iran are stalled. We hear and read stories about people from the US and Iran flying here, there and everywhere to take part in 'talks, but the negotiations that are supose to lead to an agreed settlement are' not really happening at all.

Over the weekend online news site Axios reported that Iran presented the US with a proposal to reopen the Strait, not to end the war. That proposal includes extending Trump's ceasefire and an assertion that any conversations about Iran’s nuclear program are off the agenda until the Strait is reopened and the US blockade is lifted. The US has not indicated whether it will accept or reject the proposal at the time of writing.

Assuming the US does agree to extend its indefinite that is of negligable significance. Remember, keeping the Strait open was a condition of the current ceasefire as agreed to on April 8, and we can all see how well that held up. Just take a look at fuel prices at the pump.

While conversations between the US and Iran stall, Iran is making friends elsewhere. Iranian Foreign Minister Araghchi met with Putin yesterday, as Bloomberg reported that Araghchi told Putin he is “committed to strengthening the country’s partnership with Russia” and that “the Iranian people are able to ‘resist US aggression and will be able to overcome it.’”

Iran and Russia may be cosying up, but the US and Germany are not. During a visit to a school in western Germany, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said that the Trump Administration was being “humiliated” by Iran: “The Iranians are clearly stronger than expected and the Americans clearly have no truly convincing strategy in the negotiations either. A whole nation is being humiliated by the Iranian leadership.”

Trump has not yet commented on Merz’ claims.

The longer the Strait remains closed, the longer the European economy, and energy complex, is squeezed. Germany, like The UK, Fance, Spain and Italy has rejected Trump’s calls to support his bid to reopen The Strait under NATO, control. This is despite German leaders softly echoing support of US military efforts.

Europe has drafted a plan to re-open the Strait after the war has ended, that is not enough to appease Trump, who has made his demands for NATO participation in the Iran war clear. But the question remains just how much collateral damage Europe is willing to be subject to in the pursuit of keeping its hands clean.

Europe’s and in particular Germany's reliance on energy from the Middle East and direct flows through the Strait of Hormuz, since the supply from Russia died up suggest that they are in for more pain than the US under a prolonged closure.

Germany was hit harder by the war in Ukraine than any other west European nation as German industry was hugely dependent of oil and gas pumped directly from Russia via the Nordstream pipeline until that was sabotaged, allegedly by Ukrainian military personnel supported by US and NATO technology and expertise.

At the same time, Europeans don’t have a fanatical obduracy to soak up the pain like the Iran (or rather, the IRGC at the expense of the Iranian people). If negotiations fail to result in a somewhat peaceful re-opening of the Strait and conclusion of the US naval blockade, Europe may have no choice but to get involved.

It’s probable that the Trump Administration is aware of this. Trump has lambasted European leaders for refusing to support the US and in some cases, outright refusing to cooperate. If the US keeps the Strait closed and inflicts enough second-hand damage on Europe, Trump may be able to achieve the NATO military “cooperation” he has been asking for.

FROM THE ARCHIVE

Just How Close Are We To World War Three
Have you read or heard in your news supplier of choice of the recent massive troop movements in Israel, the massive build up of British, French and American warships around the approaches to the Persian gulf or just how badly the situations in Egypt and Libya have deteriorated since ...

Irony Overload: Iran Warns Obama Not To Cross Red Lines
the United States concluded an agreement with Iran which lifted US and International sanctions in return for Islamic Shi'ite Republic agreeing to limit their nuclear ability. At a high level, the US would lead the way in lifting oil and financial sanctions imposed due to Iran’s nuclear programs; in return Iran would reduce their stockpile of enriched uranium,

"West's War In Syria Is Part Of A Global war Waged By The USA And Its ~~Dupes~~ Allies Against Russia"
Arthur Foxake brings us a brilliant analysis of the geopolitical picture from the black Sea and Middle East, but ahead of the embed window we get a few of Arthur's own thoughts on the situation

Labour leader Corbyn rejects bombing Syria, blames BRITAIN and the US for the rise of ISIS: because it will spark more ‘mayhem’
Though the story is from The Daily Mail which, we expect to be one of the new Labour leader's greatest critics, it's good to see Mainstream Media actually reporting one of the things Jezza is getting right. Obviously he reads The Daily Stirrer because we've been saying since ISIS were pulled out of ...

How Hillary Clinton Planned The Syrian Holocaust We bring you evidence that the destruction of Syria was planned by the USA and Israel long before the US engineered 'spontaneous uprising'known as The Arab Spring ...

Another Obama Sponsored Genocide - not Alawi or Christians In Syria but Yazidi in Iraq.
While the west has been distracted by events in Gaza and Ukraine, and the neo - fascist 'left' have suddenly discovered the joys of anti Russianism and anti Semitism, the FUKUS axis sponsored genocidists of ISIS have discovered another inoffensive minority to exterminate now that the Syriac Christians have fled.

More Than ISIS, Iraq’s Sunni Insurgency
The story emerging in Iraq is of another American foreign policy fuck up, a total misreading of the situation by the world's most parochial global power. By December 2013, Sunni leaders had become tired of the jihadi group the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) actions in their areas and publicly supported the Iraq government’s military campaign against the group’s bases. Unfortunately the ISIS rebels were armed with US military technology and Obama was calling for the resignation of the government in Baghdad, prompting Russia and Iran to support them ...

Poison Gas Used In Syria Sparks Calls For Western Military Invasion
Claims circulating in Washington, London and Brussels that chemical weapons have been used in the Syrian conflict have prompted less conspiracy theories and more intelligent discussion that we might expect. Even so commentators in mainstream media have divided into two opposing camps – those who believe that President Obama's failure to ...

Islamic Cleric Announces Fatwah Allowing The Legal Rape Of Syrian Women By Anti Assad Rebels

An Islamic cleric has pronounced a fatwa that permits US-backed FSA rebels to rape non-Sunni women in Syria as part of a "sexual jihad" that has so far involved girls as young as 14 being transported to remote areas of the country to service the needs of ...

France sends more troops to Mali as UN backs intervention

A contingent of 750 French troops has joined the offensive against Islamist rebels in Mali, French president Francois Hollande said in Abu Dhabi on Tuesday after France secured fresh UN backing for its military action

Over 4000 Civilians Have Died In Forgotten War. As attention has focused on Syria ans then on the efforts of the Obama administration, in its dying months, to avenge the defeat of the anointed successor Hillary Clinton and discredit the election victor and President - elect Donald Trump, and simultaneously demonize Russia and President Putin I Would Do anything To Get Assad Out Of Syria Says Cameron
Syrian president Bashar Assad could be allowed a free pass to flee his country if it would end the bloodshed, David Cameron said today. The Prime Minister said he would do ‘anything to get that man [Assad] out of the country’ but refused to offer Assad a safe haven in Britain. Mr Cameron is on the second day of ...

Will Egypt Seize Libya For Its Oil

If the conflict in Syria, currently showing signs of spreading to Turkey, Iraq and Kurdistan were to escalate into a regional war, a proxy for east and west to butt heads without sustaining too much domestic damage, is Egypt likely to take advantage of the distraction and

EXPLORE:
[Daily Stirrer] ... [ Our Page on on Substack ]... [Boggart Aboad] ... [ Ian Thorpe at Quora ] ... [ Greenteeth Home ] ... [ Greenteeth on Minds.com ] ... [ Here Come The Russians ] ... [ Latest Posts ] ... [ Blog Bulletin ]

Wednesday, April 22, 2026

As Trump's Ceasefire Breaks Down In The Strait of Hormuz We Ask What Is This War Really About?

by Egbert Nohbakkon

There's been a lot of claim and counterclaim since Trump's Truth Social Post earlier this week: first he demanded that eight young women whom he said were on death row in Iran for protesting against the theocratic regime must be released. Then on Thursday Trump proclaimed that Iran complied.

But Iran rejects the whole narrative from the start. "Trump was misled once again by fake news," the Islamic Republic judiciary's official Mizan Online website said. "The women who were claimed to be on the verge of execution, some of them have been released, while others face charges that, if convictions are upheld, would at most result in imprisonment."

HOwever instead of peace talks today, the US-Iran ceasefire is on the brink of collapse and the situation in Strait of Hormuz is heating up.

Despite Trump's two-week deadline for reaching a deal ending today, Vice President JD Vance never boarded a plane to Pakistan for further negotiations as had been advertised and neither did anyone from Iran. Instead, Donald Trump extended the ceasefire indefinitely and the IRGC has today attacked several more international ships in the Strait.

Is the war about to restart? Who knows what might happen next with unpredictable characters like Trump and Netanyahu squaring up to the equally unpredictable Ayatollahs and religious fanatics in Tehran..

So far Israel is the only winner in this war, they got what they wanted - the destruction of Arab countries in the gulf and Lebanon. As usual the Arabs & Iran were placed to fight each other as is common practice to have neighboring countries fight each other - most recently Ukraine & Russia, in the past France and Germany, China and Japan, Russia and Turkey, etc.. Trump has also diverted oil tankers from the Gulf to Houston, Lousiana, Alaska, Venezuela . .. thus capitalising on the disruption of Arab country oil resources and suply lines.

The same was done in the early days of the war in Ukraine. The Biden adminitration destroyed with sanctions and sabotage the vital flow of cheap oil and gas from Russia to the European Union. The main purpose of that escapade was to steal away the oil market from Russia and place the market under 100% US control. The US stole the entire oil and LNG market away from Russia under pretext of the war to liberate Ukraine. Trump at least understands the world still runs on hydrocarbons, and is trying to re-establish US hegmony by controlling that vital resource.

A factor in the longevity of the conflict in Ukraine is that neither the Ukies nor the Russians really want peace. They are puruing ancient hatreds and appear to want to destroy each other. The same can be said of Israel (Zionism) and the Iranian Islamist regine.

This war is much the same. Under the pretext of liberating the oppressed people of Iran, the very predictable Iranian response of weaponising the Strait of Hormuz, has blocked all oil trade of Arab countries and enabled The USA to use the war as a pretext to steal the oil markets in the Middle East and shift them to the US , in effect stealing the oil markets again. It looks as if the purpose of the closing of the Strait of Hormuz is not Iran, it is to seize the oil market from the Arab countries and move this oil market to the US. A big gamble.

The longer the Arabs are landlocked, the easier to seize this market permanently. That is why opening the hormuz is not a priority for trump. the longer this war last and the more the Arabs fight with the Iranians the more damage to the oil infrastructure in the Gulf which will take 5 to 10 years to recover. In the meanwhile, trump will have seized the oil market from the Arabs.

The EU will have severe problems. They lack energy and airline traffic have already become severely curtailed because NATO jets have preference for jet fuel. Tourism will be severely constrained 2026, fuel costs for business, domestic and transport use are rocketing and a rapid rise in the cost of living is driving many European citizens into poverty.

There really is only one way to end this war. That is to force open the Straits and erect a sea route seige on Iran with no imports or exports. Iran has the capability of occasionally getting lucky with attacking a ship. But with complete air security, surveillance drones and rapid response military the great majority of such attacks would fail, especially with a convoy system in place. All that is then needed is for the USA and friendly governments of the Gulf to provide war insurance to shipping. The cost will be small compared to the cost of conventional attacks.

It is our fear of casualties, no matter how few that gives Iran its ace card. We have to rediscover our martial spirits and accept that this is a war and people on both sides get hurt. The question is: do the people with the power to end the war want to end it.

FROM THEARCHIVE:

Islamic Cleric Announces Fatwah Allowing The Legal Rape Of Syrian Women By Anti Assad Rebels

France sends more troops to Mali as UN backs intervention

Will Egypt Seize Libya For Its Oil

Wednesday, April 15, 2026

As The War For Control Of The Persian Gulf Enters A New Phase, Iran Holds All The Best Cards

Iran's Mosuito Fleet of small, fast, well armed boats patrols the Strait of Hormuz shipping lane

Every day that the conflict between USA/Israel and Iran continues and the main shipping route into The Persian Gulf remains completely or partially closed, the world is deprived of an eighth of its oil supply and must draw more deeply into its rapidly diminishing reserves.

“The scale of the challenge has not been well understood by the aggressors: as of today, we are losing 13 million barrels per day and tomorrow it may be bigger,” said Fatih Birol, the head of the International Energy Agency. This blog reported last year during a preliminary skirmish to the war that if The USA or Israel attacked Iran the Iraian response would be to weaponise The Strait of Hormuz by blockading the movement of ships in and out..

They have done just that, and now US President Trump is blockading ships belonging to Iran's allies from using the Strait, Iran is threatening that its Houthi allies in Yemen will block the route in and out of the Red Sea, which would leave The Suez canal, capable of handling only a fraction of the traffic to and from oil ports in Saudi Arabia. With Trump's ceasefire unlikely to hold as reports come in of Iranian attacks on commercial shipping in the Strait of Hourmuz the world must prepare for prolonged economic disruption.

If nothing else this war should have shown the Green Loons that oil and hydrocarbons are still the world's most important trade.

The shortfall is likely to rise to 15 million barrels if the US navy carries out its plan to blockade Iranian oil moving through the Strait of Hormuz, which is extremely unlikely as it would mean attacking ships from China. Donald Trump launched this war with inadequate forces based on Israeli assurances – deemed “farcical” by his own CIA chief – that Iran would crumble at the first shock, thus while failure was not guaranteed, it was always more likely than a quick victory.

Tehran has warned it will expand the war to the Red Sea route if its ships are attacked or sunk, endangering another six million barrels a day at the Saudi terminal of Yanbu and causing wider havoc to global container shipping. Should this happen it will plunge everywhere in the world into a fuel crisis plus economic and political chaos.

“The ports of the Gulf are either for everyone or for no one,” the Iranian regime said.

It is rumoured that the authorities in China, which is tacitly supporting Iran, filled their strategic petroleum reserve at a breakneck pace towards the end of last year as a cushion against the fall out from another US / Israeli attack on Iran. If the worst comes to the worst they can cover 300 days of lost imports from the Gulf, and have also negotiated a deal for Russia to cover any shortfall in its supplies due to problems with the Gulf supply line.

We don't know any pf that for certain of course. The size of China's oil reserves are a state secret, and 300 days' worth is well above most estimates (90 - 130 days).

Whatever the case, it is wrong to assert that cutting off oil from the Gulf is a problem China can just shrug off - it can't. That represents a shortfall of several millions barrels a day. China can't sustain that, and those oil reserves are war reserves - it will never let them run completely dry.

In the end, it's a game of chicken. Someone has to blink first. It might be Trump, but I'm by no means certain of that.

FROM THE ARCHIVE:

Islamic Cleric Announces Fatwah Allowing The Legal Rape Of Syrian Women By Anti Assad Rebels

France sends more troops to Mali as UN backs intervention

Will Egypt Seize Libya For Its Oil

Sunday, April 12, 2026

Trump's Plan To Blockade Iran's Blockade Of The Strait Of Hormuz Is Not Impossible, Just Crazy

If the end goal is to restore freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz to pre-war levels, then I can't understand what Potus is doing — The US navy can wrestle control of the Strait of Hormuz from Iran Credit: Alex Brandon/AP

President Trump’s latest pronunciations on the conflict with Iran makes it clear that he is going to blockade the Strait of Hormuz. With peace negotiations having hit the brick wall of Islamist intransigence almost as soon as they had got under way, this is the latest power move to wrestle control of the Strait back off Iran, where it currently resides.

“Effective immediately, the United States Navy, the Finest in the World, will begin the process of BLOCKADING any and all Ships trying to enter, or leave, the Strait of Hormuz. At some point, we will reach an ‘ALL BEING ALLOWED TO GO IN, ALL BEING ALLOWED TO GO OUT’ basis” Trump ranted on Truth Social.

A blockade on a blockade, is certainly something we don't come acros often. Though it sounds illlogical in practical terms such a move would not be difficult. The US will have excellent situational awareness of all ships coming and going, their details, and most likely whether or not they have either been given a free pass by Iran or have paid at the toll booth, so the US Navy could prevent vessels approaching the strait from the Indian Ocean and also stop ships leaving The Persian Gulf via the strait..

However any attempt to blockade Iran would necessitate the use of force to prevent Indian, Chinese and Russian ships from entering Iranian harbors.

At the same time, a blockade of Iran would represent a total U-turn from America’s tactics in recent weeks, and necessitate lifting sanctions on Russian and even Iranian oil, in order to avoid a catastrophic cutoff of global energy supplies and an ensuing economic depression.

In the unlikely event that the US proceeds with a blockade, the entire rest of the world would focus its ire on the US. NATO would collapse. Japan and Korea would see that the US is a nihilistic monster, indifferent to their economic destruction and looming starvation and the dollar exchange rate would crash.

The US government has well and truly backed itself into a corner. Given its established habit of doubling down on what didn’t work, all one can foresee is more feckless bombing of Iran — which will not open the Strait.

FROM THE ARCHIVE:

Islamic Cleric Announces Fatwah Allowing The Legal Rape Of Syrian Women By Anti Assad Rebels

France sends more troops to Mali as UN backs intervention

Will Egypt Seize Libya For Its Oil

Friday, April 10, 2026

Iran Weaponises The Strait of Hormuz Against The Petrodollar

The PetrodollAr system has propped up the US economy for 50 years - picture: sbcgold.com

In spite of the very fragile ceasefire in the conflict between the USA / Israel alliance and Iran, the theocratic regime of the Muslim nation has opened a new front in the war by weaponising the Strait of Hormuz against The Petrodollar.

Having made ths strait a de facto toll gate at the entrance to the Persian Gulf, the Irania's are demanding that commercial vessels pay hefty transit fees in yuan or Bitcoin, according to multiple reports form news organisations in the middle east. As well as signalling a further deepening of Chinese-Iranian economic cooperation it brings a new dimension to Ian's asymmetric warfare. A huge proportion of the world's hydrocarbons supply passes through the Strait of Hormuz and signififant reductions in shippping movments will trigger a global crisis.

China, Russia and Iran along with their BRICS partners have been threatening currency wars with the aim of replacing or at least offering a serious rival to the US Dollar as the primary global reserve curency.

For years, Russia and the two Asian allies have accused Washington of using the dollar's dominance in global trade as a weapon, imposing sanctions and inflicting economic pain on rivals through the dollar-dominated financial system.

Now the ongoing war aound The Gulf - and lets not fool ouselves that the current ceasefire wil turn into lasting peace - is forcing a fundamental reassessment of the petrodollar system that has underpinned US financial hegemony for decades. This informal arrangement, in which Gulf oil producers price crude in dollars and reinvest revenues in US assets, emerged as a cornerstone of American economic power in the 1970s and has held since then. But with the US-Israeli campaign against Iran now in its second month, the strait’s uncertain fate is raising urgent questions about whether that order can survive.

Iran has so far managed to withstand the US-Israeli attack and inflict some damage on Israel and US allies around The Gulf, even after significant casualties aming its leadership, and has been able to assert strategic control over the Strait of Hormuz. Thus they have added a currency war to the shooting war.

This means Iran has been able to insist it will only accept payment for passage through the Strait of Hormuz in Chinese Yuan or crypto currencies, . At least two vessels have so far settled the transit fees in Yuan via a Chinese maritime services company which is acting as an intermediary and handling payment to the Iranian authorities.

This is a significant even though analysts debate if it can ultimately become decisive in the longer run. The de-dollarisation rhetoric has emanated from China, Russia, Iran and their BRICS partners for years, without materialising into meaningful change. Now, if one of the vital choke points through which one-fifth of the world's petroleum passes becomes conditional on currency denomination that is meaningful.

The practical consequence, even if it was partially adopted, would be a bifurcated global oil market. One where yuan-denominated barrels flowing through Hormuz for payment in China's currency in the Chinese payment system CIPS ( Cross-Border Interbank Payment System) and dollar-denominated barrels are rerouted at a high additional cost and time for those who are not using Chinese currency.

Further, Iran is employing a broader mechanism employing informal transactions in cryptocurrency to effectively circumvent the US financial system. Wang Yiwei, director of the Institute of International Affairs at Renmin University, said that the yuan-for-passage is more likely to gain international acceptance than a complete blockade.

Of far more concern to banks and businesses in the west if oil shipments through the strait are to be transacted in currencies other than the dollar, particularly the Chinese yuan and the Iranian rial the Gulf states, driven by security concerns, begin to distance themselves from the dollar-based energy trade, the ripple effects could be profound: reduced demand for the greenback, waning appetite for US Treasury debt, and a gradual erosion of the dollar’s reserve currency status.

FROM THE ARCHIVE:

Islamic Cleric Announces Fatwah Allowing The Legal Rape Of Syrian Women By Anti Assad Rebels

France sends more troops to Mali as UN backs intervention

Will Egypt Seize Libya For Its Oil

Tuesday, April 07, 2026

Does Trump's Crazy Rhetoric Suggest He Plans To Nuke Iran?

Nuclear explosion (Picture - adobe stock image )

American President Donald Trump inexplicably gambled the future of the world and his own political legacy on achieving regime change in Iran. From last summer's first shouts in the campaign to replace the theocratic regime this blog warned that Iran was not some third world failed state which could easily be rolled over.

Now Trump's Iran gamble, which was always a risky bet, is poised on a knife edge, the Iranian's have so far given as good as they get in terms of air and drone strikes, have invoked asymmetric warfare by weaponising the Strait of Hormuz through which, when shipping can move freely through it, approximately a quarter of the worlds oil, natural gas and petroleum products are distributed..

At first, in the opening days of the current round of hostilities most conservative opinion in the USA was behind Trump but currently, five weeks into the war, it is getting harder to find commentators who are backing him to the hilt. Even some of his more usually supportive backers are getting cold feet. Andrew Day in American Conservative is worried that Trump might use nukes in Iran:

A new rhetorical theme emerged last week, when Trump threatened to bomb Iran “back to the Stone Ages”. The phrase is associated with Curtis LeMay, who served as Air Force chief of staff during the Vietnam war. LeMay is known for something else too: his promotion of nuclear weapons and complaint that Americans had a “phobia” of using them.

Trump doesn’t seem to share that deranged perspective, but nuclear anxieties are growing thanks to his belligerence. Two weeks ago, a United Nations representative resigned from his post and leaked the disturbing information that “the UN is preparing for possible nuclear weapon use in Iran”. Days earlier, officials from the World Health Organisation told Politico they were worried about a possible nuclear attack.
If Trump decides to go further and actually push the big red button, at least one of his main advisors likely wouldn’t object. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has echoed Trump’s threat to send Iran back to the Stone Age, and he says US armed forces should aim for “maximum lethality, not tepid legality”.

As Trump's threats and claims have become crazier day by day it looks as if nuclear is on the agenda. Many American commentators think there is a strong likelihood the US will use a nuclear weapon. Who is going to object? America's NATO allies in the UK and Europe have surrendered the right to do that because of the way they hve distanced themselves from the whole escapade. Russia and China are Iran's allies but it is unlikely they would risk all out war with The USA over Iran. Both would probably instigate moves to have America censured by theUnited Nations and then take a PR advantage of the situation since their leadership is not crazy like ours is (in the US).

There is no certainty that the Iranians, like the Japanese will surrender should the US use a weapon of mass destruction, more likely they would retreat and allow a US occupation and then wage guerilla warfare for years, knowing that the American public do not like US soldiers returning home in body bags.

Will there be someone in the US government able to stop such a thing? We shall see. This is an existential struggle for Iran but also for the American global hegemony. If the US allows Iran to win that would be the beginning of the end of the Petrodollar Empire as many are predicting.

FROM THE ARCHIVE:

Islamic Cleric Announces Fatwah Allowing The Legal Rape Of Syrian Women By Anti Assad Rebels

France sends more troops to Mali as UN backs intervention

Will Egypt Seize Libya For Its Oil

Monday, April 06, 2026

If Trump Carries Out His Threat To Quit NATO Will That Be The End Of The Alliance?

Though the US President's threats to blow up Iran's oil and gas gacilities and destroy the country's entire infrastructure can be take with a pich of salt because Iran's allies, Russia and China, are unlikely to sit back and let that happen, his warning that the US could pull out of NATO should shock even the most complacent and anti-American elements on tEurope's political left.

Mr Trump has reportedly raised the issue in private discussions with White House aides in recent days, and on Wednesday confirmed that he was ‘absolutely’ reviewing membership.

There are a number of valid reasons why it would serve US interests to do this. The global reach of US military power and the fact that the USA brings weapons and tactics to NATO that no other country has, or is ever likely to have being the main one. With American backing, NATO has credibility in its deterrent fuction (we must remember that the purpose of forming NATO in 1945 was to defend Europe angaist any future rebirth of Nazi style totalitarian ideology,) with its whole defensive strategy being built on defensive capabilities and will to usethose capabilities.

Without the USA the only remaining defensive capability is in the nuclear sphere because of the independent British and French arsenals. In terms of conventional warfare NATO would be a toothless guard dog because leadership in member states has been content to let the USA be the world's peacekeeper, while British and French governments chose to neglect national security in favour of politically correct, virtue signalling policies and vanity projects. An aggressor could well, therefore, be tempted to take actions that fell short of the use, or riposte, of weapons of mass destruction. A Russian incursion into a non-Nato state, for example, Bosnia and Herzegovina or Moldova; or even a limited incursion in the Baltic, either on land or at sea. And financially of course, without the money Washington throws in NATO would be bankrupt.

President Trump's threat to NATO came as the latest in a sereies of contemptuous responses to the failure of traditional allies to give their support to the US/Israeli war on Iran. Foremost in his targets for criticism was UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, with whom his disappointment, first over his refusal allow US bombers to use the joint base on Diego Garcia and the RAF bases in Cyprus and at Fairford in Gloucestershire for strikes on Iran, and over Starmer’s reluctance to deploy the Royal Navy to defend the shipping route through the Strait of Hormuz, and then his refusal to take part in re-opening the Strait of Hormuz. France’s preference for diplomacy over action has irked him too.

Whether or not this outburst was more than a mark of his frustration with unappreciative allies or a wake-up call to NATO member states rather than a than genuine threat, it still suggests an alarming failure on his part to understand what NATO is and is not;

Bringing home 100,000 troops already on the US taxpayer rolls is a political winner. Losing command positions in an outdated, unattended, organization doesn't seem like a loss, just a matter of course. And upon pulling out of NATO, the US understands old alliances will be lost, but if those allies are only interested in a one sided alliance in which the USA defends freedom against tyranny while the allies whose security benefits from US strength make trade deals with America's enemies, there is no point in the US continuing to be part of NATO.

The morale boosting of being stationed in Europe is not what it used to be (unless some diplomatic post) and will soon carry the same weight as being stationed in Iraq. Yesterday (Good Friday 2026) we saw British leaders praising sitting down with muzzies, and a few days ago Britain's monarch (who has allegedly converted to Islam,) lauding a Muslim leader who is presiding over a genocide of Christians in his homeland. No surprise then that the United Nations is considering a global ban on criticism of Islam.

This begs the question how long will it be until Great Britain, Germany, or France become just another Muslim country with a nuke. Europe is a sinking ship, recruiting more and more basket case states like Albania to the European Union to drag down even powerhouse economies like Germany

The conflict in Ukraine, which NATO could have prevented had any leader including Trump's predecessor, ben able to muster the Testicular Fortitude to stand up to both Moscow, and the neo - Nazi regime in Kiev, was a money laundering scheme from the outset and is only an issue because of weak, appeasing, governments that lack the will to act. So what, hypothetically is lost if Ukraine is lost? The great have always swallowed up the lesser.

The Russians have no room or reason to laugh as they send their personnel, their people, to the slaughtered in Ukraine. Why is it--how is Russia such a problem if Europe keeps funding Russia for Russian energy? Does Europe fear a Russian invasion? Why? China never feared NATO as they do the other treaty/blocs formed by the US, Japan, SKorea, Australia, et. al.

And what's "funny", just like Russia, China probably sees the European betrayal of American interests as "funny". Is Europe a federal nation of semi autonomous states, or a continent made up of individual nationalities? No one seems to know and that seems the point all along.

Its not just NATO, and the United Nations that would be bankupt without American support, it's the WHO, IMF, all of these international organizations that have lost sight of their original purpose and meanings, and are now a gigantic anti-American bureaucraxy with ambitions to become a global government, and yet find themselves incapable of survival without US taxpayer dollars.

Should the US taxpayer pay eternally for anti-American behavior? For alliances that like to virtue signal their opposition to America?

If Trump quits both NATO and the UN both will die and nations will be forced to make alliances and trade arrangements with geographic neighbours and nations of similar economic and cultural development instead of bureaucrats from third world failed states being allowed to jerk the strings of successful, socially and economically devloped nations.

FROM THE ARCHIVE:

Syria's Dirty War Looks Set To Get Dirtier
'From unobtrusive, anonymous offices scattered around the middle east, in Qatar, Jordan, Turkey and Croatia, CIA officers have acted as brokers and overseers of a programme of massive arms shipment to Syria's rebels. The western powers operation to support those trying to overthrow the Assad regime is officially denied and ...

Islamic Cleric Announces Fatwah Allowing The Legal Rape Of Syrian Women By Anti Assad Rebels

Saturday, April 04, 2026

In A Crazy War When The Best Option Is Retreat The Choice Will Always Be Escalate

People are asking how we got into this crazy war that now threatens to spiral out of control and affect us all materially even if our homelands are ot directly involved in the fighting.

The narative peddled by the American / Israeli lobby to the Gulf Cooperation Couci (GCC) states and Iraqi government (as confessed by that Iraqi MP) was based on the premise that Iran would fall within 3 days, after they killed Khamenei, there’d be a regime change, various rebels and pro-westerners would take over – basically it’d be a cakewalk like Venezuela. That’s how they got the Gulf States on board with the plan to attack Iran.

Simply put, it was a failure of deterrence by Iran. Iran was too soft and was seen as weak by its enemies. To succeed in deterrence, getting nukes would be one method. Shutting up reformists who kept messaging they want to surrender would be another. In fact Iran need never have had a problem getting nukes, in the 1980s I worked for several years in the UK nuclear industry, and in the organisation that employed me (as a computer specialist) we had a number of Iranian scientists who had been working in britain and decided to stay when the Ayatollahs took over.

These guys were highly regarded by their British, French and American colleagues ,and I ;earned in conversation with senior managers that having them on board was regared as a major success by our governments. The Iranias were ahead of us in nuclear research, perhaps because they focused on practicalities rather than getting bogged down in Science - Fiction inspired theories. There were plenty of equally talented scientists who did not get out of Iran, and maybe did not want to. But they had their own nuclear research facilities, their oil provided the money to fund research and they had the people to develop nuclear weapons, directed energy beam weapons and much more.

So why did Iran not develop these technologies for defence purposes when, for almost 50 years western gvernments had been demonising the theocratic,authoritarian regime? We can only speculate, but while we know Iran has been a major sponsor of terrorism, acts of violence and destruction are attributable nly to the terrorist groups rather than Iran itself.

The scenarios incorporated into the propaganda narative justifying recent attacks on Iran, arms race, Iran going nuclear, threat to western interests, developing an aerial dfence shield etc doesn’t matter. Other than the fact that despite the claims made for 'renewables' by green loons, the world still runs on hydrocarbons, there are no valid reasons why western governments have been fearful of Iran.

As for asymmetrical attacks? Same idea. Failure of deterrence, Iran's regime could have closed the Strait of Hormuz whenever it wished, but they didn't. So the US government is not deterred, they convince themselves Iran is too scared of US military power to hold the global economy to ransome. But Washington gambled that Iran would not close the Strait of Hormuz and strangle their own economy, and the Ayatollahs called their bluff.

A planned vote at the UN Security Council on a draft resolution authorizing the “use of force” in the Strait of Hormuz has been abruptly postponed, exposing deep divisions among major powers over how to respond to complications arising from the imposed war on Iran.

The draft, submitted by Bahrain and backed by the United States in UNSC, would further escalate the US-Israeli war on Iran. However, the delay, officially attributed to the Good Friday holiday, comes despite the predetermined voting day, raising questions about underlying political disagreements.

China has warned that authorizing such measures risks further escalation, while Russia has denounced the text as “biased”, signaling potential obstacles to its authorization.

Meanwhile, French President Emmanuel Macron dismissed the idea of a military operation in the strait as unrealistic, cautioning that it would be prolonged and expose global shipping to greater danger.Other NATO members feel the same.

With no new vote date announced and veto threats looming, the future of the resolution remains uncertain, highlighting the growing complexity the US has created at a critical global energy chokepoint.”

FROM THE ARCHIVE: