FOREVER WARS – Part 8: Iran

So the ancient timeless agitation between Israel and the Arab world has reignited – again.
Is Iran, the last of the seven countries on General Wesley Clarke's 'memo', finally about to fall? Or, is Israel about to be blown off the map?
Tel Aviv awoke to a terrifying Tuesday this week as Iran unleashed a barrage of back-to-back missile strikes on the Israeli city, killing at least 24 and wounding hundreds, in what Tehran called a 'campaign of revenge.'
Iran also struck the port city of Haifa (which receives a third of Israel's imports) on day 5 of the tit-for-tat attacks between the two Middle Eastern countries.
Iran's counterstrike is retaliation to Israel's airstrike on more than 100 nuclear, military and infrastructure targets across Iran last Friday – including its main nuclear facility in Natanz – that killed several top Iranian military officials and nuclear scientists. Israel's attack came two days before Iran was set to resume talks with the US over Iran's nuclear programme.
On Monday, 16 June, Israel bombed Iran's State TV broadcaster IRIB with an airstrike, captured live on camera.
The talks between the United States and Iran, scheduled for last Sunday in Oman, have been cancelled.
Let's recap.
Back in 2007, ex-NATO commander Clarke told the world, in an interview with Democracy Now , that, 10 days after 9/11, he was shown a classified memo by a colleague at the Pentagon outlining how the US was going to knock out seven Middle East and North Africa countries in five years.
Lest we forget, those seven countries were: Iraq, Somalia, Sudan, Libya, Lebanon, Syria…and Iran.
(As I pointed out in part one of this series, it was actually 8 countries – if you include Afghanistan.)
All but one of those countries have been bombed, invaded, destabilised or overthrown by the West – and Israel.
And…here we are. Last domino on the Middle-Eastern map, Iran, is now too in the crosshairs of the US-NATO-Israel axis of evil. The axis may be way over schedule, and no doubt over budget, but they are right on course.
And what is the big gripe with Iran?
Well, apart from the usual, stock-standard, Western Arabiophobic racism? According to Israel – and their loyal slavish pit bull, the US – Iran is in the process of creating a nuclear weapon. We've heard the words countless times before. Israel, specifically Netanyahu, has said it over and over, ad nauseam; 'Iran CANNOT have a nuclear weapon!' And Trump just basically parrots his puppetmaster, Bibi.
In fact, do you know how many times, and for how long, Benjamin Netanyahu has been crying wolf, going on and on about Iran building an atomic bomb? Believe it or not…since at least 1992. Some say as early as 1984.
Here are just a few dates and quotes from when Bibi tried to terrorise the world with Iran's phantom nuke: 1992: 'Iran is 3-5 years from nuclear capacity.'
2003: 'Iran's nuke programme is a global threat.'
2010: 'Iran could produce a bomb within a year.'
2021: 'Iran closer than ever to nuclear weapons.'
2024: 'Iran dangerously close to nuclear bomb.'
2025: 'Iran days away from enrichening uranium for a bomb.'
That's right, according to Bedlam Bibi, Iran has been right on the cusp of building a nuke…for decades. Unfortunately, these fear-mongering, propaganda lies are regurgitated by the Western echo chamber mainstream media, particularly in the US.
By the way, this is the same Netanyahu who said we could restore peace to the Middle East if we could just get rid of Iraq's Saddam…if we could just get rid of Libya's Gaddafi….if we could just get rid of Syria's Assad.
Well, all that happened, and…do we have peace in the region?
And now, Bibi is saying…if we could just remove the Iranian regime, there would finally be peace in the Arab world.
Are we learning yet…?
So, let me get this straight. Everyone else in the world can have nukes…but not Iran?
Russia and the US have more than 5000 nuclear missiles each. France and the UK have more than 200 each. China, India, Pakistan and North Korea have nearly 1000 between them.
And we have the nations of Italy, Turkey, Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands 'hosting' more than 100 nukes collectively.
Yet, Iran is not even allowed to have… one?
What's that all about…? Just more of that Western Arabiophobic racism?
Here's the thing though…there's no substantial proof that Iran is developing nuclear weapons. And it's not just me – and the Iranians – saying it.
On 25 March this year, Trump's director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, appeared in testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee where she made it clear that US intelligence has determined Iran is not building a nuclear weapon.
In her opening statements, she said: 'The IC [intelligence community] continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Khamenei has not authorised the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003.'
She also said the IC was closely monitoring if Tehran decided to reauthorise its nuclear weapons programme.
However, you know who doesn't give a toss what Gabbard or the IC think?
Their boss, President Donald J. Trump.
In a brief interview on Airforce One on Tuesday, a reporter reminded Trump what Gabbard said to the Senate Committee about Iran not having a nuclear weapon. Trump responded, 'I don't care what she said, I think they were very close to having one.'
(Nice. Way to go, throwing your DNI under the bus there, Big Don.)
That's because Trump doesn't care what his cabinet, staff, advisors, voter base or the American people think or want. He only cares what Benjamin Netanyahu wants. Because, as we've well established, Trump is Bibi's patsy, Bibi's b**ch.
It's clear now that Trump was never about America First or MAGA, he was always about MIGA.
If Israel and the US thought ratcheting up tensions with Iran was somehow going to spur the Iranian people to turn against the 'regime' in Tehran and overthrow the Ayatollah and his government, they were dead wrong. All the airstrikes did was coalesce and galvanise the Iranian people, against their common foe.
As one article put it, Israel is making the case for a nuclear-armed Iran.
In fact, a video has gone viral of an Iranian woman at a rally in Tehran, without a hijab, shouting and calling for Iran to acquire a nuke – the very thing Israel and the US are trying to prevent.
'These b*st*rds have been driving us crazy for 400 years', she said. 'These scoundrels spent a year and a half killing half a million people. Now, an attack (on us). We want an atomic bomb!'
The crowd around her cheered her on. 'The Strait of Hormuz? Close it already,' she snapped.
I don't have to tell you what happens to oil and petrol prices if that happens. If Iran does shut down the Strait, economists estimate it could push the oil price (currently around $75 per barrel) up to $130 p/barrel. Some speculators are talking $300 per barrel.
Which means they won't have to forcibly lock you down again…because you won't be able to afford to drive anywhere.
Trump's actions on Iran – and Israel – has split the MAGA base, down the middle. While the usual warmongering neocons – like senators Lindsey Graham and Richard Blumenthal, Mike Pompeo and John Bolton – to name a few, are salivating at the prospect of destroying yet ANOTHER Middle-Eastern country, anti-war voices are coming out of the MAGA camp in droves.
Here's what some experts, analysts, commentators and many from the MAGA base are saying on X about Trump's recent double-play against Iran:
Conservative commentator and staunch Trump supporter, Tucker Carlson wrote; 'The real divide isn't between people who support Israel and people who support Iran or the Palestinians. The real divide is between those who casually encourage violence, and those who seek to prevent it — between warmongers and peacemakers.'
He asked, 'Who are the warmongers? They would include anyone who's calling Donald Trump today to demand air strikes and other direct US military involvement in a war with Iran.'
Carlson was also just in an interview with former Trump advisor, Steve Bannon. Both men were devout in their opposition to Trump attacking Iran.
Republican representative for Georgia, Marjorie Taylor Greene, has been amongst the most vocal voices on Capitol Hill against a war with Iran.
'Anyone slobbering for the US to become fully involved in the Israel-Iran war is not America First or MAGA. Wishing for murder of innocent people is disgusting. We are sick and tired of foreign wars. All of them,' she posted.
'Real America First/MAGA wants world peace for all people. I don't want to see Israel, Iran or Gaza bombed. This position is NOT antisemitic. It's rational, sane, and what many Americans voted for in 2024,' she added.
Comedian and podcaster, Dave Smith, posted; 'It's genuinely hard to imagine a worse decision than going to war with Iran. They pose absolutely no threat to us and the war would be a substantially larger catastrophe than Iraq. If you wanted to destroy the USA, another disastrous war in the Middle East would be the move.'
Republican representatie for Kentucky, Thomas Massie, posted; 'This is not our war. But if it were, Congress must decide such matters according to our Constitution.'
'I'm introducing a bipartisan War Powers Resolution to prohibit our involvement. I invite all members of Congress to cosponsor this resolutionm,' he added.
Other military and political analysts were more direct and brutal in their take on Trump's buckling to Bibi's push for (more) war.
In an interview with Judge Napolitano, ex-CIA analyst Larry Johnson said: 'Donald Trump now has established himself in the last 48 hours as a liar.'
He added: 'You know what this is? This is Saddam Hussein – Part 2.'
In another interview with Napolitano, military and intelligence analyst, Scott Ritter, said: 'What the president just did here is undermine American legitimacy, and credibility, and shows that America is incapable of serious diplomatic engagement. What this proves is that Donald Trump – the most pro-war president out there – is a duplicitous, two-faced liar.'
In an interview with Carlson, military analyst Douglas Macgregor said: 'The way Donald Trump handled Zelensky is the way he has got to handle Netanyahu. If he doesn't, Netanyahu will drag him into the abyss…because Bibi wants this war with Iran – come hell or high water.'
Meanwhile, the US has reportedly dispatched a second aircraft carrier, the USS Nimitz, among other 'substantial military assets' to the Middle East as the Israel-Iran conflict ramps up.
On Monday 16 June, Trump posted this on his Truth Social; 'Iran should have signed the 'deal' I told them to sign. Simply stated, IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON. I said it over and over again!'
Then he added: 'Everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran!'
That last line has sparked a mass exodus out of the city – of 10 million people.
He followed that up in the past 24 hours with an apparent threat aimed at Ayatollah Khamenei when he posted: 'We know exactly where the so-called 'Supreme Leader' is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there. We are not going to take him out, at least not for now. (Did he just borrow a line from Juju?) But our patience is wearing thin.'
Finally, he delivered an ultimatum to Iran: 'UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!'
As the tit-for-tat strikes between the two countries continues into the sixth day, Israel has just announced that they've killed another Iranian military commander who was appointed only 4 days ago.
Well, here we go again, folks. Like we've seen so many times before; left or right, Republican or Democrat. No matter who's in the Oval Office, the wars never end and the bombs keep dropping.
Are we learning yet..?
I think journo-activist, Caitlin Johnstone, said it best when she recently posted on X: 'There is absolutely no excuse for buying into the war propaganda about Iran after what we all saw with Iraq.'
'If you're a grown adult with internet access still swallowing this load of bull in the year 2025, you're either stupid…or evil,' she added.
Let us know by leaving a comment below or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1.
Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X, and Bluesky for the latest news.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Eyewitness News

8 hours ago

• Eyewitness News

Supreme Court allows US victim suits against Palestinian authorities

WASHINGTON, UNITED STATES - The US Supreme Court cleared the way on Friday for American victims of attacks in Israel and the occupied West Bank to sue Palestinian authorities for damages in US courts. The court issued a unanimous 9-0 decision in a long-running case involving the jurisdiction of US federal courts to hear lawsuits against the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). Americans killed or injured in attacks in Israel or the West Bank or their relatives have filed a number of suits seeking damages. In one 2015 case, a jury awarded $655 million in damages and interest to US victims of attacks which took place in the early 2000s. Appeals courts had dismissed the suits on jurisdiction grounds. Congress passed a law in 2019 -- the Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act (PSJVTA) -- that would make the PLO and PA subject to US jurisdiction if they were found to have made payments to the relatives of persons who killed or injured Americans. Two lower courts ruled that the 2019 law was a violation of the due process rights of the Palestinian authorities under the US Constitution but the Supreme Court ruled on Friday to uphold it. "The PSJVTA reasonably ties the assertion of federal jurisdiction over the PLO and PA to conduct that involves the United States and implicates sensitive foreign policy matters within the prerogative of the political branches," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote. The PA announced in February that it would end its system of payments to the families of those killed by Israel or held in Israeli prisons, responding to a long-standing request from Washington. In 2018, during his first term as US president, Donald Trump signed into law rules suspending financial assistance to the PA as long as it continued to pay benefits to Palestinians linked to "terrorist" entities, according to the criteria of the Israeli authorities.

IOL News

14 hours ago

• IOL News

Escalating tensions: Iran-Israel war latest news and developments

Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi (2nd L) during meeting on Tehran's nuclear programme, with Germany's Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul, France's Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs Jean-Noel Barrot, European Union High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, European powers began talks with Iran in Geneva on Friday, talking of a window of opportunity for a diplomatic solution while the United States weighs whether to join its ally Israel's bombing campaign. Israel came under renewed Iranian missile fire after carrying out dozens of strikes overnight on targets, including a suspected nuclear research centre. Here are the latest developments: Geneva talks Top European diplomats opened talks with Iranian Foreign Minister Abas Araghchi in Geneva, saying they wanted to offer a "diplomatic solution" to the war, now on its eighth day. Ahead of the talks, French President Emmanuel Macron said it was "essential to prioritise" a return to negotiations, and said European powers would offer Iran a "diplomatic solution". The foreign ministers of Britain, France and Germany, and the European Union's top diplomat have urged de-escalation, with British Foreign Secretary David Lammy saying the next two weeks are "a window... to achieve a diplomatic solution". Israel pressed the Europeans to adopt a "firm stance" with Iran in the talks, underlining that it was "not part of that meeting". "We expect the European foreign ministers to... demand that there is a complete rollback of the nuclear programme, the dismantling of ballistic missile arsenal and programme, and putting an end to Iran's regional terrorist activities and active support for its terrorist proxies," Israel's ambassador in Geneva Daniel Meron told reporters.

IOL News

15 hours ago

• IOL News

Fuel price pain as missiles fly

While missiles fly thousands of kilometres away, the effects of a deepening conflict between Israel and Iran are beginning to reach South African shores - not through politics or security, but through rising prices at the pump and pressure on already-stretched household budgets. A surge in global oil prices, triggered by military strikes on strategic energy assets and growing fears of supply disruption, is stoking inflation concerns that could ripple through the economy and stall any hopes of interest rate relief. The bombardment of Iranian military targets by Isreal erupted over a week ago as airstrikes targeted Iranian military infrastructure, including pivotal oil and gas facilities such as the South Pars gas field and the Shahr Rey oil refinery, provoking retaliatory missile attacks by Iran on major Israeli cities. This has raised alarm bells among market watchers, particularly given Iran's critical role as the third-largest oil producer within the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC+), contributing around four million barrels of crude oil per day and controlling access to the vital Strait of Hormuz. The Strait of Hormuz is a crucial maritime chokepoint through which approximately 18–19 million barrels per day or 20% of global oil shipments pass, making any potential disruption a considerable concern for worldwide oil supply. Despite Iran maintaining crude exports at 2.2 million barrels per day amid the conflict, rising shipping costs and delays due to the potential blockade of this strategic waterway could influence inflation across the globe. Nolan Wapenaar, co-chief investment officer at Anchor Capital, on Friday said the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz would have far-reaching consequences for South Africa's economy. Wapenaar said this would obviously be a major blockage in the supply of oil to the rest of the globe. 'This could drastically impact the availability of oil and one would expect significantly higher prices. The clear impact in South Africa is higher inflation and quite potentially rising interest rates again,' Wapenaar said. 'The impact of a major supply shock to oil will be more pronounced and detrimental to South Africa. We would expect pressure on the terms of trade from rising oil prices, the South African rand could well weaken, exacerbating inflation pressures beyond just the impact of oil prices and supply.' According to the OPEC+, the global oil demand growth forecast for 2025 remains at 1.3 million barrels per day. The eight OPEC+ countries, which previously announced additional voluntary adjustments, have agreed to start a gradual and flexible return of the 2.2 million barrels per day by implementing a production adjustment of 411 000 barrels per day in July 2025 in view of a steady global economic outlook and current healthy market fundamentals. Analysts warn that the conflict has the potential to reshape power relations within the Middle East and influence OPECʼs internal dynamics as Iran's role as a major oil producer and its strategic position in the Gulf give it considerable leverage. Bianca Botes, director at Citadel Global, said the Strait of Hormuzʼs strategic importance cannot be overstated. 'Any disruption – whether due to military action, electronic interference affecting navigation systems, or blockades – could severely constrain global oil supply. Recent incidents, such as the collision and fire involving two oil tankers near the strait, have heightened these concerns,' Botes said. 'While OPEC members possess some excess production capacity that could theoretically offset Iranian supply losses, the risk of a prolonged or expanded conflict introduces significant uncertainty. 'Analysts warn that oil prices could spike to $100/barrel or even $120/barrel if supply through the Strait of Hormuz is disrupted. Such a price shock would reverberate through global markets, impacting inflation, consumer costs, and economic growth worldwide.' South Africa consumes around 530 000 barrels of oil per day, or more than 25 million litres of petroleum products each year, facilitated by imports and its three operational refiners. Petrol and diesel are the most important petroleum products, accounting for more than 85% of consumption. While the country refines imported crude oil, a portion of its fuel supply also comes from synthetic fuels produced from coal and natural gas. The increase in the fuel price would come as consumers are already battling with the high cost of living after the finance minister hiked the General Fuel Levy (GFL) by 16 cents per litre for petrol and 15 cents per litre for diesel — the first increase in three years — on the back of inflationary pressures. The price of Brent crude oil traded around $77 (around R1 390) per barrel on Friday, heading for a third consecutive weekly gain as escalating hostilities in the Middle East continued to fuel fears of regional supply disruptions. However, Investec chief economist Annabel Bishop allayed fears of any fuel supply shortages but said the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz would raise shipping costs, impacting inflation and also increase shipping delays. 'South Africa mainly gets oil from Africa and Saudi Arabia (which is expected to stay out of the conflict) so the supply is not expected to be interrupted,' Bishop said. 'We are less impacted as we get our oil supply from Africa not the middle east and are food secure. We would be impacted on price not supply as all oil is priced off Brent crude.' Rising oil prices have immediate and far-reaching consequences. Higher crude costs translate into increased transportation and manufacturing expenses, feeding into broader inflationary pressures. This dynamic can slow economic activity by reducing consumer purchasing power and increasing production costs. Inflation in South Africa has held steady at 2.8%, paving the way for potential interest rate cuts though several factors may yet cause the Reserve Bank to adopt a more hawkish stance. Everest Wealth CEO, Thys van Zyl, said rising tensions in the Middle East and discussions about lowering South Africa's inflation target band were two key concerns that could temper expectations of further rate cuts. 'This conflict could quickly filter through to fuel prices and transport inflation – and that will narrow the room for rate cuts,' Van Zyl said. 'Although food inflation rose sharply in May due to the impact of foot-and-mouth disease on beef prices, transport inflation was the only category with negative growth thanks to the past year's decline in fuel prices – which helped keep overall inflation low.' BUSINESS REPORT