Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Ian Bremmer’s biggest concern in the Iran war is command and control. Washington and Tehran may both want to contain the conflict. That doesn’t mean every decision remains under their control. “𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘪𝘵 𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘢 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘭 𝘥𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘴 𝘶𝘱 𝘥𝘦𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘻𝘦𝘥, 𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵...

22,423 görüntüleme • 14 gün önce •via X (Twitter)

3 Yorum

Mark1000 profil fotoğrafı
Mark100014 gün önce

Just a reminder. Since Mid July the US Navy escorted hundreds of Tankers through the straights, while Iran didn't move a drop. Thank for your attention to this matter.

Mafia Ka Dushman profil fotoğrafı
Mafia Ka Dushman14 gün önce

Americans be out in jail for 5 years for Antisemitic flyers. Americans are slave in their own country

pecinta seblak profil fotoğrafı
pecinta seblak14 gün önce

This new pace has been a very pleasant surprise. I'm enjoying the space in my head.

Benzer Videolar

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump remains trapped because he still refuses to accept how much leverage Iran possesses. He still thinks overwhelming American power will eventually force Tehran to give in, and political scientist Ian Bremmer says that's the mistake keeping this war alive. Instead, Iran has shown it can keep raising the economic cost of the war without crossing Trump's red lines. Ian doesn't think Iran believes it can defeat the U.S militarily; it believes it can make continuing the war more painful than ending it. And so far, it's working. Trump keeps threatening to destroy Iran's infrastructure, eliminate its leadership and dramatically escalate the conflict. But Ian points to something more revealing than Trump's rhetoric: His actions. Despite months of fighting, Trump has avoided the biggest escalations. No ground invasion, no sustained campaign against Iran's energy sector, and no full-scale assault on the country's leadership. Even after American casualties, his instinct has repeatedly been to play them down rather than use them to justify a much wider war. And Tehran has noticed. It increasingly sees a president who talks like he's preparing for total war but behaves like someone searching for an exit. The bigger problem, Ian says, is inside the White House itself. Trump's advisers know the military and economic costs are mounting, and many want the war to end, but very few are willing to tell Trump the uncomfortable truth: Iran has far more leverage over how this ends than Washington expected. Until Trump accepts that reality, Ian believes a genuine compromise remains unlikely. ian bremmer

Mario Nawfal

380,968 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

🇺🇸🇮🇷 For months, the strangest feature of the Iran war has been how carefully both sides have escalated it. Trita Parsi thinks that may be ending. “𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘶𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘣𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘦𝘴𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘮𝘢𝘺 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘵 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘶𝘯𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘭𝘭𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘦𝘴𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯.” Washington and Tehran have repeatedly climbed the ladder while deliberately avoiding steps that could trigger something much larger. The U.S. even kept Israel out of the second round, Parsi says, partly because Washington feared Israel would escalate beyond the level it was prepared to manage. Yemen now threatens to break that system. A U.S. attack on the Houthis could trigger Iranian retaliation or action by Iraqi militias. Parsi even raises scenarios in which Kuwait or Bahrain become engulfed and the political map of the Gulf begins changing beyond anyone’s control. “𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘢𝘵𝘩𝘸𝘢𝘺𝘴 𝘵𝘰𝘸𝘢𝘳𝘥𝘴 𝘥𝘦-𝘦𝘴𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘮𝘶𝘤𝘩, 𝘮𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘧𝘦𝘸𝘦𝘳.” And here is the maddening part: diplomacy is actually happening. Qatar and Pakistan are heavily involved. Iran and Saudi Arabia are talking directly. Parsi says Tehran is even showing new flexibility, potentially accepting a final agreement different from the existing MOU if negotiations begin from it. But both Washington and Tehran increasingly doubt the other side actually wants a deal. That may be the most dangerous stage of a war. Not when diplomacy disappears. When diplomacy still exists, but nobody trusts it enough to use it. Trita Parsi

Mario Nawfal

253,080 görüntüleme • 10 gün önce

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Journalist Sharmine Narwani says Trump is trying to claim credit for a Hormuz deal he did not negotiate and may no longer have the power to stop. She argues there is no U.S-Iran deal; Washington and Tehran are not even negotiating directly. The real discussions are taking place between Iran and Oman, with Gulf states increasingly backing a regional solution to a crisis America created but could not control. And that distinction matters. Trump wants to present any reopening of the Strait of Hormuz as another war he personally solved, but Sharmine says the real story is almost the exact opposite. Regional states are no longer waiting for Washington to decide how they engage with their neighbors. They are taking matters into their own hands because leaving their security to the U.S became too dangerous. The emerging Hormuz arrangement is still being negotiated, but one Iranian position appears immovable: The Strait will never return to the system that existed before the war. Iran could retain authority over inbound traffic, oversight of vessels using the Omani route, the power to inspect or block ships it considers hostile, and transit or service fees also remain on the table. Even a final agreement would not mean business as usual, because any renewed attack on Iran could immediately close the Strait again. America may now have to accept an arrangement written by Iran and Oman, supported by Gulf nations and only reluctantly tolerated by Washington. Sharmine argues this reflects something much larger than a dispute over shipping lanes: The old regional order is breaking down. For decades, Washington expected allies and adversaries alike to wait for American approval before making major security decisions. This war changed that calculation, and Iran emerged not isolated or broken, but with greater influence over the diplomatic endgame. Her argument is that the U.S did not merely fail to defeat Iran; it accelerated the rise of the regional power it entered the war to contain. Sharmine Narwani

Mario Nawfal

230,974 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump threatened to unleash the “gates of hell” against Iran, then he backed away, which in Washington may have been seen as restraint. According to Geopolitical analyst Pepe Escobar, Tehran interpreted it very differently. They saw it as proof that Iran’s deterrence had worked, America’s military options were narrowing, and that the longer Iran holds out, the more leverage it gains. Pepe says that transformed Iran’s objectives. Tehran is no longer thinking only about surviving the war, lifting sanctions or securing control over the Strait of Hormuz. According to his sources, forcing the U.S to retreat from West Asia has now become a central strategic goal. Iran began this conflict trying to prevent America from imposing its will. Pepe believes it now sees an opportunity to dismantle the military system that allowed Washington to threaten it in the first place. And Tehran reportedly believes it has found the mechanism. He says Iran has replaced its previous proportional retaliation policy with a new warning: Strike one Iranian energy target, and Iran will strike ten targets across America’s regional network. The message to Gulf governments is brutal. If they help Trump attack Iran, their refineries, pipelines and export facilities will pay the price. Pepe says that threat is one reason regional leaders pushed Trump to stand down. Saudi Arabia, in particular, understands that another major escalation could devastate the infrastructure it depends on to export oil. For decades, American bases were supposed to protect Gulf allies from Iran, but now those bases are putting the countries hosting them at risk. Pepe Escobar

Mario Nawfal

286,832 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce