正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

🇺🇸🇮🇷 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...

MarioNawfal's profile picture

Mario Nawfal

3,819,511 subscribers

380,398 次观看 • 21 天前 •via X (Twitter)

教育新闻政治
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

🇺🇸🇮🇷 The biggest mistake Washington may be making is assuming Iran is running out of options. According to Prof. Robert Pape, Tehran believes it has already solved the central military problem of this war. Not because it can defeat America, but because it believes the U.S can't achieve its objective. Trump's goal is simple: reopen the Strait of Hormuz and restore normal shipping. The only problem is that Iran can launch drones capable of striking ships from an area larger than California. Much of it is mountainous, filled with tunnels, valleys and concealed launch sites. It's like trying to find someone in an area equivalent to 11,000 Manhattans. Iran doesn't need thousands of drones to survive; it only needs enough to keep attacking ships. That's why Prof. Pape believes Trump can't simply bomb his way to reopening Hormuz before the midterms, and probably not even before January. And he says Tehran knows it, which changes everything. If Iran believes Washington has no realistic military solution, why would it rush into negotiations? Instead, political scientist Prof. Pape believes Tehran will try to maximise its leverage by keeping pressure on global shipping, energy markets, and the U.S economy. His warning is that Iran is no longer simply trying to survive; it's trying to convince every future American president that attacking them carries an unacceptable economic and political price. Robert A. Pape
45:43

🇺🇸🇮🇷 The biggest mistake Washington may be making is assuming Iran is running out of options. According to Prof. Robert Pape, Tehran believes it has already solved the central military problem of this war. Not because it can defeat America, but because it believes the U.S can't achieve its objective. Trump's goal is simple: reopen the Strait of Hormuz and restore normal shipping. The only problem is that Iran can launch drones capable of striking ships from an area larger than California. Much of it is mountainous, filled with tunnels, valleys and concealed launch sites. It's like trying to find someone in an area equivalent to 11,000 Manhattans. Iran doesn't need thousands of drones to survive; it only needs enough to keep attacking ships. That's why Prof. Pape believes Trump can't simply bomb his way to reopening Hormuz before the midterms, and probably not even before January. And he says Tehran knows it, which changes everything. If Iran believes Washington has no realistic military solution, why would it rush into negotiations? Instead, political scientist Prof. Pape believes Tehran will try to maximise its leverage by keeping pressure on global shipping, energy markets, and the U.S economy. His warning is that Iran is no longer simply trying to survive; it's trying to convince every future American president that attacking them carries an unacceptable economic and political price. Robert A. Pape

Mario Nawfal

306,593 次观看 • 18 天前

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump has restarted a war he no longer controls, and Iran intends to make escape painfully difficult Middle East analyst Trita Parsi says Trump believed he could inflict enough military pressure to force Iran back to the negotiating table, then declare victory and end the conflict whenever it became politically convenient. Instead, rather than giving him an easy off-ramp, Iran is trying to make the war so costly that he never thinks of doing it again. That's why Trita believes the economic pressure matters just as much as the missiles, because every additional cost increases the political pain of continuing the conflict. At the heart of the war is the Strait of Hormuz, and Trita argues this isn't really about shipping fees; it's about leverage. Iran believes control of the Strait is its single biggest deterrent against a full-scale American attack. Give that up, and Washington can launch another war with far fewer consequences. That's why he says Tehran is extremely unlikely to compromise on the issue, regardless of the military pressure. His warning is that this creates a dangerous cycle, because every failed attempt to force a breakthrough creates pressure for another escalation. Trita says that's how wars stop being short campaigns and start becoming open-ended conflicts. He puts the chances of the fighting escalating over the next month at more than 80%. Not because either side necessarily wants a forever war, but because both sides now believe backing down today makes an even bigger war tomorrow more likely. Trita Parsi
24:15

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump has restarted a war he no longer controls, and Iran intends to make escape painfully difficult Middle East analyst Trita Parsi says Trump believed he could inflict enough military pressure to force Iran back to the negotiating table, then declare victory and end the conflict whenever it became politically convenient. Instead, rather than giving him an easy off-ramp, Iran is trying to make the war so costly that he never thinks of doing it again. That's why Trita believes the economic pressure matters just as much as the missiles, because every additional cost increases the political pain of continuing the conflict. At the heart of the war is the Strait of Hormuz, and Trita argues this isn't really about shipping fees; it's about leverage. Iran believes control of the Strait is its single biggest deterrent against a full-scale American attack. Give that up, and Washington can launch another war with far fewer consequences. That's why he says Tehran is extremely unlikely to compromise on the issue, regardless of the military pressure. His warning is that this creates a dangerous cycle, because every failed attempt to force a breakthrough creates pressure for another escalation. Trita says that's how wars stop being short campaigns and start becoming open-ended conflicts. He puts the chances of the fighting escalating over the next month at more than 80%. Not because either side necessarily wants a forever war, but because both sides now believe backing down today makes an even bigger war tomorrow more likely. Trita Parsi

Mario Nawfal

280,503 次观看 • 22 天前

🇺🇸 Trump blamed dead American soldiers on local partners. Americans operate those defenses. Ian Bremmer points to the moment that offended the room: sitting with Lebanon's president, Trump explained the Jordan base deaths by saying local partners don't run US defenses well. Except American soldiers operate the air defenses in Jordan themselves. Then came the post comparing how few Americans died versus other wars. Ian says the understating is deliberate. Downplay the casualties, and you never have to answer them, because Trump genuinely doesn't want all-out war. The problem is Tehran knows it, and as long as Iran believes escalation carries limited consequences, the ships keep burning and the economic bill keeps growing. ian bremmer
4:43

🇺🇸 Trump blamed dead American soldiers on local partners. Americans operate those defenses. Ian Bremmer points to the moment that offended the room: sitting with Lebanon's president, Trump explained the Jordan base deaths by saying local partners don't run US defenses well. Except American soldiers operate the air defenses in Jordan themselves. Then came the post comparing how few Americans died versus other wars. Ian says the understating is deliberate. Downplay the casualties, and you never have to answer them, because Trump genuinely doesn't want all-out war. The problem is Tehran knows it, and as long as Iran believes escalation carries limited consequences, the ships keep burning and the economic bill keeps growing. ian bremmer

Mario Nawfal

45,828 次观看 • 21 天前

Professor Stephen Walt says Trump restarted the Iran war without changing a single thing that caused America to lose the first round. The bombing failed before, Iran still controls the same leverage, and Tehran remains willing to endure more pain than Washington. Yet Trump has returned to the same strategy, apparently expecting surrender this time. Prof. Walt says that's the central flaw. The first bombing campaign didn't force Iran to capitulate; instead, the U.S ended up signing the MoU because the economic consequences of the war were becoming too severe to ignore. It wasn't a good agreement from Washington's perspective; it was full of ambiguities, but it stopped the bleeding. Then, according to Prof. Walt, the Trump administration tried to quietly work around one of the agreement's most important provisions: Article Five. The part dealing with Iran's role in managing access to the Strait of Hormuz. The administration began encouraging ships to use the Omani route, as far from Iranian waters as possible. Iran saw that as a direct attempt to undermine the agreement and, more importantly, strip away what had become its greatest source of leverage. So it attacked shipping, America bombed back, and suddenly everyone was right back where they started. America is fighting a war of choice; Iran is fighting what it believes is a war for survival. If Tehran believes the objective is regime change, then almost any sacrifice becomes worth making. That's why Prof. Walt doesn't expect Iran to suddenly cave simply because the bombing has resumed. Trump can still walk away from the war, but to do so means accepting that the U.S will be in a worse position than before it began. When you start an unnecessary war, and it goes badly, you don't get to negotiate from a position of strength; you negotiate from the position you've been left with. And Prof. Walt thinks the sooner Washington accepts that, the sooner this war has a chance of ending. Stephen Walt
21:11

Professor Stephen Walt says Trump restarted the Iran war without changing a single thing that caused America to lose the first round. The bombing failed before, Iran still controls the same leverage, and Tehran remains willing to endure more pain than Washington. Yet Trump has returned to the same strategy, apparently expecting surrender this time. Prof. Walt says that's the central flaw. The first bombing campaign didn't force Iran to capitulate; instead, the U.S ended up signing the MoU because the economic consequences of the war were becoming too severe to ignore. It wasn't a good agreement from Washington's perspective; it was full of ambiguities, but it stopped the bleeding. Then, according to Prof. Walt, the Trump administration tried to quietly work around one of the agreement's most important provisions: Article Five. The part dealing with Iran's role in managing access to the Strait of Hormuz. The administration began encouraging ships to use the Omani route, as far from Iranian waters as possible. Iran saw that as a direct attempt to undermine the agreement and, more importantly, strip away what had become its greatest source of leverage. So it attacked shipping, America bombed back, and suddenly everyone was right back where they started. America is fighting a war of choice; Iran is fighting what it believes is a war for survival. If Tehran believes the objective is regime change, then almost any sacrifice becomes worth making. That's why Prof. Walt doesn't expect Iran to suddenly cave simply because the bombing has resumed. Trump can still walk away from the war, but to do so means accepting that the U.S will be in a worse position than before it began. When you start an unnecessary war, and it goes badly, you don't get to negotiate from a position of strength; you negotiate from the position you've been left with. And Prof. Walt thinks the sooner Washington accepts that, the sooner this war has a chance of ending. Stephen Walt

Mario Nawfal

265,657 次观看 • 1 个月前

🚨🇮🇷 IRAN’S STRATEGY: FORCING THE AMERICANS DOWN The Iranian regime understands they are militarily weaker, but they are betting on their "leverage to disrupt" the global economy. Ian Bremmer explains that by holding the Strait of Hormuz hostage, Tehran believes they can force a U.S. retreat. The political scientist and author warns that while Trump seeks an off-ramp, his lack of clearly articulated war goals makes the situation "unconscionable." Bremmer emphasizes that as long as drone strikes continue, the leverage remains firmly with the disruptors. ian bremmer
12:04

🚨🇮🇷 IRAN’S STRATEGY: FORCING THE AMERICANS DOWN The Iranian regime understands they are militarily weaker, but they are betting on their "leverage to disrupt" the global economy. Ian Bremmer explains that by holding the Strait of Hormuz hostage, Tehran believes they can force a U.S. retreat. The political scientist and author warns that while Trump seeks an off-ramp, his lack of clearly articulated war goals makes the situation "unconscionable." Bremmer emphasizes that as long as drone strikes continue, the leverage remains firmly with the disruptors. ian bremmer

Mario Nawfal

30,913 次观看 • 4 个月前

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump needs Iran to give him a face-saving victory, but they've deliberately decided to deny him one. Trump expected this war to end within weeks. Instead, months later, he's venting at aides, insulting Iranian leaders, and growing increasingly frustrated that the war refuses to end. Military analyst Elijah Magnier says that's because Trump fundamentally misunderstood Iran from the very beginning. In his view, every insult, every new strike, and every failed ultimatum only convinces Tehran that giving Trump a face-saving victory would guarantee another war in the future. So they've made a strategic decision: Don't give him the ladder. That's why Elijah believes Tehran rejected another temporary ceasefire. From the Iranian perspective, Trump launched the war, walked away from previous commitments, kept sanctions in place, and tried to change the facts on the ground while negotiations were supposedly continuing. Why help him now? Elijah says the real battle isn't over missiles; it's over the Strait of Hormuz. Not because Iran just wants to collect shipping fees, but because Hormuz has become the leverage that can force Washington to negotiate issues it has refused to address for decades: Sanctions, frozen Iranian assets, and America's wider military role in the region. Until those issues are addressed, Elijah believes Iran has no incentive to surrender its strongest bargaining chip. And right now, Tehran has made one thing absolutely clear: It has no intention of rescuing Trump from the war he chose to start. Elijah J. Magnier 🇪🇺
49:27

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump needs Iran to give him a face-saving victory, but they've deliberately decided to deny him one. Trump expected this war to end within weeks. Instead, months later, he's venting at aides, insulting Iranian leaders, and growing increasingly frustrated that the war refuses to end. Military analyst Elijah Magnier says that's because Trump fundamentally misunderstood Iran from the very beginning. In his view, every insult, every new strike, and every failed ultimatum only convinces Tehran that giving Trump a face-saving victory would guarantee another war in the future. So they've made a strategic decision: Don't give him the ladder. That's why Elijah believes Tehran rejected another temporary ceasefire. From the Iranian perspective, Trump launched the war, walked away from previous commitments, kept sanctions in place, and tried to change the facts on the ground while negotiations were supposedly continuing. Why help him now? Elijah says the real battle isn't over missiles; it's over the Strait of Hormuz. Not because Iran just wants to collect shipping fees, but because Hormuz has become the leverage that can force Washington to negotiate issues it has refused to address for decades: Sanctions, frozen Iranian assets, and America's wider military role in the region. Until those issues are addressed, Elijah believes Iran has no incentive to surrender its strongest bargaining chip. And right now, Tehran has made one thing absolutely clear: It has no intention of rescuing Trump from the war he chose to start. Elijah J. Magnier 🇪🇺

Mario Nawfal

282,783 次观看 • 21 天前

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump already fought this exact war against China... He lost. Ian Bremmer says forget Iraq or Vietnam, the real precedent is the tariff war. Trump hit Beijing expecting capitulation, China shut down the critical minerals supply chain, American factories faced going dark, and Trump backed down into engagement: "When he hits them hard, they hit back. The difference here is that Trump does not yet believe or accept that the Iranians really have far more leverage over the outcome than he is prepared to understand and accept." Two sides who agree on their relative strength negotiate. Two sides who don't keep fighting, and that disagreement is the war now. ian bremmer
2:57

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump already fought this exact war against China... He lost. Ian Bremmer says forget Iraq or Vietnam, the real precedent is the tariff war. Trump hit Beijing expecting capitulation, China shut down the critical minerals supply chain, American factories faced going dark, and Trump backed down into engagement: "When he hits them hard, they hit back. The difference here is that Trump does not yet believe or accept that the Iranians really have far more leverage over the outcome than he is prepared to understand and accept." Two sides who agree on their relative strength negotiate. Two sides who don't keep fighting, and that disagreement is the war now. ian bremmer

Mario Nawfal

131,685 次观看 • 21 天前

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump may be making the biggest strategic miscalculation of the war. Geopolitical analyst Brandon Weichert believes the White House is assuming one overwhelming show of force will push Iran back to the negotiating table. He thinks the opposite will happen. According to reports discussed in the interview, Washington is weighing a large-scale campaign targeting not only military sites, but potentially Iran's energy infrastructure as well. Brandon believes the logic is simple. Hit Iran hard enough, demonstrate overwhelming American power, then negotiate from a position of strength. He doesn't think Tehran sees it that way. His argument is that Washington is treating Iran like a conventional state that responds primarily to military pressure. Iran, he says, defines legitimacy through resistance. The harder it's hit, the harder it becomes politically for Tehran to compromise. That's why Brandon believes a major U.S. campaign wouldn't be the final round. It would simply be the start of the next one. The U.S. may be able to destroy what it can find. But it can never be certain it found everything. Meanwhile, Iran only needs to keep enough capability intact to continue imposing costs. Brandon believes that asymmetry favors Tehran over time. If Iran refuses to bend, what started as escalation could well become an open-ended war neither side knows how to end. Brandon Weichert
42:29

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump may be making the biggest strategic miscalculation of the war. Geopolitical analyst Brandon Weichert believes the White House is assuming one overwhelming show of force will push Iran back to the negotiating table. He thinks the opposite will happen. According to reports discussed in the interview, Washington is weighing a large-scale campaign targeting not only military sites, but potentially Iran's energy infrastructure as well. Brandon believes the logic is simple. Hit Iran hard enough, demonstrate overwhelming American power, then negotiate from a position of strength. He doesn't think Tehran sees it that way. His argument is that Washington is treating Iran like a conventional state that responds primarily to military pressure. Iran, he says, defines legitimacy through resistance. The harder it's hit, the harder it becomes politically for Tehran to compromise. That's why Brandon believes a major U.S. campaign wouldn't be the final round. It would simply be the start of the next one. The U.S. may be able to destroy what it can find. But it can never be certain it found everything. Meanwhile, Iran only needs to keep enough capability intact to continue imposing costs. Brandon believes that asymmetry favors Tehran over time. If Iran refuses to bend, what started as escalation could well become an open-ended war neither side knows how to end. Brandon Weichert

Mario Nawfal

374,538 次观看 • 13 天前

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump’s threats no longer frighten Iran, and every retreat makes the U.S look weaker Trump insists Iran is desperate to negotiate, but Tehran says there are no direct talks, Pakistan says they aren't happening, and even U.S officials deny any direct negotiations are taking place. So what's actually happening? Fmr. CIA analyst Larry Johnson says we're watching the same cycle repeat over and over again. Trump threatens overwhelming military action, Iran refuses to concede, the world braces for war, then Trump steps back. Days later, the threats begin all over again. The problem is that Iran has now learned the pattern, and it no longer assumes every ultimatum will end in military action. Instead, Tehran prepares for the worst, waits, and watches Washington blink. Larry believes that's because the U.S has run into a reality it cannot bomb away: The Strait of Hormuz. Trump says America controls it, but Larry says that's simply not true. The U.S can launch airstrikes, move ships, and threaten, but it cannot reopen the Strait on its own terms while Iran still retains the ability to strike shipping and energy infrastructure. Which means the military solution Trump keeps hinting at doesn't actually exist. That's why Larry believes Iran's leverage keeps growing. Every day the disruption continues, oil, LNG and other critical exports remain constrained, pressure builds across the global economy, and Washington faces mounting costs from a conflict it still cannot decisively resolve. And if that continues... The question may no longer be what concessions Iran is willing to make. It may be what concessions America can no longer avoid. SonofNewAmericanRevolution
48:20

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump’s threats no longer frighten Iran, and every retreat makes the U.S look weaker Trump insists Iran is desperate to negotiate, but Tehran says there are no direct talks, Pakistan says they aren't happening, and even U.S officials deny any direct negotiations are taking place. So what's actually happening? Fmr. CIA analyst Larry Johnson says we're watching the same cycle repeat over and over again. Trump threatens overwhelming military action, Iran refuses to concede, the world braces for war, then Trump steps back. Days later, the threats begin all over again. The problem is that Iran has now learned the pattern, and it no longer assumes every ultimatum will end in military action. Instead, Tehran prepares for the worst, waits, and watches Washington blink. Larry believes that's because the U.S has run into a reality it cannot bomb away: The Strait of Hormuz. Trump says America controls it, but Larry says that's simply not true. The U.S can launch airstrikes, move ships, and threaten, but it cannot reopen the Strait on its own terms while Iran still retains the ability to strike shipping and energy infrastructure. Which means the military solution Trump keeps hinting at doesn't actually exist. That's why Larry believes Iran's leverage keeps growing. Every day the disruption continues, oil, LNG and other critical exports remain constrained, pressure builds across the global economy, and Washington faces mounting costs from a conflict it still cannot decisively resolve. And if that continues... The question may no longer be what concessions Iran is willing to make. It may be what concessions America can no longer avoid. SonofNewAmericanRevolution

Mario Nawfal

284,922 次观看 • 11 天前

🇮🇷🇺🇸 Was Trump's sudden shift on Iran driven by diplomacy? Retired Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski says it exposed a power struggle inside the Pentagon. The people with the clearest picture of the war aren't the ones shaping policy. Kwiatkowski argues Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Dan Caine has been pushed to the sidelines, while CENTCOM's Adm. Cooper has a more direct line to Hegseth and, ultimately, Trump. Why? Because, she says, Caine keeps delivering the bad news Trump doesn't want to hear. Kwiatkowski says Trump became so frustrated with JD Vance raising concerns about the war that he asked advisers how to remove him. If true, that's more than an internal disagreement. It suggests dissent itself had become the problem. She argues the cracks go beyond personalities. According to Kwiatkowski, CENTCOM is striking many of the same targets simply because the target list has been exhausted. Her conclusion is bleak. She believes Washington has already lost much of the military and financial leverage it thinks it still has, but the war keeps grinding on because no one in the chain of command is willing, or able. If she's right, and what's happening on the battlefield isn't what's making the decisions... who is? Brandon Weichert Karen Kwiatkowski
1:05:31

🇮🇷🇺🇸 Was Trump's sudden shift on Iran driven by diplomacy? Retired Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski says it exposed a power struggle inside the Pentagon. The people with the clearest picture of the war aren't the ones shaping policy. Kwiatkowski argues Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Dan Caine has been pushed to the sidelines, while CENTCOM's Adm. Cooper has a more direct line to Hegseth and, ultimately, Trump. Why? Because, she says, Caine keeps delivering the bad news Trump doesn't want to hear. Kwiatkowski says Trump became so frustrated with JD Vance raising concerns about the war that he asked advisers how to remove him. If true, that's more than an internal disagreement. It suggests dissent itself had become the problem. She argues the cracks go beyond personalities. According to Kwiatkowski, CENTCOM is striking many of the same targets simply because the target list has been exhausted. Her conclusion is bleak. She believes Washington has already lost much of the military and financial leverage it thinks it still has, but the war keeps grinding on because no one in the chain of command is willing, or able. If she's right, and what's happening on the battlefield isn't what's making the decisions... who is? Brandon Weichert Karen Kwiatkowski

Mario Nawfal

236,806 次观看 • 12 天前

🚨🇺🇸🇮🇷 More bombing will not change the reality on the ground: Hamas is still in Gaza, Hezbollah is still in Lebanon, and the same ruling system remains in Iran. Elijah J. Magnier says Trump and Netanyahu achieved nothing except creating domestic solidarity inside Iran, and the Strait stays closed until every sanction is lifted and war compensation is paid in full. Iran has said things will never return to how they were before the war, and Trump is the one who has to pay the price for starting it. "Donald Trump did not win to impose his terms. That is his problem, not Iran's." Elijah J. Magnier 🇪🇺
7:54

🚨🇺🇸🇮🇷 More bombing will not change the reality on the ground: Hamas is still in Gaza, Hezbollah is still in Lebanon, and the same ruling system remains in Iran. Elijah J. Magnier says Trump and Netanyahu achieved nothing except creating domestic solidarity inside Iran, and the Strait stays closed until every sanction is lifted and war compensation is paid in full. Iran has said things will never return to how they were before the war, and Trump is the one who has to pay the price for starting it. "Donald Trump did not win to impose his terms. That is his problem, not Iran's." Elijah J. Magnier 🇪🇺

Mario Nawfal

90,928 次观看 • 3 个月前

Peter Schiff: Trump didn't win the Iran war; he handed Tehran the cards, then called it a strategy. Most people are asking whether America destroyed enough targets, whether Iran's nuclear programme was set back, or whether the ceasefire will hold. Schiff's question is much simpler: Who needs a deal more? And in his view, the answer isn't Iran, it's Trump. He argues Trump started a war he now has to end before the political cost catches up with him, because oil prices, the economy, and the midterms matter. And Iran knows it. That's why Schiff believes Tehran is negotiating from a position of strength, not weakness, and could actually emerge from this conflict in a better economic position than it was before the first bombs fell. Sanctions could be lifted, oil exports could surge, and a richer Iran eventually becomes a stronger Iran. Then we got onto JD Vance's comments about the MOU. Schiff thinks Vance accidentally revealed far more than he should have. If the MOU is really just about calming energy markets, rebuilding reserves, and buying political breathing room before deciding whether to strike again later, why would Iran trust any of it? And if Tehran believes another round of bombing is simply being delayed until conditions are more favourable for Washington, why would it make life easier for Trump in the meantime? While Washington is trying to convince the world it negotiated from strength, Schiff thinks the opposite happened. He believes the war exposed how dependent America still is on stable energy markets, and how much leverage that gives Iran once the shooting stops. Peter Schiff
36:34

Peter Schiff: Trump didn't win the Iran war; he handed Tehran the cards, then called it a strategy. Most people are asking whether America destroyed enough targets, whether Iran's nuclear programme was set back, or whether the ceasefire will hold. Schiff's question is much simpler: Who needs a deal more? And in his view, the answer isn't Iran, it's Trump. He argues Trump started a war he now has to end before the political cost catches up with him, because oil prices, the economy, and the midterms matter. And Iran knows it. That's why Schiff believes Tehran is negotiating from a position of strength, not weakness, and could actually emerge from this conflict in a better economic position than it was before the first bombs fell. Sanctions could be lifted, oil exports could surge, and a richer Iran eventually becomes a stronger Iran. Then we got onto JD Vance's comments about the MOU. Schiff thinks Vance accidentally revealed far more than he should have. If the MOU is really just about calming energy markets, rebuilding reserves, and buying political breathing room before deciding whether to strike again later, why would Iran trust any of it? And if Tehran believes another round of bombing is simply being delayed until conditions are more favourable for Washington, why would it make life easier for Trump in the meantime? While Washington is trying to convince the world it negotiated from strength, Schiff thinks the opposite happened. He believes the war exposed how dependent America still is on stable energy markets, and how much leverage that gives Iran once the shooting stops. Peter Schiff

Mario Nawfal

320,718 次观看 • 1 个月前

🚨🇺🇸🇮🇱 Gaza and the Iran war have changed the U.S-Israel relationship forever. Ian Bremmer says the winds are already shifting: Most Americans under 40 are more sympathetic to Palestinians than Israelis, including young Republicans. Rahm Emanuel said on Bill Maher that Israel doesn't need American money. Tucker Carlson and Megyn Kelly are framing Trump as "Israel first, not America first." A deal to reopen the Strait feels closer now than at any point since the ceasefire. But you wouldn't want to bet your house on it. ian bremmer
10:42

🚨🇺🇸🇮🇱 Gaza and the Iran war have changed the U.S-Israel relationship forever. Ian Bremmer says the winds are already shifting: Most Americans under 40 are more sympathetic to Palestinians than Israelis, including young Republicans. Rahm Emanuel said on Bill Maher that Israel doesn't need American money. Tucker Carlson and Megyn Kelly are framing Trump as "Israel first, not America first." A deal to reopen the Strait feels closer now than at any point since the ceasefire. But you wouldn't want to bet your house on it. ian bremmer

Mario Nawfal

37,546 次观看 • 2 个月前

Trump said Israel wasn't going to strike Iran. Israel struck Iran anyway. Was Trump lying, or has Netanyahu made it clear that even the President of the United States doesn't get the final say? For all the talk of Iran being weakened, it is Israel and Washington that increasingly look stupid and unable to dictate events. Tehran has emerged with greater power and leverage than before the war, and now Trump appears eager for a deal that Israel seems determined to sabotage.
2:45

Trump said Israel wasn't going to strike Iran. Israel struck Iran anyway. Was Trump lying, or has Netanyahu made it clear that even the President of the United States doesn't get the final say? For all the talk of Iran being weakened, it is Israel and Washington that increasingly look stupid and unable to dictate events. Tehran has emerged with greater power and leverage than before the war, and now Trump appears eager for a deal that Israel seems determined to sabotage.

Bushra Shaikh

16,707 次观看 • 2 个月前

The US has spent $11.3bn on 5,500 military strikes in just the first six days of the war. President Trump says Iran has been totally destroyed, but Iran is still carrying out low-cost drone and mine attacks towards its neighbours in the Persian Gulf. This small but steady warfare has effectively stopped cargo ships from crossing the vital Strait of Hormuz, which connects Iran and the countries of the gulf to the rest of the world. That means oil and gas can't move, threatening to spike global oil prices and turning the conflict into a grueling war of financial attrition. While very few Americans have died, the US military has a problem: the expensive systems it uses to stop enemy drones cost much more than the cheap drones being fired at them. Is this how Iran, despite being vastly overpowered, can find a way to win this war?
12:33

The US has spent $11.3bn on 5,500 military strikes in just the first six days of the war. President Trump says Iran has been totally destroyed, but Iran is still carrying out low-cost drone and mine attacks towards its neighbours in the Persian Gulf. This small but steady warfare has effectively stopped cargo ships from crossing the vital Strait of Hormuz, which connects Iran and the countries of the gulf to the rest of the world. That means oil and gas can't move, threatening to spike global oil prices and turning the conflict into a grueling war of financial attrition. While very few Americans have died, the US military has a problem: the expensive systems it uses to stop enemy drones cost much more than the cheap drones being fired at them. Is this how Iran, despite being vastly overpowered, can find a way to win this war?

Channel 4 News

31,153 次观看 • 5 个月前

Trump's Fmr. Lawyer Robert Barnes says he's no longer fighting Iran to achieve a strategic objective; Trump's fighting to force Tehran to kneel, and he may destroy MAGA trying. He says Trump watched the enormous crowds turn out for Khamenei's funeral and became personally agitated by it. He had convinced himself Iran's leadership was hated, that the regime was weak, and that a little more pressure would finally make the Iranian people turn on it. Instead, millions came into the streets, and Robert says Trump took it almost as a personal insult. And from there, the strategy became brutally simple: Make Iran cower. Trump tried to reopen the Strait of Hormuz's Omani shipping lane. Iran had repeatedly warned it would attack vessels using it before the dispute was resolved. Trump apparently convinced himself they wouldn't, then Iran did exactly what it said it would do. Trump became enraged and hit back, Iran kept fighting, Trump escalated again, but Iran still didn't capitulate, so Trump decided to hit harder. Robert says this has been the same failed theory of victory for months. The problem is virtually everyone around Trump who understands Iran has reportedly told him the same thing, but he ignored them. Robert says Trump can now imagine only two outcomes: Iran cowers before him, or America conquers Iran. That's why compromise keeps collapsing. But while Trump waits for Iran to break, something else is breaking instead: MAGA. Robert says the older Fox News Republican base is still with Trump, but the younger, independent, podcast-driven, anti-war wing of MAGA is increasingly getting off the train. He says many of them briefly came back after the MOU, then he restarted the war. Robert calls it a "nightmare version of Groundhog Day." The same bombing, the same promises that Iran is days from capitulation, the same excuses. And he thinks the political consequences could be catastrophic. Robert Barnes
51:05

Trump's Fmr. Lawyer Robert Barnes says he's no longer fighting Iran to achieve a strategic objective; Trump's fighting to force Tehran to kneel, and he may destroy MAGA trying. He says Trump watched the enormous crowds turn out for Khamenei's funeral and became personally agitated by it. He had convinced himself Iran's leadership was hated, that the regime was weak, and that a little more pressure would finally make the Iranian people turn on it. Instead, millions came into the streets, and Robert says Trump took it almost as a personal insult. And from there, the strategy became brutally simple: Make Iran cower. Trump tried to reopen the Strait of Hormuz's Omani shipping lane. Iran had repeatedly warned it would attack vessels using it before the dispute was resolved. Trump apparently convinced himself they wouldn't, then Iran did exactly what it said it would do. Trump became enraged and hit back, Iran kept fighting, Trump escalated again, but Iran still didn't capitulate, so Trump decided to hit harder. Robert says this has been the same failed theory of victory for months. The problem is virtually everyone around Trump who understands Iran has reportedly told him the same thing, but he ignored them. Robert says Trump can now imagine only two outcomes: Iran cowers before him, or America conquers Iran. That's why compromise keeps collapsing. But while Trump waits for Iran to break, something else is breaking instead: MAGA. Robert says the older Fox News Republican base is still with Trump, but the younger, independent, podcast-driven, anti-war wing of MAGA is increasingly getting off the train. He says many of them briefly came back after the MOU, then he restarted the war. Robert calls it a "nightmare version of Groundhog Day." The same bombing, the same promises that Iran is days from capitulation, the same excuses. And he thinks the political consequences could be catastrophic. Robert Barnes

Mario Nawfal

350,328 次观看 • 1 个月前

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump's former lawyer Robert Barnes thinks the U.S has entered the most dangerous phase of the Iran war. Not because America is getting stronger, but because it's running out of time. He believes Trump knows the window for this war is rapidly closing and that he can't sustain the conflict indefinitely. So instead, Trump's trying one final gamble: Escalate hard enough, and fast enough, that Iran finally breaks. The problem is that every new strike is hardening Iranian public opinion. A population that overwhelmingly opposed developing nuclear weapons before the conflict is, he says, becoming increasingly convinced they need one as the only reliable deterrent against another attack. That's why Robert believes Trump's strategy is fundamentally flawed. He's trying to force concessions from a country that now sees surrender as even more dangerous than war. Robert doesn't think America has the military, economic, or political capacity to keep this conflict going for months. His expectation is a short, intense escalation followed by Trump declaring victory and looking for an exit. But if Trump keeps trying to force one last breakthrough, Iran could retaliate by striking critical infrastructure across the Gulf. Trump may be escalating because he knows time is running out. But every escalation is making the outcome he wants less likely, not more. Robert Barnes
50:53

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump's former lawyer Robert Barnes thinks the U.S has entered the most dangerous phase of the Iran war. Not because America is getting stronger, but because it's running out of time. He believes Trump knows the window for this war is rapidly closing and that he can't sustain the conflict indefinitely. So instead, Trump's trying one final gamble: Escalate hard enough, and fast enough, that Iran finally breaks. The problem is that every new strike is hardening Iranian public opinion. A population that overwhelmingly opposed developing nuclear weapons before the conflict is, he says, becoming increasingly convinced they need one as the only reliable deterrent against another attack. That's why Robert believes Trump's strategy is fundamentally flawed. He's trying to force concessions from a country that now sees surrender as even more dangerous than war. Robert doesn't think America has the military, economic, or political capacity to keep this conflict going for months. His expectation is a short, intense escalation followed by Trump declaring victory and looking for an exit. But if Trump keeps trying to force one last breakthrough, Iran could retaliate by striking critical infrastructure across the Gulf. Trump may be escalating because he knows time is running out. But every escalation is making the outcome he wants less likely, not more. Robert Barnes

Mario Nawfal

294,970 次观看 • 22 天前

Trump's Fmr. Lawyer Robert Barnes says Trump thinks he's escalating to make Iran capitulate, but in reality, Tehran has learned how to play him. That is what makes this moment so dangerous. Trump appears to believe the war can still be ended quickly if he just applies a little more pressure and moves further up the escalation ladder. Then wait for Iran to surrender, but Robert says Iran is never going to give him that. For Trump, this is a war he wants to finish on favorable terms; for Iran, it's existential. That means Washington and Tehran are not operating with the same tolerance for pain, the same timeline, or the same definition of victory. And Tehran now understands the man across the table better than he understands himself. Iran has watched Trump repeatedly convince himself that another strike will finally produce the submission the previous strikes failed to achieve. Then, when the opposite happens, he becomes frustrated and escalates again. Iran appears to be exploiting that weakness with a disciplined tit-for-tat strategy rather than random escalation or total war. Each move raises the cost without immediately giving Trump the clean pretext he might want for unlimited escalation. Robert thinks Iran is studying his psychology and asking one question before every major action: Will this provoke him too early, or will it punish and humiliate him at exactly the right moment? That distinction is crucial because humiliation may be Trump’s greatest vulnerability. Robert Barnes
54:53

Trump's Fmr. Lawyer Robert Barnes says Trump thinks he's escalating to make Iran capitulate, but in reality, Tehran has learned how to play him. That is what makes this moment so dangerous. Trump appears to believe the war can still be ended quickly if he just applies a little more pressure and moves further up the escalation ladder. Then wait for Iran to surrender, but Robert says Iran is never going to give him that. For Trump, this is a war he wants to finish on favorable terms; for Iran, it's existential. That means Washington and Tehran are not operating with the same tolerance for pain, the same timeline, or the same definition of victory. And Tehran now understands the man across the table better than he understands himself. Iran has watched Trump repeatedly convince himself that another strike will finally produce the submission the previous strikes failed to achieve. Then, when the opposite happens, he becomes frustrated and escalates again. Iran appears to be exploiting that weakness with a disciplined tit-for-tat strategy rather than random escalation or total war. Each move raises the cost without immediately giving Trump the clean pretext he might want for unlimited escalation. Robert thinks Iran is studying his psychology and asking one question before every major action: Will this provoke him too early, or will it punish and humiliate him at exactly the right moment? That distinction is crucial because humiliation may be Trump’s greatest vulnerability. Robert Barnes

Mario Nawfal

374,241 次观看 • 28 天前

🇮🇷🇺🇸 Iran is turning the war into a global energy conflict, and each day that passes increasingly favors Tehran Most people still think this war will be decided by airstrikes, missiles, or whichever side destroys more military targets. Geopolitical analyst Brandon Weichert thinks that's yesterday's way of looking at it; the real battlefield is energy. Every additional day that the Strait of Hormuz remains disrupted creates costs that spread far beyond the Middle East. Higher energy prices, more expensive shipping, pressure on agriculture, manufacturing, and global supply chains. Even if the shooting stopped tomorrow, those economic effects wouldn't disappear overnight. And that's exactly why Brandon believes time increasingly favours Tehran. Iran doesn't need to defeat the U.S military; it simply needs to keep imposing economic costs that Washington, its allies and the global economy become less willing to absorb. That's the strategic shift he believes many people still haven't recognised. The U.S isn't fighting a conventional war of conquest; it's trying to restore normal trade, shipping and energy flows. Iran's objective is much simpler: Prevent that from happening. The longer disruption continues, the more pressure builds on Washington to either negotiate or dramatically escalate. Trump would probably prefer a negotiated settlement if it preserved U.S interests. Iran also wants a deal, but on terms that recognise the leverage it has created. The obstacle, in Brandon's view, is that Israel's strategic objectives are much broader than Washington's. As long as those objectives remain misaligned, every diplomatic opening becomes harder to turn into an actual agreement. That's why he thinks this conflict is becoming more dangerous, not less. Brandon Weichert
36:21

🇮🇷🇺🇸 Iran is turning the war into a global energy conflict, and each day that passes increasingly favors Tehran Most people still think this war will be decided by airstrikes, missiles, or whichever side destroys more military targets. Geopolitical analyst Brandon Weichert thinks that's yesterday's way of looking at it; the real battlefield is energy. Every additional day that the Strait of Hormuz remains disrupted creates costs that spread far beyond the Middle East. Higher energy prices, more expensive shipping, pressure on agriculture, manufacturing, and global supply chains. Even if the shooting stopped tomorrow, those economic effects wouldn't disappear overnight. And that's exactly why Brandon believes time increasingly favours Tehran. Iran doesn't need to defeat the U.S military; it simply needs to keep imposing economic costs that Washington, its allies and the global economy become less willing to absorb. That's the strategic shift he believes many people still haven't recognised. The U.S isn't fighting a conventional war of conquest; it's trying to restore normal trade, shipping and energy flows. Iran's objective is much simpler: Prevent that from happening. The longer disruption continues, the more pressure builds on Washington to either negotiate or dramatically escalate. Trump would probably prefer a negotiated settlement if it preserved U.S interests. Iran also wants a deal, but on terms that recognise the leverage it has created. The obstacle, in Brandon's view, is that Israel's strategic objectives are much broader than Washington's. As long as those objectives remain misaligned, every diplomatic opening becomes harder to turn into an actual agreement. That's why he thinks this conflict is becoming more dangerous, not less. Brandon Weichert

Mario Nawfal

273,838 次观看 • 15 天前

WATCH: DOES AMERICA HAVE A SECRET WEAPON AGAINST IRAN—ISRAEL? Dr. Eric Mandel, founder and director of the Middle East Political Information Network (Dr. Eric Mandel / MEPIN™), says Tehran believes it can outlast President Trump by exploiting war fatigue, political pressure and the approaching midterm elections. But Washington may have leverage Iran fears far more: Israel. Mandel argues the U.S. should use Israel’s military capabilities—and the threat of sustained Israeli action—to pressure Tehran rather than rush into another weak agreement. Drop a comment: Should Israel enter the war against Iran—or stay out?
14:36

WATCH: DOES AMERICA HAVE A SECRET WEAPON AGAINST IRAN—ISRAEL? Dr. Eric Mandel, founder and director of the Middle East Political Information Network (Dr. Eric Mandel / MEPIN™), says Tehran believes it can outlast President Trump by exploiting war fatigue, political pressure and the approaching midterm elections. But Washington may have leverage Iran fears far more: Israel. Mandel argues the U.S. should use Israel’s military capabilities—and the threat of sustained Israeli action—to pressure Tehran rather than rush into another weak agreement. Drop a comment: Should Israel enter the war against Iran—or stay out?

Mossad Commentary

81,668 次观看 • 27 天前