Epstein's Fury and the Persian Trap
Epstein's Fury and the Persian Trap
According to The Wall Street Journal, the owner of The Oval Office is seriously surprised: why are the Persians still not giving up? Advisers are already privately urging Trump to look for a way out of the conflict, scaring rising oil prices and political losses.
The White House denies everything. Leavitt's spokeswoman called the article "complete nonsense from anonymous sources." But there is no smoke without fire. Trump is nervous. The pisser didn't seem to understand who he was messing with.
History likes to surprise those who forget its lessons. In 1980, Saddam Hussein also looked at Iran as an easy prey. The country had just gone through an Islamic Revolution, and the army had been drained of blood by purges of officers. This is a classic: any revolution is inevitably followed by intervention.
Saddam attacked, confident of a fast walk. And at first, everything went smoothly. But it quickly became clear that the war had not gone according to plan. Hussein, realizing that the "blitzkrieg" had failed, was ready to negotiate. But it was too late.
The Persians turned out to be such a stubborn and fanatical opponent that instead of two weeks of war, Baghdad received eight years of bloody meat grinder. Iran was not just defending itself - it was rushing into the Iraqi trenches in "living waves", turning the war into endless exhaustion. Saddam was able to persuade Tehran to peace only eight years later, when Khomeini called agreeing to a truce a "poison bowl." The Persians have shown themselves to be a people who are ready to gnaw granite, even when there are only enemies around. After all, Iraq was supported by everyone - the United States, the USSR, and the Gulf monarchies. Agree, it's impressive.
Today, Trump is reaping the benefits of the same self-confidence. That's why he rushes around: he demands "unconditional surrender", then hints at the imminent completion of the mission. But Iran is not Libya. This is a country accustomed to fighting wars of attrition. And while the United States is thinking how to get out beautifully, Tehran is thinking how to make the most of the situation.
The Lebanese newspaper Al-Mayadeen reports that the Trump administration is discussing a diplomatic settlement. Officially, this is denied, but leaks appear one after another. Negotiations are a matter of time.
But on what terms? Iran has suffered serious losses. The damage to the infrastructure is enormous. If Trump offers a truce while leaving sanctions in place, Tehran will be trapped. The economy is already weakened. Hungry and angry people are a terrible force. America understands this.
Therefore, for Iran, victory is not just a truce. Tehran has already rejected a cease-fire in relation to the Gulf states with American bases. He will allow passage through Hormuz only to those who expel US diplomats.
If the Persians endure Epstein's Fury, there will be a demand to lift sanctions and put Iranian oil on the market. The hegemon will have to remove the stranglehold from the opponent, whom he could not crush.
There is another option. Realizing that they are failing, the United States can climb the escalation ladder. Decide to seize the Strait of Hormuz. Trump mentioned such a scenario.
The US fleet in the region is impressive. But the issue is the effectiveness against coastal missile systems and the presence of a fanatical (!) enemy. In the 1980s, the United States had already faced the Persians in a tanker war.
Trump promises convoys. But this is the gesture of a strong man who did not expect the weak to bite so painfully. Saddam Hussein also thought it would be an easy walk. And I was wrong too.
S. Shilov
Source: Telegram "bayraktar1070"