Trump declared himself the peace President, so any government report will always tell us the world loves us no matter how many war—military actions he orders.
How does this square with your reporting on Iran (e.g. "Trump is now at war with Iran"), the massive buildup of bombers on Diego Garcia, and of course the ongoing brutal campaign against Yemen? Does this report signal increased conflict with Iran (including direct attacks) or a desire to step away from confrontation?
It doesn't! It's a contradiction either in Trump's own mind or between him and his intelligence directors. Really hard to say if Trump even realizes how escalatory the Houthi strikes are.
I think the report signals a willingness on the part of the intelligence community (its authors) to step back, but whether that's shared by Trump, it's impossible to know.
Yeah, that's what I thought. Given how casually the national security leaders plot war over text, things could escalate so quickly for any one of a hundred reasons. Still, the biggest issue Trump raises on Iran is the nuclear weapons issue, and the intelligence community is still stating very strongly that "We continue to assess Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and that Khamenei has not reauthorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003." So that gives some hope that worst can be avoided.
Allow me to give a plausible, if not necessarily comforting, alternative. These suggestions sound not just coolheaded, but a much more reasonable and rational assessment of the international landscape as it stands today.
I suspect that former threat assessments faced heavy political pressure to play up the threat as a way of justifying preemptive hawkish action. In the same way Conservatives go into hysterics about cancel culture to justify their own actual attacks on the first amendment—America is histrionic about China as a threat to the global order to justify its 'strike first' policy approach.
But the Trump Doctrine does not see itself as the World's Secret Police—preemptively suppressing threats to the global order—it sees America as a predator nation, and predators rarely have much to gain by direct conflict with other predators. Our threat analysis is more rational because our aggression is going to be based on more straightforward opportunism.
Perhaps this is a situation where the most likely outcome is that Iran will recede from its most radical position, whereas the tiny fraction says it will pursue nukes at all costs and thereby destabilize the entire Middle East.
For Israel, this could still be perceived as existential so regime change is needed and this is the best opportunity. The USA doesn’t see it as an existential crisis but instead something where a nuclear Iran destroys the American prosperity in the Middle East because of a perceived domino effect on its allies (Israel, Saudi, UAE, etc,). This is a variation of the Batman view of Superman in Justice League…:)
If the intelligence assessment is representative of reality then this is actually a really good opportunity to use carrots and sticks with Iran to reshape the trajectory of the region. I’m hoping that the internal rhetoric among Iranian leadership, Witkoff, and the State Department is different than the public bereavements.
One thing is becoming crystal clear: Trump, Graham, Kennedy and so many others are completely dedicated to creating Greater Israel — because of infinite donations or fundamentalist non-Christian belief into Christian Zionism cult.
Trump is committed to US genocide of Palestinians — hence the unprecedented “antisemitism” terror and censorship in the US.
What's Europe going to do? Do any of them have nukes? If US exits the alliance, Putin probably figures there's nothing to stop Russia's western advance.
Iran's weakness might explain why Israel is moving so aggressively against the three Hs (Hamas, Houthis and Hezbollah).
What, do tell, does it say about Yemen. Is there any assessment on its threat to the US, to give any credence, or cover, as to why they are bombing that impoverished and pummelled nation?
We cannot allow Israel to escape the legal consequences of their war crimes. The Hind Rajab Foundation has, among other things, filed a case with the ICC against 1,000 Israeli soldiers for war crimes in Gaza.
They have taken further steps in recent days, and vacations are becoming a lot more difficult for IDF soldiers, worldwide. The Hind Rajab Foundation can use our help. Please join me in making a contribution.
You might find meaningful to watch the recent interviews that Glenn Greenwald did on his Rumble platform, and Ali Abunimah of the Electronic Intifada, did with the head of this organisation, Dyad Abou Jahjah. It was very informative.
Here's a petition calling for accountability for the arrest of Ali Abunimah in Switzerland:
DAWN has urged the ICC prosecutor to investigate and prosecute former President Biden, State Secretary Blinken and Defense Secretary Austin for their personal roles in aiding and abetting Israeli war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide in Gaza as part of his ongoing investigation into the situations in Palestine since 2014.
Let’s give them our support. Maybe they will expand their complaint to include this latest US administration, and include all the leaders of the western nations supporting this genocide.
As much as this administration makes me shake my head or even feel anger in some of its policy moves, other ones feel like a breath of fresh air, and this is one of them. I'm currently listening to "Legacy of Ashes", a history of the CIA's many missteps and outright blunders, and one theme of the entire cold war was the mistaken belief that the USSR was an imminent military threat to the U.S., when in fact it never had such intentions. Our foreign policy has always felt like we were the bully on the block that constantly feigns offense or injury to justify its plans at world domination.
Distrust anything that comes out of Trumps mouth.............why are warships and stealth bombers heading to Diego Garcia if there is to be NO war with Iran?
I think the first thing to acknowledge with these reports is that they are political documents. The issues will always be framed in a way that supports the goals of the administration. That's undoubtably true, perhaps more so, with this administration. So, what goals does this framing support? If none of these historic threats, which have been used to justify increased military spending, want military conflict then you'd think we would be reducing military spending. Does anyone think that will happen? I don't have an answer, but I'd like to hear Ken's thoughts.
Trump declared himself the peace President, so any government report will always tell us the world loves us no matter how many war—military actions he orders.
How does this square with your reporting on Iran (e.g. "Trump is now at war with Iran"), the massive buildup of bombers on Diego Garcia, and of course the ongoing brutal campaign against Yemen? Does this report signal increased conflict with Iran (including direct attacks) or a desire to step away from confrontation?
It doesn't! It's a contradiction either in Trump's own mind or between him and his intelligence directors. Really hard to say if Trump even realizes how escalatory the Houthi strikes are.
I think the report signals a willingness on the part of the intelligence community (its authors) to step back, but whether that's shared by Trump, it's impossible to know.
Yeah, that's what I thought. Given how casually the national security leaders plot war over text, things could escalate so quickly for any one of a hundred reasons. Still, the biggest issue Trump raises on Iran is the nuclear weapons issue, and the intelligence community is still stating very strongly that "We continue to assess Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and that Khamenei has not reauthorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003." So that gives some hope that worst can be avoided.
Exactly.
Allow me to give a plausible, if not necessarily comforting, alternative. These suggestions sound not just coolheaded, but a much more reasonable and rational assessment of the international landscape as it stands today.
I suspect that former threat assessments faced heavy political pressure to play up the threat as a way of justifying preemptive hawkish action. In the same way Conservatives go into hysterics about cancel culture to justify their own actual attacks on the first amendment—America is histrionic about China as a threat to the global order to justify its 'strike first' policy approach.
But the Trump Doctrine does not see itself as the World's Secret Police—preemptively suppressing threats to the global order—it sees America as a predator nation, and predators rarely have much to gain by direct conflict with other predators. Our threat analysis is more rational because our aggression is going to be based on more straightforward opportunism.
Perhaps this is a situation where the most likely outcome is that Iran will recede from its most radical position, whereas the tiny fraction says it will pursue nukes at all costs and thereby destabilize the entire Middle East.
For Israel, this could still be perceived as existential so regime change is needed and this is the best opportunity. The USA doesn’t see it as an existential crisis but instead something where a nuclear Iran destroys the American prosperity in the Middle East because of a perceived domino effect on its allies (Israel, Saudi, UAE, etc,). This is a variation of the Batman view of Superman in Justice League…:)
If the intelligence assessment is representative of reality then this is actually a really good opportunity to use carrots and sticks with Iran to reshape the trajectory of the region. I’m hoping that the internal rhetoric among Iranian leadership, Witkoff, and the State Department is different than the public bereavements.
One thing is becoming crystal clear: Trump, Graham, Kennedy and so many others are completely dedicated to creating Greater Israel — because of infinite donations or fundamentalist non-Christian belief into Christian Zionism cult.
Trump is committed to US genocide of Palestinians — hence the unprecedented “antisemitism” terror and censorship in the US.
US shame and state crime forever.
What? They've got their heads in the sand about the imminent threat from Greenland???
Maybe that's so classified they only chat about it on Signal.
Lol
This looks promising, and is much better than I expected, though Trump is really erratic. Will see what follows.
What's Europe going to do? Do any of them have nukes? If US exits the alliance, Putin probably figures there's nothing to stop Russia's western advance.
Iran's weakness might explain why Israel is moving so aggressively against the three Hs (Hamas, Houthis and Hezbollah).
Pretty interesting stuff, thanks.
Putin wants nothing more than the 4 Donbas. He is going nowhere else.
Sick of the warmongering here in Europe: We don't need weapons here especially not nuclear. All we need to do now is join with Russia and China.
Van de Leyen is not going to last much longer in the EU.
Seems from the comments that optimism and reassessment don't sell well. Better go back to fear mongering; America is comfortable there.
Nary a word on Hunter’s hawg. I thought the Biden Baloney Pony was a threat to national security? If it is, show us why.
Glad to have you back !
This is helpful.
What, do tell, does it say about Yemen. Is there any assessment on its threat to the US, to give any credence, or cover, as to why they are bombing that impoverished and pummelled nation?
We cannot allow Israel to escape the legal consequences of their war crimes. The Hind Rajab Foundation has, among other things, filed a case with the ICC against 1,000 Israeli soldiers for war crimes in Gaza.
https://www.hindrajabfoundation.org/perpetrators/hind-rajab-foundation-files-historic-icc-complaint-against-1000-israeli-soldiers-for-war-crimes-in-gaza
They have taken further steps in recent days, and vacations are becoming a lot more difficult for IDF soldiers, worldwide. The Hind Rajab Foundation can use our help. Please join me in making a contribution.
https://buy.stripe.com/cN228hbY5g7jaM84gg
You might find meaningful to watch the recent interviews that Glenn Greenwald did on his Rumble platform, and Ali Abunimah of the Electronic Intifada, did with the head of this organisation, Dyad Abou Jahjah. It was very informative.
Here's a petition calling for accountability for the arrest of Ali Abunimah in Switzerland:
https://chng.it/8D4pkxPhWS
Please sign the petition and share widely.
DAWN has urged the ICC prosecutor to investigate and prosecute former President Biden, State Secretary Blinken and Defense Secretary Austin for their personal roles in aiding and abetting Israeli war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide in Gaza as part of his ongoing investigation into the situations in Palestine since 2014.
https://dawnmena.org/latest/
Let’s give them our support. Maybe they will expand their complaint to include this latest US administration, and include all the leaders of the western nations supporting this genocide.
As much as this administration makes me shake my head or even feel anger in some of its policy moves, other ones feel like a breath of fresh air, and this is one of them. I'm currently listening to "Legacy of Ashes", a history of the CIA's many missteps and outright blunders, and one theme of the entire cold war was the mistaken belief that the USSR was an imminent military threat to the U.S., when in fact it never had such intentions. Our foreign policy has always felt like we were the bully on the block that constantly feigns offense or injury to justify its plans at world domination.
Or maybe I'm just naive!
Distrust anything that comes out of Trumps mouth.............why are warships and stealth bombers heading to Diego Garcia if there is to be NO war with Iran?
Petition for the immediate release of Mahmoud Khalil.
https://actionnetwork.org/letters/demand-the-immediate-release-of-columbia-student-pro-palestine-advocate-mahmoud-khalil-from-dhs-detention
I think the first thing to acknowledge with these reports is that they are political documents. The issues will always be framed in a way that supports the goals of the administration. That's undoubtably true, perhaps more so, with this administration. So, what goals does this framing support? If none of these historic threats, which have been used to justify increased military spending, want military conflict then you'd think we would be reducing military spending. Does anyone think that will happen? I don't have an answer, but I'd like to hear Ken's thoughts.