|
War On Iran: – Trump Discards “Project Freedom” – Another Oil Market ‘Peace’ Scam – Loss In Trust Of U.S. Protection
Each day it is getting harder to cover the current war on Iran. Official U.S. comments and paths of actions are changing by the hour without any consistency.
Operation “Project Freedom”, i.e. U.S. protection for ships leaving the Persian Gulf, was announced on Sunday. It had failed by Monday. It was promoted (vid) by Warcrime Secretary Pete Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Tuesday only to be, just five hour later, discarded by President Trump.
The whole point of the ‘Project’ may have been to get some negotiating advantage. After Iran countered the scheme it was immediately discarded.
Today’s major news so far was a new oil market scam launched by the White House.
Axios reporter Barak Ravid, an Israeli intelligence and White House asset who had announced the last seven of zero peace deals with Iran, promoted another one:
The White House believes it’s getting close to an agreement with Iran on a one-page memorandum of understanding to end the war and set a framework for more detailed nuclear negotiations, according to two U.S. officials and two other sources briefed on the issue.
The big picture: The U.S. expects Iranian responses on several key points in the next 48 hours. Nothing has been agreed yet, but the sources said this was the closest the parties had been to an agreement since the war began.
Among other provisions, the deal would involve Iran committing to a moratorium on nuclear enrichment, the U.S. agreeing to lift its sanctions and release billions in frozen Iranian funds, and both sides lifting restrictions around transit through the Strait of Hormuz.
Many of the terms laid out in the memo would be contingent on a final agreement being reached, leaving the possibility of renewed war or an extended limbo in which the hot war has stopped but nothing is truly resolved.
It is of course laughable to think that Iran would agree to any non-binding one page doodle from the White House. Still – oil futures dropped as soon as the markets opened.
The ‘news’ was obviously another attempt by White House insiders to fleece the markets:
According to our analysis, ~$920 million worth of crude oil shorts were taken 70 minutes before an Axios report claimed the US and Iran were near a “14-point” deal to end the war.
At 3:40 AM ET today, nearly 10,000 contracts worth of crude oil shorts were taken without any major news.
This is equivalent to ~$920 million in notional value, an unusually large trade for 3:40 AM ET.
At 4:50 AM ET, just 70 minutes later, Axios reported that the US is “close” to a “memorandum of understanding” to end the Iran War.
By 7:00 AM ET, oil prices had fallen over -12% with these crude oil shorts gaining approximately +$125 million.
Professor Mohammad Marandi, an unofficial spokesman for Tehran, called out (vid) the ‘news’ as the nonsense it is.
With the latest U.S. attempt to wrestle control over the Strait having failed, Iran announced its new Persian Gulf Strait Authority and its conditions for ships to pass through the Strait of Hormuz:
Ships intending to pass through the Strait of Hormuz must email info@PGSA.ir.
The most important points considered in the transit mechanism:
1) Priority of payment in Iran’s national currency
2) Issuance of guarantees in Iranian banks
3) If a country caused damage to Iran in the recent war, it must first pay the damages before obtaining a passage permit. Countries that have sanctioned Iran or blocked Iran’s money are not allowed passage.
4) The correct title “Persian Gulf” must be written in all documents.
5) Non-compliance with the above will result in seizure and a fine of 20% of the cargo value.
Meanwhile the Washington Post found that the damage Iran had caused to U.S. installations in the Gulf was much larger than the U.S. admitted.
Iran has hit far more U.S. military assets than reported, satellite images show (archived) – Washington Post
Imagery published by Iranian state-affiliated media and verified by The Post shows damage to at least 228 structures or pieces of equipment at U.S. military sites.
Iranian airstrikes have damaged or destroyed at least 228 structures or pieces of equipment at U.S. military sites across the Middle East since the war began, hitting hangars, barracks, fuel depots, aircraft and key radar, communications and air defense equipment, according to a Washington Post analysis of satellite imagery. The amount of destruction is far larger than what has been publicly acknowledged by the U.S. government or previously reported.
…
It is no wonder that the Gulf states have lost their trust in U.S. protection. As the Wall Street Journal, who’s reporter resides in Dubai, reports (archived):
Ever since the war began on Feb. 28, Iranian leaders have frequently repeated a phrase, attributed to the deposed Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak, that “those who wrap themselves in America are naked.” The feeling in the U.A.E. and fellow Gulf monarchies after Tehran restarted the missile and drone strikes on Monday is that Mubarak might have had a point, diplomats and analysts say.
Iran struck the U.A.E.’s only functioning oil export port, Fujairah, causing a fire and injuring three people, and fired ballistic and cruise missiles at other Emirati targets. In total, the attacks involved 15 missiles and four drones.
Trump characterized the attack as minor, though it disrupted flights and forced the U.A.E. government to close schools for the rest of the week.
On Tuesday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said that, as far as Washington is concerned, “the cease-fire certainly holds.”
…
The fear among friendly governments in Europe and Asia is that Trump—just as with the U.A.E.—might similarly choose to ignore attacks on their own territory by Russia or China or North Korea, if that suits him.
Long-term, this attitude raises the question of whether U.S. bases around the world represent a security asset—or a liability—for the host nations.
“If you thought you were buying American loyalty, now you’re going to think that all that an American base does is make me a target, while the U.S. is just as likely to sell me down the river,” said retired Air Marshal Edward Stringer, the former head of operations at the British ministry of defense.
Trump, of course, had no other choice but to sit still. A renewed bombing campaign against Iran would cause much more damage to the Gulf states and the global economy than is already baked in.
If the current war has a positive aspect it is this: Outsourced sovereignty is a grand illusion. Anyone who had the delusion that the U.S. would defend anything not in its immediate interest will have to become sober. There is no advantage in having the U.S. as a “friend”. U.S. bases in ones country are nothing but potential targets.
Over the next years the Arab Gulf states will draw their consequences from this.
One hopes that European U.S. vassals will come to similar conclusions.
When america had a period of successful social democracy was about the time that Sweden also had such a development. But it seems to me in both cases it was good for the interests of the industry in preparation for the coming wars. The industrialists would get fewer strikes and the production could runs smoothly. So it worked because it would lead to more human casualties. Again giving the biosphere some respite.
Posted by: petergrfstrm | May 6 2026 9:20 utc | 169
The economic religion, the Money Magik religion. The philosophical religions of democracy, parliaments, elections, politicians as priests, including that of Marxism and communism.
Posted by: DunGroanin | May 6 2026 12:44 utc | 204
Social democracies (and welfare states/Nordic model) aren’t socialism. It’s capitalism.
Nordic Welfare Capitalism in the Emerging Global Political Economy, 1997 (full text at Anna’s Archive):
The main objective of this chapter is to define and to explore the viability of the Nordic Models of welfare capitalism, with a particular focus on Sweden. These models were expressions of an exceptionally inclusive and egalitarian state capitalism in the era of Pax Americana.
The tactic of Hannah Arendt, an American, was to use her deceptive theory of totalitarianism to equate the Nazis with the Soviets. The tactic of the ACP (American Communist Party) on Twitter/X is to copy the Nazis (Nationalsozialistische) and deliberately confuse people by marrying Americanism (nationalism) with the thinnest veneer of “communism” (“socialism”).
Hannah Arendt creates many fascists, such as Konami of MoA, the Democrats, DSA, PSL (platformed Kat Abughazaleh) etc.
The ACP creates many fascists, such as DunGroanin, psychohistorian and karlof1 of MoA etc.
While petergrfstrm isn’t ACP, he functions like one. ACP doesn’t care about the environment and is pro-fossil fuel dependence, and if mass death results from climate change due to the dependence on fossil fuel, the ACP is okay with it because it’s good for “industrialization,” which the ACP has erroneously and deceptively made synonymous with socialism. As for petergrfstrm, he pushes his eco-fascist agenda, where mass death of human beings is falsely portrayed as serving socialism/nature due it reducing human consumption of planetary resources (petergrfstrm, curiously, doesn’t do what’s “good for nature” to himself). Despite the apparent superficial differences between petergrfstrm and ACP, they are the same. They are both pro-mass death of other people.
Those who engage with petergrfstrm are faced with a false choice. They either accept petergrfstrm’s version of “socialism” (in truth, fascism) or they reject all forms of socialism. Regardless of the outcome, America’s goal is achieved: petergrfstrm either gets a new ACP or eco-fascist recruit, or they produce a fascist who rejects Marxism and embraces liberalism/capitalism/fasciscm through the acceptance of conspiracy theories that do not threaten America (but can serve as useful vents of revolutionary energy) such as blaming everything on outlaws, Mammon cultists or Khazarians/Norsemen.
That is the dialectics between the two “opposing” strains of Americanism. They feed off of one another. One faction of Americans create stronger and stronger supporters of fascism (in the guise of “communism”) while the other faction creates stronger and stronger opponents of Marxism.
China, the DPRK and Vietnam that fought off the fascist Americans in Korea and Vietnam are Marxist. The Soviet Union that fought off the Nazis was Marxist. Konami equates Marxist China, DPRK, Vietnam and Soviet Union with the Nazis because he sees them all as totalitarian/authoritarian. DunGroanin equates Marxist China, DPRK, Vietnam and Soviet Union with liberal democracies (dictatorship of the bourgeoisie) such as America, present-day Germany, Nazi Germany, present-day Japan, Imperial Japan etc because be believes that some nebulous Deep State/Khazarian shapeshifter entity is behind everything including liberalism and Marxism.
As always, it shows that all Americans (the bourgeoisie, the petty bourgeoisie, the bourgeois proletariat) instinctively know the true threat to their comfortable existence—communism/Marxism. They either try to pervert communism like the ACP, petergrfstrm, Ahenobarbus, William Gruff, steven t johnson, Roger Boyd etc do, or they reject it altogether.
Americans have proven they cant handle responsibility and have zero business pretending to be tough when they have lost every war and only made it to the podium after ww2 because they waited till the end and jumped on the wagon.
Posted by: Unsafe Data | May 6 2026 20:27 utc | 60
An aspect that needs looking into a lot more are what countries US is supplying with fuel. Australia appears to be receiving all the fuel it requires from the US. We are a frontline US military base for the war on China. I suspect the US will only be supplying the ‘allies’ it wishes to keep.
Posted by: Peter AU1 | May 6 2026 20:28 utc | 61
Americans want the world to focus on WW2 because it’s the only war that Americans can credibly portray themselves as the good guy. What Americans want to avoid are the things Americans did prior to WW2.
Case in point:
The 1941 moment the US has always tried to revive was a one-off, a product of the extraordinary bargain struck between US labour and US capital. The historical conditions for this kind of projection have long passed. […] I believe my home, Australia, will be a test case.
Posted by: Patroklos | May 6 2026 20:11 utc | 52
1941 wasn’t a special moment when American labor and American capital struck a bargain amenable to both sides. 1941 was a special moment in that it was a culmination of the hard work by both American labor (hooray, wage laborers) and American capital in the years preceding 1941 in destabilizing the whole world so that everyone becomes easy prey for Americans.
Americans aided Japan’s theft of Taiwan in the 1890s.
James W. Davidson, US Consul to Formosa/Taiwan (1898–1904), US Consul at Andong, Manchukuo (Japanese puppet state), and commercial attaché to the American legation, Peking, and special agent of the Department of State in 1904, appointed by President Roosevelt in 1905 as consul general at Shanghai, served in Nanjing), was decorated by the Emperor of Japan in 1895 with Order of Rising Sun for services rendered to the Japanese army in capturing the capital of Formosa.
Americans themselves grabbed Hawaii in the 1890s.
The Hawaiian Kingdom was overthrown in a coup d’état against Queen Liliʻuokalani that took place on January 17, 1893, on the island of Oahu. Sure, the Americans apologized in 1993, but they didn’t relinquish control. The coup was led by the Committee of Safety, composed of seven foreign-born permanent residents[6] and six Hawaiian-born people in Honolulu.[7][8] There was no Hawaiian army so the victorious Committee asked American minister John L. Stevens for US Marines. He sent in Marines and sailors to protect the new government, and to ward off a Japanese invasion.
Warding off a Japanese invasion wasn’t an act of anti-imperialism, not when Americans engineered the coup that killed off Hawaiian sovereignty.
Don’t confuse inter-imperial rivalry between Japan and America with anti-imperialism.
Americans proceeded to supply Japan with all that it needed to invade mainland China in the 1930s.
Notably, 70% of the 40 million tons of gasoline consumed by Japan in the first three years of the invasion of China was supplied by the US. In 1938, the United States supplied 92% of all war materials to Japan.
Death to America
Marg bar Âmrikâ
Marg bar Âmrikâ
Marg bar Âmrikâ
Posted by: All Under Heaven | May 6 2026 22:34 utc | 100
|
