Paul Craig Roberts: Iran vs USA: US Forces FORCED to Retreat as Iranian Retaliation Turns the Tables

Donald Trump's public statements on the Iran conflict are contradictory, claiming strong US positioning while simultaneously pursuing negotiations and facing military vulnerabilities. This incoherence is seen as a result of conflicting pressures: the desire to appear victorious and the influence of the Israel lobby, which demands continued US engagement, despite the military realities.

Trump's Truth Social posts claiming a 'perfectly executed' six-week war and no pressure to end it, contrasted with the host's observation of his contradictory actions. Major General Randy Manor's critique of the 'lack of clarity of the military and political objectives'.

US naval assets, including aircraft carriers and destroyers, are highly exposed to Iranian missile capabilities in the Persian Gulf. Military experts indicate that Iran could easily shut down the Strait of Hormuz with mines, and any attempt to reopen it or occupy Iranian territory would require an unfeasible deployment of hundreds of thousands of US troops.

Major General Randy Manor states, 'from anywhere in Iran, they can hit ships transiting that area... put a handful of mines... would continue to shut down the straits. Anything to open that effort would require hundreds of thousands of US military to occupy large portions of Iran, which quite bluntly is not possible.'

The fundamental driver of conflicts in the Middle East, including the current US-Iran tensions, is identified as Israel's 'Greater Israel' expansionist agenda. This agenda, openly discussed and mapped by Israeli prime ministers, seeks to expand Israeli territory significantly, necessitating the destabilization and control of neighboring states.

Roberts states, 'If there was no Zionist agenda of great Israel, there would there would have been none of the wars in the 21st century in the Middle East and this current attack on Iran wouldn't be ongoing.' He also mentions Israeli prime ministers holding up maps of 'Greater Israel'.

Iran is criticized for its reactive military and diplomatic strategy, consistently responding to US/Israeli initiatives rather than setting its own agenda. By engaging in 'tit-for-tat' responses and negotiations that ignore the core 'Greater Israel' issue, Iran misses opportunities to leverage its military advantage and expose the true nature of the conflict to a global audience.

Roberts questions, 'Why does Iran continue with the ceasefire?' and 'What is their plan? Their plan seems to be, well, uh, we'll defend ourselves when we're attacked. Well, this this is not successful.' He adds, 'Iran has been positioned as the threat. Well, why did they allow that? They should have positioned Israel as the threat. Greater Israel.'

The continuation and escalation of the US-Iran conflict would have severe worldwide economic repercussions. Disruptions to global oil supplies and fertilizer production would trigger widespread inflation, economic slowdowns, rising unemployment, and potential global starvation, making the cost of the conflict unbearable for the international community.

Roberts warns, 'if you substantially curtail uh the world oil supply the world uh supply of fertilizers then you cause world inflation you cause world starvation... All economies slow down. Unemployment rises. It becomes a worldwide thing.'