The Hormuz Trap: How Iran is Quietly Emptying the US Military Arsenal (PART I)

Hello everybody and welcome to Geopolitical Trends, where truth matters. Excited to be with you as always and hope you had a, a relaxing and enjoyable weekend. Uh, every time now an Iranian drone targets any commercial tankers intercepted in the Strait of Hormuz, the US finds itself firing a missile costing up to $4 $1 million, and the drone ain't destroyed after all. So it cost less than $20,000, those drones that Iran is, is, is deploying. This isn't a maritime standoff as the US, uh, claims. It is a calculated, in my opinion, asymmetrical trap designed to bleed the American military arsenal dry, while at the same time routing the massive financial bill straight to the economies of the European Union and of course the American consumers. So as geopolitical analyst, I am tracking a catastrophic cost now imbalance that is quietly breaking traditional US military doctrine. And this is why today I decided to look at the hard data behind this, in those numbers, and see and tell you exactly who is really losing this war of attrition. So just off the bat, I am gonna divide this live stream into two parts because it's so long. I spent the weekend doing, uh, getting the information for you and constructing the analysis that I'm gonna be sharing with you. So I will not be able to do it in one hour. So I decided to split it into two parts. So I will do the first part today, uh, uh, that's where we're going to be addressing, uh, what's going on with the Pentagon and so forth, and the war that is now being, uh, erupted again between the US and Iran. And tomorrow I will do the second part of this particular analysis. So, so this is now when you're saying— and to those who had a chance to look at my clip, my short clip that I did about the escalation that we shoveled now the cards geopolitically, economically, and militarily after the IRGC, or Iran for that matter, announced the closure of the Strait of Hormuz and the prevention of ships from passing through till further notice. We don't know when that time is. So, and that is exactly— and, and by the way, Iran also threatened that it will retaliate if the US attacks And as a matter of fact, it has been an attack in Kuwait this morning, and I'm going to show you the clips and show you everything else. And this is exactly where now you're going to have to realize that no ship will be allowed to pass through, except that this morning two ships have passed, and I'm yet to get the information as to who the ships belong to and why did Iran allow them. I do not know that info yet. Because I just found out literally an hour and a half before I, uh, I came on the air here. So, so what I'm going to do in this analysis here, I'm going to ask, uh, 2 or 3 questions and end it right there. Then tomorrow we'll follow up with this. So the first question we're going to ask about the Strait of Hormuz: is this now a trap that Iran set to deplete the American arsenal and shipping bill for Europe? It's a legitimate question to ask. And we all know that geography, the importance of it, especially when it comes down to Iran, they understand the importance of the Strait of Hormuz and how that's gonna now bleed the American— it's already been bleeding the American dry. So yes, if we are to answer that question, the answer is yes, the Strait of Hormuz has functionally evolved into now an asymmetric trap. And that is for one purpose and one purpose only. It is designed to deplete the American military arsenal, while at the, the same time Iran strategy is thinking in terms of shifting the long-term financial burden directly to the American citizens and the Europeans. And I'll tell you later on, uh, I think this point I'll talk about it tomorrow regarding the Europeans, why that is so. So by utilizing low-cost drones and the ammo and so forth, and shore-to-ship missiles. What is Iran's purpose for all this? The purpose is that Iran exploits a profound cost imbalance against the United States. And that is why, while the Pentagon is sort of expending millions of dollars— of course, our tax dollars that is spent on that— millions of dollars per interceptor missile to secure the transit lines, or lanes rather. And that is why the US said, oh, the Strait of Hormuz is now closed. And now the US is saying to the other companies who wants to pass through, they're saying, oh no, no, no, no, no, we do— we were going to provide you with security and all that stuff. No, no, what we're saying is just giving a lip service to those countries. So, because where is the reality? Is the reality is that Iran can sustain a high-frequency, low-cost campaign of disruption indefinitely. And that's in itself— this decision by Iran to do so has now forced the US Central Command to burn through sort of, uh, precious logistics and advance ammunition stockpile to counter threats that cost Iran merely a fraction to produce. I mean, literally, think about it— a 10,000 or 20,000 drone versus a $4 million missile. I mean, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to see how genius this approach by the Iranian was. And simultaneously, you have the geopolitical layout now ensures that When you look at this, you look at this reality, this geopolitical reality now that is sort of forcing itself on the stage, will ensure that the European economies and the American citizens bear the direct shipping bill for this prolonged situation. This is not going to be over next week or next month because you have one reason, and that reason is that the Europeans rely heavily on Middle Eastern crude or West Asia crude. That is one of the reasons for that. And this is why, because you have now what we call the almost a double invoice, the resulting of this system. You have the surge in private maritime insurance premiums, emergencies, you have the carrier surcharges, and you have Tehran's newly asserted transit fee via the Persian Gulf Strait Authority, the PGS. And this hits the European markets hardest because the, uh, this econ— this economic pain has already began fracturing Western unity. Think about it. So think about it, because you have some European leaders right now consider paying localized navigational services fee to stabilize inflation and bypass the conflict. I will say to them, good luck with that. So ultimately, where you're going to see this moving forward, because now gloves are off and there's MOU that signed in Versailles or Islamabad— when I say Versailles, I'm also referring to Islamabad. What I found interesting is that Western media do not even want to mention Islamabad. The one he mentioned in Versailles. So for me, because I am preparing an analysis for you that's going to be in a recorded video towards the weekend, uh, and I'm going to mention Versailles forward slash Islamabad. So this way, because you give credit where credit is due. Suffice it to say that when you think about this, this, uh, this strategic trap, because that's the only way I can describe it, so Now it allows Iran to use its geographical leverage to wage a war of financial and material exhaustion without provoking a conventional ground invasion. And with that comes the question: will the US go crazy enough to send the, uh, ground troops? We all know what the outcome is going to be. And that in itself, with this Iran's strategy is by forcing Washington to absorb unsustainable defense cost. And it's becoming now more and more people here inside the US are talking. On the other hand, you do this on one end and you pass the bill also to the Europeans, so you hit two birds with one. So Tehran, in my opinion, is successfully leveraging the choke point, which is the Strait of Hormuz, to its benefit, to its advantage. That's exactly what is going. So to challenge now Western deterrence and rewrite the rules of global maritime trade, something we couldn't control, because you all remember what Donald Trump said, oh, we're gonna control Strait of Hormuz, or we're gonna devastate Iranian forces, or we're gonna do this, we're gonna obliterate this and that. All that blustering and bravado served no one and served nothing, because at the end of the day, this choke point is controlled by Iran. Simple as that. No matter what. And I'm going to be sharing with you what the US is doing with the, uh, sort of now the deployment of certain assets and so forth as I move forward. And this leads me to the second question, and the second question is Is the United States right now forced to think, or rethink rather, its military doctrine? Because when you realize you're deploying your aircraft carriers, you're deploying your missiles, all the— and that didn't deter the Iranians, what are you left with? You're left with to ask yourself, is what I'm doing wrong? Do I need to rethink the strategy? And that's exactly what the Pentagon was working on this past weekend. That is why I spent time, uh, uh, uh, sort of gathering the information for you and do my own analysis to get the accurate information, of course confirm it. And that's why it's so long. That's why I decided to split it into two. So the answer to this question, whether the US is forced to rethink its military doctrine, is yes. Straightforward. There's no ifs and buts. Yeah, because the US is actively being forced now to think that due to the unsustainability of the asymmetric naval warfare that Iran is now launching, especially in a choke point like the one in the Strait of Hormuz. I can also, uh, uh, think far ahead down the road should this scenario repeat itself in another location, like for example the, uh, where is the, uh, bear with me here, I'm trying to get you the picture, uh, if this could happen also in the Strait of Malacca. Because that's, to me, it's common sense. And that is why if the US thinking about the Strait of Hormuz, I am certain they are thinking of other choke Americans, because the recent collapse of this US-Iran Memorandum of Understanding, MOU, that was agreed upon in Pakistan, in Islamabad, but Donald Trump signed it when he was in Versailles in France. And in addition to that, you have this tit-for-tat maritime strikes. All this highlighted now, in my opinion, the dangerous coercion adaptation spiral, which Iran has the upper hand. Because remember, you have to go back a decade or two. Why is this important? Because you have to think about back then, what was the US naval doctrine and what did they relied on? It relied on the absolute sea control through massive, expensive platforms like carrier strike groups and so forth. So I got an image for you. I'm going to share a map for you quickly here to show you the locations of where the US, uh, uh, naval strikes are currently. You see where the USS Nimitz right here on the left, that's closer to the US. You have the USS Fort Lauderdale, which is right there in the tip of Central America there. Then you have the USS Mount— Mount Weather— oh, Mount Whitney, I'm sorry. Then you have Abraham Lincoln. This is the one that we are interested in. The two of those that we are interested in is this one here, the Abraham Lincoln, okay, the George W. Bush, okay. And you have the USS Tripoli. Then you have the 7th Fleet, uh, those are on the far east, the George Washington and the, and the, uh, uh, uh, uh, Roosevelt. It's important to understand this particular mapping of it. So however, the theater in the Persian Gulf has proven that land-based coastal defense cruise missiles, the swarming fast attack, uh, uh, crafts, and the low cost of drones can effectively challenge conventional superior navies at a fraction of the cost. That is exactly what Iran— when you look at about, for example, our precision missiles and all that stuff, how much does it cost to launch one? When you think about or consider, consider, just look at this one here, consider the first 16 days of fighting. It cost America 40% of its expensive missiles.

40%.

I mean, think about it. Or you think also about US, you know, all the missiles that we have launched and so forth. And by the way, I give credit, uh, of this picture to the US Navy. And that is why it's important to understand these dynamics. So what I'm going to do, I'm going to share a clip not clip, I'm sorry, I'm gonna share the link with you, uh, should you decide to read this particular, uh, uh, article pertaining to really what the Pentagon has done this weekend, but also highlight to you where the US naval assets are. And that is exactly now where you have this reality now has triggered a crisis in the fleet. And exposed several vulnerabilities in the traditional logistics. This is on part of the US because the harsh reality settles in. And that reality is that the Pentagon cannot maintain an economically viable defense when forcing the Navy, US Navy, that is, to use, expend, or to expend rather multimillion-dollar interceptors, missiles, to down a drone. Cheap, mass-produced autonomous threats. This is the reality that is now the US is faced with, and Iran knows it. That is why they are not deploying their advanced systems. As a matter of fact, Iran just deployed one of its advanced systems that attacked one particular location. And you know what that location is? Is the— where we have the Atacams. And this location is exactly— it's in Kuwait. That is what Iran has just done. It targeted this specific location. And I'm going to get into that in a second here as I move forward. That is why it's important to understand now where this is headed. And this economic and even a physical depletion of the American arsenal, uh, sort of, uh, what's the word I'm looking for, it challenges now, or even broken the standard, the playbook, that is And you know what that playbook is? You fight from the fort, from the sea. Not anymore, because Iran proved that that approach by the US, it's not winnable. And that is why now you have the top military strategist at the Pentagon discarding now outdated assumptions or regarding uncontested maritime logistics, because it proved the vulnerabilities. And that is why, to adapt to this new reality— that's what I found out this weekend— what the, this, what the Pentagon was working on this weekend is rapidly now pivoting to an entirely new doctrine. And that in itself will be centered around the cost-imposing strategies. Because the past week, the Pentagon was working on establishing a centralized drone chief, a role. In other words, they want to create another department within the Department of Defense to accelerate the autonomous systems procurement. In a simple language, they want to build more drones. Yeah, that is exactly what it means. Would it succeed? I have my doubts. So of course the US is going to go into some areas like the directed energy weapon, which we have used in some locations. We're going to move into the high-power microwaves known as HPM, which are systems. And what's the purpose for all this? Is for the US to restore deterrence without exhausting the American missile inventory. It's too late for that. Iran has exposed the weakness of the US and the Israeli systems for that matter. And that leads us to the next question, and that next question is: what are Donald Trump's options? Even though I say personally there are limited options to begin with. That's how I see it. So when you think about it, following the collapse of this Islamabad-Versailles MOU, Donald Trump— now the guy is, is lost. He's lost because he's faced now, really, he's facing a narrow, high-risk set of options. To resolve this issue of the Strait of Hormuz. Because why? The Strait of Hormuz now become the focal point of this whole MOU. Forget about everything else. Now the issue now is dealt with the Strait of Hormuz. And guess what? Iran ain't gonna waver from what was agreed upon on Article 5 within this MOU. Or paragraph 5, that is. That is again where Donald Trump is stuck. He has limited options because his primary dilemma, the dilemma that I see Donald Trump now faced with, his primary strategic dilemma is a stark mismatch. And a mismatch, you may ask yourself, of what? The mismatch between the political goals, the maximalist political goals that he stated, and you know what that was, right? Demanding a total Iran capitulation, the complete control of the Strait of Hormuz. That's— those are the stark mismatch between what Donald Trump was hoping for than the reality of the strict aversion of deploying American ground forces. There are reports out there, it just didn't come out openly. There are about 60,000 troops on standby, but 60,000 in Iran will be like a drop in the bucket. Let alone, I'm not talking about the rugged terrain, I am not talking about the Iranians are trained on that environment, we are not. So, and with the conflict already draining over $113 billion from taxpayers, from American taxpayers, in addition to leaving sort of the energy supplies highly vulnerable. So, and that leaves you with the only conclusion is that Donald Trump's room for maneuver is severely restricted, you know, and let alone also the addition to the corrupted Congress that is now talking about being reluctant to fund an escalating and popular war. So his, his options, at least from this aspect, is very, very limited. If we are to look at the milit— militarily speaking, Trump's current playbook is limited to tactical escalation short of a full-scale invasion, which he won't be able to do because if he does— the Russians already warned the Americans about that. And second, if Donald Trump does this one, he won't be able to because You have to think about the political cycle. We are coming into midterm, which is expected that the, the Republicans will lose.

Both of—

both parties are two faces of same coin. I've always said this so many times. Both parties are corrupted. The system is corrupted to its core. But suffice it to say, for our sake of the argument That's the only options he has, is limited tactical escalations. And that's what we are witnessing now with the firing of missiles and so forth. So he can— Donald Trump can continue ordering localized, uh, heavily retaliatory strikes on Iran coastal infrastructure, because that's all it's going to be. You're going to be targeting certain areas right on, on the coast. That would be about it. Because that's all it's going to be. You're going to say, well, I'm going to target the drone storage facilities, I am going to target the missile launchers, you know. Well, you so far you have done this and you have not stopped Iran. Iran still firing. Because his argument has always been, oh, we have degraded Tehran's offensive capabilities. I don't think so. And stop lying, Mr. President. One thing is sure is that this tit-for-tat bombing strategy has failed on part of the Americans to permanently secure the Strait of Hormuz. Why? Because Iran quickly adapts with asymmetric mobile launchers and drone swarms. That is exactly what Iran is doing. They know how to play the game. So no matter what the US said, we're gonna move the airstrike carriers, we're gonna do this, we're gonna do that, all this is nothing but hypes. No more, no less, because it's not gonna work out in a long term. If the truth matters to you, hit like, subscribe, and tap that bell. No spin, no agenda, just the stories they don't want you to know. Don't watch from the sideline. Be part of the movement. Your support keeps the truth alive. Thank you.

Indeed.

Now, the, the, the only alternative that I see— I see the possibility of it, but I don't see it taking effect or being operational at this point. Because it's very limited. And, and the one is if Donald Trump ordered a high-risk operations. For example, I'm going to show you the map here of Gharq Island. Gharq Island— why is this important? Because that's where Iran's vital Iranian energy nodes are, because it's an oil hub. To my knowledge, Iran exports about almost literally almost 85% of, of its oil from there. Or the other option for Donald Trump to attempt a total naval blockade to completely cut off Iranian oil export. But how can he do that when Iran— okay, Iran still has— let me show you here— Iran still has those mines there. They're still there. So how does, how does, uh, uh, Mr. Trump thinks he's gonna go around that? There is no way. There is no way. So, and that's exactly this blockade. This, to me, this options, this operations, even though they look aggressive, but I don't see them succeeding because they carry an immense risk of triggering a much broader an uncontrollable regional war. And of course, what is going to do to the global economy is going to further disrupt the international shipping lanes. So at the same time, while this happening, there is some— something is happening also inside Iran, voices that asking for something. I'm gonna play the first clip., for you to highlight to you that point. Take a listen, please. Oh, of course, after I share it on the screen.

Sorry.

Take a listen to what, what, uh, Tucker Carlson had to say.

No choice but to obtain the atomic bomb to remove the military option. Iranian state media says it has now no choice but to obtain the atomic bomb to remove the military option for the occupation and partitioning of Iran from the table, arguing Iran must absolutely reach nuclear deterrence before current negotiations can be conducted. Iranian officials declared that the country has no choice but to pursue nuclear weapons to deter what they describe as existential threats from Israel and the United States. The announcement comes amid stalled negotiations and recent military actions in the region, with Tehran arguing that nuclear deterrence is now essential for national survival before any meaningful talks can resume. The Trump administration has condemned the statement as extremely dangerous and reckless, convening emergency meetings at the White House and Pentagon. Israel has placed its defenses on the highest alert, while oil prices have surged sharply as fears grow of a new nuclear arms race in the Middle East and potential closure of the Strait of Hormuz. Analysts warn that this bold declaration could rapidly accelerate proliferation across the region and push the world closer to a catastrophic confrontation. The situation remains extremely volatile, with the risk of rapid and dangerous escalation increasing by the hour.

Yeah, it's spot on. Like I've, I've said it so many times, no matter how many negotiations you're going to enter or, or get involved with the Americans and so forth, it's only your deterrence that's going to sort of put an end to all this. And for Iran, the only option is the nukes. Simple as that. No, and again, if you start— if you think in terms of, uh, uh, and all this, by the way, which I will share in a second here about a secret meeting that took place in the city of Casablanca in Morocco pertaining to the nuclear aspect aspect. I'll talk about it in a second here. So for Iran, it's only left with this particular option. And now you have more voices inside the country that's saying, you know, this is not going to end till we declare. And Iran can do it if that is what they want. They have no other option, in my opinion. So let me share the second clip with you before I continue in my analysis. And this one has to do with the missiles that Iran launched. So, and that's one day ago. That was about a day ago. So take a listen here, please.

Second ballistic missile attack targeting Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, dramatically escalating tensions in the Gulf and directly threatening US military assets in the region. According to reports, multiple ballistic missiles struck the massive US-led airbase, which serves as a key hub for American operations in the Middle East. Initial assessments indicate significant damage to infrastructure, with casualties reported among coalition forces. Iran has claimed responsibility, stating the strike was a direct response to recent US and Israeli actions. Iran has once again closed the Strait of Hormuz. The ceasefire is over. The memorandum of understanding has collapsed. The Trump administration has condemned the attack as an act of war and placed all US forces in the region on maximum alert. Oil prices have surged over 25% in early trading as fears grow of further disruption to the Strait of Hormuz and a wider regional conflict. Qatar has called for an immediate ceasefire while US Central Command is preparing retaliatory options. The situation is extremely volatile with the risk of rapid escalation into a full-scale war involving multiple nations and catastrophic.

Indeed.

And by the way, what, uh, the, uh, the Iranians did is they targeted two locations, one in Kuwait, one in Qatar. The Qatar one is Al Udeid Base because the location in Al Udeid Base, which is the largest Air Force base in the region, the US, that is, and the one in Kuwait because of the ATACMS, the, the types of missiles we have. I think I have a picture of the— yes, this one right here in Kuwait. That's where Iran targeted these two locations. And like I always say, as long as the US presence on their soil, they're going to be a target no matter what. So that is where, where you see it going. So So let me continue on this one here. When we think about what I just shared with you earlier, when you think politically and economically, because what Trump's option, as I said, limited operationally, they are very limited unless you want to send Americans to their graves. And if you are to do this, Mr. President, why don't you send your son to go fight? Why send someone else's? You know, we all went through the military by choice. You know, because even Mr. Trump himself, he dodged the military. You know, just look at the records. And I'm not talking negatively here. All I'm talking about is reality. You know, if you are to advocate for the war, then let's start with your own kids. Send your own kids to fight first, then we go from there. Suffice it to say, politically and economically, what Trump can do, he can pivot to the international, uh, sort of use international pressure architecture. And financial coercion. That's the only other options left for him. But he's already shocked by the move that now the Saudis have strongly using the yuan instead of the dollar. The petrodollar, it becomes now the petroyuan. So, and that is why Donald Trump's looking aggressively leveraging the G7 which is a useless bloc anyway, and the NATO, which is a relic of the past. Why? Because he wants to link European economy or economic stability to the crisis. Because what Trump is trying to do, he's trying to force the European allies to align with Washington anti-Iran sanctions because the Europeans are saying We don't want to be part of that. We're not sending our forces to the Strait of Hormuz to die for a war that ain't ours. We're not going to be, uh, taking part of escorting, uh, uh, uh, the escort operations of, uh, oil tankers, whatever. No, we're not doing that. But that's the aim of Donald Trump. He wants to— Trump has also threatened, yeah, some sort of, uh, an orthodox— yeah, an orthodox, orthodox economic penalty. You believe that? That's Trump. You know what he wants to do? He wants to impose unilateral shipping toll within the Strait of Hormuz if a diplomatic resolution fails. That he's living in la-la land. He doesn't understand the reality. So because you remember when this war started, what was the first objective?

You remember?

Regime change. So not anymore, because he's realizing, I don't think so, we were thinking straight. About this one here. Because Trump's options now are dangerously balancing act, you know, between what? Between accepting the reality. What is the reality? A flawed and stable peace deal that grants Iran implicit leverage over global energy, or launching a costly military operation that risks depleting US arsenal and sending US troops to their graves for a war that is not ours to begin with. So, and this leads me, by the way, as I mentioned earlier, it was a secret meeting. Yeah, it was secret. It just been revealed lately because the meeting took place between the 16th and the 20th of May in Casablanca in Morocco. And the meeting brought high level experts and diplomats representing 5 nuclear-armed permanent members of the United Nations Security Council. And the meeting took place aimed at hiding international tensions among the nuclear powers. Makes you just wonder why the meeting will take a— well, meeting be a secret. Why will Morocco host a meeting like that? And why will the 5 representatives of the Security Council be attending that. And by the way, this was disclosed later on by the representative of Russia. So I'm trying to put the two and two together and figure, is this why the voices inside Iran now calling for deterrence, nuclear deterrence? That, that's the way I see it rolling up in that direction. So now the next question, uh, uh, uh, before I conclude this one here, the next question is who controls ship movements in the Strait of Hormuz? Because it's a simple question we have to ask. The US wants to say, oh no, no, no, no, no, the ships are going through, whatever.

No.

Only two ships passed this morning, and I am yet to— I'm gonna dig and make some calls and whatever to find out, uh, first of all, who the ships belong to, why did Iran allow them, or did they coordinate with Iran, or what have you. That's what I intend to do later on. So suffice it for now to ask the question, uh, because the, uh The control over ship movements in the Strait of Hormuz as of today is actively disputed between what the United States is saying, what Iran is saying, what Oman is saying, and what the US military is saying. Because, because for military, for the US, we have two tracks: one political, White House and all that, and one military, the Pentagon, Central Command, and what have you. And here is what A part of the US is arguing, is arguing that under international law and the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea and clause, the waterway is an international strait governed by the principle of transit passage, meaning that no single nation has the legal right to block or dictate commercial shipping. Well, if it is the case, what makes us think that we wanted to impose fees on other— well, who gives us the right to do so? And second, if Iran is operating in its own vicinity, we're looking at the Strait of Hormuz. It's not that big. And if you think about, by according to international law, how many nautical miles a country can operate within its own shores, that puts it within closer to its, uh, geography. The only difference going to be is the coordination with Oman. Well, we all know Oman is just like another Gulf states that it's going to do what the US is going to tell it to do, or it's going to ask it to do. Oman is right here, very tiny. And I know we have a presence there because I was in the Middle East, so I kind of know the countries where we have presence. Like right now that is becoming clear that Iran attacked a military installation in Jordan that belongs to the US, not to Jordan, to the US. And actually, that base is very, very critical. So, and because the strait, as I mentioned, or I'm sorry, as I showed you in the picture right there, either this one or This one right here is because the strait's narrow width dictates that all shipping lanes have to pass directly through either Iranian territory or Omani territory waters. So, and that is why both nations exercise immense physical and administrative leverage over traffic. And that is why Iran can work out a deal with Oman, Oman can work out a deal with Iran. It's the US being in the middle of it. That's what, what's creating all this havoc. So, and that is why Iran went ahead and established the Persian Gulf Strait Authority, because this one is operating under the military oversight of the IRGC Navy and mandating— oh, you know what, for all commercial to submit a vessel information declaration, including what's in the cargo, including the crew list, including the routes plan, or the routes that they're planning to use before entry into the strait. I don't see anything wrong with that, do you? You know, you're gonna cross through closer to a country's territory, the country has the right to know who's coming closer to its borders. Simple as that. And that is why Iran has declared now a strict northern shipping corridor near Larak Island as the only authorized route for safe passage. And that's why I'm going to find out about the two cargoes that passed this morning, whether they used this particular route or not. I, I can't confirm anything yet till I, uh, uh, on the— on that, the same time Iran routinely, routinely enforces this control, uh, and executes the drones and missile strikes against commercial vessels that navigate unapproved waters. Or if this ship, like what happened with the, uh, I believe it was Singapore ship that was attacked because they refused to cooperate with Iran's naval command.

It.

The same time Iran doing this, the Oman Sultanate of Oman and the US— Oman is not working alone, Oman is working with the US. This is where you see that why the Iranians are very cautious about, because they can't trust now what the Omanis are doing, because Oman and the US actively now challenging Iran's oversight over this. Instead of Oman reaching out to Iran and work out a deal, they are there, Oman, involving the US into this. Iran does not trust the US, and how can— how could you? You know, even Oman themselves, if when the dust settles on this, they're going to end up holding the end of the stick because we're going to trick them anyway. So, and that is why you see in these tensions where they are as far as the US Central Command refusing to recognize Iran's authority. So, but at the same time, we are quietly deploying our naval forces to the region, and the argument that Donald Trump is making is we want to escort the ships, but of course the ships will have to pay the Americans instead of the arrangements. So, so that is where this particular aspect is here. So, so I'm gonna stop right here, uh, I'm gonna share only with you the conclusion for this part, and I'll share the clips with you. And tomorrow we're gonna do part 2 of this one here, uh, where I will, uh, uh, uh, detail more information, uh, regarding some other key questions I'll do them tomorrow. So, so let me, uh, because I'm going to talk about the scenarios for the future of the Strait of Hormuz, uh, and, and I do have some possibilities. I'm going to talk about also the idea of who's paying the bill right now, uh, and I'm going to also talk about does Iran see a strategic opportunity into all this.

Yeah.

Those are questions that are worth, uh, delving deeper into. Uh, I just, for the sake of time, I don't want to do this too long for you because, you know, 1 hour is enough, I believe. So, all right, let's, uh, let's— here is my conclusion for this part here. The way you need to understand this is that this asymmetric war of attrition in the Strait of Hormuz, because has successfully successfully now turned the US naval power or dominance, whatever term you want to use, into a logistical liability. At the same time, it is forcing Europe now to finance the bill, footing the bill, and the American average citizen, the middle class here, taxpayers. US is already depleting its advanced missile stockpile. And Washington now is running out of sustainable military options. So, because the way you're going to be looking at it moving forward, and we've already mentioned this before, the rules of global trade now are being rewritten by regional power, not by the United States. That is the difference. All those trades we used to see and all that It's now changing because of a regional power that is dictating all that. So, and that in itself force us to ask the critical question: if the world's most powerful navy, according— in theory, on paper, basically— can no longer guarantee free transit without bankrupting its own arsenal, Who will actually control the global choke points of tomorrow? That's to me a question worth, worth, worth asking, and, and I would love to read your feedback on it. So if you get a chance, just, uh, uh, put your comments, uh, uh, in the comment section. I will pin this for you later on when I'm done with this. So once again, just to remind you quickly before I'll play some clips for you Tomorrow I will do part 2 of this, and I am also going to be working on two other stories. Is why did Israel promote the theory of Iran, uh, assassinating Donald Trump? Makes you just wonder. So that's, that's one of the topics I am looking into. The other topic has to do with what happened in Yemen. This morning. And I know one of you, uh, let me— I, I pinned it here. Uh, yeah, Louis, thank you for sharing that. Ansarullah has launched 5 or 6 ballistic missiles towards Abha International Airport in southern Saudi Arabia. Yeah, because there are a belief that the Saudis have been involved in trying to down that Iranian plane, because it was an Iranian plane. So I am going to be looking into this and do a live stream for you about it. So let's play some clips here, uh, for like we always do here. I'm gonna start with the first one. And the first one, uh, this one about the sudden death of, uh, a warthog. Now, you know, usually, you know, you don't— as they say, you don't talk bad about the dead people, whatever. But, uh, how can you forget what this guy has been saying when he was alive? Uh, you know, you're talking about wanting to nuke Iran, wanting to nuke people in Gaza, you know, you know, how can you forget that? Anyway, he died suddenly. So let's take a listen. He was an evil, literally But take a lesson, please.

Who spent their entire careers making life worse— I don't mourn people, people who spent their entire careers making life worse for everyone else. Let me remind you of who this man was. He was one of the most pro-war politicians in modern history, so much so that The Guardian literally called him, quote, the most pro-war Republican out there, unquote. He spent decades pushing for a war with Iran, and he finally got his wish when he helped to convince Dumpy Pants to launch a military campaign that has destabilized the entire Middle East and the world. He pledged loyalty to that blue and white country over the United States. Bibi Yahoo has repeatedly said that there is no greater friend to that country than Lindsey Graham. The man literally visited the blue and white country more than his own constituents. He enriched himself during both dumpy pants presidencies. He made money off of Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Boeing, and lots of insider trading. He pushed through an amendment to increase the military budget by $38 billion. He profited off of death and chaos. He's named in those J-E files. According to Sasha Riley, his name appears among powerful figures implicated in that network.

Work.

He tried to force taxpayers to pay for the $400 million ballroom while families across the country can't even buy groceries. He was a pathological liar. For years, he falsely claimed to be a Gulf War veteran, saying that he was at Operation Desert Storm even though he never left South Carolina. He has done so much damage to his home state and the United States as a Yeah, that's, that's disturbing.

That's disturbing. And shame on those voters inside South Carolina who's been voting for him. So that's, uh, it'll be interesting now to see what they're going to do. So, uh, next clip we're going to play, uh, the one I'm going to play for you is the attack. I told you I will play the clip for you, is the attack on the, uh, here, let me show you the picture on, on this one here, the, the ATACMS, which is an American supersonic short-range tactical ballistic missile. That's— it's, uh, manufactured by, uh, Lockheed Martin. So, so take a listen here, please. Oh, oh, let me, let me remove this one. Reportedly targeted US ATACMS launch sites in Kuwait.

Footage shows a massive plume of smoke rising after the impact of multiple Iranian ballistic missiles in Kuwait. The reported target of the attack was US HIMARS ground-based rocket systems, which were used in recent strikes on targets in southern Iran.

Since the HIMARS is a highly mobile system, the chances of it being hit in retaliation are relatively low.

Nevertheless, the Iranian missiles appear to have struck something, and despite Kuwait's layered air defense network, missiles appears to have reached their intended target.

Yeah, it's interesting about all this, uh, defense systems, this appears— it's becoming more and more clear that they are useless. They are useless against Iran missiles. And Iran launched, to my knowledge, recently some other version of this, uh, uh, one of the type of missiles. I forgot the name, I am sorry, I will get you that info. But they upgraded that missile now to even the, the Iron Dome and all those defense shields that the Gulf states have bought from the US in billions of dollars are useless. They are not sort of doing their job. So next one is about how Israel now is pushing. That's why I told you it's the idea of let's push for the war. That's exactly what is happening. Now saying they're ready to restart conflicts with Iran for the third time. Now they're the ones keeping this war going. They're the obstacles to the peace deal. They're the whole reason why we went into this war to begin with. If you agree with me that Israel needs to be defunded and even demilitarized, comment below. Yeah, it's the idea of— and now we are talking about— I just got a word that we're talking about, uh, uh, in, in the US, we're talking about merging the, uh, cancel, sorry, uh, we're talking about, uh, We're talking about merging the intelligence services, which is very problematic. And soon, are we going to merge the military? I'm really concerned about where this is going. So, uh, next one is, uh, I don't know if this one is worth it. It's not. It's when the Prime Minister of Israel saying, oh, he sense that the US is going to dump him So he's turning to India. What a joke. What a joke. So anyway, I'm not going to play that one because it's not worth it, uh, your time. Uh, let's play this one from Professor Mersheimer, and I want you just to hear, uh, uh, once you hear his take about a question from, uh, either podcast— I don't know who that person is that was asking him. So take a listen, please. Full force of the American military again.

John?

Tom, let me take a minute or two just to lay out the big picture here, which will show you that that line of argument makes no sense. The war started on February 28th, and on April 8th, the air war part of it ended. So from February 28th to April 8th, we had a 40-day air war. We have not gone back to that air war or even hinted that we would go back to that air war for the past 2 months and 3 weeks, and the reason is very simple: the air war does not provide a war-winning strategy, and in fact, if we started the air war again, it would be Iran that benefited from So there's no air war option. Unsurprisingly, on April 13th— remember, the air war ends on April 8th— on April 13th, President Trump switches gears and he puts into place the blockade. We go from naval power, we go from air power to naval power. The blockade is on from April 13th to June 17th. That's a little more than 2 months. What happens on June 17th? On June 17th, President Trump signs the Memorandum of Understanding, which is a surrender document. That basically means that the blockade didn't work, because if the blockade had worked, he wouldn't have signed a surrender document. He signed it because the blockade didn't work. So here we are, we've tried air power, it didn't work. And nobody's talking about going back to that. We tried a blockade or naval power. That didn't work, which again is why we signed the memorandum of understanding. The third option is land power, and I have not heard anybody make a serious argument that we should put boots on the ground. So the question you want to ask yourself today, Tom, is what are we going to do to up the ante? These people were talking about going up the escalation ladder and teaching the Iranians a lesson, or using all of our coercive leverage to get them to play by our rules. I'd like to know, where's the coercive leverage come from? I just told you what all the options are, and the answer is there is no option.

Yeah, but, but they would say to you, John, that given the state of Iran's economy that Tehran could now be overplaying its hand in the Strait of Hormuz? I mean, doesn't sanctions relief provide Washington with equally important leverage?

John?

No, the point is that Iran faces an existential threat from the United States. The United States and Israel are an existential threat to Iran, and when you face an existential threat, you'll eat grass if that's what's necessary to survive. The idea that the Iranians are suddenly gonna throw up their hands and concede defeat to the United States and to Israel, Tehran—

He is spot on, and this is again where history comes in. This is again the short-sightedness of American politicians. They have no clue about history. They don't understand what the Persian Empire had to endure back then, we're talking about way, way, way, way back. We don't understand that. And whatever took place back then has shaped the trajectory for Iran, for modern-day Iran. So without understanding that— I remember I detailed this in my Iran book. If you get a chance to get a copy of this, you'll find the chapter about the history of Iran. When I say history, I'm referring back to the Persian Empire in its entirety. So, uh, next one is about this podcaster. She got— she was, she was spot on, and I really was surprised, uh, for what she had to say. So take a listen, please.

Believing Western media propaganda— for everyone genuinely believing Western media propaganda about what's going on in Iran, They lied to you. Somebody asked for everyone genuinely believing Western media propaganda about what's going on in Iran. They lied to you about Vietnam with the Gulf of Tonkin incident used to justify war. They lied to you about South Africa by supporting apartheid for years and calling it stability. They lied about Kuwait with false testimony to sell the Gulf War. They lied about Iraq. There were no weapons of mass destruction. They lied about Afghanistan. Internal documents, which you can access yourself, showed officials knew the war was not winnable, that progress was being exaggerated to the public for years. We struggled in Afghanistan. They lied to you about Colombia under the guise of war on drugs while fueling violence against Colombians. They lied about Venezuela through sanctions and narratives around intervention. They lied about Libya, claiming it was about protecting civilians, and it turns into a regime change. They lied to you about Syria constantly shifting narratives around who we were actually supporting. They lied to you about Yemen while backing a humanitarian crisis. They lied about the DRC, ignoring and enabling exploitation and genocide tied to resources. They lied about Sudan, downplaying involvement and strategic interests. They lied to you about Palestine, framing occupation and violence as self-defense. What on earth makes you think They are telling you the truth about Iran. The United States loves to talk about how Iran can't have weapons, but who gave them to them? You ever heard of the Iran-Contra affair?

And for everyone, she is spot on. Uh, interesting that she brought up Venezuela because that's my next clip. Uh, very interesting thing, uh, uh, especially pertaining to, uh, uh, yeah, take a listen here, please. You don't hear much about it anymore. You remember we took over the oil of Venezuela? Take a listen.

From the sale of the oil that he took from Venezuela. So Trump took the money from the sale of the oil that he took from Venezuela, and he's hiding it in a bank in Qatar. I think it's about $500 million, but we have no idea because he won't share that information with us. We have no idea what he's going to be doing with it, and we also have no idea what the Qatar banks will be doing with it while he decides. He's using the proceeds from a US military action without the approval of Congress. That's not only against the law, it's against our Constitution. Every single day our Constitution is being destroyed because every time he breaks a law and nobody holds him accountable, he just keeps doing it again. The Department of Justice, the Supreme Court of the United States, and every single coward Republican in Congress keeps giving him more and more power every day. He's destroying our country and our Constitution, all while he and his family get richer and richer. And this time he used our military. He used the lives of our service members to enrich himself. And Republicans in Congress don't care. They have no respect for our military. And he's going to try to use them again in Greenland and everywhere else that he feels like it. Cuba, Mexico, Colombia. What's next?

She's spot on. And they corrupted the Congress. But again, are you— how much can you blame the government? You blame the people, the ignorant people, the ill-informed, the oblivious, the voters. That's the one that keep doing that. You know, again, you can shout blame, whatever, whatever, but Till you look inward, when American citizens start to ask themselves, what's wrong with me voting for this idiot, then we could see a change of sorts. So, uh, last clip I will play for you is about President Xi Jinping of China. I found it very, very interesting dynamics what he did with Burkina Faso. You all remember I did a video for you back then. He sent something to Burkina Faso, but take a listen, please. Let me start it all over again.

President Xi just sent Burkina Faso another care package— 160 million FCFA in tractors, seeders, and actual farming equipment. Not loans, not lectures about democracy, just tools. While Western aid comes with 40-page conditions and IMF supervision, China drops off seed analysis labs and fish pond blueprints. No strings, no structural adjustment programs. Just, here's some tractors, good luck. Since 2018, this partnership built 2,800 hectares of rice fields, trained 7,400 farmers, created 15 water systems. 400 more hectares coming this season. Most aid programs take 5 years to hold the first committee meeting. China's already installing breeding equipment and teaching people how to grow their own food. Here's what I want to know. Why does aid without colonialism attached feel so unusual that it makes headlines? And maybe that's why people are paying attention, because tractors produce food, training creates skills, and irrigation creates harvests. Whether you agree with the partnership or not, the focus is easy to see. President—

Spot on. You can see where Burkina Faso is moving. Moving forward. This is why when France lost the Sahel region, they flipped. That is because they couldn't take advantage of the resources. And not just France, most of the other countries in Europe too. The US also had a presence there and so forth. So now things have changed. So you see why the cooperation with the Chinese, where it's leading, is the economic prosperity. That's always the key. Anyway, guys, hope you all enjoy this. And as I said, uh, uh, remember to join me tomorrow for, uh, for the part 2. I'm gonna do this, and I always look forward to, uh, seeing you. Before I let you go, allow me just to update you on, uh, on the— we are across 63% now for my upcoming trip to Asia. I would greatly appreciate it If you decide and you would like to support this one, here is the link for it. We still are about $3,000, $4,000 to reach our goal, and I hope we can get this one ASAP because of the, the time that I need to plan and so forth, the locations and what have you. So I would greatly appreciate your support for that. Uh, for those who wants to support the channel Here's the link for that, and that gives me an opportunity to say thank you to Doug Lee for your generous donations. We're talking about substantial donations. As a matter of fact, that's one of the things that moved the channel, the, the, the funding upward. So thank you very much, Doug, once again. So I'll take this opportunity to thank Andrew Wong for buying me cups of teas in support of my upcoming trip to Asia. And I also want to give a shout out to Aziz for your support of buying me cups of teas in support of my upcoming trip to Asia. I'm very, very grateful to all of you, and, and I will see you tomorrow. As always, remember, geopolitics impacts your daily life in more ways than one. Till next time, bye-bye.