Geo-Strategy #8: The Iran Trap

There are three major forces pushing the United States towards war with Iran.

The first is the Israel Lobby, which is composed of both Jewish and Christian interests. Representing the Jewish interest is an organization called AIPAC. They have a membership of about 100,000, but they're very wealthy; there are many billionaires in this group, so it has significant financial power. In fact, AIPAC is considered the second most powerful lobbying organization in the United States. The first is the AARP, representing pensioners; there are about 30 million of them, and their lobbying organization is the most powerful. But AIPAC is second.

Also in the Israel Lobby are the Christian Zionists. For example, the organization Christians United for Israel has 7 million people in its membership. Together, the Christian Zionists and AIPAC are an extremely powerful force in government, and they want a war in the Middle East to advance Israel's interests.

The second force is that America is now addicted to Empire because Empire represents easy money. All money has to be channeled through the US, and so there are many people in the US who make their money by speculating on money—for example, Wall Street. That has made Wall Street extremely powerful in US politics.

The third force is Saudi Arabia. The major conflict in the Middle East is not between Israel and Iran, but between Saudi Arabia and Iran. For Israel, Iran is a security threat because it supports Hezbollah and Hamas. But for Saudi Arabia, Iran represents a threat to its very existence. Saudi Arabia must resolve the Iran problem soon.

The Political Manifestation: Trump, Kushner, and Haley

These three forces manifest themselves through Donald Trump. Basically, Trump is their champion. Privately, a man named Jared Kushner, who is Trump's son-in-law, is very good friends with both Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel and Mohammed bin Salman (MBS), the leader of Saudi Arabia. Jared Kushner's father, Charles Kushner, was a very prominent sponsor of AIPAC. In fact, when Benjamin Netanyahu comes to the United States, he lives with the Kushner family. One night, Benjamin Netanyahu had to stay in Jared Kushner's bedroom, and Jared Kushner had to sleep in the basement. That's how close they are.

Jared Kushner is also friendly with MBS, so friendly that when Kushner started a private equity fund, Saudi Arabia invested two billion dollars. Through Jared Kushner, these three forces are able to exert influence on Trump.

It's very likely that Trump will become president of the United States again in November, and he will pick Nikki Haley as his VP. That means Nikki Haley will be the one in the Trump White House pushing for war against Iran. As we discussed, Nikki Haley makes most of her money from the Israel Lobby—the anti-Iran lobby.

We know from the first Trump administration that these forces are able to exert tremendous influence on him. The evidence is clear:

1. Trump withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal that would have secured peace between the United States and Iran.
2. Trump moved the United States Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem in Israel, which caused major friction in the Middle East.
3. Trump ignored the fact that MBS killed a journalist. He has been very friendly with Saudi Arabia.
4. Trump sponsored the Abraham Accords, which is trying to bring peace between Israel and other Arab countries and unite them against Iran.
5. The last thing that Trump did, which is the most important, is that in January 2020, he ordered the assassination of General Qasem Soleimani, who was the leader of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

From all this, we can suspect that in a second Trump term, war with Iran will be a major priority.

The US Military: Hubris and the "Shock and Awe" Doctrine

Even though there are forces that want war with Iran, ultimately it is the US military that must implement this war. If the US military refuses to go to war, then the war can't happen. Unfortunately, the US military is very different from what it was 30 years ago.

Thirty years ago, the US military maintained very standard military doctrine. They maintained three very important principles that all militaries must maintain in a time of war:

1. Mass forces
2. Avoid encirclement
3. Protect supply lines

The important idea is that when you fight a war like this, which is traditional warfare, you must have the consent of the public. It is the public that sends soldiers, provides money, and gives you political support.

But in 2003, the US military changed its military doctrine to one of Shock and Awe. What Shock and Awe means is that you don't have to follow these three principles anymore. You can use air supremacy, you have technological omniscience, and you have special forces. This allows you to fight wars cheaply, quickly, and decisively, so that you no longer need public political support. As we also discussed, this created the idea of hubris in the American military. Because of the 2003 war in Iraq, the American military is confident that it can win any war, any place, against any enemy.

We know that this doctrine is not true because of something called Operation Prosperity Guardian. A few months ago, the Houthis, a rebel group in Yemen, started to attack ships in the Red Sea. A lot of trade goes through the Red Sea, so the American military dispatched a massive naval force against the Houthis. Were the Americans able to defeat the Houthis? No, they were not.

What can the Americans do about the Houthis? What's the solution to this problem? You have these Houthi pirates attacking ships, which is affecting international commerce and is a huge reason for inflation right now. What is the American military going to do about this?

The answer is nothing. The American military has no solution because they don't have the forces necessary to undertake an operation against the Houthis. They have special forces, air supremacy, and technological omniscience with satellites, but they don't have infantry. They don't have lots and lots of ships. Therefore, they cannot stop the Houthis.

What's telling is that Joe Biden has come out and said that yes, we know we are losing the war in the Red Sea, and yes, we know that we cannot stop the Houthis, but we are going to continue on this path. This is the idea of hubris: not knowing your limitations, and when you are faced with your limitations, you refuse to accept them. That's why when the US military is given the order to invade Iran, they'll probably go along with it, because they cannot imagine the possibility that they could be defeated.

Iran's Revolutionary Guard: Eager for a Fight

Then you have the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. They want war with the United States because they're very angry about US interference in Iran. During the Shah's regime, which was a brutal police state from 1953 to 1979, the Americans were the ones backing this police state. Many are angry about this. They're also angry about the fact that the US continues to protect Israel and Saudi Arabia, and that Trump killed General Soleimani. It's possible that the Revolutionary Guard Corps killed the president of Iran, Ebrahim Raisi, last week because he was preventing war. They want war with the United States.

You see the logic here. There are powerful forces in the United States pushing towards war. You have Trump, who agreed in his first term to increase escalation with Iran. Within the Trump White House, there will be Jared Kushner and Nikki Haley to push this war, both privately and publicly. The US military has so much hubris that they think they can win this war. And Iran wants to provoke the United States into invading it. Iran has many strategies to provoke the United States into war. Basically, the United States is looking for a reason, and Iran wants to give them a reason. That's why I think war between the United States and Iran is very likely in the next two to four years.

The Hypothetical War: Operation Iranian Freedom

Let's talk about the actual war. Most of this is speculation, but I'm using speculation to help us better understand what a war would look like.

Let's pretend that it's March 2027. Trump goes on TV and announces Operation Iranian Freedom: a full-scale US invasion of Iran, along with Israel and Saudi Arabia as its main partners. The UK, Australia, the UAE, and Poland will also be involved. You have many countries attacking Iran together.

Trump goes on TV and explains to the American public why the United States is fighting this war. This is what he says:

1. Freedom and Democracy: "For the past year, there have been violent protests in Iran—religious, political, and ethnic protests. The Iranian people are sick of the Ayatollah, sick of the dictatorship. They want democracy and freedom. In response, the Revolutionary Guard is killing thousands of protesters. Iran is on the brink of civil war. Therefore, the United States has an obligation to protect the people of Iran. They are praying for freedom, and the United States, the world's greatest democracy, must give it to them."
2. Nuclear Threat: "US intelligence, along with Israeli intelligence, has discovered that for the past two years, Iran has been working very hard on developing a nuclear bomb. In fact, Iran is only one month away from having three nuclear bombs, so that New York City, San Francisco, and Los Angeles could all be destroyed. To prevent this, we must strike first."
3. Global Prosperity: "Iranian proxies—the Houthis, Hezbollah, and many other groups—have been disrupting shipping in the Middle East, in both the Red Sea and the Strait of Hormuz. 40% of the world's oil passes through that region, mainly to East Asia: China, Japan, and South Korea. Our global prosperity is at stake. We must go to war to protect these shipping lanes and ensure that the oil goes to our allies so they can continue their economic prosperity. The United States, as the world hegemon, has a responsibility to protect global prosperity."
4. Protecting Allies: "Iran has been launching attacks against our allies, Saudi Arabia and Israel. Hezbollah has been violently attacking Israel, killing dozens of Israelis. The Houthis have been attacking Saudi Arabian oil fields, damaging their economy. We have an obligation to protect our friends in the Middle East."
5. Sponsor of Terrorism: "We know for a fact that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps is a sponsor of terrorism. Last week, in a mall, gunmen went and killed 107 people. Our intelligence says that it was most definitely an Iranian operation."

"But don't worry," Trump will say. "This invasion will be successful because we have a lot of allies. Our special forces are already in the country looking for their air bases and missiles; we can knock them out at the beginning of the war. We have been in contact with Iranian opposition groups; they want to overthrow the regime, and they will install democracy. Our American military is the greatest in the world. In 1991, our military defeated Saddam Hussein in 100 hours. In 2003, we defeated him in less than three weeks. To prove that we are the greatest, we will defeat Iran in only two weeks. Do not worry. We will be strong in protecting democracy, freedom, and global prosperity."

Of course, you're going to have large-scale protests throughout the country opposing this war, but most people will support it.

The Invasion Begins: A Deceptive Victory

After this speech, the operation is launched. We'll watch it on TV and on YouTube, and we'll be so impressed by the power of the US military.

In the Strait of Hormuz comes the USS Gerald R. Ford, a $13 billion supercarrier designed to destroy countries. It is now prowling the Strait to ensure that shipping is safe. America establishes air supremacy very quickly, meaning it has complete control over the skies.

Then, a massive invasion force is sent to Iran. In the south, 100,000 US troops land, along with maybe 200,000 Saudi Arabian troops. You have 300,000 to half a million troops in Iran, and they are about to strike Tehran in the north. The United States and its allies have established a foothold and have a huge presence in the country.

At this point, the war has been decided. Who has won? America has established air supremacy, the US Navy controls the seas, and you have 100,000 US troops in the country ready to strike Tehran. Who has won the war?

Obviously, this is a trick question. Iran has won the war. Why? What's the problem with this plan? This is typical American doctrine—Shock and Awe. This is how they fight wars. But there's a problem. Why would the Iranians want this?

Let's go back to traditional military doctrine. You have three principles: mass forces, avoid encirclement, and protect supply lines. These are three things you must absolutely obey if you want to win a war. Using traditional military doctrine, explain why the United States has lost the war right now.

First of all, they're encircled. Iran is all mountains; it's a fortress. To get these troops into the country, you have to airdrop them. But once they're in the country, you can't get them out. That's the first problem.

What's the second problem? They failed to mass forces. Iran has a population of 90 million people. You would need at least three to four million soldiers to even think about conquering the country. They've got 100,000. And you can't move tanks through mountains; they're not designed for mountain warfare.

And what else is a problem? This is the biggest problem: they cannot be resupplied. They have no supply lines. For them to be resupplied, airplanes have to drop ammunition and food into the country. But again, Iran is all mountains, so it's very easy for Iranians to shoot down the airplanes. When you pass through mountains, you can't see what's on the ground. A random guy with a rocket launcher can just shoot down a helicopter, which is what the Afghans did against the Soviets in the Afghanistan war. A drone can take down any airplane.

In other words, these guys are trapped. You think they're soldiers, but they're not. What they really are is hostages. You have too many people in the country, so you can't get them out, but you don't have enough people to actually launch a strike against Tehran. You can't resupply them, and they've been encircled by Iranian forces.

Why Won't the Iranian People Support the US?

The logic of having 100,000 US troops in the country is that once they are there, all the resistance to the regime will rise up and strike against Tehran. The Iranian army will mutiny. That's the hope. Why won't this happen?

Iranians hate Americans. They remember the Shah. From 1953 until 1979, the American-supported Shah was running a brutal police state, so brutal that everyone in Iran revolted against the regime.

What else? Which country is next door? Iraq. America destroyed Iraq. From 2003 to 2011, America was there destroying the country. America said it would bring freedom, democracy, and prosperity, but instead, it just destroyed the country. American soldiers were running into houses every night, pointing guns at children, destroying homes, and arresting men for no reason. Iranians saw all this on TV and heard about it from neighbors. They know that if America comes, it's to destroy the country, not to bring freedom. That's why they're going to fight.

Another reason is that Iranians think they belong to a great civilization, so they value their freedom and independence. They're not going to submit to a foreign conqueror. Also, religion. The Iranians are religious; they believe that America is Satan and they have a religious obligation to fight Satan. For many reasons, there is no way the Iranian people are going to stand with America. You might have a minority, but most are going to resist.

Why would the Americans think the Iranian people will rise up?

They need to justify the invasion. They have to have a logical explanation for why this invasion will succeed. One of the criticisms against them will be, "You need 4 million people to invade Iran." They don't have 4 million soldiers; they have at most one million total throughout the world. So their only explanation is, "Well, we're going to pretend that once we invade, the people of Iran will support us." It's not based on truth, but it's an explanation for why the invasion will succeed.

Do they actually believe this? The answer is hubris. They do believe this because they have hubris. Once you're in that position where you have access to nuclear weapons, when you can kill anyone in the world, when you can see everything in the world, it makes you think you're God. The Greeks believed the worst thing is hubris because it makes you think you're God, but you're not God, and you're going to get into a lot of trouble if you think you are.

Historical Precedents for Strategic Failure

There are two ways we can provide evidence that this scenario is plausible. The first is historical analysis: are there historical examples like this? The second method is game theory analysis: why would rational actors do something as stupid as trapping 100,000 American soldiers in Iran?

Historical Analysis: Three Case Studies

1. The Athenian Expedition to Sicily (415 BC)

The year is 415 BC in Athens. We studied Thucydides' The Peloponnesian War. For the past 17 years, Athens has been fighting a brutal war against Sparta. It's a stalemate. Then, a man named Alcibiades has a suggestion: to win the war against Sparta, let's go invade Sicily. His opponent, Nicias, is like, "Why the hell would we want to invade Sicily? It's far away." Alcibiades says, "Because it has a lot of money, and if we invade, we can take their money." By making this argument, the people of Athens really supported it. The war was costing them a lot of money, and they had become addicted to the easy money of empire.

Nicias has a great idea of how to convince people not to go to war. He says, "Okay guys, I know you want to fight this war, but Sicily is a huge place. It has a navy. Therefore, we need a massive expeditionary force. We need at least 5,000 soldiers and about 100 ships." The idea is that Nicias is trying to scare people into not fighting. The Athenians say, "That's a great idea! Let's send a massive force so the war can be won just like that." Shock and Awe.

The problem is that never before in its history has Athens sent a large expeditionary force against another power. When you send a massive force against another country, what is your number one problem? The biggest problem is resupply, and this is something the Athenians didn't think about because they had never fought a war like this before.

They sent this huge expedition against Sicily and Syracuse. For the first year, the Athenians were destroying the Syracuse army, which had to retreat back into their city. The Athenians laid siege to the city. But then, the Athenians couldn't resupply themselves. Syracuse also had a navy and could stop the Athenian navy from resupplying the troops. Therefore, the Athenian army was wiped out in Sicily. This caused the Athenians to ultimately lose the war against Sparta and caused the Athenian Empire to collapse. Historians have been trying to figure out for a long time why the Athenians would do such a stupid thing, and the only answer is hubris. They had never really lost a war and had become addicted to empire—the same situation America finds itself in today.

2. The Vietnam War

In the beginning of the 1960s, most Americans had never heard of a country called Vietnam. By the end of the decade, in 1969, half a million American soldiers were in the country destroying everything, but also getting destroyed themselves. 58,000 US soldiers died in Vietnam.

In 1971, the Pentagon Papers came out. It was a history of America's involvement in the Vietnam War, and it made three major points.

• First, American military leadership had been expanding the war without public knowledge. This is what we call mission creep.
• Second, American leadership knew from very early on that the war was unwinnable. This was the greatest military in the world; they dropped more bombs on Vietnam in the 60s than all the bombs dropped in World War II, and they could not win.
• Third, to win a war, you have to solve three problems: have a clear strategy, adapt to the battlefield, and maintain the will to fight. Even though America was killing a lot of people—it killed three million Vietnamese—it was not destroying the enemy's will to fight. In fact, it was making them angrier.

So why did America stay in the war? The answer is credibility. They didn't want to lose face. But there's another way to understand this: the sunk cost fallacy. When you go to a casino and start losing money, at some point you cannot leave because you want to reclaim the money you've lost. You've invested so much that you cannot leave. That's the problem with war. Eventually, you've invested so much that you cannot leave the war because you don't want to admit that all this has been lost.

3. The Russo-Ukrainian War

In February 2022, Putin ordered a special military operation against Ukraine. Russia attacked from three axes. If you were the Ukrainian president, there's really only one way you can fight this war and win using traditional military doctrine: you must retreat. You want to overextend your enemy. Ukraine is a huge country, and Russia didn't send that many soldiers. If you just give them space, they're going to outrun their supply lines. Then you can encircle them and disrupt their supply.

What did the Ukrainians do instead? They refused to give up land. They wanted to fight the Russians for every inch of territory. Eventually, because the Russians had more forces, they were able to push through. Then, last summer, Ukraine launched a counter-offensive. Russia, a land army, had developed fortifications and defenses. The Ukrainian military sent hundreds of thousands of soldiers against this artillery, and the Russians blew everyone up.

Why are the ukrainians doing this?

• First, the president, Zelenskyy, is a TV actor. He doesn't think strategy; he just thinks about what looks good on TV. For the first two years, it looked as though the Ukrainians were going to win. Zelenskyy is a master of public image manipulation, but the reality on the ground is very different. Who else is like Zelenskyy? Trump. He is also concerned about what looks good on TV. He doesn't really care about strategy.
• Second, you have extremists in the Ukrainian military. These extremists are neo-Nazis. They hate Russia and wanted to kill as many Russians as possible, pushing for as much war as possible.
• Third, NATO. It's an open secret that NATO is helping the Ukrainian military. It's most likely that the summer offensive was a NATO plan. We also know that NATO special forces are in the country directing missile strikes. If Ukraine loses the war, what will NATO do? The most likely outcome will be that NATO sends its own troops against Russia. Macron of France has said he wants to send French soldiers, and the British prime minister is considering conscription.

These are three historical examples that are very similar to what could happen in Iran.

Game Theory Analysis: The Actors' Motivations

Now let's use another mode of analysis: game theory. Why would the United States send 100,000 troops into Iran? Let's look at the motivations of the individual players.

• United States: It wants to topple the regime in Tehran, and you can only do that with a ground invasion.
• Iran (Revolutionary Guard): They want to kill as many Americans as possible. They want to force an American land invasion, knowing that if the US invades, it will lose the war. The Revolutionary Guard can just send suicide bombers against the United States.
• Israel: What is Israel's optimal outcome? They want Iran defeated, and they want the proxies defeated. But what happens if the United States and Iran both lose the war? Meaning, Iran is destroyed as a country, and the United States is destroyed as a military presence in the Middle East. Israel becomes the top dog. The optimal outcome for Israel is that Iran and the United States are both destroyed.
• Saudi Arabia: What is their optimal outcome? Exactly the same as Israel's. This would leave the Middle East to Saudi Arabia and Israel, but Israel has a far superior military.

In other words, all the major participants want an invasion of Iran, but they want different outcomes. Saudi Arabia and Israel most benefit if you have 100,000 US troops trapped in the country, because it becomes a sunk cost fallacy, and the United States can only pour in more soldiers.

The Nuclear Trump Card and Russia's Role

The United States has nuclear weapons, which is its ultimate trump card. Trump can say to Tehran, "I have 100,000 troops in your country. You have to let them go, or I will nuke you." This is what Donald Trump will do once the situation arises. The only way for him to save face is to threaten Tehran.

So how do the Iranians protect themselves against this possibility? Who can help them? Russia.

Before this war happens, Iran and Russia must come to an agreement where Putin says from the onset, "No one is allowed to use nuclear weapons. If Iran uses nuclear weapons, I will nuke Iran. If the United States uses nuclear weapons, I will nuke the United States. If Israel uses nuclear weapons, I will nuke Israel."

If Putin says that, how will the world react? He's a hero. He saved humanity. But because he says this, the United States is now trapped. This becomes a black hole for the United States, where they can only send in more troops.

What's the problem with sending more troops? The military cannot recruit soldiers. But even if you did have enough troops, you can't resupply them. Why? What do you need to create bullets and ammunition? America has no manufacturing capacity because it moved all its manufacturing to China. For every one ship that America can build, China can build 232 ships. That's what the Pentagon says.

If this war were to happen, there's absolutely no way America can win. It's just completely trapped inside Iran. Once it becomes trapped, the sunk cost fallacy comes into play, and America just puts all its resources into the country, but it's a black hole. They cannot use nuclear weapons because Putin has said from the onset that they are not allowed to.

The question then is, why would Putin do that? Why would Putin involve himself in this war? That's what we'll discuss next.