The Automatic Earth

Pablo Picasso The first communion 1896 (he was 14/15 when he painted this!)

EX GB MI6 DIPLOMAT CROOKE: IRAN'S SHOCK COUNTERSTRIKE – THE WAR THAT CHANGES EVERYTHING

In a stunning escalation, Iran has flipped the script on US and Israeli aggression, launching a regional war that's already crippling Gulf states and exposing American vulnerabilities. With… pic.twitter.com/N2y0wlkTS6

— Mark (@Mark4XX) March 2, 2026

Ex-CIA spy John Kiriakou:

“The reason Trump decided to bomb Iran was the Israelis said, for the first time, 'If you don't bomb Iran we're going to use nuclear weapons.'” pic.twitter.com/hD8AspQAKs

— redpillbot (@redpillb0t) March 1, 2026

Back in May 2024 before the U.S elections a Beijing-based historian named Jiang Xueqin predicted THREE massive things that sounded insane at the time… but two have already hit:

1. Trump will win the 2024 elections.

2. The United States will go to war against Iran.

3. The… pic.twitter.com/NmKKPxK9FI

— Defiant Ghost (@TheDefiantGhost) March 2, 2026

"The United States is suffering significant material losses"

Larry C. Johnson
Former CIA Intel Analyst pic.twitter.com/eogAHKHHxj

— Paddystinian (@Paddystinian) March 2, 2026

Iran will drive the United States out of the middle East.

Former CIA anaylst pic.twitter.com/Y7jlPC1WzT

— The Kremlin (@The_Kremlinn) March 1, 2026

BREAKING: January jobs numbers reportedly came in at +130,000—nearly double the 70,000 estimate—while government payrolls fell by 34,000.

Reaction: “Wow… This is NOT the report we expected!” pic.twitter.com/3xtgqBUWMJ

— Brandon Straka #WalkAway (@BrandonStraka) March 2, 2026

Elon Musk made a bombshell prediction on aging at Davos:

“Aging is incredibly obvious once we find the clock — not subtle, not random wear-and-tear. I think we’ll crack it. Do I think we’ll figure out ways to extend life and maybe even reverse aging? I think that’s highly… pic.twitter.com/SjlJJUaSl9

— Camus (@newstart_2024) March 2, 2026

I don’t believe “easily”. And other than that, there are just so many -contradictory- accounts and opinions. Meet you halfway!

“.. delivering quick regime change and falling oil prices that cement Trumpism as a historic win, OR sparking Middle East chaos and global blowback..”

• Trump Claims ‘We Will Easily Prevail’ In Iran War (ZH)

President Trump opened Monday’s Medal of Honor ceremony in the White House East Wing with a carefully prepared, somewhat brief statement on Operation Epic Fury. Speaking deliberatively – but not quite with the level of his typically confident and energetic tone and demeanor – he spoke initially and broadly on the rationale for ordering the attack on Iran, which is now in day three and has taken at least four American troop lives at this point. Trump vowed to “crush” the “Iranian threat posed to the US,” claiming that “we will easily prevail”. He declared that already US forces have knocked out ten ships, and that the plan is to also ensure the Iranians “can’t fund armies beyond borders”.

But high on the minds of Congressional leaders and the American public is: what’s next? Trump gave a timeline of a “projected four to five weeks” for war with Iran, “but we can go longer” and this will involve “whatever it takes.” He vowed to continue the mission with “unyielding resolve” – even amid reports that US Gulf allies UAE and Qatar are now lobbying allies to persuade Trump to end the Iran war soon (as the Gulf continues to feel the impact of Iran’s retaliatory strikes). The President just committed the nation to another potentially open-ended war in the Middle East. * * *

Update(1015ET): The Pentagon has announced it has gained complete ‘local air superiority’ over Iran, and also that Israel continues working with the US to eliminate ‘common threats’. This came soon on the heels of the shocking news of three US F-15s downed over Kuwait. Iran is claiming to have shot down at least one US jet, while the US and Kuwait counter-claim that it was actually Kuwaiti ‘friendly fire’. Some six total US airmen parachuted down safely into Kuwaiti territory.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has meanwhile stated that at this point approximately 600 Iranian infrastructure sites have been dismantled in Iran using 2,500 munitions. These sites included “over 20 targets belonging to Iranian military leaders,” the IDF said. But as the conflict expands into Lebanon, and as many Gulf countries continue witnessing inbound Iranian missiles and drones, NATO command has distanced itself from the conflict, with Secretary General Mark Rutte stating Monday that the alliance “will not participate” in the joint US-Israeli mission. The Joint Chiefs say that more American service members are being added to the operation.

THE BIG WAR GAMBLE… or, Rabobank’s take paraphrased down to a single key sentence: The US strike on Iran is Trump’s high-risk gamble to choke China’s energy lifeline, flip Tehran to allied control, open the India-Middle East-Europe corridor, weaken Russia, and lock in 21st-century US hegemony—delivering quick regime change and falling oil prices that cement Trumpism as a historic win, OR sparking Middle East chaos and global blowback that hands Beijing the advantage in a new age of empires.

In the meantime, War Secretary Pete Hegseth appeared on the defensive in a Pentagon briefing early Monday. He confirmed there are as yet no US boots on the ground, while also seeking to assure the American public this is not an “endless war”. And yet, reporters were still left frustrated by lack of a clear timeline, or laying out of specific objectives which must be accomplished before Operation Epic Fury is declared over. There was a moment where Hegseth erupted at a reporter’s question, revealing that tensions are high at the Pentagon:But worrisomely for the prospect of escalation, NBC observes that Hegseth did not rule out boots on the ground:

Asked whether U.S. boots are on the ground, Hegseth said no, but said he would not lay out what the U.S. could do as the operation continueHegseth said that Trump ensures that the country’s enemies know that the U.S. will go as far as it needs to in order to advance the U.S.’ interests. Time will tell if this firm pledge becomes a reality or not: U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said on Monday that military operations against Iran would not lead to an “endless war” and that the aim was to destroy Tehran’s missiles, Navy and other security infrastructure. “We’re hitting them surgically, overwhelmingly and unapologetically,” Hegseth said during a press conference at the Pentagon.

Russia and China knew the attack was coming-before it happened. Putin and Xi both decided to stay silent. “The Russians and Chinese have known all of this. They have concluded that if they tried to deter militarily the US-Israeli attack, it would go ahead anyway, and with nuclear weapons.”

• On The Brink Of Israeli Nuclear Attack On Iran — Trump Just Said So (Helmer)

In investigating war and peace, life and death, truth and lies, innocence and guilt, there is hindsight bias and there is confirmation bias. Hindsight bias occurs when, with the evidence of what has just happened, the investigator is sure he anticipated the outcome from the beginning and is convinced he knew it all along. Confirmation bias operates forward in time, and also retrospectively, as new evidence is searched for in an investigation, interpreted when found, even fabricated, to prove what the investigator already suspected or believed to be the truth. These are the biases you the reader, and I the investigator, must beware of, especially now, if to believe the following reconstruction of the war which has just begun.

• Iran had agreed in the negotiations to the nuclear warhead and enrichment conditions, and probably also the agreement to stop backing Hezbollah, the Iraqis and the Houthis. Evidence: https://www.facebook.com/share/p/17Bepid5iL/?sfnsn=mo

• The sticking point was the Iranian missile programme — and plainly that was non-negotiable for the Iranians.

• Israel sees the missile threat from Iran as existential — it certainly is, according to the maps by Theodore Postol of a 500-missile Iranian raid on Israel (lead image).

• Therefore, it doesn’t take Chabadniki like Benjamin Netanyahu and Jared Kushner reading their holy books to conclude that Iran must be destroyed before they destroy Israel, no matter what international law, the articles of the United Nations Charter, or the rest of the world thinks.

• General Daniel Caine and the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) told President Donald Trump that there was no certainty that a conventional attack on Iran would either achieve decapitation and regime change, or destroy the Iranian underground missile stocks and systems for overground retaliation against Israel. He advised a “balancing act”.

• The Israelis have been emphatic in Netanyahu’s meetings with Trump in Miami and Washington that they have no choice but to attack and will go nuclear if they judge it necessary — with or without Trump’s say-so.

• The Americans replied that they would agree to attack and try to head off nuclear attack.

• The Russians and Chinese have known all of this. They have concluded that if they tried to deter militarily the US-Israeli attack, it would go ahead anyway, and with nuclear weapons. Whether that was a Netanyahu bluff or not, President Putin believed there was reason not to issue an advance warning. We don’t know what President Xi Jinping thought of the nuclear war risk and what he thought of the reason for not issuing an advance warning. We know he didn’t.

• We also know that the Russians and Chinese have been at loggerheads over something so strategic and important that they have been repeatedly hinting at it without disclosing the details since last December.

So here we are on the evidence, on the brink, and Trump has said so. The US and Israel will press their attack until they are confident that the Iranian missile defences are totally destroyed – “until all of our objectives are achieved”, Trump has said. Military sources say that the Iranians have been hitting targets in Haifa, Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, and will be aiming at refineries and electricity power generating power plants. If the Iranians can, they will launch the attack on Israel which Postol has mapped as near-total destruction of the Israeli cities. If they do, or if they are about to do, Israel will launch preemptive nuclear attack.

“.. under Article I, Section 8, Clause 11, only Congress may declare wars. The result has been over two centuries of conflicts between presidents and Congress.”

• Fight or Flight: How Trump Boxed in Congress on War Powers (Turley)

Below is my column in Fox.com on the move this coming week to introduce a war powers resolution to end the attacks in Iran. The task, however, will be far more challenging in light of the escalation of hostilities. With the loss of American personnel, the choice is even more stark politically for these members. President Donald Trump has left Congress with only fight or flight options.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D., Va.) promised to force a vote on a war powers resolution to bar further prosecution of the war against Iran. Republicans such as Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) have joined in the call to bar further hostilities. These members are certainly within their rights to call for such resolutions and the Framers wanted such debates to occur in Congress. However, it is too late to make this cat walk backwards. While there are good-faith reasons to oppose the commencement of the attacks, the United States is now in close combat with Iran. Drafting a war powers resolution at this stage would be nearly impossible without putting U.S. personnel and allies at risk.

The Constitution divides war powers between the legislative and executive branches. Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution declares that “the President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states.” However, under Article I, Section 8, Clause 11, only Congress may declare wars. The result has been over two centuries of conflicts between presidents and Congress. Presidents are clearly authorized to respond to threats to national security by commencing military operations. Past presidents, including Democratic presidents such as President Barack Obama and Joe Biden, have asserted the unilateral power to attack other nations when they believe that combat is warranted by national security.

The War Powers Act was the response of Congress to try to curtail such unilateral authority. Overriding the veto of President Richard Nixon, Congress mandated that presidents must consult with them and cease all combat operations within 60 days if Congress has not approved the use of force. Presidents, and some academics, have long argued that the WPA is unconstitutional in part or in whole. Now to the current conflict. The sixty-day period is likely ample for what President Donald Trump is planning for Iran since he has ruled out putting American boots on the ground in the conflict. That is why Kaine, Massie, and others are moving to cut off authorization immediately.

The problem is that the Iranian Revolutionary Guards are now launching a full-fledged attack with thousands of missiles against the United States, its assets, and its allies around the world. It has also declared that the key Strait of Hormuz is now closed — potentially choking off twenty percent of the world’s oil reserves. So how are these members going to draft a War Powers Resolution? The WPA requires that“The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and after every such introduction shall consult regularly with the Congress until United States Armed Forces are no longer engaged in hostilities or have been removed from such situations.”

Kaine and others insist that hostilities were not imminent when we attacked. Even if that were true, they are now. We are in a full engagement with Iran with mounting injuries and destruction. All threats are now imminent and all attacks are arguably preemptive. WPR specifically allows for the use of force in “a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.” Those attacks are now occurring. In these circumstances, it would be nearly impossible to limit the war powers of the President without putting American personnel or allies at risk. After decapitating the leadership in Iran, Iranian assets are clearly operating under prior orders in a decentralized structure. That means that the United States must neutralize any and all assets that they can find in preemptive attacks while trying to further degrade the command structure of the Iranian government. Is Congress going to require the United States to only act responsively, rather than preemptively, to attacks? That would be absurd from an operational standpoint. The most a resolution could demand is the cessation of hostilities once imminent threats are removed. That would be practically meaningless given the fact that hostilities will continue so long as the current Iranian government remains in power. Both the IRG and de facto Iranian leader Ali Larijani pledged that they are now unleashing every asset against the United States and its allies. Larijani declared “They stabbed heart of the nation, their heart will be stabbed too.”

“Some of the supposed character “flaws” of @realDonaldTrump are precisely those that are needed to be a courageous and bold global leader.” Gad Saad

• Ayatollah So (James Howard Kunstler)

You’ve got to think: if the US military can pinpoint one room in Teheran with a Grand Ayatollah and 39 other high officials in it, then the US military can figure out where Iran’s missiles are being launched from and put a stop to that, too. With no high command left, Iran’s missile batteries have been on their own since Saturday, desperately trying a kind of last-ditch “Samson option” to light up the whole region and bring the House of the Middle East down with Iran.

Firing on the Emirates, and Saudi Arabia especially, was maybe not such a hot idea. Saudi Arabia’ air defenses intercepted almost all the drones aimed at their giant Ras Tanura oil refinery. Falling debris started a small fire that was contained while the refinery shut down safely. Iran has reawakened the centuries-old rift between Shi’a and Sunni Islam and Saudi Arabia has been stockpiling war planes from the USA for fifty years without getting to use them much. I doubt they’ll pass up the chance.

Who does speak for Iran now? Just naming a successor to the Ayatollah Khamenei would put a target on his turban. Iran’s Intel Service building was blown up on Sunday, so that network must be dark. How is Iran’s government and its remaining military command communicating? And how would US and Israeli intel not be listening in on whatever chatter is out there? The world fretfully expects Iran to try to close the Strait of Hormuz, but how does that happen with tanker traffic halted and most of Iran’s navy blown up and its naval command headquarters destroyed? Without the ships to do it, it’s unlikely that Iran will be laying out minefields in the Strait. Or that any tankers will be around to sink in the channel.

President Trump has declared a four-week window for Operation Epic Fury. Sounds a little too generous. With no command structure left and no viable communication, you might give the Islamic Republic one more week, maybe. It’s a tossup whether they run out of missiles and drones before all their launch-sites and stockpiles get bombed. Meanwhile, a US / Israeli info operation that hacked Iran’s state-run TV seeks to persuade Iranian army personnel and government bureaucrats to turn on what remains of the theocracy and think about forming a secular government. Why would they stick with the loser regime?

Of course, the Trump-deranged political opposition in America is ululating over this effort to put the world’s leading fomenter of terrorism out of business. The New York Times is especially glum, claiming, “The American public’s appetite for an attack on Iran was low before Trump and Israel took action.” Maybe the Jacobin-Democrats they cater to feel that way, since the party has been increasingly synchronizing with the forces of Jihad since the Oct 7, 2023, Hamas raid. After forty-seven years of ayatollahs, what part of “Death to America” don’t they understand?

Not a few prominent figures on the Right also deplored Operation Epic Fury. The increasingly rogue Trump-hater and Israel vilifier, Tucker Carlson, called the action “disgusting and evil.” MTG called it “unnecessary and is unacceptable.” Blackwater founder Erik Prince colored it as “not serving America’s interests and inconsistent with President Trump’s MAGA agenda.” Rep. Thomas Masie (R-KY) framed his objection in Congress’s prerogative to declare war — though the War Powers Act of 1973 permits the president to conduct military operations for 60 days after notifying Congress of his intentions.

You can understand why people are nervous about this, with so many commentators predicting World War Three and Biblical Armageddon. The Fourth Turning narrative asserts that a major war is inevitable at this moment in history. Maybe so. But Ukraine has already happened and is on a glide path to its conclusion. And Operation Epic Fury does not have to turn out badly for all concerned, including Iran. Other more sanguine observers see a more peaceful and prosperous Middle East emerging from the smoke, a fulfillment of the Abraham Protocols, and the termination of Iran-sponsored proxy wars, terror programs, and medieval social despotism.

Epic Fury looks like a turning point for Western Civ more generally as regards tolerating Jihadi insolence — its declared intent to destroy all its “infidel” enemies, meaning you and me and the remaining indigenous population of Europe. The strife Iran managed to stir up all around the Middle East and beyond for decades was largely responsible for the mass migration into Europe and the dispersion of millions into the USA during “Joe Biden’s” open border years. Citizens are now rising to oppose Islam’s aggressive promotion of Sharia Law and demographic replacement in Texas and other states. Expect bolder resistance to all that now, here and in Europe, too.

However this thing goes, Iran will not acquire a nuclear arsenal, and this was, after all, the main issue. Anyway, the Iranians must be sick of the rule of the mullahs. Mr. Trump told them some weeks ago that “help is on the way.” He meant what he said, he didn’t chicken out, and now it’s up to the people of Iran to sort out how they enter the future, starting now.

Iran is important for Russia and China. That is not less so with Khameini gone. BRICS.

• Trump Bit Off More Than He Can Chew With Iran – Ex-Pentagon Analyst (RT)

The US-Israeli strikes on Iran are unlikely to trigger regime change and risk escalating into a wider geopolitical confrontation, former Pentagon security policy analyst Michael Maloof has told RT.Washington and West Jerusalem launched what they described as a “preemptive” attack on the Islamic Republic after nuclear talks failed to produce a breakthrough, prompting retaliation from Iran. Tehran responded with missile and drone strikes targeting Israel and US military bases across the region.

In an interview with RT on Saturday, Maloof said the timing of the attack had likely been finalized during Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to Mar-a-Lago on February 12, despite President Donald Trump publicly insisting that negotiations with Tehran were ongoing. “The United States has always done Israel’s bidding. Netanyahu basically controls Trump,” Maloof claimed, adding that the US president has effectively pursued the Israeli PM’s vision of “a greater Israel to encompass all the Arab countries.” Trump openly declared his goal to force regime change in Tehran, but efforts to topple Iran’s government would face major obstacles, according to Maloof.

“Regime change is something that is going to be difficult, especially in Iran, where they’re very, very set. They have a government in place,” he said. Even with the killing of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps would likely keep the country functioning as a “cohesive nation-state.”At the same time, he described the strikes as part of a broader strategic confrontation extending beyond Iran’s nuclear or missile programs, noting how the US president has been openly critical of BRICS and China’s Belt and Road Initiative.

“And Iran just happened to be a very critical component to that, with Russia and with China,” Maloof said. “I think Trump bit off more than he could chew on this one.”“These attacks are gonna affect the whole economic world order, literally overnight. So we’re in for a long, hard slug here,” Maloof said, adding that “it’s easy to start a war, but [it’s harder to know how to stop one.”

“Last night, all over Iran, the voices of the Iranian people could be heard cheering and celebrating in the streets when his death was announced.”

• Trump Responds to American Casualties in Iran, Predicts More (DS)

President Donald Trump is promising to avenge the deaths of those lost in Operation Epic Fury. U.S. Central Command reported three fatalities in the first 24 hours after the strike on Iran. The United States and Israel launched strikes on Iran in what Trump characterized as the beginning of “major combat operations” early Saturday morning.“As one nation, we grieve for the true American patriots who have made the ultimate sacrifice for our nation,” Trump said in a video address Sunday night. “Even as we continue the righteous mission for which they gave their lives, we pray for the full recovery of the wounded and send our immense love and eternal gratitude to the families of the fallen.”

Trump said “sadly” there will “likely” be more deaths before the operation in Iran end“It is likely be more, but we’ll do everything possible where that won’t be the case, but America will avenge their deaths and deliver the most punishing blow to the terrorists who have waged war against basically, civilization,” he said. “They have waged war against civilization itself.” Trump said the resolve of the United States and Israel has never been stronger.“America is now again the richest, most powerful nation in the world by far,” he said. “But the only reason we enjoy the quality of life that we do and the freedom and security is we have done things that others are unable to do, but it’s because of warriors who are willing to lay down their lives to do battle with our enemies, and they do battle better than anybody.”

Trump again called the Iranian military and police to relinquish their weapons to “receive full immunity or face certain death.” He also encouraged protesters “to seize this moment to be brave, be bold, be heroic and take back your country.”“America is with you,” he said. “I made a promise to you, and I fulfilled that promise.” Trump said the voices of celebrating Iranians could be heard across the world last night after the ayatollah was killed.“This wretched and vile man had the blood of hundreds and even thousands of Americans on his hands and was responsible for the slaughter of countless thousand of innocent people all across many countries,” he said. “Last night, all over Iran, the voices of the Iranian people could be heard cheering and celebrating in the streets when his death was announced.”

Good story.

• U.S. Hits Iran With Iran’s Own Drone Design (Stephen Green)

In light of recent news out of the Middle East, we have to rewrite the old dictum — provenance disputed — that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery that mediocrity can pay to greatness. Because you know those Iranian-made Shahed drones Russia keeps smacking Ukraine with? Yeah, we hit Iran last weekend with a copycat version of the very same drone. In July of 2025, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth headed up a Pentagon event showing off 18 American-made drone prototypes, that had gone from drawing board to development in just an average of 18 months. By comparison, the Navy’s F/A-XX to replace the aging F/A-18 multirole jets with a modern platform started in 2012, and they haven’t even chosen a design.

One of the prototypes shown off by Hegseth looked more than a little familiar to anyone following the Russo-Ukraine War drone campaign, because it was a virtual copy of Iran’s infamous Shahed drone, now made in Russia, too, and manufactured in the thousands. Only this one is made in Arizona by a startup called SpektreWorks.They cost roughly $35,000 apiece and have an attack range of roughly 450 miles. Iran calls it Shahed, or Witness. The Russians call their domestically produced version Geran-2, or Geranium. We call ours the Low-Cost Unmanned Combat Attack System, or LUCAS, because of course we do. Anyway.

At the time, Undersecretary of Defense for Research and Engineering Emil Michael told reporters, “It’s an extraordinary achievement. This kind of thing was going to take five, six years.” This was all in response to an executive order by President Donald Trump, directing the Pentagon to “procure, integrate, and train using low-cost, high-performing drones manufactured in the United States.”Trump called it “unleashing American drone dominance,” and not even a year later, here we are. On Saturday, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) confirmed that LUCAS flew in combat for the first time during Operation Epic Fury, not much longer than two years after SpektreWorks began developing them:

“Task Force Scorpion Strike, for the first time in history, is using one-way attack drones in combat during Operation Epic Fury. These low-cost drones, modeled after Iran’s Shahed drones, are now delivering American-made retribution.””For the price of a single Tomahawk, you can launch 57 LUCAS drones,” analyst Shanaka Anslem Perera posted over the weekend. What’s even more remarkable is the cost savings — even over the Russian model. “A Shahed-136 in Russian production costs approximately $80,000 per unit at the Alabuga facility. The American reverse-engineered version costs less than half the Russian licensed copy of the Iranian original.

“SpektreWorks received a $30 million initial production contract. That buys 857 kamikaze drones for what the Navy spends maintaining a handful of Tomahawks.”LUCAS also has some nifty electronics under the hood. The Shahed/Geran is a fairly simple creature, capable of flying to a pre-programmed location and blowing up. Each LUCAS is integrated into the Pentagon’s MUSIC mesh network — some even with built-in SpaceX Starshield terminals! — allowing operators to reprogram it in real-time, and making it into a communications node, expanding every local commander’s view of the battlespace.

All for the price of a nicely appointed Chevrolet Equinox.Granted, with its short range and comparatively tiny warhead, even in large numbers, there are jobs LUCAS simply can’t do that Tomahawk can. The Tomahawk can also carry some… interesting… payloads that LUCAS can’t. But having large numbers of cheap drones broadens the range of decisions available to any commander lucky enough to have LUCAS — and their low price means they’ll eventually be integrated anywhere we can make them fit.

It’s been maybe three years since the Russo-Ukraine War had even doubters admitting that drone warfare changes everything — and, frankly, we’ve been behind. While Western air forces (particularly the American and Israeli) dominate the skies above 3,000 feet, drone operators own, or at least can contest the lower altitudes. I wish I could remember who to credit that observation, but it dates back to probably 2023. So perhaps instead of some closed-minded insistence about imitation being the sincerest form of flatter that mediocrity can pay to greatness, how about we just ask, “How about a taste of your own medicine?”

Delivered on the cheap.

“.. the Obama administration transferred $1.7 billion to Iran as part of a settlement tied to the nuclear agreement. The payment included $400 millon in cash delivered the same day American prisoners were released, along with $1.3 billion in interest.”

• The Left’s Iran Meltdown: Outrage on Cue, Memory on Vacation (David Manney)

Explosives our military shared with regime targets in Iran during Operation Epic Fury did more than blow up targets; it exposed a political reflex that snaps into place whenever President Donald Trump takes decisive action overseas.

Within hours of the strikes, prominent Democrats declared the operation illegal, reckless, and unconstitutional. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), she of the small ankle-biting dogs who never stop barking and constantly make a nuisance of themselves, called the action an unlawful war and demanded that Congress rein in the White House. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), calling on her comic-book collection for foreign-policy lessons from such esteemed fictional characters as Joe Biden, labeled the strikes catastrophic and unnecessary. Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), the Temu Obama, insisted the administration owed Congress immediate answers and suggested limits on war powers.

Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), six-time champion of the Gollom look-a-like contest, said Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s removal was a positive development but warned the white House lacked a clear plan. Their language differed in tone and scripts, but the outrage moved in one direction. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez labeled the strikes catastrophic and unnecessary. U.S. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries insisted the administration owed Congress immediate answers and suggested limits on war powers. Sen. Mark Kelly said Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s removal was a positive development but warned the White House lacked a clear plan. Their language differed in tone, but the outrage moved in one direction.

Resolutions over the War Powers Act surfaced almost immediately; democratic lawmakers pushed for votes to restrict presidential authority and framed the strikes as a dangerous escalation. The urgency was unmistakable, the message unified, and the volume turned up to 11. Yet maybe because the left uses so much oxygen in a room, Democrats suffered from oxygen deprivation? I’m only asking because their memories surrounding historical Iranian policy appear selective. It was good to be an Iranian terrorist group in January 2016, when the Obama administration transferred $1.7 billion to Iran as part of a settlement tied to the nuclear agreement. The payment included $400 millon in cash delivered the same day American prisoners were released, along with $1.3 billion in interest.

Money was flown to Tehran in foreign currency, as the administration defended the transaction as a lawful settlement of a decades-old dispute. Democratic leaders broadly supported the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action and its financial framework. That action didn’t trigger debates over emergency powers, didn’t produce accusations of unilateral recklessness, and didn’t prompt televised warnings about catastrophic instability. Instead, many Democratic lawmakers praised the diplomatic breakthrough and, in glorious terms, described the deal as a stabilizing force in the region. Seriously, what harm would a few billion dollars given to the world’s largest terrorist government create?

Good times. Seriously. Pfft! Ben Rhodes, former Deputy National Security Advisor under President Barack Obama, strongly supported the nuclear deal at the time and has since repeatedly criticized President Trump’s withdrawal from it. Following successful reports from Operation Epic Fury, Rhodes warned of escalation and humanitarian fallout. X users curtly told Rhodes to sit this one out. His critique reflects a sharp shift in posture compared to the confidence expressed during the 2015-16 negotiations. Surprisingly, compared to the single-message strategy commanded by Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), the Democrats were, well, in disarray. For her part, when the “emeritus” speaker talks about reckless behavior, irony quietly refills the glass.

Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) broke from most of his colleagues and defended the strike, arguing that decisive action against Iran’s leadership could create an opening for long-term stability. Rep Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.), a member of the Blue Dog Coalition, expressed support for confronting Iranian aggression while still seeking clarity on objectives. Their positions stand in visible contrast to the louder condemnations. What’s tough to ignore is the pattern: When President Joe “where’s my nose” Biden authorized strikes against Iran-backed militias during his administration, opposition within his party remained muted. When President Barack “Cash and Carry” Obama reduced sanctions relief and a $1.7 billion cash settlement, Democratic leaders framed the move as responsible statecraft.

But when President Trump orders coordinated strikes that eliminate hostile members of leadership, the response shifts from legal panic and televised alarm.Operation Epic Fury will succeed or fail on strategic grounds, but early on, it’s hard to argue that the attack’s planning was well coordinated. Serious debate about long-term consequences is fair and necessary. What undermines credibility is selective outrage that appears tied more to the occupant of the Oval Office than to the underlying threat posed by the Iranian regime.

For decades, Iran’s leadership funded proxy militias, backed regional terror networks, and suppressed (re: killed) its own people. Presidents from Jimmy Carter onward faced the decision of how to handle that regime. Some chose engagement, while others chose pressure: Each decision carried risk. What’s changed isn’t the region’s volatility, but the consistency of partisan reaction. If killing a tyrannical leader is illegal under one president, it must be illegal for all. If financial transfers are wise diplomacy under one administration, then decisive military action can’t automatically become reckless under another, simply because of party affiliation. The actors, displaying their versions of meltdowns, tell their own story.

But does it protect against hypersonic?

• Golden Dome for America (Joe Dodd)

The Golden Dome for America (GDA) initiative has drawn criticism for not publicly releasing a detailed architecture, cost breakdown, or long-range budget projections. Think tanks, major media outlets, and some lawmakers argue that without public transparency the program risks becoming an expensive, open-ended undertaking. Those concerns deserve to be taken seriously. But they often treat public disclosure as an unquestioned virtue. Revealing how the system works would give our adversaries the information they need to blunt it. We don’t disclose budget information or performance characteristics for nuclear submarines, the F-35 and other sensitive air vehicles, or spy satellites developed by [the National Reconnaissance Office]. Demanding public disclosure of GDA is akin to asking the United States to publish a playbook for defeating it.

This reality is not theoretical. China and Russia have already criticized Golden Dome as destabilizing and driving an arms race. In this environment, withholding key details is not only prudent—it is imperative. A homeland defense system that is predictable is easier to defeat and doesn’t deter aggression against the US. A system that retains secrecy forces adversaries to spend more to plan around it. The lack of public disclosure does not mean the program lacks oversight. General Michael A. Guetlein—the Director for GDA—has briefed members of Congress and industry leaders in classified settings. That is the appropriate model: informed insight without giving adversaries a free intelligence windfall on the design and capabilities of the systems and architecture.

Regarding cost, much of the debate has been distorted. Some estimates suggest GDA will cost trillions over decades, often assuming a perfect system with extremely large numbers of space-based interceptors, satellites, and radars. The CBO estimates that Golden Dome will cost up to $540B over the first 20 years or about 2% of [Department of Defense] spending in that period—that’s not budget breaking … and the Golden Dome office suggest that their estimates are even lower. This is more comparable to a large [Department of War] modernization program than a Manhattan Project-scale shock.

Critics also sometimes misapply affordability comparisons to the 1980s Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). SDI relied on immature technologies and unproven physics at scale. Golden Dome is largely a systems architecture challenge—linking sensors, command and control, and layered intercept capabilities across domains. General Guetlein even goes as far as saying the technology already exists for GDA, the challenge is integrating it.Golden Dome should face rigorous oversight, cost discipline, and clear milestones. Congress is right to demand accountability. Government and Industry must protect classified information. But the most common criticism—that secrecy is inherently illegitimate—misunderstands the domain. In homeland defense, transparency is not neutral. It is information that can be weaponized.

A classified architecture shared with Congress and industry, paired with public accountability on budgets, schedules, and outcomes, is the right balance. If Golden Dome can be delivered near the budget numbers cited above, it is not only affordable—it may be one of the most strategically beneficial investments the United States has ever made. For deterrence to work, the nation needs credible, demonstrated defensive capabilities to defend against credible threats. Golden Dome for America is about building that deterrence to protect Americans in their Homeland.

“Britain desperately needs a reckoning with the Afghan crime wave—and with the political leaders who have allowed and enabled it ..”

• The UK’s New Grooming Gang Scandal (Fraser Myers)

In borderless Britain, it seems as if barely a day goes by without some monstrosity being committed by a migrant who should never have been in the country in the first place. The world is now familiar with the ongoing scandal of Britain’s predominantly Pakistani rape gangs. Yet what is also unfolding right now is a wave of brutal sexual violence committed by illegal arrivals, often asylum seekers from Afghanistan.Take the case of Afghan national Ahmad Mulakhil, convicted last month for raping a 12-year-old girl in a park in Nuneaton, Warwickshire. Alongside one count of rape, 23-year-old Mulakhil was also found guilty of child abduction, two counts of sexual assault, and taking indecent photos of a child. He had already confessed to a charge of oral rape.

Mulakhil arrived in the UK illegally, crossing the English Channel from France in a small boat in July 2025. This being post-borders Britain, he was not detained or punished for this incursion. He was instead offered free accommodation and financial support, initially in Kent on England’s south coast, before he was relocated to Nuneaton, a quiet market town, where he was placed in social housing, at the taxpayers’ expense. Six weeks later, he approached his 12-year-old victim as she was playing on the swings in a park. His identity was confirmed when, after the attack, he went to purchase some cans of Red Bull in a nearby shop, using the preloaded debit card issued to him by the UK Home Office.

A few weeks later, just a few miles down the road in Leamington Spa, two Afghan 17-year-olds abducted a 15-year-old from a park, took her to a secluded area, and then raped her. Another Afghan illegal migrant raped a 15-year-old in broad daylight in Falkirk town center in Scotland in 2023. Sadeq Nikzad sought to defend himself by citing language barriers and “cultural differences.” These cases are barely the tip of the iceberg. You can open a newspaper on any day in Britain and expect to read about a gruesome crime committed by a small-boats migrant, more often than not from Afghanistan.

In a twisted way, the Falkirk rapist, Sadeq Nikzad, sort of had a point, even if the courts rightly rejected the notion that “cultural differences” were a reasonable defence. It is surely not for nothing that so many high-profile sex attacks in Britain are being committed by Afghans. Although data on the ethnicity and nationality of criminals are notoriously difficult to compile (made deliberately so by authorities beholden to political correctness), research by the Telegraph suggests that Afghan nationals are 20 times more likely to be convicted of a sexual offense than the average person in England and Wales. Afghans have the highest rate of sexual offending of all nationalities in the UK.

Should this really be a surprise? Of course, it would be wrong to tar every Afghan with the worst crimes imaginable. Yet it would be equally absurd to assume that Afghans shed their upbringings and cultural assumptions as soon as they arrive in Europe or on Britain’s shores.

According to the Georgetown Institute’s Women, Peace and Security Index, Afghanistan ranks last out of 181 countries on almost every measure of women’s wellbeing, from the threat of partner violence to gender-based political persecution and women’s safety in general. Since the Taliban retook power in 2021, women have been relegated to below second-class status. The Islamic Republic of Iran looks like a feminist utopia by comparison. Women are forbidden from leaving the house without a male relative, and must be fully veiled when they do so. All girls are banned from attending school and one in three is forced into a child marriage. Rape is rampant. and, while men go unpunished, female victims can be prosecuted and punished for “adultery,” including by being stoned to death. To call this misogyny “medieval” is an insult to the actual medievals.

Britons who grew up in the 1990s, 2000s or 2010s will remember the “feminist” campaigns to ban the sale of soft pornography on in supermarkets and newsagents. The Sun, once Britain’s bestselling tabloid newspaper, used to feature a bare-breasted woman on “Page Three” every day. “Lads mags”—bawdy magazines for men—would feature topless models, sex tips, and lewd anecdotes. These relatively harmless, anodyne fixtures of British public life were regularly denounced by the great and the good as “proof” that the UK had a “rape culture.”

Yet now a very real “rape culture” has been imported from Afghanistan and is tearing through Britain. It is doing so with the connivance of the state, thanks to its porous borders combined with an overly generous interpretation of who should be deemed a refugee. Meanwhile, establishment feminists are either silent at best or at worst, happily complicit in the erosion of Britain’s borders and indifferent to the now-constant abuse of women and girls this has entailed. Any suggestion that thousands of young, unattached men from the most misogynistic nation on the planet might pose a non-negligible risk to women and girls is dismissed as “divisive,” “racist” and even “fascist.”

This is not to malign everyone who arrives from Afghanistan. Not only are there many genuinely deserving of asylum from their tyrannical government (women, for instance, though they are notable for their absence among small-boats arrivals); there are also many Afghans whom the British government specifically has a duty to protect. Following the U.S.-UK withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021, many interpreters and others who supported the British war effort were left stranded as the Taliban retook Kabul. Worse, a UK Ministry of Defence data breach led to more than 250 of their names being made public, effectively handing the Taliban a kill list of traitors. Here the case for asylum seems inarguable. Such people were placed in immediate danger of death by the rank incompetence of the British state. And so the British state has a responsibility to protect them.

But what also seems inarguable is that the British state’s primary responsibility ought to be to protect its own citizens. Instead, our “compassionate,” “open-hearted” elites are rolling out the red carpet for tens of thousands of mostly male, young, totally unvetted illegal migrants arriving at random on the southern coast. As far as the establishment is concerned, those men are the real victims deserving of the state’s charity. The women and girls that are being on a horrifyingly regular basis are treated as mere collateral damage. Britain desperately needs a reckoning with the Afghan crime wave—and with the political leaders who have allowed and enabled it.

“… a Minnesota-based nonprofit stole roughly $300 million in COVID-19 relief funds meant to feed needy children..|| “Walz and Attorney General Keith Ellison are set to testify before the House Oversight Committee on March 4 “

• Tim Walz Is Stonewalling Congress to Protect Fraudsters, His Legacy (Margolis)

Tim Walz’s political career is finished. He has abandoned his reelection bid, and his hopes of running for president are shot. Yet he’s still trying to protect his legacy by stonewalling a federal investigation into one of the biggest fraud scandals in American history. The U.S. House Education and Workforce Committee, chaired by Rep. Tim Walberg of Michigan, sent Walz a letter in February, calling him out for failing to fully comply with a congressional subpoena that has been sitting on his desk since September 2024.

The U.S. House Committee on Education and Workforce (Committee) continues an investigation it began in the 118th Congress into how the Minnesota Department of Education (MDE) administers two federal nutrition programs (i.e., Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) and Summer Food Service Program (SFSP)) and into the massive fraud perpetrated by the nonprofit Feeding Our Future (FOF), its principals, and other individuals.3 Federal prosecutors have described the scheme as “not just criminal, but depraved and brazen.” The Committee writes to reiterate key requests made in its earlier correspondence to which you have as yet failed to provide full or complete responses.

That subpoena — issued by then-Chairwoman Virginia Foxx — contained 14 specific document requests tied to the Feeding Our Future scandal, a breathtaking scheme in which a Minnesota-based nonprofit stole roughly $300 million in COVID-19 relief funds meant to feed needy children. For what it’s worth, Walz’s office responded to the subpoena — eventually. But what lawmakers got back was a carefully curated pile of nothing. Curiously, the information the committee really needed was missing. Text messages between Walz and his staff? Missing. Communications showing how his team handled congressional information requests related to the fraud probe? Also missing. Walberg wasn’t impressed. His February letter stated flatly that Walz’s “responses to the subpoena lack clarity and appear designed to evade the requests.”

In short, Walz may be headed out the door, but he’s not exactly going quietly. He has a legacy to protect, and he’s going to spend as much time and energy as he can to protect it. “Reporting over the last five to 10 years and the criminal trials of FOF personnel and others continue to raise grave concerns about whether the [nutrition] programs have adequate safeguards in place against fraud, waste, and abuse,” the committee’s letter noted. “Related questions exist of whether Minnesota and MDE have exercised sufficient oversight of food service sponsors and providers.”

Whistleblowers have claimed that Walz knew fraud was occurring and allowed it to continue. In January, House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) argued that the scheme wasn’t an oversight failure but “active assistance” from the top of Minnesota’s government. All three Republican Minnesota state lawmakers who testified at a January House Oversight hearing agreed that the Walz administration didn’t just miss the fraud — it had political reasons to let it keep going.

Nearly 80 defendants have been charged in connection with the Feeding Our Future scheme, and more than 50 convictions have already been secured. But make no mistake about it, the investigation is far from over. Walz and Attorney General Keith Ellison are set to testify before the House Oversight Committee on March 4.

“age-gating”

• Poland Plans Social Media Ban For Under-15s (ZH)

Three months after Australia banned minors under the age of 16 from accessing social media, Poland is preparing to do the same thing. A bill is currently being prepared by the largest party in Poland’s ruling Civic Coalition Party that would prohibit children under the age of 15 from using social media platforms, and would require tech companies to verify users’ ages. Education Minister Barbara Nowacka laid out the plan on Friday, which include fines of up to 6% of the worldwide (global) revenue of social media companies if their services remain accessible to under-15s. “We need to limit access to social media for children under 15. At the same time, we need to work on mental health and raise awareness among children, parents, and the entire Polish society about the dangers of social media,” Nowacka said.

If sped through legislation, Poland’s bill could take effect as early as 2027, however the coalition hasn’t fully signed off yet, and it will undoubtedly face legal pushback from US tech giants. As the Epoch Times notes further, on Dec. 10, Australia became the first country to impose nationwide restrictions on minors accessing social media, banning those under 16 from a dozen platforms.The restrictions were brought in amid concerns over mental health, online harms, and screen addiction affecting Australian children.Poland is the latest country in the European Union to say it was planning to introduce a ban or some other form of restriction, with other member states similarly citing concerns over children’s mental health.

In France, legislation is moving through parliament to ban children younger than age 15 from accessing social media platforms. Denmark and Slovenia are likewise looking at bans for under-15s. Spain will follow Australia in banning social media for minors under age 16. Portugal is taking a different approach. Rather than introducing an outright ban on children under a certain age from accessing social media, it aims to require explicit parental consent for children aged 13 to 16 to access the platforms. Other countries around the world are making similar plans, including Malaysia, which says it will ban social media accounts for children younger than age 16 this year.

‘Age-Gating’ Social Media
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced a series of new proposals earlier this month aimed at protecting young people from social media addiction, including a proposed ban for under-16s, subject to a public consultation. Some measures by the UK and the EU to curb online harms have led to tensions with the United States, home of many big tech companies, around issues of free speech and regulatory overreach. Privacy and free speech advocates, such as UK-based Open Rights Group, say that a social media ban for under-16s would be an ineffective response to online harms.

The Open Rights Group says it would lead to “age-gating” across all social media platforms, requiring users to prove their age. “Protecting children online should not mean building a surveillance infrastructure for everyone,” Open Rights Group spokesman James Baker said. “We need regulation that puts users back in control, not policies that force people to trade their privacy and voice for access to modern life.”

“What the team giveth, the state taketh away.”

• Major League Pitcher Turns Down Padres $40 Million Due to State Taxes (Turley)

This week, “there is no joy in Mudville” – the mighty Padres have struck out. The California Padres thought that they had secured Arizona Diamondbacks pitcher Merrill Kelly with an offer of $40 million for just two years. The Diamondbacks were offering that payout over three years, but Kelly took the Diamondbacks. The reason? California’s ruinous tax burden is fueling an exodus of wealthy taxpayers and businesses from the state. It is the latest example of how Democrats have reversed the Gold Rush with a long line of U-Hauls heading to more responsible states.

Explaining his decision, the pitcher told the media that “I don’t think it’s any secret on how much money you get taken out of your pocket when you go to California.”With the calls for billionaire taxes and attacks on the wealthy as “not paying their fair share,” Democrats and unions have doubled down on their “eat the rich” rhetoric. The problem is that wealth, like the wealthy, is mobile. Both are leaving, and the current estimate stands at a possible $2 trillion fleeing the state over the last year. California continues to lead the nation in the loss of citizens to other states. In the meantime, Democrats are continuing their high-spending pattern under Gov. Gavin Newsom from boondoggle projects to reparations to bloated union pension agreements.

With California’s 13% tax rate on income above $1 million, players view California as illusory in terms of elite contracts. What the team giveth, the state taketh away. That does not include the higher collateral taxes and costs, including gasoline costs (which are also the highest in the nation). It appears that the high-spending, high-taxing policies are not just benefiting red states but also their baseball teams. As a Cubs fan, I would be delighted except for the fact that Chicago and Illinois are also in the hands of Democrats pursuing the same disastrous policies. The irony is that Texas and Florida could end up not only with more jobs but better baseball players.

mRNA injections have killed 470,000–840,000 Americans and functioned as sterilization agents among survivors.

They destroy over 60% of women’s non-renewable egg supply.

They reduce pregnancy success by 33%.

This is NOT accidental — it is a serious national security threat. pic.twitter.com/BQNq1GccvO

— Nicolas Hulscher, MPH (@NicHulscher) March 1, 2026

The Greater Blue-Eared Starling: a living jewel of the African savanna. 📷
That stunning iridescent plumage isn't just color – it's a high-tech light-reflecting structure! Paired with those fiery orange eyes, it’s one of nature’s most vibrant masterpieces pic.twitter.com/zzUDI00WKR

— 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐅𝐚𝐛𝐮𝐥𝐨𝐮𝐬 𝐖𝐞𝐢𝐫𝐝 𝐓𝐫𝐨𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫s (@FabulousWeird) March 1, 2026

The variety of beautiful birds
pic.twitter.com/Lt5mesLNsW

— Science girl (@sciencegirl) March 2, 2026