Is Iran is winning?

Here is the man the Revolutionary Guard has assigned for negotiations with the USA:

Mr. Ghalibaf addressed the nation on state television on Saturday night local time, assuring Iranians that Mr. Khamenei was involved. He struck a defiant but pragmatic tone, saying that Iran had gained military achievements, including shooting down an American fighter jet, but that now it was time to leverage those gains in diplomatic negotiations.

“Sometimes, I see our people say we destroyed them,” Mr. Ghalibaf said. “No, we did not destroy them; you need to understand this. Our military gains do not mean that we are more powerful than the United States.”

…..

Two things jump out from this……firstly Iran is negotiating, something they said they wouldn’t do. Secondly Iran is not claiming victory, their only notable accomplishment is shooting down one jet. And even that became embarrassing because the US airman was rescued from deep inside Iranian territory.

This is a long way from a conventional war, even the air activity has been directed exclusively to military targets. The US has the ability to completely destroy Iran’s industrial base, but is refraining because Iranian oil is an international asset and because nobody wants Iran to be an impoverished country. By contrast it would like to see a prosperous, free Iran. Or if it chooses to remain a religious dictatorship by fair elections, at least a country that refrains from exporting terrorism.

So this has become a police operation, which shifts the advantage to the weaker participant. But smartly there are no US troops in Iran, so activity is focused on Hormuz. Iran gained an initial advantage by closing the Strait. The US countermove of blockading was a master stroke. There is still some terrorism conducted by small boats with missiles…this will gradually be eliminated. Inconvenient but not important.

What’s important is oil isn’t leaving Iran and there is no place to store it, which means the production mechanism will have to be shut down soon…and face a difficult restart when hostilities cease. This is costing Iran a huge amount and long term customers are probably looking for new, more secure sources. A potential economic crisis.

This may not bother Board of generals who are now running the country, their lives probably don’t change much. But the economic resources and production capacity are being eroded. And once this illusion of victory fades, it will be a dangerously unhappy country

At some point if they remain intransigent a few power plants may be taken out to increase pressure. Time is a big player in all this. Trump probably wishes he had no mid terms, it put time pressure on the US. Gas prices are up, but not beyond levels seen in the recent past. The airlines are saying they see no loss in traffic because of higher prices. Large tax refunds are an offset. The economy and the markets are in great shape.

So the perfect tactic has been employed, time pressures are easing, Iran has significant issues to solve. The unfortunate part in all this is there is no charismatic Iranian leader to seize this opportunity, another example of how dissent has been marginalized in this sadly governed country.

But despite the Iranian propaganda and the Mullah love in feeble Europe, time is not on Iran’s side

Meanwhile back in reality...

I don't think anyone seriously thought that Iran was going to win. America is the largest arms producer in the world.

America use long-range weapons to stay out of harm's way, and once they have destroyed everything, they send in boots on the ground. Then they make a war hero movie.

However, even if/when America win, what have they actually won?

Another expensive war for the taxpayer to bear.

It is not as if anyone can guarantee that Iran will never create a nuclear bomb in the future, or are already working on one under ground.

It is not as if anyone can guarantee that Iran will never create a nuclear bomb in the future, or will not create one right down deep under some mountain.

Which is why free and fair elections are still the ultimate goal. And the best path to that is economic not an Iraq style occupation. Precisely where things are now with some help from the Iranians who decided to close the Straits.

It is very funny. Another liberal opinion piece that came to birth as liberalism can not bear contradiction.

It is used a familiar strategy known vulgarly in rhetoric as the gallop: you keep lining up non arguments and the guy in front of you tries to catch up correcting or filling the gap.

Rhetoric is about convincing people and the fun part of things these days is that situations are by themselves convincing. They part between people who can admit and people who are forced to deny.

The opinion piece is so bad, it does not blink at rationality being on the side of Iran. They are clear sighted about the balance of power and contrary to the claim made, Iran has always sought normalisation of international relations. So of course they are negotiating but with leverage, which is not the US' goal.

Just one point:

By contrast it would like to see a prosperous, free Iran.

Which is absolute garbage. Of course not, liberals do not want to see a free and prosperous Iran. That is what they fight against.

Iran is another of these regimes that liberals claim are doomed to fail yet liberals feel forced to plague with economic sanctions which are so unnecessary since they are doomed to fail, according to liberals.

Free is another funny thing, peeps.

Iran is on the same path as South Africa when liberals announced that South Africa could not turn liberal unless they yielded sovereignty.

Liberals want to apply the same recipe here on Iran.

What does a free Iran mean in liberal lingo?

An Iran coerced not to have nuclear weapons.

An Iran coerced not to stand as a regional power.

An Iran coerced not to trade oils (and other things) in Huan.

So liberals are telling Iran that if they want to be free, they must give up on sovereignty.

A free Iran can not be an Iran that decides whether or not it wants the nuclear weapon, whether or not they trade oils in Huan, whether or not they express regional power.

Of course, it has nothing to do with freedom. The US are a globalistic entity and the Iranian national project is not aligned with the US globalistic agenda.

So the US must crush the national political project of Iran.

Liberals did not hide they aimed at triggering a civil war in Iran, if it happens, the number of casualties is going to quickly dwarf the number of people the Iranian regime has killed so far.

Free press will not make headlines about it. All these dead people will be made invisible.

They are clear sighted about the balance of power and contrary to the claim made, Iran has always sought normalisation of international relations.

You can’t be a normal country if you kill and torture 3000 people in an election and fund terrorists….peeps

"You can’t be a normal country if you kill and torture 3000 people in an election and fund terrorists….peeps"

Isn't the a zero missing?

"The number of protesters killed in Iran during the 2025–2026 protests ranges from confirmed figures of over 6,488 to estimates exceeding 36,500, according to human rights groups and media reports. The US-based Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA) confirmed 7,015 deaths as of early February 2026, including at least 6,508 protesters, while Iranian health officials and doctors on the ground reported figures between 30,000 and 36,500 based on hospital records.

Iranian authorities have acknowledged only 3,117 deaths, which they claim include both civilians and security personnel, but this figure is widely disputed. Multiple sources, including Time, The Guardian, and Iran International, cite internal government reports and medical data indicating mass casualties—particularly during a five-day period in January 2026—when up to 3,500 people were reportedly killed, including at least 3,379 protesters. The UN and independent experts have emphasized that the true death toll remains obscured by internet blackouts and state suppression of information. "

Real standup government.

Iran obviously is not a normal country. It is crippled by multiple economic sanctions and has liberal Israel as a neighbour.

If ever a civil war is triggered in Iran, as per wish of liberal countries, the number of casualties reported now will be a long gone memory. But it does not matter. What matters is that the nationalist iranian project is crushed in favour of the globalistic US scheme.

Meanwhile back in reality...

. But it does not matter. What matters is that the nationalist dictatorial iranian project is crushed removed in favour of the globalist democratic US scheme.

Meanwhile back in reality

All they have done is shoot down one jet

.

All they have done is shoot down one jet

LOL knew you wouldn't be able to let it go after Denny's post.

ROFL ….I knew you couldn’t resist fawning on any poster who gives you much needed support.

Says the man who does nothing but fawn on himself.

Don’t despair perhaps one day you will find something to like about yourself.

...lol ..so much angry indignation...no wonder he and Rudenek get along...so similar they can almost be related...

Fawaz Gerges

Tehran has shown that its grip over the strait of Hormuz is its most potent deterrent – arguably more consequential than its now defunct nuclear programme

1. Fawaz Gerges is professor of international relations at the London School of Economics

Thu 23 Apr 2026 15.44 BST

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/apr/23/donald-trump-iran-war-tehran-strait-hormuz

But it does not matter. What matters is that the nationalist dictatorial iranian project is crushed removed in favour of the globalist democratic US scheme.

It is so bad. And so enjoyable.

Remember, peeps, the great speculation: liberals are en route to kill hundreds of millions people. This can not happen without the adequate framework. Part of the job is check if this framework is growing in strength.

This comment is so bad in terms of liberal tenets and so good when it comes to validate things.

One core element of the framework is for liberals not to be able to give up on their ways.

Of course, liberal societies are not democracies, they are oligarchies that seek the consent of the governed, governed who have shown to have no autonomy.

But let's consider it as valid; Iran will be a democracy or even just a country that may determine its course of actions.

A democratic iran could not decide they want nuclear weapons, can not trade oil in Huan and can not be a regional power and this despite their multi millennia history of being one.

When in fact, it is clear that the US are dictating the terms. Dictating what iranian people can or can not do.

Short comment but already stacking so much.

It is a brilliant example of the gallop strategy.

It reads that dictatorship can not represent national interests while democracy could not either.

This kind of highly contradictory line of thoughts are impossible to produce for a simple minded person. Simple minded people give up before they can complete it.

But for liberal minds, they flow naturally.

...lol ..so much angry indignation...no wonder he and Rudenek get along...so similar they can almost be related...

Sorry but where is my angry indignation on this thread?