1328 The conflict is escalating. Israel And The US Could Use Nuclear Weapons Against Iran

EN English (FR IT PT SP)

1328 The conflict is escalating. Israel And The US Could Use Nuclear Weapons Against Iran

17 Mar 2026 The conflict between Israel and Iran is escalating, with the potential for nuclear weapons to be used. David Saxs, a Trump adviser, suggests that Trump should declare victory and end the conflict to prevent further escalation and global economic calamity. The discussion also highlights the importance of recognising all parties’ security interests for achieving peace in the Middle East.

The speaker argues that the root cause of conflict in the Middle East is the Israeli government’s refusal to recognise a Palestinian state and its desire for control over all of Palestine. The speaker believes that establishing a Palestinian state alongside Israel would lead to peace and disarmament of militant groups. The speaker also emphasises the importance of indivisible security, where the security of one state does not come at the expense of another.

The hegemonic era is over, and the distribution of power has shifted. The United States’ attempts to assert hegemony over Ukraine and its disregard for Russia’s security concerns led to the Ukraine war. This delusion of overwhelming force, coupled with a lack of strategic thinking and a psychologically unstable president, has resulted in disastrous consequences for the United States and the world.

Key points

* Israel’s Nuclear Option: Israel possesses the “Samson option,” a last-resort nuclear response to existential threats. * Escalating Conflict: The situation between Israel and Iran is escalating rapidly, with both sides potentially exhausting their arsenals. * Call for De-escalation: David Saxs, a Trump adviser, suggests declaring victory and ending the conflict to prevent further deterioration. * Economic Risks: The risk of global economic calamity is increasing due to the situation. * Oil Supply Concerns: The closure of the Strait of Hormuz and the impact on oil production and infrastructure are highlighted as major concerns. * Proposed Solution: David Sachs suggests that the best course of action is to de-escalate the conflict and withdraw, which would benefit global security and the economy. * War’s Negative Impact: The ongoing war is detrimental to all involved parties, including Israel, the United States, the rest of the world, Iran, and the Gulf countries. * Potential Escalation and Consequences: Further escalation, such as the US targeting Iran and Iran retaliating against Gulf States’ energy installations, could have severe consequences, potentially outweighing the importance of keeping the Strait of Hormuz open. * Five Steps for Peace: There are five steps proposed that Trump could take to potentially end the war, as discussed in a publication on UN civil affairs. * Netanyahu’s Actions and Global Impact: Netanyahu’s actions are described as putting the Middle East in flames and potentially leading to a global economic crisis. * Trump’s Involvement and Potential Advice: Trump is mentioned as having tweeted about the situation and is advised to cut losses and avoid dragging others into disaster. * Path to Peace in the Middle East: The speakers recommend recognising everyone’s security interests, including Iran’s, as a way to achieve peace in the Middle East. * Illegal Aggression: The speaker condemns the attack on Iran as blatant, illegal, and a violation of international law. * Nuclear Agreement Violation: The speaker criticises Trump for withdrawing from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), an agreement that prevented Iran from developing nuclear weapons. * Iran’s Stance on Nuclear Weapons: The speaker highlights Iran’s consistent stance against nuclear weapons, emphasising the Supreme Leader’s religious decree and Iran’s willingness to engage in negotiations and UN scrutiny. * Omani Mediation and Iranian Nuclear Program: The Omani mediator reported progress in negotiations with Iran, who stated they do not want nuclear weapons. The speaker believes the issue is not about nuclear weapons but about overthrowing the Iranian government. * Trump’s Approach to the Strait of Hormuz: The speaker criticises Trump’s approach to the Strait of Hormuz, suggesting he should not rely on NATO or China but instead encourage the Gulf Cooperation Council and Iran to resolve the issue bilaterally. * Proposed Solution for the Strait of Hormuz: The speaker proposes that Gulf countries assert sovereignty over military bases in their territory and declare they will not be used for aggression against Iran. * Strait of Hormuz Resolution: Gulf countries should reassert sovereignty, agree with Iran, and ensure the strait remains open for trade. * US Military Bases in Gulf Countries: Gulf countries should reclaim control of US military bases and agree not to use them against Iran. * Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: Israel should return to its 1967 borders to allow for the creation of a Palestinian state, which is the root cause of recent conflicts. * Netanyahu’s Doctrine: Israel will control all of Palestine and potentially other parts of the Middle East, as evidenced by his involvement in every war in the region for the past 40 years. * Reason for Wars: According to the speaker, Israel’s goal is to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state, leading to wars against any government in the region that supports Palestine. * US’s Role: The US, not Israel, has the power to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state by vetoing it. * International Recognition of Palestine: Almost every country supports the establishment of Palestine alongside Israel, but the US blocks it in the UN Security Council. * Land Dispute: Israel demands 100% of the land, refusing to acknowledge even 22% for Palestine, leading to continuous conflict. * Disarmament with Statehood: Establishing Palestine as a UN member state would lead to the disarmament of militant groups like Hamas and Hezbollah. * Peace Obstacle: Israeli supremacism, apartheid, and violence, driven by Netanyahu’s Likud party’s expansionist goals, hinder peace. * International Law Violation: Likud’s 1977 charter, claiming sovereignty over all territory from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, contradicts international law and decency. * Security Approaches: Two paths to security: indivisible security, prioritising common security and avoiding an arms race, and hegemonic peace, relying on dominance to ensure security. * Hegemonic Era’s End: The era of a single dominant power is over, leading to a shift in global power distribution. * Indivisible Security’s Importance: Restoring the principle of indivisible security is crucial in this new multipolar world. * Ukraine War’s Origin: The Ukraine war stems from the U.S.’s attempt to maintain its hegemony by expanding NATO near Russia’s borders, disregarding Russia’s security concerns. * US Support for Israel: Netanyahu believes he doesn’t need to compromise because of strong US support, as evidenced by the US’s backing of Israel’s hegemony in the Middle East. * Trump’s Global Hegemony: Trump’s actions, such as seeking control over oil exports and demanding obedience from other countries, reflect a desire for US global dominance. * Dangers of Hegemony: The pursuit of unchecked hegemony, as exemplified by Trump’s approach, is dangerous and could lead to global disaster. * US Foreign Policy Criticisms: The US is criticised for its foreign policy, particularly its actions in Israel and Taiwan, which are seen as reckless and disregarding the security interests of other nations. * Risks of US Actions: The US’s actions are seen as increasing global risks, including the risk of nuclear war, due to the lack of respect for other countries’ security concerns. * Underestimation of Iran: The speaker questions why Iran’s capabilities and strategic thinking were underestimated, particularly in light of reports suggesting that Trump dismissed the likelihood of certain Iranian actions. * Misjudgement of Iran’s Response: The speaker questions how the US government misjudged Iran’s potential response to the killing of Ham, suggesting a disconnect between their assumptions and reality. * Comparison to Iraq War: The speaker draws parallels to the Iraq War, highlighting the consistent inaccuracies in predictions and the US government’s approach of creating their own reality despite evidence to the contrary. * Consequences of Arrogance and Improvisation: The speaker emphasises the dangers of arrogance and improvisation in foreign policy, citing the US’s history of missteps and the long-term consequences of such actions. * US Foreign Policy Critique: The speaker criticises the US’s approach to foreign policy, particularly in Afghanistan, highlighting a lack of strategic planning and accountability. * Domestic Political Instability: The speaker expresses concern over the US political climate, citing a “psychologically unstable president” and a Congress that fails to exercise its constitutional authority. * Consequences of Poor Leadership: The speaker argues that the lack of thoughtful leadership and strategic planning in the US has led to a desperate situation, where the country relies on others for support.