The spectre of another “necessary war” now hovers over Washington. It’s the ghost of mistakes past; Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam. The US is “locked and loaded” on Iran, the President tells everyone. “Bad things could happen.”
But first, a question most media won’t ask: does a flailing administration, haemorrhaging credibility on every domestic front, really need another war it can’t afford?
When Trump, a populist past his use-by date and an inveterate liar, promises to end “forever wars” only to go back on his word as he hints at a long stint in Iran, no one is surprised. He’s like an old pooch returning to his vomit. But before we lean into the madness of repeating a losing formula, we need to call Trump’s latest stunt. It’s psychological as much as political. And it is an old trick of clapped-out regimes running on empty. Let’s call it “wag the dog.”
Domestic Crisis Fuels the Distraction
The economic carnage at home is real. It is on the ledger. Trump’s tariff buccaneering has cost the average American household an estimated $1,700 per year, according to the Yale Budget Lab. The stock market has shed trillions since January. Consumer confidence indices are in free-fall. The promises of “America First” prosperity have soured into inflation, uncertainty, and a manufacturing renaissance that exists primarily in presidential press releases and new letterhead for The Pentagon, now The War Department. For an administration whose domestic policies are going to hell in a hand basket, a war — any war — offers the oldest of political fixes: the rally-round-the-flag effect, the silencing of dissent, the short-circuiting of accountability. Margaret Thatcher understood this only too well in 1982. So, too, it seems, does Donald Trump in 2026. But hold that thought.
Israel Sets the Tempo
Israel wags the dog. It’s the piece of the jigsaw that Washington’s press prefers to leave on the table. A nation of nine million people, with no formal defence treaty with the US, appears to be setting the tempo of a potential world war. It is “Bibi” Netanyahu, facing his own domestic legal survival crisis, whose intelligence services are leading the claim that Iran has “reconstituted” its nuclear capacity. It is Israel which provides the pretext, shapes the target list, and then steps back, while American carrier groups do the heavy lifting. This is not an alliance of equals. It is a tail wagging a very large, very confused dog. When Washington demands that the world take its intelligence on Iran seriously, it is worth remembering that this is recycled from the same workshop that brought us Iraqi WMDs in 2003. The pretext is paper-thin, and the global community sees right through it.
The Ticking Definite Maybe
“We’re either going to get a deal, or it’s going to be unfortunate for them… 10 to 15 days would be enough time… You’re going to be finding out over the next probably 10 days.”
Say again? The clock on Trump’s ten-day flaky ultimatum is ticking. The “deal” consists of demands that the US knows Tehran will never agree to. But it does buy time for its navy to get all its ducks in a row. As a dual-carrier strike group settles into the Arabian Sea and the B-2 fleet awakens at Diego Garcia, Trump’s Washington claque is yet again peddling the myth of the just, clean war. Yet beneath the bullshit of “preemptive self-defence” and “decapitation strikes” lies a terrifying reality: an attack on Iran is not a tactical reset, but a blueprint for another colossal loss. Afghanistan would seem a minor logistical glitch in contrast. Afghanistan cost the United States $2.3 trillion over twenty years. Iraq cost another $2 trillion and counting. Iran would make both look like absolute bargains.
Iran’s Terrain Defies Conquest
Just as the Shock and Awe of 2003 failed to account for the decade of insurgency that followed, today’s Decapitation Doctrine ignores the sociology of the Iranian state. The plan, fuelled by Mossad-CIA assets assassinating key military figures, seeks to gut the regime. But history warns that hollowing out a state does not lead to democracy; it leads to asymmetric chaos.
In Afghanistan, the United States fought a pre-industrial insurgency. In Iran, it would face a high-tech Taliban armed with hypersonic missiles and AI-driven drone swarms, operating across a territory twice the size of Chile, three times the size of Texas and roughly equivalent to France and Germany combined. Iran is a vast, mountainous, ideologically coherent nation where every mountain pass is a potential tomb for American stabilisation forces.
If the US-Israel alliance collapses the central government, they will not be liberating a people. They will be inheriting a radicalised, fragmented catastrophe with no exit ramp in sight.
Entanglement, Not Parity
Iran’s military deterrence is not built on parity but on entanglement. Its forward defence doctrine links Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen in a single retaliatory network where states and proxies form one organic web of reprisal. Strike Tehran and you trigger Beirut, Damascus and Basra. Threaten Hormuz and Yemen’s Houthis respond in the Red Sea. That strait is no abstraction: 20 million barrels of oil per day, roughly 20 percent of all global petroleum consumption, transits through that narrow choke point every single day. A closure would send prices beyond $150 per barrel, imposing an immediate and savage indirect tax on every American household at the petrol station, supermarket and delivery cost on the Temu online shopping cart, compounding the damage already inflicted by tariffs. Unlike Iraq in 2003, Iran’s alliances are interdependent and self-activating. No power, least of all the United States, can bomb one node of this network without setting the whole region ablaze.
Heartland Blowback
The most catastrophic consequences of an Iran war are not to be found in the Persian Gulf but in the American heartland. Home is where the hurt is. The United States in 2026 is a nation barely able to govern itself. Political partisanship amounts to a second Civil War by any other name, and trust in institutions has collapsed to historic lows. A mother-of-all-wars that risks becoming a world war, as Trump himself once warned, could deliver the kiss of the Spider Woman, fatally entrapping what cohesion remains. For a populist administration elected on the promise of ending forever wars, a new quagmire in the Middle East would represent a profound betrayal of its mandate and the voters who delivered it. It would ignite a domestic legitimacy crisis unseen since Vietnam; with one crucial difference. In 1968, America was rich enough to absorb the wound. In 2026, with the fiscal cupboard bare from tax cuts and tariff self-harm, the bill falls due immediately.
Military Exhaustion Exposed
Behind the roar of engines, the deployments and the 2,400 gallons of ice-cream consumed weekly by just two carrier groups, lies a deeper rot. If Trump’s ten days pass and a “deal” is miraculously reached, the Captain might authorise a “Steel Beach Picnic” on the flight deck. In that single afternoon, the crew could easily burn through 10,000 cans of Pepsi in a few hours of sugar-soaked celebration.
Sugar hits aside, the American military machine is itself showing signs of exhaustion. Persistent under-staffing, collapsing morale and bureaucratic inertia combine to erode its once-fabled faith in itself. Today, the officer corps is increasingly wary of orders that run the full gamut from impulsive aggression, braggadocio and bullshit to political theatre. Worse, the Commander-in-Chief appears incapable of the disciplined review that modern warfare demands. His understanding of strategy is trapped in the era of shock and awe, gob-smacked by the spectacle of carrier groups and bunker-busting bombs while apparently sanguine about Iran’s hypersonic missiles, AI-driven drone swarms and multi-domain battle spaces that now define contemporary warfare. A military that cannot trust the clarity or competence of its leadership is one misstep away from paralysis. And paralysis in the Strait of Hormuz is a global economic shock, not merely an American military embarrassment.
Moral Authority Lost
The illegality of targeted regime change, pursued through extrajudicial assassinations and police actions that bypass both Congress and the United Nations, has stripped America of the last ragged tatters of its one-time moral authority. When Washington demands that other nations respect borders while its own clandestine operatives kill foreign officials, the hypocrisy ceases to be a footnote. It becomes the headline. By 2026, the BRICS+ nations, led by China and India, have made clear they will not recognise a police action built on manufactured intelligence. America is no longer the world’s policeman. It is increasingly viewed as its vigilante; and vigilantes, history reminds us, tend eventually to face the community they have terrorised. It can only end badly.
Strategic Overstretch
An attack on Iran in 2026 would mark the ultimate act of strategic overstretch. It would bog down the United States military in terrain optimised for attrition, detonate a regional war across five countries simultaneously, alienate the rising powers of the Global South, and threaten the fragile remains of domestic stability at home; all while solving precisely none of the problems that drove a desperate administration to the brink in the first place. America cannot afford to pretend to play the world’s policeman while its own precinct smoulders.
If the ten-day clock expires and the missiles fly, the real regime change may not occur in Tehran but within the global order that has sustained American power for a century. But fortune is fickle.
Iran is not a problem you can just bunker-bust your way out of. It is a regional reality that demands a diplomacy the West has all but forgotten how to practise; and a mirror that reflects, with alarming clarity, the death rictus of a US empire in its restless, dangerous, self-destructive decline.
Urban Wronski Writes 