Geo-Strategy #8: The Iran Trap

• The episode argues that the United States is being pushed toward war with Iran by three powerful interest groups, that the US military’s doctrine makes it blind to its own limitations, and that a US invasion of Iran would almost certainly end in catastrophic failure, drawing on historical parallels and game theory to make the case.

The Three Forces Driving the US Toward War with Iran

• The Israel Lobby is one of the most powerful political forces in the US, composed of two main groups:

  • AIPAC represents Jewish interests, has about 100,000 members including many billionaires, and is considered the second most powerful lobbying organization in the US after the pensioner lobby.
  • Christian Zionists, such as Christians United for Israel with 7 million members, add enormous grassroots political power.
  • Together they push for war in the Middle East to advance Israel’s strategic interests.

• Wall Street and the “addiction to Empire”: The US financial system depends on all global money flowing through the dollar, and many powerful actors make money by speculating on this system, giving them a vested interest in maintaining imperial military engagements.

• Saudi Arabia views Iran as an existential threat, not merely a security concern. The core conflict in the Middle East is actually between Saudi Arabia and Iran, not Israel and Iran. Saudi Arabia feels it must resolve the Iran problem soon.

Trump as the Champion of These Forces

• Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law, is the key private link connecting Trump to both Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS):
  • Kushner’s father was a major AIPAC sponsor; when Netanyahu visits the US, he stays with the Kushner family.
  • When Kushner started a private equity fund, Saudi Arabia invested $2 billion.
• Trump’s first-term actions already demonstrated his alignment with these forces:
  • Withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA).
  • Moved the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
  • Ignored MBS’s role in the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.
  • Sponsored the Abraham Accords to unite Arab states against Iran.
  • Ordered the assassination of General Qasem Soleimani, leader of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps, in January 2020.
• If Trump wins the November 2024 election with Nikki Haley as VP, war with Iran will likely be a major priority. Haley makes most of her money from the Israel lobby and will push for war both publicly and privately from within the White House.

The US Military’s Dangerous Doctrine: Shock and Awe

• Thirty years ago, the US military followed traditional war-fighting principles:

  • Mass forces: Deploy enough troops to achieve objectives.
  • Avoid encirclement: Don’t let your forces get surrounded.
  • Protect supply lines: Ensure your army can be resupplied.
  • These principles require public consent because they demand large-scale mobilization of soldiers, money, and political support.

• In 2003, the US shifted to a “shock and awe” doctrine based on:

  • Air supremacy, technological omniscience (satellites, drones), and special forces.
  • This allows wars to be fought cheaply, quickly, and decisively without needing broad public support.
  • The result was hubris: the belief that the US military can win any war, anywhere, against any enemy.

• Operation Prosperity Guardian proves this doctrine is failing:

  • The Houthis, a rebel group in Yemen, have been attacking ships in the Red Sea, disrupting global trade and contributing to worldwide inflation.
  • The US dispatched a massive naval force but has been unable to defeat the Houthis.
  • The reason: the US has air supremacy, satellites, and special forces, but lacks sufficient infantry and ships to actually control territory.
  • President Biden has publicly admitted the US is losing and cannot stop the Houthis, yet insists on continuing, illustrating hubris, the refusal to accept limitations.

• This hubris means the US military will likely comply with orders to invade Iran, unable to imagine the possibility of defeat.

Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Wants War

• The Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) wants war with the US for several reasons:
  • Anger over US backing of the Shah’s brutal police state from 1953 to 1979.
  • Anger over US support for Israel and Saudi Arabia.
  • Revenge for the assassination of General Soleimani.
  • The episode speculates the IRGC may have been behind the recent helicopter crash that killed Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi, because Raisi was preventing war.
• Iran has many strategies to provoke the US into invading, essentially giving the US a pretext. The logic is that the US is looking for a reason, and Iran wants to give it one.

The Logic of the Trap: Why War Is Likely

• Multiple forces are aligned pushing toward war:
  • Three powerful interest groups (Israel Lobby, Wall Street, Saudi Arabia) want it.
  • Trump has already demonstrated willingness to escalate against Iran.
  • Kushner and Haley will push for war inside a second Trump administration.
  • The US military’s hubris makes it think it can win.
  • Iran’s Revolutionary Guard wants to provoke an invasion.
• The speaker assesses war between the US and Iran as very likely within the next two to four years.

What a US Invasion of Iran Would Look Like (March 2027 Scenario)

• Trump announces “Operation Iranian Freedom”, a full-scale invasion with Israel, Saudi Arabia, the UK, Australia, UAE, and Poland as partners.

• Trump gives five public justifications:

  1. Democracy and freedom: Iran is on the brink of civil war; the US has an obligation to liberate the Iranian people.
  2. Nuclear weapons: Iran is one month from having three nuclear bombs capable of destroying New York, San Francisco, and Los Angeles.
  3. Shipping security: Iranian proxies (Houthis, Hezbollah) are disrupting 40% of the world’s oil supply through the Red Sea and Strait of Hormuz, threatening global prosperity.
  4. Allied protection: Iran is attacking Saudi Arabia and Israel through proxies.
  5. Terrorism: Iranian gunmen killed 107 people in a mall attack.

• The military operation begins:

  • The USS Gerald R. Ford, a $13 billion super carrier, patrols the Strait of Hormuz.
  • The US establishes air supremacy over Iran.
  • 100,000 US troops and 200,000 Saudi troops land in southern Iran, with plans to strike Tehran in the north.
  • Trump promises victory in two weeks, citing the 1991 Gulf War (100 hours) and the 2003 Iraq invasion (less than three weeks).

Why This Plan Is Actually a Catastrophic Trap

• Using traditional military doctrine, the invasion has already lost:

  • Encirclement: Iran is a mountainous fortress. Troops can be air-dropped in but cannot be extracted through mountain passes, where they are vulnerable to ambush.
  • Failure to mass forces: Iran has a population of 90 million. Conquering it would require 3–4 million soldiers. The US has at most 1 million soldiers worldwide and about 60,000 in the Middle East. Tanks cannot move through mountains.
  • No supply lines: Resupply requires air drops through mountain terrain, where any person with a rocket launcher or drone can shoot down aircraft, exactly as the Afghans did to the Soviets.
  • The 100,000 troops are not an invasion force; they are hostages.

• Why Iranians will not revolt against their government:

  • Iranians remember the Shah’s US-backed police state (1953–1979) and revolted against it.
  • Iranians watched the US destroy Iraq (2003–2011), bringing death and chaos, not freedom or democracy.
  • Iranians take pride in belonging to a great civilization and value their independence and freedom.
  • Religious Iranians view America as Satan and feel a religious obligation to resist.
  • Only a small minority might support the US; the vast majority will resist.

• Why the US thinks Iranians will revolt: It is not based on truth but is a necessary propaganda justification. The US cannot admit it lacks the troops, so it claims the Iranian people will rise up. This belief is sustained by hubris, the same overconfidence that the Greeks warned about, thinking you are God when you are not.

• Nuclear weapons: The claim that Iran is “one month from a bomb” has been made repeatedly for over a decade with no evidence. Even if Iran had nuclear weapons, it would not use them because the US could retaliate with a full nuclear strike. The only way the US can guarantee victory is to nuke Iran, which is why Iran fears nuclear escalation.

Historical Analysis: Three Analogues

• Athens invades Sicily (415 BC):

  • After 17 years of stalemate with Sparta, Athens was persuaded by Alcibiades to invade Sicily for its wealth, feeding the addiction to easy money from empire.
  • Nicias tried to dissuade Athens by demanding a massive force (5,000 soldiers, 100 ships), hoping the scale would scare people off. Instead, Athens enthusiastically approved it.
  • The expedition was Athens’s first large-scale foreign invasion. It had no experience with the critical problem of resupply over long distances.
  • Syracuse had a navy that cut off Athenian supply lines. The entire Athenian army was destroyed in Sicily.
  • This defeat caused Athens to lose the Peloponnesian War and collapse its empire.
  • Historians conclude the Athenians acted out of hubris, the same condition afflicting the US today.

• The Vietnam War (1960s):

  • In 1960, most Americans had never heard of Vietnam. By 1969, half a million US troops were there, and 58,000 Americans died.
  • The Pentagon Papers (1971) revealed three critical findings:
    1. Mission creep: Military leadership expanded the war without public knowledge, escalating from observers to advisors to trainers to combat soldiers.
    2. The war was known to be unwinnable from early on: The US dropped more bombs than in all of World War II but could not break the enemy’s will to fight. The Vietnamese grew angrier and more determined with each bombing.
    3. Credibility and the sunk cost fallacy: The US stayed in the war not because it could win, but because it didn’t want to lose face before the Chinese, Soviets, and Europeans. Having invested so much blood and treasure, it couldn’t bring itself to leave.
  • The Vietnam War shows how a superpower can commit forces it cannot extract and refuse to admit defeat.

• The Russian-Ukraine War (2022–present):

  • Russia attacked Ukraine from three axes (north, east, south). The northern attack on Kyiv failed; the east and south succeeded.
  • Ukraine’s only viable strategy using traditional doctrine was to retreat, overextend Russian supply lines, then encircle and cut them off, because Russia only sent about 160,000 troops into a very large country.
  • Instead, Ukraine fought for every inch of territory, allowing Russia to use its advantage in mass forces.
  • In summer 2023, Ukraine launched a counteroffensive against heavily fortified Russian defensive lines and suffered massive casualties for no gain.
  • Why did Ukraine make these mistakes?
    • President Zelensky is a TV actor who prioritizes what looks good on TV over actual strategy. He created a false narrative of victory through media manipulation. Trump is described as exactly like Zelensky in this regard.
    • Extremist elements in the Ukrainian military (neo-Nazis who hate Russia) pushed for maximum war.
    • NATO devised the summer counteroffensive strategy and has special forces in Ukraine directing missile strikes.
  • Ukraine has now lost the war: the average age of its soldiers is over 40, with men in their 60s and 70s fighting. NATO may respond by sending its own troops, as Macron has suggested for France and the British PM has raised conscription.
  • This mirrors the pattern: initial failure leads to escalation rather than withdrawal.

Game Theory Analysis: Why Rational Actors Would Create This Trap

• Game theory examines what each major player wants and how their motivations interact:
  • United States: Wants to topple the Iranian regime in Tehran, which requires a ground invasion.
  • Iran (Revolutionary Guard): Wants to force a US ground invasion, knowing the US will get trapped and defeated. The IRGC can use suicide bombers and guerrilla tactics against trapped forces.
  • Israel: Wants Iran defeated and its proxies destroyed. But Israel’s optimal outcome is for both the US and Iran to be destroyed as military powers in the Middle East, leaving Israel as the dominant regional power.
  • Saudi Arabia: Wants the same outcome as Israel. With both the US and Iran weakened, Saudi Arabia and Israel would dominate the region, though Israel’s superior military would make it the top power.
• All major participants actually want a US invasion of Iran, even though they want different end states. The scenario of 100,000 trapped US troops serves everyone’s interests except America’s, because the sunk cost fallacy will force the US to keep sending more resources into a black hole.

The Nuclear Trump Card and How Iran Neutralizes It

• The obvious counterargument: Trump could threaten to nuke Iran unless it allows US troops safe passage out.
• Russia is the key to Iran’s defense: Before the war, Iran and Russia must reach an agreement where Putin declares that no party is allowed to use nuclear weapons. If the US, Iran, or Israel uses nuclear weapons, Russia will nuclear-retaliate against that party.
• Putin would be hailed as a hero for saving humanity, but more importantly, this removes the US’s ultimate trump card.
• The US is then fully trapped:
  • It cannot use nuclear weapons.
  • It cannot resupply its troops (no manufacturing capacity; the US outsourced it to China, which now outproduces the US 232 to 1 in shipbuilding).
  • It cannot recruit enough soldiers.
  • It can only send more troops in, deepening the sunk cost fallacy.
• The episode concludes that this would become a black hole consuming all US resources with no possibility of victory.
• The next class will examine why Putin would involve himself and how he sees this war.