After the rapid victory that Israel had assured the US leadership of did not materialize, the only real option for the US administration was TACO. With the Memorandum of Understanding, a US tactical retreat was within grasp. But the administration could not keep to its side of the bargain and broke the MOU. Now months later, after endless empty threats of “annihilation” and aimless attacks, together with the empty threat of an even greater economic and financial embargo, it is obvious that the US has no plan except for not making a peace acceptable to the Iranians. The administration has become like a zombie that aimlessly just keeps trying to break through. The latest US attacks just underline this reality.
The military and intelligence leadership below the political appointments sees this clearly, as US stand-off weapon inventories are rapidly depleted and the combat readiness of the US forces (especially the US Navy) falls below critical levels. It had seen clearly through the Israeli lies designed to drag the US into a war with Iran, and had documented its opposition prior to the start of the war:
In mid-February 2026, before the US military initiated the airstrikes that began Operation “Epic Fury,” the National Intelligence Council (NIC), an agency of the executive branch created to synthesize the analysis of the US’s 18 intelligence agencies, submitted to the president a classified report detailing the prospects of an attack on Iran. This assessment, first reported on in the Washington Post and subsequently confirmed by the Associated Press, painted a grim picture. It concluded that an offensive operation launched by the US military would be unlikely to dismantle the central pillars of the Iranian government. Assassinating Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei could backfire, resulting in the consolidation of Iranian military and political structures and the activation of emergency protocols the Iranians had been preparing for years. Iran’s domestic opposition was unlikely to be able to seize power in such a scenario. A limited air campaign or even a protracted war stood a serious chance of failing to achieve regime change.
As with the two wars upon Iraq, this war would also be based upon lies. “Babies thrown out of incubators” and “weapons of mass destruction” were replaced with the “Iranian nuclear weapons program” that did not exist, a lack of existence backed up by US intelligence:
For nearly two decades, American intelligence has assessed, repeatedly and in public, that Iran was not actively developing a nuclear weapon.
…
The historical record here is damning. American intelligence and military officials at the highest level of the power structure consistently warned four successive presidents that Iran was not developing nuclear weapons, that diplomacy was the best path for making sure they wouldn’t, and a military option could at best delay an Iranian nuclear weapons program by a year or two. These warnings helped prevent conflict, but only up until February 2026.
And one of the first acts of the war? The killing of the very leader, Khamenei, that was fully opposed to the development of nuclear weapons by Iran. The US military also very much understood that the Iranian military’s core weapons of counter-offence were ballistic missiles (costing around US$1 million) and cheap drones. While the US defensive systems were comprised of anti-missile missiles costing between US$15 and US$37 million apiece; with multiple interceptor missiles required to bring down one incoming missile. And even then, the interception rate was far below the US claims of 90% to 100%. Previous limited engagements against Yemen had also shown the prodigious rate at which such incredibly expensive missiles were used up, especially when compared to the limited stock levels.
CSIS’s warning, the Depleting Missile Defense Interceptor Inventory, estimated total stocks of both systems (THAAD and SM-3) in the mid- to low hundreds, with no THAADs having been delivered at all between 2023 and the end of 2025.
With the high end systems so limited, there was a great reliance upon the older Patriot missile system which has rates of interception of between 3% and 20% against missiles with maneuvering and/or multiple warheads; even with the firing of multiple PAC-3 interceptors at a single target. Each PAC-3 missile costs about US$4 million and a full battery about US$1 billion. At the start of the war, the Iranians generally used their older less-advanced missiles, together with drones, to deplete the US and Israeli interceptor inventories. The newer missiles also displayed their ability to outwit the Patriot systems. The Iranians also destroyed the land-based US and Israeli early warning radar systems, reducing the warning time of an attack and the accuracy of any forecasts of possible targets. All of this was foreseeable, and in many cases was foreseen, as with the extensive Iranian burying of military assets underground and its widespread usage of camouflage, dummy decoys and highly mobile forces. The US military knew that it could not protect its bases in the region and could not destroy the Iranian offensive missile and drone capabilities. The Defence Intelligence Agency reported that:
Tehran has established what it calls a “passive defense” doctrine. The effort was based on lessons learned from past military conflicts, including U.S. operations in the Middle East and the 2006 Israel-Hizballah conflict. Key Iranian passive defense measures include camouflage and concealment, force dispersals, underground facilities, and highly mobile units. For example, Iran configures some military vehicles to resemble civilian trucks….Iran has the largest underground facility (UGF) program in the Middle East. Based on the central pillars of Iran’s passive defense doctrine, Tehran has invested heavily in constructing UGFs to conceal and protect critical military and civilian infrastructure throughout the country. Iran designed and built these facilities to support various aspects of its defense industries, key nuclear infrastructure, and military forces, including naval sites, missile bases, and equipment storage.
At the same time, the US and Israeli airforces have been unable to quell the anti-aircraft missile systems of Iran, requiring attacks to be carried out with stand-off weapons. The stocks of these weapons have also been greatly reduced as the US and Israel continue to lob them at Iran with no real strategy in mind. The US military also very much understood the ability of Iran to shut down the Strait of Hormuz for an extended period, and its ability to devastate the Gulf oil and gas facilities. In addition, the US military even had the experiences of the repeated failures to quell the impoverished Ansar Allah forces in Yemen with air power and the failure of the “12 day war” against Iran in 2025.
The thoughts of the Iranian state collapsing under a “decapitation” strike and the Iranian people rising up against their government were not realistic possibilities.
American planners knew that Iran, with its complex, parallel political, clerical, and military structures, was a poor target for a leadership attack. The NIC told the Trump administration this in mid-February, just weeks before the war began. Iran’s military and political structure had “pre-arranged protocols” in place in the event of Khamenei’s assassination, the report said. It was “unlikely” that even a large, prolonged military campaign would result in regime change, “even if the current leadership was killed.”
Iran has shown itself to be what the US military considered it to be, a nation that had been preparing for decades for just such a war. A highly industrialized nation, with an effective state that had chosen the most appropriate weapons strategy and had implemented that strategy well. One that would be fully supported by the Iranian people against the Israel and US aggressors. None of that has changed since the end of February, and in fact Iran can be said to have displayed greater resilience and fortitude than many would have expected.
After launching a war based upon delusional assumptions that even the US military rejected, and then throwing away the MOU off-ramp, the Trump administration is at a loss; with a simple retreat seemingly not an option. The obstinacy of the administration, even with the mid-terms approaching within a couple of months, has surprised me. Even as the US position gets worse and worse, with US aircraft pushed back to Jordanian and Israeli airfields (and even these being attacked by the Iranians), together with the aircraft carrier groups.
With the US Navy vessels already being greatly overused and under-maintained in the past years, the long assignments within the Gulf are exacerbating a US Navy readiness crisis. A classified US military report states that only 25% of US destroyers are ready for deployment. Of the eleven US aircraft carriers, four are in maintenance and overhaul (Gerald Ford which was significantly damaged on station in the Iran conflict, Stennis, Reagan and Truman), one is returning home after one of the longest carrier deployments in history (Abraham Lincoln), one is being readied for retirement (Nimitz after 51 years), two are on station in the Middle East (George Washington and George Bush), three are in training and getting ready for deployment (Vinson, Roosevelt and Eisenhower). The Gerald Ford is the youngest carrier, having been built nine years ago. The average age of the rest is 35 years; an ageing, somewhat outdated and high maintenance fleet. Being used up in lengthy and intense deployments, while the US Navy struggles to produce new ones.
The US military is like an ageing boxer who came out strong in the first round, but his opponent weathered the storm and he is now losing more with each new round. With future opponents happy to see him so diminished by this effort. Then, recently the boxer had a quick flourish (the attack against Sirik) only to be punched in the face as a result. The latest attack has also added President Trump to an inglorious list of those that have murdered wedding parties. And still, the boxer thinks that he can launch periodic attacks on his opponent (“mowing the lawn”) that will quell his opponent’s offensive capabilities rather than resulting in more punches in the face.
This is not a plan, rather it is aimless flailing in place of a plan. The same with the new sanctions that will be ignored by all the nations that are important to Iran (e.g. China, Russia and even Pakistan). All the while, the traffic through the Strait of Hormuz remains limited (and falling after each US attack), with oil prices now regaining the US$90 level. As of August 28th, the US Strategic Petroleum Reserve contained 286.6 million barrels, with a practical minimum of 250 million barrels before draws may become increasingly limited. At current rates of withdrawal, that level will be hit at the end of October; a week before the US mid-term elections. Another pressure point is oil product inventories with distillate stocks not having been rebuilt during the usual low season due to foreign demand, and now facing the peak demand season of autumn (diesel for farming) and winter (heating oil). US diesel prices have already risen 50% y-o-y and may rise higher as farm demand fully kicks in, feeding into the cost of food in the US and elsewhere. Heating oil prices are already 100% higher then before the Iran War. With US refineries running flat out and skipping regular maintenance, the possibility of a supply shock from a refinery shutdown is an increasing possibility. The resulting inflation feeds into the possibility of higher US interest rates, impacting the US government debt servicing costs and economic growth.
And the plan is just to continue a zombie-like blind repeating of what has not previously worked while the US military continues to be depleted and the US economy will increasingly be impacted by higher prices, even possibly shortages and higher interest rates? Will the US then save itself by cutting off oil product exports to bring down domestic prices while exporting a colossal crisis to its vassals and the rest of the world? One which Iran, Russia and China will stand to benefit from.
As the great philosopher Tyson puts it, “everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face”. The US plan was shown to be delusional very early on and Iran certainly providing a good few punches in the face. The best plan for the US would be to return to the MOU and accept Omani and Iranian management of the Strait of Hormuz. Its obstinacy with respect to that is costing the US greatly. When you are losing a war, the cost of leaving only increases over time. With the Iranian hard liners gaining more and more prominence and increasingly looking for the war to provide a sustainable peace for Iran from Israeli and US aggression.
Part of the problem is that an utter lightweight Fox News presenter, Hegseth, is the Secretary of War. Instead of listening to those with many times more knowledge and experience than he has, he has been firing them. The Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, has been in repeated conflict with Hegseth and took his complaints directly to the president.
Trump was surprised when Driscoll told him how many generals and other top officers had been fired, pushed out, or passed over for promotion under Hegseth, one of the people said. Driscoll argued that the Army could not transform itself the way it needs to, because of the departure of so many leaders, this person said, adding that Trump expressed concern about the deep cuts to the Army’s senior leadership. Driscoll informed the president of his intention to resign—and by today, Driscoll was on his way out.
Another senior leader gone under a Secretary of War that seems more interested in (ste)roid rage, the “manliness” of the military and restricting press access than understanding the intricacies of running a massive military organization. Driscoll’s replacement may be House Representative Brian Mast, who has the habit of wearing IDF uniforms. Tulsi Gabbard, who warned against the attack on Iran left Trump’s cabinet.
And now it seems that the Trump administration want to start a “tanker war” with Iran. Yet more flailing in a desperate attempt to find “something that works”. Even thinking that it can carefully control the scale of conflict, keeping it simmering until after the mid-terms.
Instead, Iran seems to have both successfully attacked a US barracks in Jordan and forced a US aircraft carrier to retreat with the use of a new anti-ship missile equipped with a cluster warhead; one or more hits may have even been scored. In addition, Iran has announced a new expanded zone of maritime control. The US is not fully in control of the scale and escalation of the conflict, no matter what the US administration believes; as the Iranians are displaying. With Ansar Allah once again attacking Saudi oil and gas facilities to underline that reality.
With the autumn harvest and winter heating season, the demand for distillates will jump; just in time for the mid-terms. At the same time, Europe will be desperately competing for LNG cargoes as it races to fill up its gas storage before winter comes. If the US administration maintains its zombie stance, and delusional notions that it is in control, it may come to feel like a very long winter.