Monday, March 2, 2026

Mad King Watch (Take XIII): Notes On The (Apparent) Eve Of World War III

 

<"Missing In Action..."/The Reckoner
Pahlavi Head Shot:
European Union, 1998-2026>

<i.>
A maximalist-minded President launches a series of strikes against a nonwhite-governed enemy, in its latest saber-rattling display of its endless appetite for controlling others. Rather than rallying around the flag, however, the overall effect is closer to the sound of one hand clapping, or the sudden implosion of a damp wet paper bag, amid rampant levels of social and political inequity. To steal a rhetorical flourish from Winston Churchill, never have so many toiled for so little, and never have so few owned so much more than the rest, always at their expense.

If you think you're living in the world of 1896 -- or going from zero to 1939, in 10 seconds or class -- welcome to the club. if you're still harboring any doubts, this weekend's strikes against Iran should finally settle them. What's most remarkable about our latest bout of Middle East madness is how little the governing classes  have learned from calamities like the endless Iraq war of 2003, and the chaotic August 2021 withdrawal from Afghanistan, that finally climaxed our 20-year military adventurism there.

Suffice to say, neither instance proved the satirical proposition that I remember seeing in one of Tom Tomorrow's cartoons on this very subject: "They'll be too busy making cheap oil for their new American friends to stay mad at us for long." We'll revisit that idea shortly, but it's a thesis worth repeating, as Trump sleepwalks into the same box canyon that derailed his Biden and Bush-era counterparts -- that nations can never be created, nor managed, by remote control.

Nevertheless, we seem ready to repeat that mistake once more, if Trump's scarlet-coated rhetorical flourishes to Iran's beleaguered masses are any indication: "America is backing you with overwhelming strength and devastating force. Now is the time to seize control of your destiny and to unleash the prosperous and glorious future that is close within your reach." Yet bombing alone has never proven enough to generate regime change all by itself, as the Allies learned in World War II, for example. Or should have learned, perhaps, in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The other basic problem, as experts cited by the Wall Street Journal suggest (see link below), is that no matter how the dust settles, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps will still hold all the guns. Without boots on the ground, or some other event  forcing their hand, they won't be going anywhere -- nor switching sides -- any time soon. "There is no organized opposition ready to seize this moment,"  as one of those experts, Mohammed Albasha, told the Journal. "The likely outcome is not reform, but consolidation, closer to a closed military state."

Indeed. Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's death has already spurred the emergence of a collectivist leadership that can hold the reins until the situation stabilizes, and eventually, choose a successor. If Iran's military fortunes fall further -- which isn't yet a given -- that same group could head for the hills, and coordinate some type of insurgency, if need be, similar to the Afghan or Iraqi experiences. 

Whatever scenario unfolds, neither seems likely to include a job opening for Iran's former crown prince. Judging by Reza Pahlavi's initial public statements, he seems afflicted by the same wishful thinking bouncing around the halls of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue: "This is a humanitarian intervention; and its target is the Islamic Republic, its repressive apparatus, and its machinery of slaughter -- not the country and great nation of Iran."

For all the richly justified hatred that Iranians harbor toward their government, we doubt that "humanitarian" will be the word they associate with the missiles and munitions raining down on their country. Nor is the same brutal regime that instigated over 7,000 verified deaths in its latest crackdown likely to post a Craigslist-style ad ("Wanted: New Leader To Usher Transition Away From Theocracy. Unlimited Potential And Benefits"), nor a billboard in downtown Tehran ("Reza, Where Are You? Phone Home").


<Simply drowning in the devil's excrement? 
Edwin Drake, the first man to succeed in drilling for oil:
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-49499443>

<ii.>
So where does this latest twitch of the Trump circus leave us? Undoubtedly, some of it's driven by petrostate nostalgia, since few blocs exert such outsized influence as the fossil fuel industry -- which accounts for just eight percent of the US economy, even by its own figures alone Yet that statistic doesn't tell the whole story, for the industry "is also woven into the U.S. political fabric in ways that resemble the structure of petrostates," as Inside Climate News suggests:

"Wyoming gets 59 percent of its state budget from fossil fuel revenue; North Dakota, 29 percent; and Alaska, 21 percent. Other states, though less reliant, take in staggering sums, led by Texas, at $14.6 billion annually; California, $7.8 billion; and Pennsylvania, $4.4 billion. And the money going into state coffers reflects the far larger impact the industry is having on state economies and jobs.

"Because institutions like the Electoral College and the U.S. Senate give states outsized power compared to their populations, fossil fuel-reliant regions can hold considerable sway over national politics and policy." It's the reason, the Climate News piece goes on venture, that Democratic nominee Kamala Harris shied away discussing from the Biden administration's attempts to move toward renewable energy, and pledged not to ban fracking, in "a vain effort to win the swing state of Pennsylvania, the nation’s No. 2 natural gas producer."

Such skewed petro-politics are also the reason why Pennsylvania's newly-minted Senator, John Fetterman, has gone from denouncing fracking as a "stain" on his state, to an aggressive proponent; why industry-backed boondoggles like clean coal and carbon capture continue to get federal funding; and why oil and gas interests rooted so openly for a Trump restoration, one that promised a golden opportunity to line their pockets like never before.

The only losers, of course, are the rest of us -- who will be cheerfully expected to pay more at the pump, which ends up being the most common collateral consequences of any prolonged conflict. I still hold vivid memories of the spring 2005 price spikes -- when gas soared from $1.60, to almost $3.50 per gallon -- and people at my newspaper of the time openly shed tears over the implications: "Whatever happened to the national interest?" 

I remember thinking, maybe we should have asked that question before we slapped an endless war on the national credit card. While those spikes came a couple years after the Iraq chaos, they still unfolded in a market that was still struggling to find its feet. 

Whatever or whoever was to blame, I couldn't overlook the consequences for my wallet, since I drove a 40- to 50-mile round trip to work every day at the time. When the Squawker and I worked out the math, we figured that I was losing about $20 a day, before I even got out of bed.

Even now, I struggle to describe how demoralized it felt, of heading to work, knowing you're going to lose money -- which is a far cry from the angst that oil and gas interests feel at failing to extract every last egg from the golden goose. It's the reason, I imagine, for the celebrated quote uttered in 1975 by Juan Pablo Pérez Alfonzo, who'd been Venezuela's petroleum minister during the 1960s:

"It is the devil's excrement.
We are drowning
in the devil's excrement."


<Time to swap out of that fancy linen, perhaps?
The ethically challenged Mr. Jorkin ponders his options...
"A Christmas Carol," 1951: YouTube capture>

<iii.>
Having been largely relegated to the dust of  scholarly obscurity, Alfonzo's lacerating observation has gained new life in recent years, notably after the Trump-sponsored snatching of Venezuela's tinpot strongman, Nicholas Maduro. On a more basic level, it reflects what those on the losing side of the petro-political divide know all too well -when the deck feels stacked.

Time will tell how the Iran crisis fits into that equation, though -- honestly -- the effect on oil prices is only one of many reasons to oppose the Orange Man's latest off-kilter gambit. Start with his 2024 victory speech pledge: "I'm not going to start a war. I'm going to stop wars." So much for that idea in a two-month period that's already seen three foreign entanglements.

Follow with the notion, ingrained since our beginnings, that only Congress can authorize any sort of military actions -- but don't linger endlessly on the "technical" or "management" arguments, as I call them, since they won't save us from this man's excesses, anymore than they did Bush's or Biden's Middle East missteps. "But you can't do that!" is catnip to any bad actor's ears, and Trump is no exception; alas, it's going to take much stronger medicine to finish the job.

However, what makes this outburst of Iranian interventionism feel especially egregious is the social backdrop it's unfolding against. Never have Americans felt more economically battered and beleaguered, yet received so little social support, in coping with the myriad of social ills they face (see the Hill link below).

Half now struggle to pay bills on time, which isn't impacting the stealth purchasing of warehouses needed to ramp up Trump's deportation machine, at a reported cost of $45 billion -- on top of an $11.25 billion increase for operating it, plus $100 million to acquire all these structures in the first place, amid record levels of homelessness (an estimated 771,840 on any given night), and housing costs exploding beyond any reasonable level.

Or we might focus on proposals announced last month for the Pentagon's first-ever $1.5 trillion budget, for an agency that has now failed eight consecutive audits (the only one among 24 departments that has been unable to meet that metric). Other ill effects will make themselves felt in other ways that not may be readily apparent at the time, but still come with a cost.

A good example is last week's announcement of the Pentagon's decision to cut off Anthropic at the knees -- because its CEO didn't want its AI products deployed for mass surveillance. Not to worry, though, since OpenAI's feral tech bro, Sam Altman, tripped over himself to fill the gap -- striking a deal only hours after Anthropic had been elbowed aside (see MSN link below). Altman's indecent haste to help the Trump regime build its long-cherished surveillance state recalls a nifty exchange from the 1951 adaptation of A Christmas Carol:

"We're all cutthroats
under this fancy linen,
Mr. Snedrig."

"I must ask you
to speak for yourself,
Mr. Jorkin."

And that's before we get to these massive data center projects -- including 32 alone threatened for Michigan -- that Altman and his kind seek to impose on the rest of us, in all their infrastructure-straining, job-draining, utility bill-jacking, wallet-busting glory, But that is the greater picture staring down at us. For affordable food, housing or utilities, the political class claims that it simply cannot rummage enough coins from under the ouch -- a reluctance that completely deserts them when they roll out their pet projects.

Giant holding pens, for real or imagined "others"? Open the checkbook; money's no object! Data centers and defense contractors? You wouldn't want them shivering in the rain and snow, do you? Innocent Americans potentially targeted as terrorists, or enemies of the state, thereby impacting their ability to make a living? Sorry, can't rethink the blueprint. Our republic would simply fall apart!

If this disconnect doesn't mobilize people, then nothing will, though it will undoubtedly take a sustained campaign to turn back this latest tide of madness. Whether that happens with the November midterms -- or, to coin the Doobie Brothers' phrase, "taking it to the streets," if Trump actively tries to derail or interfere with them -- remains to be seen.

Easy answers will hardly abound, as the risks continue to pile up. Yet this is, paradoxically, when we must find our greatest resolve, and steel ourselves for the enormous task that lies ahead, as the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists noted, in assessing the aftermath of Trump's 2024 victory:

"We do this not because our success is guaranteed. Given the forces mobilized against us, we are clearly the underdog. No white wizard will come to our rescue. But we have truth and justice on our side. And the stakes simply couldn’t be greater. We continue to fight for a livable planet, for us, our children, and future generations. Because it’s worth fighting for."

We couldn't have said it better. When all is said and done, let us hope that we're up to the task. --The Reckoner

Links To Go
Associated Press: Trump Statement On Iran:
https://apnews.com/article/iran-us-trump-address-f662a4f3378535d81197be699fb35a3e

Bulletin Of Atomic Scientists:
Welcome To The American Petrostate:
https://thebulletin.org/2024/11/welcome-to-the-american-petrostate/

Inside Climate News:
Trump's "Energy Dominance Agenda"
Sounds Like A Petrostate Plan To Some:
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/26112024/will-the-united-states-be-a-petrostate-under-trump/

MSN: Cancel ChatGPT Movement 
Goes Big After Open AI's Latest Move:

Wall Street Journal:
The Iranian Force Built To Defend The Regime...:


<Suggested Soundtrack: "For My Country," the A-side
of this 1983 single released by UK Decay:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XF9Dn9bb98o&list=RDXF9Dn9bb98o&start_radio=1>

Smashing and crashing,
Disguised as terrain:
Count up the memories,
We'll go back again

For the honor I don't ask why,
His majesty's pleasure my honor to die:
For -- my -- country!
For -- my -- country!

Posted by at
Labels: ,

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)