Brief Summary
This video analyzes the geopolitical situation between the U.S., Israel, and Iran, focusing on whether Trump will decide to attack Iran. It emphasizes prediction over activism, aiming to understand the forces influencing Trump's decisions. The analysis covers the history of conflict between Israel and Iran, the potential risks and benefits of U.S. intervention, and the shifting narrative around Israel in American politics. The video concludes with a prediction that Trump will avoid direct military action against Iran due to the potential damage to his political base and agenda, and stresses the importance of focusing on the larger issue of artificial general intelligence (AGI).
- Prediction of Trump's actions regarding Iran.
- Analysis of the shifting Israel narrative in American politics.
- Emphasis on the importance of AGI over geopolitical conflicts.
Purpose of this video: PREDICTION
The video aims to predict whether Trump will attack Iran, focusing on political and pragmatic reasons rather than moral or ethical ones. The goal is to provide insights for predicting market trends and geopolitical events. The video emphasizes rational analysis over emotional or tribal debates, aiming to understand the forces influencing Trump's decisions. The speaker acknowledges the high risk of making predictions but highlights his past accurate predictions, such as Trump's election victory and Tesla's robo taxi launch.
What has happened so far
In April 2024, Israel bombed the Iranian embassy in Damascus, killing 16 people, including Iranian Republican Guard Commander Muhammad Raza Zahedi. Iran retaliated with missiles on Israel, but most were intercepted. Israel responded with a limited strike on Isfahan, targeting a radar system, which led to de-escalation. In September 2024, Israel killed Hezbollah leader Hassan Masarallah and Iranian guard official Abbas Nil Furu Shan in Beirut. Iran launched 180 ballistic missiles at Israel, and Israel responded with strikes on Iranian missile sites. In June, Israel launched Operation Rising Lion, targeting Iran's nuclear facilities and military leadership, resulting in Iranian retaliation with over 100 ballistic missiles hitting Israeli cities and causing civilian casualties. Israel claimed air superiority, destroying a third of Iran's missile launchers, while Iran faced an internet blackout.
Current status and questions
As of June 20th, the USS Nimitz is in the region. The U.S. has not joined the fight but has deployed B2 bombers and the USS Nimitz. The White House plans to decide on strikes on Iran in the coming weeks. Trump's statements suggest he is torn between demanding total surrender from Iran and pursuing diplomacy. The U.S. demands that Iran halt uranium enrichment and dismantle its nuclear program, while Iran warns of an all-out war if attacked but has softened its rhetoric towards the U.S. The domestic debate in the U.S. includes neocons and hawks advocating for war due to the perceived nuclear threat, while others demand congressional approval and oppose escalation. Key questions include whether the U.S. should join Israel to delay Iran's nuclear program, avoid escalation, or pursue diplomacy, and what role Congress should play in the decision.
What are the risks?
The speaker emphasizes the historical failures and high costs of U.S. military interventions in the Middle East, citing the examples of Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, and Libya. The initial estimate for the Iraq war was $55 billion, but it ended up costing $4 trillion, including interest on debt. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan resulted in 7,000 U.S. deaths, over 50,000 wounded soldiers, and $11 trillion in costs, without achieving democracy or freedom in those countries. Iran is vastly larger and more sophisticated than Iraq and Afghanistan, with a population of 90 million, a significantly larger GDP, and a stronger military. Iran has a large army, an extensive drone program, and the largest ballistic missile program in the Middle East. A war with Iran could escalate into a proxy war involving China and derail the MAGA agenda domestically, distracting from the issue of AI.
What are the benefits?
The primary argument for attacking Iran is to prevent them from acquiring nuclear weapons, which would be unacceptable given their religious extremist government. However, there is currently no clear evidence of an active nuclear weapons program, leading to "mushroom cloud fatigue" among the public. Another potential benefit is regime change to remove the oppressive mullahs and improve women's rights, but past attempts at regime change in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria have failed. Supporting Israel is another argument, based on the narrative that Israel is the most important ally.
Israel narrative is shifting
The traditional narrative of unwavering support for Israel is shifting in America. The "greatest ally" coalition, consisting of Democrat and GOP neocons, AIPAC donors, the Christian right, the majority of the Jewish community, and mainstream media, is facing pushback. The MAGA coalition is challenging this narrative, advocating for no more wars of choice and prioritizing "America First." Alternative media figures like Joe Rogan, Tucker Carlson, and Candace Owens are pushing against the traditional narrative, focusing on the "swamp" and unnecessary foreign wars. The "look up" paradigm, emphasizing issues like money, wars, taxation, and debt, is gaining traction. Key MAGA figures are strongly opposed to U.S. involvement in a war with Iran, viewing it as a trap that would destroy Trump's presidency and America's future. Even Trump loyalists like Charlie Kirk are acknowledging the strong opposition to war among the MAGA base.
Trump’s decision
Trump's decision hinges on whether attacking Iran is a war of choice or necessity, which depends on whether Iran is developing nuclear weapons. If there is clear evidence of an imminent nuclear threat, MAGA could support military action. However, without such evidence, it becomes a war of choice with extremely high risks, including the potential breakup of the MAGA coalition. Even in the best-case scenario of quick regime decapitation, Trump would likely lose MAGA support and control of Congress.
My KEY predictions
Trump is predicted to avoid war with Iran because it would destroy the MAGA agenda and base. He will likely pressure Israel to act alone, offer support without direct U.S. involvement, and attempt to ramp up diplomacy with Iran to de-escalate the situation. Iran will strategically want to de-escalate but tactically has to co-escalate with Israel. The speaker believes Trump wants to de-escalate and make the situation go away because he's in a terrible predicament.
Also, AGI
The speaker concludes by highlighting the importance of focusing on artificial general intelligence (AGI) over geopolitical conflicts. He quotes Elon Musk, who compares dealing with politics to cleaning up a beach while a giant tsunami (AGI) is approaching. AGI is predicted to arrive by the end of the year or early next year, fundamentally reshaping the world, economy, job system, and geopolitics within the next 3-4 years. Trump's primary mission should be to ensure the U.S. survives AGI, making involvement in the Middle East a distraction.
