Middle East Meltdown: Obvious Escalation Pathway

A deliberate, recursive Catch 22 follows false pretext enabled by strategic impunity

“Pretext” is what justifies action first internally then externally. Iran helped the US/IS manufacture its false pretext by publicly communicating Iran's stance/intent etc re nuclear activities. US/IS spun up that pretext to justify internally to attack Iran.

This was fully predicted and explained by

Scott Ritter

while many others on the same side attacked him. He described the “negotiate new terms or risk attack” situation. This was correct but mistakenly assumed USA negotiations were genuine, good faith.

Ritter should know better.

In actual fact, Iran was in a recursive Catch 22.

Catch 22: "We will attack you. Until then be distracted by talks under threat of attack."

Now, false pretext (“Iran is a nuclear threat”) is presented as the lie to justify the illegal invasion of Iran.

Iran enters the next Catch 22 loop.

Catch 22: "We are attacking you. Defending/responding will justify our initial attack & excuse our ongoing & escalatory attacks."

False framing of everything stems from the false, illegal pretext.

This is all critical, integrated political military strategy for specific effect:

• Iran MAY have adequate conventional capability to suppress IS.

• USA doesn't have adequate force presence regionally to comprehensively defeat Iran and it lacks a full pretext (being distant).

• So combine US/IS to generate integrated pretext to enable/justify (internally):

I. labelling Iran a formally rogue nuclear state (it's not);

II. declaring it strategic existential threat to US/IS;

III. exploiting proven lack of any opposing regional or international forces, entities or enforceable laws;

IV. initiating illegal invasive attacks via IS spear tip.

V. Using Iran's response to being attacked as false justification (secondary false pretext) for USA to directly deploy its limited expeditionary forces as a flanking manoeuvre.

This is straightforward kinetic warfare positioning to split Iran across two flanks. Pre-baked escalation to a planned strike.

IS strike packages are old plans. Their execution date had to precede any real Iranian nuke production. The pretext can always be false because there is no effective opposition to US/IS.

Risk calculus:

How much damage to IS can Iran do in the time it takes to:

a. Engage via IS forces (pathfinder SEAD etc);

b. Weaken & distract Iran to maximise US strike channel success;

c. Deliver tactical nukes via B2s across all sites in Iran;

d. Force regional capitulation of all Axis forces via this use of force.

This will be “justified” post facto thusly:

“We saved the world from the threat of Iranian nuclear weapons (that didn't exist) by using nuclear weapons on Iran before Iran ever contravened any laws or norms.”

Think the world “won't tolerate this”?

How would it oppose it or register meaningful dissent?

The above is near exactly the same domination show of force as USA's nuking of Japan when it was no threat and surrendering. From that event, USA domination through fear, military power & proven intent/will to nuke nations spawned into full blown Empire.

WW2 gave the USA false pretext to use nukes against Japan when it did.

US/IS live strategy is both:

• the renewal of Empire through false nuclear use pretext; and

• the full spectrum dominance of the entire Middle Eastern region ahead of multipolarity power rebalancing.

These actions and escalation will totally contain all ME states within the US/IS pocket including Iran, thereby extending US/IS control into China via full capture of Iranian oil and regional totalitarianism.

All this is achievable under the false pretext now extant & said by US/IS: “Iran is a threat,” and the uncontested use of tactical nuclear weapons underground.

What is Iran's way out?

Unknown.

If it can fight off IS, it “justifies” the escalatory flank attack from US. If it can fight off US, it justifies the nuclear flank escalation by IS.

If it can destroy nuclear B2s outside its borders via AD/air force, it's in a full-scale war with USA.

One option is the maximal destruction at highest speed of the IS flank ahead of B2 engagement to create capacity to watch, detect & defend against B2s. Then the maximal destruction of that threat outside its borders, so nukes land in Iraq etc.

If the Iranian Government cannot defend 2 flanks, the net global fear at state level after US/IS tactical nuke use will trigger total collapse of Iranian political support in ME & regional capitulation to US/IS force & willpower via reforging reality-on-the-ground.

LAW, MORALS & NORMS ARE IRRELEVANT. THEY ARE UNENFORCEABLE.

PRETEXT TO INTERNALLY DRIVE US/IS ACTION IS PRIMARY. THAT THRESHOLD WAS EXCEEDED YEARS AGO.

External justification before, during and after can then be literally anything if there is zero means to challenge or punish a transgressor/psychopath/criminal (see Iraq war).

US/IS now believe all forms of force & ideology align in their favour (including Third Temple aspects).

Escalation by US/IS is guaranteed. Iran is damned no matter what it does.

There is no off ramp. Any “offer” is a lie that will generate a new false pretext or just distract.

Recognising Iran's permanent corner - a recycling Catch 22 - is key; it sets the terms of combat.

Those terms are now - for the Iranian Gov & millions around the target cities - existential.

It's not existential for US/IS, such claims are totally false, only power impinging.

If Iran does not fight existentially now, what people think is burgeoning multipolarity is going to be significantly interrupted because a false pretext will be used to stop that multipolarity by glassing three cities in Iran.

None of the above gives any other nuclear power adequate, genuine pretext to use nukes. They must adopt adequate pretext to oppose US/IS. They can threaten conventional defence of an ally if Iran formally requests.

In extremis, Iran needs overt nuclear backing from any/all of China, Russia and Pakistan to prevent Iran being glassed.

The reasoning/justification/pretext?

“Iran's present existence is existentially critical to our strategic interests globally and in the region.”

This is exactly the US/IS pretext logic it employs to justify its escalating actions. It cannot technically deny that logic from other, pro Iranian nuclear powers.

Formalization of such at the UNSC in order to initiate a nuclear-backed regional stand off (coincidentally protecting RU/CH/IR BRI interests) would be a way out that slows WW3. Iran is already in a strategic alliance with Russia, but a reiteration that includes nuclear back stop may be useful/required.

That's one potential scenario that will be tested over the next month or less.

THINK THIS IS FANTASTICAL BULLSHIT WITH NO FACTUAL BASIS OR HISTORICAL PRECEDENTS?

Legal justification for current US/IS invasion of Iran, pretext covering the invasion, negotiations logic post JCPOA-abandonment, B2 nuclear munitions evidence and circumstance, WW2 Japan justification, Greater Israel plan are all factored into this chatGPT critique of the above.

Guess what the net outcome is?

Why do we keep showing you this chatGPT stuff?

In cognitive warfare you are the target. Understand what's happening to you via the LLM otherwise you are beaten without fighting.

https://chatgpt.com/share/684df156-ff30-8005-9fef-215f49fa5233