Friday, 10 April 2026

18 negatives to Trump's Iran war and zero positives

Op-ed: Trump's elected Iran war has created a plethora of negative outcomes - listed. There will be more. Many more I suspect. And I can't think of any positives because the war was unnecessary. Yes, Trump has severely damaged Iran's military equipment but they can rebuild. They will rebuild and the damage by all accounts is less than boasted by Trump and his cronies.

"Iran still has thousands of ballistic missiles in its arsenal that it could use by retrieving launchers from underground storage areas, according to American officials familiar with U.S. intelligence assessments," said a recent intelligence report

Negatives (not an exhaustive list):

Thousands of innocent Iranians killed by US bombs. High casualties across Iran, Lebanon, Israel, and U.S. forces.
The possibility that the Iranian regime will become more dictatorial when the war finishes.
The Strait of Hormuz now potentially subject to a toll imposed by Iran which will strangle shipping going forward for an indefinite time.
Europe's stagnant economy - including the UK - will be further battered by inflation due to the Iran war due to higher oil prices, and higher interest rates.
NATO is ruptured thanks to the war as Trump believes that NATO countries should have stepped in and assisted the US. But the US did not keep NATO in the loop. Nor did Trump seek the approval of Congress. Many European leaders see the war as illegal.
Russia has received a much needed economic boost due to a sanctions break (Trump's decision) and elevated oil and gar prices. This will assist Russia in its illegal war against Ukraine where hundreds of thousands have been killed. Trump's decisions are often immoral.
The relationship between Israel and the US is frayed because many in the US believe that Israel dragged the US into this unnecessary war. This is Bibi's war. He loves to batter the Arabs as it keeps him in power! True.
Gulf nations have had their peace, quiet and stability rudely interrupted indeed destroyed to a certain extent because of Iran's attacks on them. They are losing tourists by the bucket full. And those who planned to emigrate to the Gulf will now think twice.
The US has spent $50 billion on the war. The US has a massive national debt that will, one day, cripple the country. Trump does not give a damn about the country's national debt because he likes to leverage debt in a business sense. The higher inflation due to the war will make servicing this debt harder. The U.S. national debt has surged past $38–39 trillion, rising by billions per day and pushing debt‑to‑GDP above 120%. Interest payments now exceed $1 trillion annually, outpacing many federal programs and eroding fiscal flexibility. As borrowing accelerates faster than economic growth, the government becomes more vulnerable to rising bond yields, investor anxiety, and policy missteps. The mounting debt strains budgets, fuels inflation pressures, weakens confidence in U.S. Treasuries, and risks crowding out future public investment—leaving the country more exposed to shocks and less able to shape its own economic destiny.
The majority of US citizens are against the Iran war started by choice by Trump. No need for it arguably. The country is polarised. The US is still at war with its own public!
Trump's Iran war is also arguably already lost as Trump has already committed war crimes! If he needs to do that, he has lost the war in my view.
Severe regional destruction including critical infrastructure and energy facilities which will affect energy prices for a decade going forward?
Risk of wider regional escalation drawing in multiple state and non-state actors.
Supply side disruptions - LPG and fertiliser for example.
A dent to Trump's support from his once highly supportive MAGA fans.
Trump's credibility severely damaged.
Trump's lack of ability to control Bibi Netanyahu who will not stop bombing Lebanon! More instability.
China is strengthened by the war perhaps indefinitely. Why? The country has done a deal with Iran to let their ships pass the Strait of Hormuz and there is damage to the US and the Gulf States but China marches on untouched.

Positives:

None that I can think of! Please comment.

-------------------------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins. Also, sources for news articles are carefully selected but the news is often not independently verified. And, I rely on scientific studies but they are not 100% reliable. Finally, (!) I often express an OPINION on the news. Please share yours in a comment.

Wednesday, 8 April 2026

Trump creates permanent Hormuz chaos with Iran demanding bitcoin toll

Before this elected war, due to Trump's recklessness and poor thinking, all was well in the Strait of Hormuz. No problems. 120 ships came and went unhindered for years until Trump blundered bigtime.

Now, no matter what happens with this unnecessary war, it seems likely that Iran will be charging shipping companies huge amounts of money in bitcoin to pass through the strait as a form of toll, depending on the origin and I suppose destination of the ship and whether it carries cargo or not.

The point is that there will be a Hormuz toll system in place for the indefinite future it seems to me and well after this crazy and sad war has ended.

This will have a very negative impact on world trade in the future. And it will create more friction between nations.

Iran has realised that they have a massive amount of leverage when in charge of the Strait of Hormuz and they are prepared to use it both to hurt Western trade and to bring in much need income.

----------------

Trump has already committed a war crime in his deranged threat

Trump has already committed a war crime in his threat to destroy Iran because a threat of this nature is itself a war crime. View this video to see that explained.

It is a really impressive video (not so much if you worship Trump). What Trump said is astonishing. Utterly reckless. Demented in fact. Irresponsible and so on leading to many people seriously thinking about replacing Trump through incapacity to discharge his duties as president. In other words he is as nutty as a Christmas cake.

The people who worship Trump and can't ever see him doing anything wrong are the ignorant and unenlightened. They really are. Can't blame them often for being ignorant and uneducated but if you see people praising Trump after these latest mad threats you'll have to agree with me.

--------------

The Ultimatum President Who Never Means It

There’s something unsettling about watching a leader - Trump - make big, dramatic threats and then quietly back away from them (TACO Trump 😱). After a while, it stops feeling like strategy and starts feeling like theatre. You can almost hear the studio lights buzzing in the background. Trump spent many years being the presenter on the American version of The Apprentice.

“A whole civilization will die tonight,” the President said on Monday, adding with jaw-dropping glibness: “I don’t want that to happen, but it probably will.” - this is Trump at his worst. Scaring the sh*t out of the entire world unless you know for sure he is pure bluster and full of crap.

Trump has already committed a war crime in this threat:

This is described as "existential theatre!"

Take the pattern we’ve seen again and again: a bold warning, a countdown, a promise of devastating consequences — and then, just as the deadline arrives, everything softens. The threat fades. The moment passes. And we’re left wondering what the point of the whole performance was.

It’s hard not to feel a bit embarrassed on behalf of the country when this happens. A threat only works if the person making it actually means it. When they don’t, it becomes noise. Worse, it becomes a habit.

The Showman’s Shadow

What strikes many people is how much this behaviour resembles the rhythm of a game show or a reality‑TV cliff-hanger. The dramatic pause. The “big reveal” that never quite arrives. The sense that the audience is supposed to gasp, even when nothing actually happens.

And maybe that’s the problem. When someone spends years building a public identity around spectacle, that identity doesn’t just disappear when they step into office. It follows them. It shapes how they talk, how they react, how they try to project strength.

But governing isn’t a show. The world doesn’t respond to cliff-hangers. It responds to consistency.

The Insecurity Behind the Bluster

There’s also something a bit sad (and mad, frankly) about it, if we’re honest. Because when a person keeps making threats they don’t carry out, it doesn’t come across as strength. It comes across as insecurity — the kind that needs to shout to feel heard, or threaten to feel powerful.

It’s the kind of behaviour you see when someone is terrified of looking weak, so they overcompensate. They puff themselves up. They talk big. They set impossible deadlines. And then, when reality pushes back, they quietly step away and hope no one notices.

But people do notice. And each time it happens, the gap between the performance and the person gets wider.

A Persona That Never Evolved

The truth is, some leaders never really leave their old roles behind. They carry the showman’s instincts into the presidency — the need for attention, the dramatic gestures, the constant sense of performing for an audience.

And that’s where the real damage happens. Because the world isn’t a studio set. Other countries aren’t contestants. And credibility isn’t something you can fake with a dramatic pause.

Many commentators argue that Donald Trump shows exactly this pattern — the game‑show‑host persona bleeding into the presidency, the big threats that evaporate, the performance that never quite becomes leadership.

Other commenters are genuinely concerned about Trump's sanity! Literally. And to think that he - and only he - can make the decision to use nuclear bombs. Is the world safe with Trump as president? Some even many doubt it.

The deeper psychological reading

When you strip away the politics and look only at the behavioural pattern, analysts often conclude that it reflects:

a constructed persona masking insecurity
a dependence on performance over substance
a fear of being exposed as ordinary or fallible
a need for dominance displays to maintain self‑worth
a mismatch between inner stability and outer theatrics

This is not a diagnosis — it’s a behavioural interpretation consistent with decades of research on public personas, leadership psychology, and compensatory self‑presentation.

A performative persona often emerges when the inner self feels insufficient

In psychology, this is sometimes called a compensatory identity.

It happens when:

the person fears being ordinary, weak, or ignored
so they build a larger‑than‑life persona to protect against that fear

This persona can look like:

exaggerated confidence
dramatic ultimatums
constant self‑promotion
theatrical displays of toughness

But underneath, the behaviour often reflects fragile self‑esteem, not stable confidence.

Below is a structured breakdown of the documented instances.

1. March 21–23 Deadline (Strait of Hormuz)

Initial threat: Iran must fully reopen the Strait of Hormuz within 48 hours or the U.S. would “obliterate” Iranian power plants.
Extension: About 12 hours before the deadline, Trump announced “productive conversations” and postponed strikes for five days, effectively extending the deadline.

2. Late March Extensions (Multiple Shifts)

After the first extension, Trump shifted the March 23 deadline several times over the following weeks.
He alternated between threats, claims of progress, and new timelines — sometimes in the same statement.

3. March 26 → April 6 Deadline

Trump again warned Iran to “get serious” before it was “too late.”
Later that same day, he extended the deadline by 10 more days, to April 6 at 8 p.m. ET, saying negotiations were “going very well.”

-------------

Nikon D5 DSLR used by Artemis II crew

The amazing photographs of the Earth in the distance and the dark moon in the foreground were taken with a Nikon D5 DSLR and perhaps the Nikon Z9 (mirrorless).

The D5 was first introduced 10 years ago but was selected for its ruggedness and proven radiation resistance and reliability in space.

The Z9 was a last minute addition on the insistence of Commander Reid Wiseman. It is being tested for possible use in future missions.

Now you know! Afterthought: the D5 takes a bit of controlling. You need to know a bit about photography and operating this pro camera to get the best out of it. The astronauts must have been specifically trained to use it.

Here is some info about the D5:

The Nikon D5 is one of those rare machines that earns its reputation the hard way: through absolute reliability in punishing conditions. Introduced in January 2016, it was built as Nikon’s flagship DSLR for professionals who needed a camera that would never quit, whether on a battlefield, a frozen tundra, or—remarkably—a deep‑space mission a decade later. Its 20.8‑megapixel full‑frame sensor may seem modest by modern standards, but that’s part of its strength. The pixel pitch is large, the circuitry is robust, and the sensor architecture is far less fragile than the ultra‑dense designs found in newer mirrorless bodies. That durability, combined with a magnesium‑alloy chassis and legendary weather sealing, makes the D5 a photographic tank.

Its EXPEED 5 processor delivers fast, predictable performance, and the 153‑point autofocus system remains one of the most dependable ever made. The camera’s ergonomics—deep grip, tactile buttons, and intuitive layout—were refined for professionals who shoot instinctively, often without looking away from the viewfinder. In low light, the D5 is a monster, producing clean files at ISO levels that would cripple lesser cameras.

What ultimately defines the D5 is trust. Photographers know it will fire, focus, and survive. NASA choosing it for Artemis II simply confirms what professionals have known for years: the D5 is built for environments where failure is not an option.