Iran Was Always the Final Domino
If you think Trump is responsible for the Iran war, then you don’t understand foreign policy for the last 30 years.
This War With Iran Was Planned Long Ago
Everything you see on TV is theater, which should be painfully obvious by now. The war with Iran was the final domino in the Clean Break strategy, a plan designed to reshape the Middle East back in the 1990s. Biden would have gladly gone into Iran, but he was busy toppling Syria. It all started with Iraq, and the United States has been toppling governments ever since.
If you’re a glutton for punishment like me and enjoy tracking the media and its messaging, then this piece is for you.
The Three Myths
For the current narrative to work — that Trump whimsically wandered into war with Iran for funsies — there are three myths the public must believe:
-
Trump must appear to be calling the shots and fully in control.
-
Trump must not appear intimidated or pressured.
-
Only Trump fell for Benjamin Netanyahu’s Iran war pitch.
1. Trump Must Appear To Be Calling The Shots
Most recently, Rep. Thomas Massie lost his primary in Kentucky’s 4th District. Massie was one of the few consistent voices in Congress against runaway spending, against foreign wars, and against AIPAC’s influence. He has even argued that AIPAC should register as a foreign agent under FARA.
In a record-shattering primary, more than $30 million was poured into defeating him. While many view this as a victory for AIPAC, it may ultimately prove to be a Pyrrhic one because it drew widespread attention to the scale of foreign lobbying and outside money operating in American elections.
The system needs Trump to look like he’s in charge. If the public concludes the game is rigged and stops blaming “the other side,” people might start uniting against the actual power structure instead of fighting each other.
2. Trump Must Not Appear Intimidated Or Pressured
I believe the assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania was a genuine effort to kill him — essentially a Charlie Kirk-style assassination that failed.
While I’ve heard many people claim Butler was staged, several facts remain difficult to reconcile with a fully controlled operation:
-
Multiple people in the crowd were wounded or killed, including firefighter Corey Comperatore.
-
Audio analysis by Chris Martenson and others appears consistent with synchronized live fire and supersonic bullet cracks.
-
Video evidence suggests the Secret Service counter-sniper team was out of position at a critical moment.
Whether you believe Butler was real or staged, the event demonstrated how easily a president can be targeted in public. The media quickly settled on the “lone gunman” narrative, and the story largely disappeared within a couple of news cycles. Not much different than what happened after Charlie Kirk’s death.
3. Only Trump Fell For Benjamin Netanyahu’s Iran War Pitch
Former CIA officer John Kiriakou has argued on multiple podcasts that no previous U.S. president bought Benjamin Netanyahu’s repeated pitches for war with Iran. According to Kiriakou, they viewed the intelligence and rationale as unreliable, exaggerated, or overly alarmist. Obama has made similar comments in recent interviews.
However, this framing is incomplete.
Although the wars didn’t follow the original timeline, Iran was always intended to be the final domino. The Biden administration didn’t launch a direct war with Iran partly because it was occupied with — and benefited from — the rapid collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria.
Conclusion
If you’ve spent any time listening to people like Scott Horton, Glen Greenwald, Jeffrey Sachs, or John Mearsheimer, then none of this should come as a surprise. The argument has been made for years that Iran was always the ultimate target, but first its allies had to be weakened, isolated, or removed.
The Biden administration would have gladly moved on Iran, but it was busy helping turn Syria into a failed state through the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad. Once you start looking at the bigger picture, the pattern becomes difficult to ignore.
As General Wesley Clark revealed in his 2007 Democracy Now interview, shortly after 9/11 he was shown a classified Pentagon memo calling for regime change in seven countries in five years: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and finally Iran.
This aligns closely with the 1996 “Clean Break” strategy, a policy paper written by a group of American neoconservatives — including Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and David Wurmser — for incoming Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The Clean Break strategy called for abandoning land-for-peace negotiations in favor of aggressive regime change and regional transformation, beginning with Iraq and eventually extending to Syria, Iran, and beyond.
We have "cartesian blinders being put on us so that we are trying to make sense out of scraps of information and hints." - @bretweinstein
WEINSTEIN: I mean, even if you have your villains who are engaged in the behavior that motivated this war in Iran, even if that's the story, presumably most of the people in the path of these ferocious bombings that he is describing are not deserving of going back to the Stone Age.
In fact, I distinctly remember him telling us that part of what we were up to was liberating the people of Iran from their tyrannical regime.
So if it's the tyrannical regime that justifies the ferocious bombing, then it's a tragedy that other people are going to be sent back to the Stone Ages with them. Right?
HEYING: It's it's not a narrative. It's an incoherent set of talking points.
WEINSTEIN: Yeah, it's a kind of cheerleading that is completely inappropriate from the perspective of the president.
Bret Weinstein discusses the Trump administrations "back to the stone age" recent remarks in the latest episode of The Evolutionary Lens, Episode 320 "Are we back in the stone age?" on DarkHorse.
Bret Weinstein explains, "If you stop businesses from starting here, and if you drive people so that they move elsewhere—even though it's difficult to do—then the point is the tax base dries up, which then forces you to become even more predatory for the people who stayed.
And that's really the thing, right? They're setting themselves up so that they have to go after more and more people, because the people who are starting new businesses are not going to do it here."
I just want to re-post my response to the episode with Michael Yon and Masako Ganaha since I think this is important and I would really like to get a response from @bretweinstein .
Unbelievable! "The Zionists" control the world? really? This is one of the oldest antisemitic statements in the book since by "The Zionists" it is implied "The Jews" otherwise why use this term?. I expected some push back from Bret other than the meek remark about Zionism definition. When you regard to "the Zionists" you are generalizing in a dangerous way. If you mean the Israeli government say so. If you can name names do that. Almost all Israeli jews are Zionists, because being a Zionist just mean that you believe Israel is the land of the jews. Any other definition of Zionism is simply false. The Zionist movement rouse as a result of antisemitism in Europe in an attempt to find a safe home for jews, and the holocaust boosted and probably caused this vision to realize. Now you may ...
