The US & Israel Have No Plan — Because Collapse Is The Plan

I don’t think it’s controversial any longer to proclaim that the ruling class of the US and Israel (USrael™) are idiot psychopaths (idiopaths™). Some around the globe have noticed the two administrations sinking all of us into a possible global economic meltdown / possible nuclear war / probable really shitty 2026 don’t seem to have a “plan” or “strategy” or “inkling” for what happens next.

Even the lawmakers who yesterday attended a closed-door briefing about the administration’s Persian Incursion exited the room completely baffled as to A) the reasons for this war, B) the plan for this war, and C) the plan for what comes after said war.

The reason these witless millionaire lawmakers don’t understand the true causes of this horrific invasion of Iran is because they either don’t understand or choose to ignore the petrodollar and it’s role in dollar hegemony and then dollar hegemony’s role in making sure the US oligarchs can print enough money to own whole islands where they can sexually abuse minors with abandon. (I discussed the real reasons for the attack on Iran in a recent column here.)

However, the reason our 72% male 78% white Congress can’t get a clear answer from the Trump administration as to what comes next if the USrael™ idiopaths “succeed” in Iran is quite simply because it doesn’t matter to those making the decisions. The idiopaths don’t care. Collapsing the state apparatus is the goal. Asking them what comes next is like asking an arsonist what he’s going to build after he burns down the house. Chances are his response would be nothing more than a bewildered look akin to when you ask your dog for advice on a variable-rate mortgage.

[SIDE NOTE: I'm very suppressed here. Follow my work at "RealLeeCamp" on subs tack.]

Some normal people — who don’t understand the sinister, soulless aims of the US imperial rulers — like to mention that the US hasn’t won a war since WWII. They like to say, “Every war the US has entered into over the past 50 years has been a disaster for us.” Unfortunately, that’s not true. It’s not true because “normal” people with feelings and souls and payment plans and moral cores can’t comprehend what counts as “winning” for the piping hot bags of douche who run the USraeli™ empire.

The clearest examples are Iraq, Libya, and Syria. Despite the breathless protestations of our various administrations at the time, the goals with the invasion of Iraq, invasion of Libya, and invasion of Syria were never to help the poor, suffering people in those countries. (Shock.) Our ruling psychopaths didn’t ever care about the women or the children or the innocents or the elderly or the pets. They didn’t give a shit. In fact, psychopaths are incapable of giving a shit about others.

The actual goal was to turn those nations into unstable, feeble, incapacitated, failed states. Once in that condition, they A) don’t pose a risk to Israel and B) don’t have the strength or ability to pump oil outside the petrodollar and align with other countries outside USrael’s™ sphere of influence.

— Libya ended up with a lawless state featuring such exciting tourist attractions as open-air slave markets and violent warlords.

— In the years following the 2003 Iraq invasion, Iraqis celebrated with extreme instability, sectarian fighting, and efforts to establish a government amidst violent insurgency.

— Following the fall of the Assad government in Syria, the country has been led by a US-installed rebranded Al Qaeda asshole. The national sport is extreme poverty, and the national flower is ethnic cleansing.

For the people of Iraq, Libya, and Syria, it’s an absolute horror movie. And yet, Americans no longer hear our politicians or our mainstream media announcing that the people of [fill in the blank] need our help. Not any longer. They apparently only needed USraeli™ “help” when there was a risk to the petrodollar. With the safety of the petrodollar secure, USraeli™ freedom bombs are no longer necessary.

USrael™ has no plan for an imaginary post-war Iran because the arsonist does not seek to rebuild the house. Cancer does not ask how to bring the host back to life. The US imperial aim is merely… hell. Hell on earth. No more stability. No more society. No more infrastructure. Essentially no more state. And for the US and Israel, this means no more resistance, no more threat, no more competition to the petrodollar. No more Iranian alliance with China.

Collapse is the plan.

But it increasingly seems that it won’t work. Iran is not Iraq. Iran is not Libya. Iran is not Syria.

Iran is a powerful and ancient society of 90 million people. Those who understand Iran far better than I do say Iranians will fight to the end. The US will not fight to the end because the majority of Americans don’t even know why we’re fighting at all. In fact, polling shows most Americans think Trump went to war with Iran to distract from the Epstein files.

[Important: Want weekly columns like this at no cost? Just follow my work at "RealLeeCamp" on subs tack. Thanks!]

 

   

Tehran has officially declared that the digital and physical assets of major American tech giants are now considered legitimate military targets, a massive escalation in global cyber warfare. This announcement suggests that Iran views these corporations as active participants in the U.S. defense strategy, particularly those providing AI and cloud infrastructure.

By naming specific companies like NVIDIA and Palantir, the Iranian leadership is signaling a focus on the supply chains and software that power modern autonomous weaponry. This move brings the "Silicon Valley" elite directly into the crosshairs of a conflict that was previously limited to traditional military sectors.

Security experts warn that this could lead to a wave of sophisticated cyber-attacks targeting data centers, satellite communications, and global financial networks managed by these firms. The threat aims to disrupt the technological backbone of the West, potentially affecting everyday services for millions of civilians worldwide.

The targeting of private corporations marks a shift toward a total warfare doctrine where the line between state-sponsored defense and industry becomes completely blurred. These companies are now likely to bolster their own private security and cyber-defense protocols to unprecedented levels.

As these tech giants become central to the geopolitical standoff, the global market is reacting with extreme caution regarding the future of international tech partnerships. This development underscores how the modern battlefield has expanded from the high seas to the servers and chips that drive the global economy.

#Amerika

#TechNews #CyberWarfare #Geopolitics #SiliconValley #IranWar #SecurityAlert

(Not pstd elsewhere)

 

Tehran has delivered its most consequential message since Operation Epic Fury began and it was not delivered through diplomatic back channels or carefully worded statements designed to leave room for interpretation. Iran has rejected negotiations entirely and declared it is fully prepared to confront a American ground invasion if one comes. The door that Trump's own advisors were desperately urging the administration to find and walk through on March 9th has just been slammed shut and bolted from the other side.

The weight of what a ground invasion would actually mean deserves to be stated plainly. Iran is not Iraq in 2003. Its terrain is more difficult, its population larger, its missile capabilities now confirmed to be dramatically greater than American intelligence assessed, and its military doctrine specifically built around making a ground campaign as costly as possible for any invading force. Nine American soldiers are already dead from air operations alone. The financial cost has already exceeded $10 billion. Congress has never voted on any of it. The question of what a ground war would cost in lives and treasure does not have a comfortable answer.

Washington's internal debate about exit strategies just became considerably more urgent and considerably more constrained simultaneously. Iran has made its position unambiguous. The administration that launched this war without a plan to end it now faces an adversary that has removed the diplomatic option and replaced it with a direct military challenge. The question of whether Congress steps in before that challenge produces an answer may be the most important one currently sitting unanswered in Washington.

 

 

Anger is growing among many Americans after reports revealed that roughly $18 million in taxpayer funds have been used over the years to settle sexual harassment and misconduct claims involving members of the U.S. Congress and congressional staff. Critics argue that these settlements were handled quietly through internal processes, leaving the public with little visibility into who was involved or how the money was used. For many voters, the issue has become a symbol of what they see as a system designed to protect powerful insiders rather than ensure accountability.

The controversy intensified after lawmakers voted against proposals that would have publicly disclosed more details about the settlements and the individuals connected to them. Advocates for reform say taxpayers deserve full transparency when public funds are used to resolve misconduct claims. As calls for accountability grow louder, the debate is fueling renewed demands in Washington for stronger oversight, clearer reporting rules, and reforms aimed at restoring public trust in government institutions.

#GovernmentAccountability #PoliticalReform #Transparency

What Emilia Hart’s passage brings up straight away is how easily a woman can be turned into a category. In her own head she’s ordinary and has reasons for what she does. And then a word is placed on top of her and that word starts doing more work than she ever did. “Witch” was a verdict. And once enough people said it, her own account of herself stopped counting.

In Weyward, the women are growing plants, keeping to themselves and leaving men who hurt them. Emilia Hart sets the story in small rural communities across different centuries, and those settings are important because when you live somewhere small, you can’t outrun a rumor. If people decide you are odd, that description follows you into the shop, into church, and every doorway.

And once the word “witch” is spoken by someone with standing, it stops being idle talk. Hart draws on the long history of European witch trials, where accusations moved through legal systems run by men. So the word carried authority and could move a neighbor’s complaint to a court. A woman might insist she was simply knowledgeable about herbs or just unwilling to remarry, but her insistence didn’t carry the same force as the accusation.

It’s uncomfortable to admit how familiar that still feels, even without fires and executions. A woman reaches midlife and stops softening her opinions, and she’s called sharp. She leaves a marriage and someone describes her as unstable. The description arrives first, and people adjust around it. You can see the slight pause before she speaks. The look exchanged between colleagues. Rachel Cusk has written about how female directness is received as aggression. The same sentence, delivered in the same tone, draws a different response depending on who says it. After that, the response becomes part of her reputation.

The line about building gallows and pyres forces you to remember that language did not float harmlessly above events. Before any execution, there were meetings, statements, and signatures. Neighbors repeating stories until they sounded like fact. The word witch prepared people to accept punishment. By the time a woman stood trial, many had already agreed on who she was.

And Hart’s characters know this, which is why they resist the label at first. There’s caution passed from mother to daughter. Don’t draw attention and give them reason. That training echoes through generations. Many women were raised to be agreeable because likeability offered protection. You can feel how that habit lingers. You add a smile to a firm email and lower your voice when disagreeing. Not because you doubt yourself, but because you know how quickly tone can be used against you.

Mona Chollet writes about the suspicion directed at women who live outside marriage or motherhood, and it connects here because those women often become subjects of commentary. Their choices are discussed more than men’s are. A single woman in her forties is still treated, in some circles, as a puzzle to solve. That scrutiny doesn’t lead to public execution now, but it can lead to exclusion or to being talked about as if you are missing a vital part.

What keeps needling at me is how group agreement forms. Witch trials required testimony from ordinary people. It wasn’t only officials. It was neighbors confirming the story. And even now, when a woman is labelled difficult, others sometimes join in.

The passage refuses to separate speech from outcome. A word can reorganize how a woman is treated a long time before any official decision is made. Once she is described in a certain way often enough, people respond to that description rather than to her behavior. Correcting it demands stamina and many women calculate whether it’s worth the effort.

Reading it as a middle-aged woman, you start to recognize how much energy has gone into staying outside certain labels. How often you’ve adjusted your presentation to avoid being renamed. And you also start to wonder what might have unfolded differently if those words had never been given such authority in the first place.

© Echoes of Women - Fiona.F, 2026. All rights reserved

 

A 28-year-old DOGE bro with zero experience in research, or peer review just admitted under oath that he canceled over $100 million in federal research funding because some projects mentioned the word "LGBTQ." He didn't even read a single book first.

Nathan Cavanaugh, a former startup bro turned DOGE operative, testified in a January deposition that he and a colleague from the investment banking world personally reviewed hundreds of grants from the National Endowment for the Humanities.

They created lists labeled "Craziest Grants" and "Other Bad Grants" and used ChatGPT to scan project descriptions for keywords like "gay," "BIPOC," "indigenous," and "tribal."

When asked why a program examining the experiences of LGBTQ military veterans was flagged for cancellation, Cavanaugh's entire explanation was: "Because it explicitly says LGBTQ." A project mentioning "feminist and queer insights" got axed for the same reason. Not fraud. Not waste. Just words that made them uncomfortable.

When the attorney asked what qualified him to make these decisions, Cavanaugh said a person could have "enough judgment from reading books." When asked which books, he admitted there were none.

Among the casualties: a documentary about Jewish women's slave labor during the Holocaust, an archival project on Italian American history, efforts to preserve endangered Native American languages, and a museum that needed a new HVAC system.

The entire process resulted in the termination of 97% of the agency's grants. DOGE staffers pressured the NEH to move faster, with one writing: "We're getting pressure from the top on this and we'd prefer that you remain on our side."

Cavanaugh also insisted the cuts were about reducing the deficit. When asked if they actually reduced the deficit, he admitted they did not.

No expertise. No books. No deficit reduction. Just a couple of guys in their twenties and a grudge against the word "queer," destroying careers and erasing history.

This is what "government efficiency" looks like.