↓
 
Home » Trump the inscrutable: deal or no deal?

Trump the inscrutable: deal or no deal?

The New Neo Posted on by

Today Trump announced a moratorium on attacking Iran’s energy infrastructure while talks he described as “very good” are supposedly going on. Meanwhile, the Iranian leaders – although “leaders” is a fungible thing in Iran these days – say he’s full of it and that no such talks are occurring, much less “very good” ones.

So, what’s going on? If you expect a definitive answer here, you’re surely not going to get one. But I don’t think you’re going to get one anywhere right now. We’re all speculating, and I think that’s the point.

We do know that Trump likes to keep people guessing as he bobs and weaves and wheels and deals. We know he said what he needs from Iran is unconditional surrender. But we don’t know exactly what that means in a case where we don’t know who’s in charge or if any one person (or even small group of people) is in charge. We don’t even know if he really is negotiating, or with whom such talks might be, or exactly for what. Nor do we know, if the subject is indeed for unconditional surrender, if such talks are with someone or some group with the will to actually surrender or the ability to do so even if the will is there.

Clear as mud. And I believe that is Trump’s intent.

Trump may also want the Iranian hard-liners to wonder who the betrayers are who are doing the supposed talking. The goal might be to keep them alll at odds with each other; to keep them guessing.

We know that, in Venezuela, Trump allowed elements of the Maduro administration to stay in place, at least for a while, as long as they play ball with him. But Venezuela, unlike Iran, was not being run by fanatic end-times Shia Muslims who believe they need to engineer Armageddon in order for them to be able to rule the world.

My own wish in Iran is for regime change to something better – something a great deal better – than what the Iranians have endured for the last 47 years. But I have zero control over the situation, and those who do have control over it are quite unconcerned about my wishes. I do think that at some point, talks have to happen with someone. But – to quote the old Rodgers and Hart song – who knows where or when?

Comments

Trump the inscrutable: deal or no deal? — 22 Comments

  1. It’s a beautiful muddle! War! Always has been, always will be. Can I get an “Amen!”?

    Beautiful! Muddle! Progress incoming, any day now! Ah-hahahahaha.

  2. Trump is waiting for the anti-regime Iranians to become the boots on the ground which are required to force regime change. There were hundreds of thousands of protesters in January. There will be some signal he gives, or perhaps the son of the Shah gives, for the protests to resume.

    Combines mostly peaceful, with few rebels having guns.

    America loses the fewest soldiers if the attack comes as a surprise. For my own infotainment purposes, I want to know Trump’s plans, but then they would be no surprise & more US deaths. So I wait for more surprises.

    It’s even okay if he has many known options, but is waiting for some opportunity that makes it easy to choose a specific option.

    Too much speculation, not enough timelines of whatever really did happen.

  3. Trump reminds me of B.H. Liddell Hart’s book on Sherman. According to Hart, Sherman excelled in the indirect approach, he kept the confederacy guessing as to his next goal during his march across Georgia, always having options. If the confederates defended one city, he would take another instead. Hart had an agenda, and used Sherman to promote that agenda, but there is something to be said for keeping the enemy guessing.

  4. Another possibility for Trump’s claiming that talks are going “very good” is to undermine criticisms and fears that he’s dragging America into another forever war. Plus, if talks ‘fall apart’ he can claim it to be proof that the Iranian regime is, once again acting in bad faith, forcing him to extend the conflict until the last Mullah and IRGC officer is dead.

  5. The pause is until the tripoli is on station (off kharg island) and some ships are near to break the blockade

    The markets are ridiculously jittery
    Mostly because of bots i suspect

  7. I’m relieved we aren’t bombing major power infrastructure just yet.

    I worry about how much infrastructure will be left for Iranians after regime change and how much they will suffer in the meantime.

    I don’t claim to know whether Trump was prepared to go that far or how much it was the Art of the Deal or whether he is just buying some time.

  8. It is not beyond belief that the leadership in Iran would lie to save face. And Trump is very likely negotiating.

  11. Perhaps laying off the energy sector is meant to look as if victory is so near that he wants the new guys to be able to get into the market immediately.

    The IDF or Mossad getting various groups in meetings means they have a good deal of intel ‘way inside. Who, when, where, when by now maybe the arrangements are made by guys running back and forth with written notes. So, say the folks who didn’t get to the meeting on time, or didn’t rate an invite, or were in the fallback cabinet for just-in-case who among the folks running around my HQ are agents? Where are the hidden mikes? Even in the latrines? Bedrooms? Last time I had a specialist check my quarters, he said they were
    clean. What if he’s a perfidious Jew?
    At the very least, communications must be pretty awkward and thus both slow and not as effective as might be wished.

  12. talks he described as “very good” are supposedly going on. Meanwhile, the Iranian leaders – although “leaders” is a fungible thing in Iran these days – say he’s full of it and that no such talks are occurring, much less “very good” ones.

    I think these are technically both true. Iran and the US are probably only talking through intermediaries; Trump thinks these talks are “very good” and Iran is technically correct to say they are not talking to the US at all, since they are talking to the intermediaries.

  13. “Trump thinks these talks are “very good””

    Maybe. It could just be the carnival barker in Trump talking. Yes that makes even many of his supporters uncomfortable, especially when applied to foreign policy. But have any of the serious, sober, chin-stroking Ivy Leaguers done any better since at least Reagan (who was no chin-stroking Ivy Leaguer either)? Certainly none of the Dems and the Republicans haven’t been that much better. Let Don be Don and we’ll see what happens.

  15. Talk excitedly! Speak expansively!!
    (Carry a big stick…)

    “Israel, US Strike Gas Facilities In Iran’s Isfahan, Possibly Triggering Retaliation Against Gulf”—
    https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/oil-plunges-stocks-spike-after-trumps-comments-iran

    Hold on!
    Didn’t DJT say/warn that he wasn’t promising anything?
    (And didn’t da Mullahs tell him to pound sand…?)

    File under: “What we’ve got heeya is a failure to communicate…” (or do we?)

  16. Putin benefits from higher worldwide oil prices. Iran becomes a non-exporting oil country, Putin screws China. Funny how your allies have repaid your help Xi.

  17. I had to laugh (cynically) a bit this morning as reports say that Iran is accusing Trump of delaying tactics over this negotiating pause. Isn’t that what they were doing in talks pre-war? And, it looks like the Marines are almost in position.

  18. Iran’s “leadership” is fragmented by choice. It is part of their “mosaic” plan of resisting/coping with an actual attack by America/Israel, which they always assumed was a possibility, unless those countries continued with feckless, spineless leaders themselves. This strategy, Iran hoped would allow it to continue to operate with a very decentralized leadership. Netanyahu always wanted to unleash on Iran, but was restrained by both his parliament and judiciary, but even more so, by America under Clinton/Bush/Bush/Obama/Biden, who either were too cowardly to act or, in the case of Obama/Biden, actually wanted to implement Iranian hegemony in the Middle East. Finally America had enough and elected a patriot in Trump and he had the cojones to implement the counter-“mosaic” strategy his War Department planners devised. That counter-strategy included unleashing America’s overwhelming military superiority to defang Iran’s war machine while simultaneously decapitating its ostensible leadership, undermining its finances, restraining its proxies/allies and gradually eliminating every cell of the “mosaic” and disrupting Iran’s ability to mount an effective, coordinated defense. We have seen every aspect of this counter-strategy successfully implemented. Strategic ambiguity as we have seen exhibited by Trump, with this seemingly contradictory public statements is part of the plan to combat the Iranian “mosaic.” Stupid corporate media has no clue what Trump and his people are doing, so they act like he is merely “confused.” Likewise, the anti-Trumpers go around beating their useless gums and fuming impotently while having no clue what is really happening. I trust Trump. So should we all.

  19. The USS Boxer, a LHD, left San Diego heading west. A different configuration than the Tripoli, but doubles the number of Marines with the 11th MEU. Has amphibious landing capability, where the Tripoli is air based landing.

    Around the 38 minute, Carroll suggests the idea of toppling the Regime is possible based information from an Iranian expat living in Canada. The point is don’t settle now.

    USS Boxer Amphibious Ready Group Added to Iran War
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCLtRz4cCHw

  20. Unlike Moby Dick, The Great Orange Whale has a lot to say, but sometimes it is a riddle to some.

    Lately, ordnance had spoken loudly.

  21. The same boxer that goes back to giron beach (certain echoes)

    It is a vast wasteland designed to obfuscate the truth

    Iran, the headless chicken – Don Surber https://share.google/Y4wX38o8WQYju1icB

    Suggestions that ghalibaf formerly irgc general mayor of tehran is the face of the regime in negotiations

    Currently the speaker like rafsanjani back in the iran contra days

  22. Here’s the dilemma the Trump administration faces. The “mosaic” plan of decentralized military leadership, operating independently of Tehran means we are defeating 32 independent ‘countries’ with their own military and source of funding.

    Half of Iran’s oil revenue bypasses the central government and goes directly to the IRGC through shadow account/crypto/dummy corp, etc.

    The world needs oil– but the oil funds the IRGC.

    What would change this?

    I asked Grok: “is anyone talking about how to resolve these issues– cutting off the money flow to the provincal IRGC military/governments, which would strangle their ability to continue waging war.”

    Yes — analysts, think tanks, U.S. officials, media commentators, and some military strategists are actively discussing exactly this: cutting off the oil revenue lifeline to starve the IRGC (especially its provincial/dispersed forces) of funding and force an end to the conflict.
    This isn’t fringe speculation; it’s a recurring theme in current strategic debates as of March 24, 2026. The core idea is that Iran’s oil exports (still flowing at reduced volumes via the shadow fleet, mostly to China) are the primary funding source for the IRGC’s parallel economy, which directly supports provincial corps, Basij units, Quds Force operations, and the regime’s war effort. Depriving them of that cash is seen as more decisive than continued airstrikes alone.

    Key Points Being Discussed

    Kharg Island as the decisive lever: Multiple analyses highlight seizing or controlling Kharg (which handles 90–95% of Iran’s crude exports) as the fastest way to physically choke the revenue flow without permanently destroying the infrastructure.
    U.S. options include blockading/seizing the island with Marines (explicitly tied to the inbound MEUs on USS Boxer and USS Tripoli) to reroute or halt tankers, then redirect proceeds to a post-regime authority or approved buyers. This would bypass IRGC shadow networks and cut funding to provincial forces almost immediately.
    The goal: Preserve the terminal for a future “clean” government while starving the current IRGC apparatus.

    Economic warfare over pure destruction: Commentators argue that simply bombing storage or facilities is less effective long-term than controlling the cash. One piece calls cutting Iran’s oil income “the smartest way to end its aggression,” noting it would cripple the IRGC’s ability to pay provincial militias and proxies — many of whom are motivated more by salaries than ideology.
    U.S. policy signals: The Treasury’s repeated short-term waivers (latest on March 20, allowing ~140 million barrels already at sea) are framed as temporary pressure valves to manage global prices — not a green light for the IRGC. Officials emphasize “maximum pressure” to limit the regime’s access to any revenue generated, with explicit statements about restricting flows to the international financial system.

    Think-tank and media coverage:
    CSIS, Critical Threats Project, and others map scenarios where disrupting Kharg directly severs the IRGC’s “primary revenue lifeline.”
    Discussions include conditional sanctions relief or rerouting exports through legitimate intermediaries once a new authority controls the island.
    Public commentary (including on X/Threads) echoes this, with users and analysts linking oil-storage strikes or Kharg control directly to “starving IRGC of funds.”

    How This Ties to Your Earlier Questions

    This strategy aligns precisely with a new-government + MEU-on-Kharg scenario we’ve been discussing. The consensus in these conversations is that physical control of Kharg + diplomatic recognition of a new central authority would let oil sales continue (via clean intermediaries) while routing payments away from IRGC parallel accounts — directly strangling provincial forces’ ability to sustain operations.
    It’s not presented as easy or risk-free (logistics, escalation, China’s role, and urban/IRGC resistance are all flagged), but it is the dominant proposed solution for resolving the funding issue you described.
    In short: Yes, this exact playbook — seize the revenue spigot at Kharg to cut the IRGC’s provincial lifeline — is being openly debated right now as the next logical phase beyond airstrikes.

    The USS Boxer won’t be in the area for two weeks. Missiles launches towards the gulf states/Israel has continued to decline, which will allow US attacks to concentrate on southern Iran/coastline defenses.

    If the goal of US is to occupy Kharg Island, it seems reasonable that would happen at the same time a call for Iranians to take back their central government occurs.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Web Analytics
↑