March 7, 2026
The Pentagon is taking notes for eventual after-action reports, as follows:
Pre-war Propaganda: Assumptions were made that the AIPAC-funded US Congress was on board. TikTok and US news corporations were primed around the long-repeated "Iran is getting a nuclear weapon next week" message and their owners and advertisers under full deep state/MICIMATT control. Polls showing MAGA unity behind Trump was collapsing on the issues of war and regime change were ignored, and even shut down. The 1991 Iraq invasion and the 2001-2003 Afghanistan and Iraq wars - and even the recent special forces kidnap of Maduro - were all preceded by months of intense and coordinated domestic public opinion-shaping that would support the eventual Pentagon action. That did not happen for the current war, or if it did, it was ineffective.
Political Objective: Pre-war crafting of an integrated political objective was fragmented; as a result, government reports and messaging on the objective varied substantively and continually from the moment of first fire. In the first eight days of what was to have been a weekend war, with success to be celebrated on Purim the following Tuesday, no less than six different "war objectives" were announced by the Executive Branch. A seventh US objective emerged on Day 7 requiring an Iranian unconditional surrender. This lack of political and communications discipline was preventable, through prior teamwork by critical sectors of the Executive Branch. This teamwork did not happen, or happened informally and asynchronously with little attention to detail or understanding. Conducting the first "joint" war with the IDF absent a mutual defense treaty or military compact between the two nations, and without clarifying and confirming singular and substantiated objectives was problematic. The Secretaries of State and War were chosen to serve not as credible and experienced advisors to the White House, but as ideologues who would unquestioningly take White House diktats and comply with the planning outputs of others. Thus, the well-qualified Director of National Intelligence, a position created to correct the intelligence "failures" of 9/11, was publicly sidelined, and the State Department "negotiators" aiming to "prevent" a war were real estate relatives and cronies of the President.
Likewise, Israel's political objectives as broadcasted, remain unclear and variable, despite its generally superior political and media discipline. The US and Israeli administration currently agree on assassination as a political tool, and on using the "shock and awe" of civilian casualties and destruction of civilian centers as a means to communicate their seriousness to the enemy.
Military Objective: Joint military objectives of the US-IDF attack on Iran remain unclear. Factors influencing the US military objectives included fragmented guidance from the Executive suite, ignoring lessons learned from ongoing and past regional war efforts, four ongoing years of active logistics, munitions, intelligence and targeting assistance/consumption in the Ukraine-Russia war, and a politicized intelligence infrastructure within DIA. Beyond that, as is always the case, CIA, IDF and Mossad activities, intentions, and objectives in the region were only partially understood and incorporated.
The November 2025 National Security Strategy shifted Pentagon focus and resources toward China, and away from Europe and the Middle East. In fact, the President's cover NSS letter stated, by way of launching this new focus, stated "[the US] obliterated Iran's nuclear enrichment capacity" in June 2025. Under an experienced Secretary of Defense, leading a coordinating realignment of Pentagon strategy and risk orientation, even without mixed messages from the White House, would have been challenging. Secretary Hegseth, hampered by a lack of preparation and seasoning, and having alienated many of his flag officers early on, was limited in influence, and his guidance reduced to punchlines.
The military objectives of Israel have been both more broad, and yet more focused, than those of the major force contributor (the US) in this war - and these objectives, to include I sraeli regional hegemony, and construction of a Third Temple, have been poorly advertised in the United States.
Logistics Planning: Existing regional capability was scattered and uncoordinated for several reasons. First, the forward deployed " lilypad" model of Secretary Don Rumsfeld, who had been involved in both previous Iraq wars, scatters smaller US bases among reliable Arab allies, without serious or permanent integration into host national defensive systems.
Second, Israel has generally refused to host a US military base or operating location anywhere in its territory. Israel's defensive systems, although largely funded by the US, offer limited defense efficiency or force multiplication for many US assets in the region.
Third, dependence on naval assets, specifically carrier battle groups in the Indian Ocean, the Red Sea and the eastern Mediterranean is expensive and increasingly vulnerable not only to modern weapons systems, hypersonic missiles, and drones; these floating air wings and missile launchers have operational limits and require routine maintenance. If human or equipment operational limits are exceeded, and maintenance delayed, additional risk internal is introduced.
Four, related to the inability of the Pentagon to pass a financial audit, equipment and logistical status across all four military services appears not to be well-understood, communicated, or accurately shared across the system and with the Executive Branch decision-makers.
Five, the pace of deployment and consumption of major munitions and weapons systems has been inaccurately monitored in the four years of the Western-backed Ukrainian proxy war, by both US supplies and systems as well as various NATO nation stockpiles. Whether this information has been shared in military channels is uncertain, but t he US political leadership seems to be getting poor quality information on US logistical and munitions strength.
Logistics Support to US Forces, Allies, and Citizens in the Region: Pentagon plans for extraction or rescue of US citizens caught in an expanding war zone were underwhelming. Similarly, no support plan seems to have been activated for US commercial interests paralyzed or made unstable as a result of the well-telegraphed Iranian defensive reaction to the US/Israeli surprise attack. The Pentagon also appears unprepared to repair and restore operations at the various US military bases and installations in the region. US coordination with and defense of allies in the region has been reactive rather than proactive, frustrating Arab allies now suffering Iranian targeting of their hosted US bases as well as commercial hotels and other locations where US and CIA personnel relocated just prior to the onset of kinetic hostilities. The US does have some recent agreements with Arab countries in the Gulf region, and so far, many Arab governments are waking up to the flaws in the US capability and intent to honor the spirit of those agreements.
While there are 50,000 US service members in the region, there are between 500,000 and a million US nationals there. The State Department's functional collapse and neglect in several decades has been addressed by billions spent on new large embassies and security systems for those embassies, but no real ability to serve the needs of Americans living overseas, including and especially in times of crisis.
Plan B: If the weekend war did not proceed according to plan, no Pentagon or White House options, including offramps, seem to have been prepared in advance. This is possibly the result of an enormous intelligence failure inside the US system, or an equally enormous miscalculation by the White House. Tactical and strategic options for an extended war or unsustainable US and Israeli defensive capacity appear not to have been considered, or priced in. Likewise, operational sustainment of a large standoff aerial and naval battle without boots on the ground or even on their wat is concerning from a war-fighting standpoint. Popular and congressional anger at the Executive Branch, as a result of unwanted, unwarranted war, and/or extended war, as well as domestic discontent with high energy prices and domestic unemployment should not have been unpredicted, but apparently they were. The timing this US attack is now correlated with Epstein's international and DC influence peddling, blackmail and pedophilia, pressuring the White House to achieve an easy "win" where poor planning and preparedness for the attack on Iran may make such a win impossible.
More concerning is the lack of US preparation for the global response to this war. The joint US and Israel assassination of a major Islamic religious leader and murdering several of his family members would predictably be seen by Shi'ites and others in the region and the world. The US decision makers were surprised that war weary and Muslim-sensitive NATO countries do not unilaterally support the operation, even as they are US dependent in many ways. Israel has used the last seven days to actively expand into southern Lebanon, and close down Gaza food and aid completely. There appears to be no US plan to prevent or control Israel's use of false flags to exacerbate conflict and chaos among Arab nations and Iran. If Israel's defenses fail and Iranian attacks continue, there seems to be no plan to contain the Israeli temptation to use their vast collection of nuclear weapons to achieve their objectives.
Conversely, three aspects of this conflict are on track as of Day 7. The Pentagon will easily justify an upcoming $1.5 trillion dollar budget request. The Senate rejected any limits on executive power to make and prosecute war, as it wishes, on whatever targets it wishes, with any rationales it comes up with, at whatever point in the process, Constitutional duties be damned. The third Gulf War to Make Israel Great Again, in MAGA parlance, promises to engage neoconservatives and enrich the MIC for the next decade.
Pray for peace, and a creative off-ramp for Donald J. Trump.