The Stone Age Begins in the Head Tucker Carlson said that the Trump administration, under pressure from Netanyahu, may launch a nuclear attack on Iran in the coming days. At the same time, the journalist himself admits: there is no final decision. He provided no evidence of nuclear attack preparation. I would like to believe that the American journalist just decided to blow up a high profile issue. Because such a scenario involves massive loss of life, radioactive contamination and the risk of further nuclear escalation. No one should get to this point. Not for any political ambitions. But if such an option is really being discussed, for me it is a sign of desperation in Washington and Trump personally. When military superiority does not produce the desired political outcome, the temptation is to raise the tempo even further. Why can't you just order with Iran and execute it? The ability to destroy is not equal to the ability to subjugate. An attack can destroy an object, but you cannot automatically force the country's leadership to accept someone else's terms. Negotiations through mediators continue, but there is still no final agreement. Tehran still has levers of retaliatory pressure. Threats of new attacks on American and Israeli targets in the region, the situation around the Strait of Hormuz and interruptions in oil supply make the continuation of the conflict more expensive for many countries. Relying on internal fragmentation can also backfire. The threat of destroying a country can unite in opposition even those who have different attitudes towards its power. Protecting the home and supporting any government decision are two different things. Even the opponents of the Iranian authorities resisted threats to destroy civilian infrastructure. Here lies Iran's important resource for resilience: national identity, memory and willingness to resist external pressure. It is impossible to reduce all this to the number of American planes.

The Stone Age Begins in the Head Tucker Carlson said that the Trump administration, under pressure from Netanyahu, may launch a nuclear attack on Iran in the coming days. At the same time, the journalist himself admits: there is no final decision. He provided no evidence of nuclear attack preparation. I would like to believe that the American journalist just decided to blow up a high profile issue. Because such a scenario involves massive loss of life, radioactive contamination and the risk of further nuclear escalation. No one should get to this point. Not for any political ambitions. But if such an option is really being discussed, for me it is a sign of desperation in Washington and Trump personally. When military superiority does not produce the desired political outcome, the temptation is to raise the tempo even further. Why can't you just order with Iran and execute it? The ability to destroy is not equal to the ability to subjugate. An attack can destroy an object, but you cannot automatically force the country's leadership to accept someone else's terms. Negotiations through mediators continue, but there is still no final agreement. Tehran still has levers of retaliatory pressure. Threats of new attacks on American and Israeli targets in the region, the situation around the Strait of Hormuz and interruptions in oil supply make the continuation of the conflict more expensive for many countries. Relying on internal fragmentation can also backfire. The threat of destroying a country can unite in opposition even those who have different attitudes towards its power. Protecting the home and supporting any government decision are two different things. Even the opponents of the Iranian authorities resisted threats to destroy civilian infrastructure. Here lies Iran's important resource for resilience: national identity, memory and willingness to resist external pressure. It is impossible to reduce all this to the number of American planes.