On Arrogant Purveyors of Massacres

On March 3, 2026, Iranians laid to rest 165 schoolgirls killed by US and Israel bombing in Minab City during the opening of Donald Trump’s Operation Epic Fury on February 28, 2026. The US-Israel also assassinated Iran’s supreme leader and military leaders, which was followed by Trump’s further meddling in Iranian internal affairs by calling on citizens to overthrow their government. Notably, both aggressors launched the bombing campaign as Washington and Tehran were scheduled to have another round of negotiations, showing a repeat of lawless behavior similar to what happened on June 13, 2025. Also noteworthy was that these negotiations entailed Washington presenting impossible conditions to Iran, on the one hand, while wondering why Iran was not capitulating in the face of US military deployment.

While the US and Israel termed their attack as “preemptive,” the Pentagon revealed to Congress that Iran was not preparing to attack, showing that Washington started a war of choice. This view was also confirmed by the US Secretary of State, who divulged that Washington bombed Iran because it wanted to shield Israel from retaliation the Jewish state would elicit after attacking Iran. With evidence showing that the ongoing war against Iran is an unprovoked war of choice, this article illuminates how the West’s juvenile fantasies and a skewed international system have enabled decades-long multispectral aggression on nations and also complicated the attainment of sustainable peace.

Between the date when the US-Israeli bombing killed 165 schoolgirls and staff in Minab city and when they were laid to rest on March 3, 2026, no Western European leader had condemned this blatant attack, showing their hidden approval 

Trump’s Hollywood Thinking

Trump’s naming of the ongoing operation against Iran displays how juvenile and out of touch with reality the architects of this war are. Including the name “Fury” shows that the US wants to express wild anger toward a country that cannot attack its territory, displaying the immaturity of the intellect that fashioned this war. Similarly, the use of the term “epic,” which denotes narratives designed to enthrall audiences, is also in bad taste, as it shows that Washington planned to entertain its audience by killing innocent people and destroying infrastructure in Iran. Consequently, it is surreal that some Americans, Western Europeans, and their allies are entertained by or acquiesce to the animalistic attitude displayed in fashioning this war.

While giving credit where it is due, the intelligentsia in Washington has become honest, as it no longer conceals US colonial interests in terms such as “enduring freedom,” “restoring democracy,” and others that featured in the names of previous, yet equally senseless wars. The name “Operation Epic Fury” reflects low quality of thinking that could have well been generated by Trump’s budget marketers for one of his matches with Vince McMahon during his days in pro-wrestling. Unfortunately, this low quality of intellect is applied in managing relations between countries with real leaders, populations, and militaries, and results in tragic events such as bombing a school full of young girls to make for an “epic” view, while destroying Iran’s military, which cannot target the US territory, to demonstrate Washington’s and Tel Aviv’s “fury.” Even worse, the real reason for this war may be a diversion from the ongoing Epstein scandal, plus Washington’s colonial ambitions of plundering Iran’s resources and facilitating Israel’s hegemonic ambitions. Western Europe and other US allies are okay with this reality, and their stand endangers the peace of the rest of the world. The Kenyan president, among selected African leaders, some reported to have stashed proceeds of corruption in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), also condemned Iran’s retaliatory bombing of the US military installations in the Gulf countries but had remained silent concerning the US-Israel bombing of a UN member. Therefore, a system emerges that accepts and sanitizes US actions at all costs, which precipitated the current war.

Allies Cheering Lawlessness for Narrow-Minded Ambitions

Between the date when the US-Israeli bombing killed 165 schoolgirls and staff in Minab city and when they were laid to rest on March 3, 2026 no Western European leader had condemned this blatant attack, showing their hidden approval. Meanwhile, the UK Prime Minister, Kier Starmer; French President, Emanuel Macron; and German Chancellor, Friedrich Merz, condemned Iran’s retaliation, some threatening to join the US or avail their resources for the US to intensify its attacks, euphemized as defending Israel. It seems the US, Israel, and their allies expected Iran to surrender to the West’s parochial interests of overthrowing the Iranian government to balkanize and loot the country’s resources. In this case, the US is acting like a small-town bully who has recruited the majority to shout at his victims, level endless accusations against them, and hence convince them to accept Washington’s bullying to earn acceptance as “democratic” or “free markets,” among others. This mentality is seen in Western Europe’s condemnation of Iran’s retaliation as indiscriminate and destabilizing. Borrowing from the analogy of bully-justifying hecklers seen above, the US-Israeli murder of Iranian civilians is promoted by Western Europeans as “precise,” “preemptive,” or “promoting stability.” This Jarring explanation has been used by the West to promote a world order that has dehumanized people in the rest of the world for centuries.

The West has created labels and policies for colonizing, sidelining, or exploiting other groups, including Africans, Palestinians, Iraqis, Iranians, Russians, and Chinese. Those targeted are dehumanized and cast in a way suggesting they do not deserve rights to their lives and resources, as the genocide in Gaza and the massacre in Minab show. This same attitude has driven 47 years of inhumane sanctions against Iran, which were targeted at collapsing the government to plunder its energy resources for Western neocolonial ambitions. Sadly, many other countries have supported or allowed these sanctions, which have curtailed targeted countries’ right to development. Studies have shown that development makes societies less likely to go to war as people prefer enjoying opportunities provided by prosperity. It can be argued that America’s sanctions have made the Iranian society willing to fight, especially against Washington, which is desirable.

Prolonged Conflict as the Oppressed Fight Back

An openly biased international system condemning some nations to underdevelopment and constant threats of war has made countries such as Iran and Russia skeptical of Western diplomatic overtures. These countries have chosen to use military means after learning that the West does not recognize their rights and interests, but prefers to recruit vassals that play a cacophony to browbeat appointed adversaries to give up their rights. However, these civilizational nations have cultivated inner strength and learned to rely on themselves to fight the West at all costs while ignoring its vassals. This reality means that Iran and Russia will hold out for as long as they can. Sustainable peace will only be achieved if the West learns to respect the rights of all other peoples or if it is defeated and denied the ability to enforce a tiered and discriminatory international system.

https://journal-neo.su/2026/03/06/operation-epic-fury-juvenile-fantasies-and-colonial-ambitions-on-full-display/

 

 

READ FROM TOP.

 

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT — SINCE 2005.

 

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zdft-4xGRE

Iran's Missile Barrage SMASHES Tel Aviv, US-Israeli Defenses FAIL | Sharmine Narwani

 

Renowned journalist Sharmine Narwani of The Cradle joins the show to break down Iran's historic 21st wave of retaliation against US and Israel dubbed Operation True Promise 4, and what the strikes tell us about the state of the ongoing war.

 

READ FROM TOP.

 

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT — SINCE 2005.

 

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.

 

SEE ALSO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGv2uQgDS84

 

 

SEE ALSO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_jALjcNodU&t=464s

Scott Ritter & Lt Col Daniel Davis: IRAN HITTING OUR BASES LIKE NO ENEMY BEFORE

 

Scott Ritter argues that the U.S. military action against Iran is illegal and unjustified under the War Powers Act of 1973, which only allows the president to use military force without congressional approval if there is an imminent threat to the United States. According to the discussion, Iran’s nuclear program did not constitute such a threat because the enriched uranium had not been weaponized, and diplomatic negotiations were still ongoing.

The conversation criticizes U.S. leaders—especially Marco Rubio and members of Congress—for misrepresenting the legal justification for the conflict and for abdicating Congress’s constitutional authority to declare war. The speaker argues that the U.S. initiated the attack rather than acting defensively, making claims of a “defensive operation” misleading.

The discussion also contends that the U.S. cannot realistically win a regime-change war in Iran, especially without deploying ground troops. The speakers note that Iran is much larger than Iraq, has spent decades hardening its infrastructure underground, and that the U.S. military currently lacks the force structure and logistics to deploy the hundreds of thousands of troops required for such a campaign.

They further criticize U.S. foreign policy, claiming America has lost credibility with allies and much of the world due to repeated betrayals and strategic miscalculations. The speakers also reject attempts by some U.S. politicians to frame the conflict as a religious war, arguing that religion influences politics across the region—including in Israel and among Christian Zionists in the United States.

Overall, the speakers conclude that the war is strategically flawed, legally questionable, and unlikely to achieve its stated objectives.