Iran - Israel/US War: Israel-US declare war on Iran, Iran responds

[ToddE]

Air power does not become irrelevant just because Iran prioritizes missiles. Modern warfare is layered, not single domain. Even countries that invest heavily in ballistic and cruise missiles still require air superiority, ISR, electronic warfare, and defensive counter air capabilities. Missiles can deter and strike, but they cannot provide persistent airspace control, dynamic targeting, close air support, or real time battle management.

The claim that air forces “factor zero” is not supported by recent conflicts. In Ukraine for example, both sides rely heavily on air defense and airpower because neither side has achieved air superiority. In the Middle East, Israel’s dominance is built on integrated airpower, not missiles . Even Russia, despite hypersonic systems like Kinzhal, continues to invest heavily in tactical aviation because missiles cannot replace sustained air operations.

Your baseline argument is wrong because you are talking about generic mini conflict scenario between two similar countries. Fine. But we are not facing some rando 3rd world country with few jets or tracking radars here and there. We are facing Israelis+US+NATO, not even RuAF can face them alone. Even when we fire a missile from Iranian territory, US AD assets on ground, sea, air, space, pick it from its ignition on TEL, search n track it, transfer real time data to Israeli layered ABM/AD shields who just have to shoot the exo+endo atmospheric interceptors for it (They failed against Fattah-1, Kheybar Shikan, Ghadr-F etc). IRGC had to strap in EW patches to MRBMs to escape bidcourse jamming by US sats after True Promise II . In this extreme hostile environment good luck sending a 4th or 4+ generation imported fighter to enemy territory or in proximity to such first world enemy with worlds largest defence budget and tech in its hand. That jet will be facing Massive EW attacks, Search-Track-Detect-Attack from TPY2, SPY-2 slaved THAAD, Iron Dome, PAC-3, hundreds of F-22, F-15E/I, F-18E/G, F-35I/B, all integrated. Back home its airbase cant stop volleys of 1000 Tomahawks or hundreds of separating warhead lofted apogee ALBMs no matter which AD battery you park near it. I have not even counted the internal quadcopter or ATGM terrorism they can cause because they have the money and means to use your own disgruntled population against you. 50-100 Million USD per airframe can turn into rubble on ground against such enemy. Also the same enemy, because they are diplomatically and financially controlling the most of the globe can cause hurdle in much needed spare parts for such planes. Even with ToT you need critical replacement parts to keep the fleet alive because outside superpowers nobody makes those parts. We saw what happened to our Shah bought worlds 4th largets fleet during war against Arabs when 450 fighters had no regular parts supply. You see the dilemma of launching fighters against such foe ? IRGCASF does not face any such hindrance, they have underground bases so they are not vulnurable and they can attack enemy with variety of missiles without fear of losing aircraft or people in air, a moral degrader. Hence its better to fund them instead of making mistakes that Baathist Iraq comitted of launching few Mig-21/23 against 500 F-16/18/15. IRIAF needs to be built but underground airbases are a must for us and so far we barely have 1-2 that can house 2-3 squadrons at most. The money and resources required to create 6 more such bases to house 8-10 squadrons of SU-35S will give IRGCASF 4-5 underground missiles bases that can launch hundreds of K-4 Post Boost Phase submunition IRBM to Fattah Hypersonic to Soumar Long range LACM. Even with this amount of money, the MIG-29 SMT, YAK-130, SU-30SM, SU-24MK fleet will still be sitting naked above surface.

What you are describing is true if we fight a regional enemy or enemies then yes but it wont work against US+NATO+Israel.

As for hypersonic and advanced stand off weapons “piercing layered ADs,” interception rates are mixed and heavily disputed in every conflict. No modern air defense system guarantees 100 percent interception, but that does not make air forces obsolete. The US, China, Russia, and even smaller powers continue to modernize fighter fleets alongside missile forces for a reason: missiles provide strategic deterrence, air forces provide operational flexibility and battlefield control.

If anything, relying only on missiles creates strategic rigidity. A balanced force structurre, including airpower, air defense, and missiles, is what serious military planers pursue. There is no modern example of a major power abandoning air capability in favor of missiles alone.

So far following missiles have hit enemy targets without getting shot, despite being fired in high numbers (last 5 years).

Fattah-1 Hypersonic MaRV-MRBM
Kheybar Shekan-1/2 high supersonic/pseudo-hypersonic MaRV MRBM
P-800 Oniks High Supersonic CM
Khinzal ALBM
Golden Horizon Separating RV ALBM
Rocks Separating RV ALBM
Blue Sparrow Separating RV ALBM

Ukrainians claim to have shot down few Khinzals but even if we go by their claim the % kill ration is barely 10%. Rest have not been touched despite facing THAAD, Iron Dome, S-300PMU-2, Khordad, HQ-16/9 etc. Attack weaponry tech has far exceeded the AD tech. If we dont adapt to changing warfare then we are doomed.

 

[maxpane]

Your baseline argument is wrong because you are talking about generic mini conflict scenario between two similar countries. Fine. But we are not facing some rando 3rd world country with few jets or tracking radars here and there. We are facing Israelis+US+NATO, not even RuAF can face them alone. Even when we fire a missile from Iranian territory, US AD assets on ground, sea, air, space, pick it from its ignition on TEL, search n track it, transfer real time data to Israeli layered ABM/AD shields who just have to shoot the exo+endo atmospheric interceptors for it (They failed against Fattah-1, Kheybar Shikan, Ghadr-F etc). IRGC had to strap in EW patches to MRBMs to escape bidcourse jamming by US sats after True Promise II . In this extreme hostile environment good luck sending a 4th or 4+ generation imported fighter to enemy territory or in proximity to such first world enemy with worlds largest defence budget and tech in its hand. That jet will be facing Massive EW attacks, Search-Track-Detect-Attack from TPY2, SPY-2 slaved THAAD, Iron Dome, PAC-3, hundreds of F-22, F-15E/I, F-18E/G, F-35I/B, all integrated. Back home its airbase cant stop volleys of 1000 Tomahawks or hundreds of separating warhead lofted apogee ALBMs no matter which AD battery you park near it. I have not even counted the internal quadcopter or ATGM terrorism they can cause because they have the money and means to use your own disgruntled population against you. 50-100 Million USD per airframe can turn into rubble on ground against such enemy. Also the same enemy, because they are diplomatically and financially controlling the most of the globe can cause hurdle in much needed spare parts for such planes. Even with ToT you need critical replacement parts to keep the fleet alive because outside superpowers nobody makes those parts. We saw what happened to our Shah bought worlds 4th largets fleet during war against Arabs when 450 fighters had no regular parts supply. You see the dilemma of launching fighters against such foe ? IRGCASF does not face any such hindrance, they have underground bases so they are not vulnurable and they can attack enemy with variety of missiles without fear of losing aircraft or people in air, a moral degrader. Hence its better to fund them instead of making mistakes that Baathist Iraq comitted of launching few Mig-21/23 against 500 F-16/18/15. IRIAF needs to be built but underground airbases are a must for us and so far we barely have 1-2 that can house 2 squadrons at most.

What you are describing is true if we fight a regional enemy or enemies then yes but it wont work against US+NATO+Israel.





So far following missiles have hit enemy targets without getting shot, despite being fired in high numbers (last 5 years).

Fattah-1 Hypersonic MaRV-MRBM
Kheybar Shekan-1/2 high supersonic/pseudo-hypersonic MaRV MRBM
P-800 Oniks High Supersonic CM
Khinzal ALBM
Golden Horizon Separating RV ALBM
Rocks Separating RV ALBM
Blue Sparrow Separating RV ALBM

Ukrainians claim to have shot down few Khinzals but even if we go by their claim the % kill ration is barely 10%. Rest have not been touched despite facing THAAD, Iron Dome, S-300PMU-2, Khordad, HQ-16/9 etc. Attack weaponry tech has far exceeded the AD tech. If we dont adapt to changing warfare then we are doomed.

if its iran doctrine then rest in peace

 

[ToddE]

Strange he does that with people he despises almost every time.

Levin is a Zio AIPAC Jew. Trump is kinda hinting who is forcing him to go to war against IRI.

Khamenei should help Trump by openly saying that Jews are forcing Trump through blackmail.

 

[ToddE]

if its iran doctrine then rest in peace

You can try otherwise and leave us be.

 

[maxpane]

You can try otherwise and leave us be.

yeah sure it will be case study for us when war starts

 

[ToddE]

yeah sure it will be case study for us when war starts

Off-course, our airbases won't be bombed in bulk so win-win.

 

[ToddE]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[maxpane]

Off-course, our airbases won't be bombed in bulk so win-win.

yeah yeah we will see . hope for the best prepare for the worst

 

[F.O.X]

Your baseline argument is wrong because you are talking about generic mini conflict scenario between two similar countries. Fine. But we are not facing some rando 3rd world country with few jets or tracking radars here and there. We are facing Israelis+US+NATO, not even RuAF can face them alone. Even when we fire a missile from Iranian territory, US AD assets on ground, sea, air, space, pick it from its ignition on TEL, search n track it, transfer real time data to Israeli layered ABM/AD shields who just have to shoot the exo+endo atmospheric interceptors for it (They failed against Fattah-1, Kheybar Shikan, Ghadr-F etc). IRGC had to strap in EW patches to MRBMs to escape bidcourse jamming by US sats after True Promise II . In this extreme hostile environment good luck sending a 4th or 4+ generation imported fighter to enemy territory or in proximity to such first world enemy with worlds largest defence budget and tech in its hand. That jet will be facing Massive EW attacks, Search-Track-Detect-Attack from TPY2, SPY-2 slaved THAAD, Iron Dome, PAC-3, hundreds of F-22, F-15E/I, F-18E/G, F-35I/B, all integrated. Back home its airbase cant stop volleys of 1000 Tomahawks or hundreds of separating warhead lofted apogee ALBMs no matter which AD battery you park near it. I have not even counted the internal quadcopter or ATGM terrorism they can cause because they have the money and means to use your own disgruntled population against you. 50-100 Million USD per airframe can turn into rubble on ground against such enemy. Also the same enemy, because they are diplomatically and financially controlling the most of the globe can cause hurdle in much needed spare parts for such planes. Even with ToT you need critical replacement parts to keep the fleet alive because outside superpowers nobody makes those parts. We saw what happened to our Shah bought worlds 4th largets fleet during war against Arabs when 450 fighters had no regular parts supply. You see the dilemma of launching fighters against such foe ? IRGCASF does not face any such hindrance, they have underground bases so they are not vulnurable and they can attack enemy with variety of missiles without fear of losing aircraft or people in air, a moral degrader. Hence its better to fund them instead of making mistakes that Baathist Iraq comitted of launching few Mig-21/23 against 500 F-16/18/15. IRIAF needs to be built but underground airbases are a must for us and so far we barely have 1-2 that can house 2-3 squadrons at most. The money and resources required to create 6 more such bases to house 8-10 squadrons of SU-35S will give IRGCASF 4-5 underground missiles bases that can launch hundreds of K-4 Post Boost Phase submunition IRBM to Fattah Hypersonic to Soumar Long range LACM. Even with this amount of money, the MIG-29 SMT, YAK-130, SU-30SM, SU-24MK fleet will still be sitting naked above surface.

What you are describing is true if we fight a regional enemy or enemies then yes but it wont work against US+NATO+Israel.



So far following missiles have hit enemy targets without getting shot, despite being fired in high numbers (last 5 years).

Fattah-1 Hypersonic MaRV-MRBM
Kheybar Shekan-1/2 high supersonic/pseudo-hypersonic MaRV MRBM
P-800 Oniks High Supersonic CM
Khinzal ALBM
Golden Horizon Separating RV ALBM
Rocks Separating RV ALBM
Blue Sparrow Separating RV ALBM

Ukrainians claim to have shot down few Khinzals but even if we go by their claim the % kill ration is barely 10%. Rest have not been touched despite facing THAAD, Iron Dome, S-300PMU-2, Khordad, HQ-16/9 etc. Attack weaponry tech has far exceeded the AD tech. If we dont adapt to changing warfare then we are doomed.

Please use paragraphs. if you want to sound coherent.......... that said.

You’re assuming this is an “either missiles or air force” equation. Modern military doctrine is not binary. It is layered, redundant, and cross domain.

Yes, the US+Israel ecosystem has unmatched ISR, satellite coverage, EW capability, and integrated air defense. No one disputes that. But that reality does not make airpower useless it makes integration and survivability more important.

Missiles are excellent for deterrence and punishment strikes. They are not a substitute for,

• Airspace denial
• Interception of enemy aircraft
• Dynamic targeting
• Electronic warfare in contested airspace
• Offensive counter air
• Protection of your own missile launch corridors

Underground missile bases improve survivability, but they do not give you air superiority, nor do they prevent enemy SEAD/DEAD campaigns.

You mention Tomahawk volleys and ALBMs. Those same threats also apply to fixed missile infrastructure. Underground does not mean invulnerable it means more survivable. The same logic applies to hardened airbases and dispersed aircraft.

Regarding spare parts and sanctions that is precisely why domestic aerospace capability and supply chain resilience matter. But abandoning airpower because sanctions exist is strategically self limiting. Even heavily sanctioned states like Iran continue trying to modernize aviation because no serious military planner believes missiles alone are sufficient.

As for Iraq’s mistake in 1991 Iraq lost because it had neither air superiority nor credible integrated air defense nor modern EW, not because air forces are obsolete. In fact, Iraq’s inability to contest the air domain is exactly why it collapsed so quickly.

Missiles without air cover create rigidity. Airpower without missile deterrence creates vulnerability. The correct answer is balanced force structure with survivability measures (dispersal, hardened shelters, underground facilities, mobile AD, EW integration).

Even Russia and China, both possessing hypersonics and massive missile inventories, continue investing heavily in 5th gen aviation. That alone should tell you something.

Against US+israel, no single domain “wins.” The goal is to raise the cost of aggression across all domains air, missile, cyber, EW, naval, simultaneously. Relying exclusively on one arm reduces deterrence depth, not increases it.

 

[ToddE]

Will Trump, Vance, Hegseth, Rubio, Ratcliffe accept that they openly lied in 2025 when they claimed destroying "entire nuclear program" of IRI with half a tonne HEU and thousands of centrifuges included ? they are now U-turn claiming that Iran is 1 week away from having fission devices which means WGU has been enriched and deviced, they are also demanding the same HEU to be shipped off to 3rd country. More funny is the IRI stance last year that nodded to Trump about the claims and is now resisting handing over HEU. Are these two fooling public as a tag team?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[ToddE]

Please use paragraphs. if you want to sound coherent.......... that said.

I will write the way I want or can.

You’re assuming this is an “either missiles or air force” equation. Modern military doctrine is not binary. It is layered, redundant, and cross domain.

For us with 30-40 Billion USD military budget against 2+trillion USD budget of enemy, its either missiles or AF for now. We cant wait for 5-8 years to build an AF while sacrificing the only deterrent we have.

Yes, the US+Israel ecosystem has unmatched ISR, satellite coverage, EW capability, and integrated air defense. No one disputes that. But that reality does not make airpower useless it makes integration and survivability more important.

Outside China no country on earth including Russia can even dream of pitting "airpower" against US+NATO+Israel.

Missiles are excellent for deterrence and punishment strikes. They are not a substitute for,

• Airspace denial
• Interception of enemy aircraft
• Dynamic targeting
• Electronic warfare in contested airspace
• Offensive counter air
• Protection of your own missile launch corridors

Underground missile bases improve survivability, but they do not give you air superiority, nor do they prevent enemy SEAD/DEAD campaigns.

You mention Tomahawk volleys and ALBMs. Those same threats also apply to fixed missile infrastructure. Underground does not mean invulnerable it means more survivable. The same logic applies to hardened airbases and dispersed aircraft.

Missile infratsucture is underground so you are wrong in comparing it to open airbases, also missiles have zero vulnerurability in air compared to a fighter jet facing worlds meanest airpower. Per unit price for delivering 0.5-1.0 tonne warhead is 20-50K USD while a fighter jet if lost in air or on ground (most likely against US+allies) means 100 million USD lost. A single squadron of SU-35S + AWACS if disabled means 2-3 billion USD lost or atleats not useful in combat anymore. Same amount given to IRGCASF means they can have IRBMs, MRBMs, LACMs, AShB/CMs without vulnurability.

Regarding spare parts and sanctions that is precisely why domestic aerospace capability and supply chain resilience matter. But abandoning airpower because sanctions exist is strategically self limiting. Even heavily sanctioned states like Iran continue trying to modernize aviation because no serious military planner believes missiles alone are sufficient.

Your point is invalid. Outside US, Russia, France and recently China nobody makes modern turbofans. Who will supply critical engine parts, wear n tear moveables in an elongated war? critical armaments when PGM and A2A weapons deplete? Even Russians face shortage because the formula of launching expensive PGMs did not work in a years long war. Economy crumbles when wars elongate. Assembling CKD kits and calling it a "local fighter" does not mean having local aviation industry. When you have Superpowers as enemies they can always get all of this CKD supply blocked because they have the diplomatic and financial power to do so. It has happened to us twice in past when Russia backedout of weapons deal due to US and Israeli pressure. We faced it in an elongated war where 450 jets were on ground and government had to smuggle spare parts. When our AIM-54A depleted our engineers had to install I-Hawks as A2A weapons. Still we had aces of aces but thats not the point. We saw this happening to our airforce because we fought against an alliance of 11 countries with oil money and superpowers at their back in an 8 years long conflict. You are talking about 1 week long shock n awe campaign where such thing will work but not in a long war against hyperpowers like US+NATO.

As for Iraq’s mistake in 1991 Iraq lost because it had neither air superiority nor credible integrated air defense nor modern EW, not because air forces are obsolete. In fact, Iraq’s inability to contest the air domain is exactly why it collapsed so quickly.

Saddam probably could have had air superiority against US+NATO+Allies with 1000 MIG-31+SU-27+25 AWACS. Get real.

Missiles without air cover create rigidity. Airpower without missile deterrence creates vulnerability. The correct answer is balanced force structure with survivability measures (dispersal, hardened shelters, underground facilities, mobile AD, EW integration).

Unless we have 6-7 underground airbases that can house atleast 10-12 squadrons of huge air-superiority fighters the size of SU-35S or 57 in future, whatever we get in IRIAF will be rubbled by USAF/USN/NATO/Israelis.

Even Russia and China, both possessing hypersonics and massive missile inventories, continue investing heavily in 5th gen aviation. That alone should tell you something.

China has a GDP of 22 Trillion USD with 1.2 Trillion trade surplus. Do you want me to list the same numbers for countries in the region ? some have Trade defecits and live on IMF/WB food stamps yet you are talking about "Air-superiority" matching China. Not even Russia is using its AF anymore, instead is causing massive destruction in Ukraine with its Iskanders, Kalibr, Khinzals, Shaheds etc. There is a reason Jew controlled ME countries are allowed airforces but not lethal billions of USD worth missile infra structure that can actually threaten Israel.

Against US+israel, no single domain “wins.” The goal is to raise the cost of aggression across all domains air, missile, cyber, EW, naval, simultaneously. Relying exclusively on one arm reduces deterrence depth, not increases it.

Defence doctrines are built around the threats you face. I have already describe the kind of threat we face. Good luck achieving "air-superiority" against this enemy that not even Russians can do so I dont know what are you trying to say here. Keeping some imported 4th gen Airforce on conventional open airbases on surface will means suicide for the force, people and hundreds of billions USD lost. Morale down.

Also missile bases are underground, so are there storage units, maintanance infrastructure. We can spread thousands of cheap welded TEL as launch points or fire from Silos with them. There is ZERO risk of losing 50-100 million USD fighter or pilot in it. Against Some regional 3rd world military it will work, not against hyperpower and its first world allies.

 

[Ali_Baba]

Air power does not become irrelevant just because Iran prioritizes missiles. Modern warfare is layered, not single domain. Even countries that invest heavily in ballistic and cruise missiles still require air superiority, ISR, electronic warfare, and defensive counter air capabilities. Missiles can deter and strike, but they cannot provide persistent airspace control, dynamic targeting, close air support, or real time battle management.

The claim that air forces “factor zero” is not supported by recent conflicts. In Ukraine for example, both sides rely heavily on air defense and airpower because neither side has achieved air superiority. In the Middle East, Israel’s dominance is built on integrated airpower, not missiles . Even Russia, despite hypersonic systems like Kinzhal, continues to invest heavily in tactical aviation because missiles cannot replace sustained air operations.

As for hypersonic and advanced stand off weapons “piercing layered ADs,” interception rates are mixed and heavily disputed in every conflict. No modern air defense system guarantees 100 percent interception, but that does not make air forces obsolete. The US, China, Russia, and even smaller powers continue to modernize fighter fleets alongside missile forces for a reason: missiles provide strategic deterrence, air forces provide operational flexibility and battlefield control.

If anything, relying only on missiles creates strategic rigidity. A balanced force structurre, including airpower, air defense, and missiles, is what serious military planers pursue. There is no modern example of a major power abandoning air capability in favor of missiles alone.

1000% agree with this assessment. Relying on only 1 domain is militarily flawed. Iran needs an effective air force, and IADS to protect the missile bases and their entrances so that the missiles can then be used for offensive operations.

We saw how freely Israel was able to progressively take down the entrances to these bases, and thereby reducing firing rates of missiles near the end of the 12 day war.

Had Iran had a proper air force, the rate at which Israel would have been able to reduce the firing capability of Iran itself would have been reduced too, thereby providing more offensive power for longer, and for damage on Israel. Iran may well have been able to go after the air refuelling tankers over Iraq, pushing back the logistics chain and force Israel to have to devote more aircraft to protect the air-refuellers, which would have reduced how many aircraft could be used for offensive actions. The fact that the Israeli aircraft flew to attack Iran with no air-air missiles because they had no threat to face, shows the folly of Iran's approach.

Any modern country needs an effective IADS, an effective air force, and then an effective offensive capability. The offensive capability itself needs active protection so that it can be utilised for it's required military outcomes.

Having an IADS and air force, are also complimentary and balanced. The fact that Iran has started to procure Su-35s shows that they have finally realised the error of their ways in relying solely on missiles as a defence policy, and we can assume that Iran will rebuild its air force over the years.

Iran cannot win against NATO/Israel with Ballistic missiles alone, OR with ballistic missiles + IADS + Fighters. It can however raise the deterrence level so high, that the cost of executing a war itself and the associated fallout and are not worth the effort relative to the outcome they want. That is the point of deterrence, to raise it such that it is not a viable option even with possibility of victory.

 

[HAIDER]

Will Trump, Vance, Hegseth, Rubio, Ratcliffe accept that they openly lied in 2025 when they claimed destroying "entire nuclear program" of IRI with half a tonne HEU and thousands of centrifuges included ? they are now U-turn claiming that Iran is 1 week away from having fission devices which means WGU has been enriched and deviced, they are also demanding the same HEU to be shipped off to 3rd country. More funny is the IRI stance last year that nodded to Trump about the claims and is now resisting handing over HEU. Are these two fooling public as a tag team?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

same old song ...

 

[Meengla]

Pakistan itself is not threat to them but as part of trilateral cooperation between SA, Turkiye suddenly becomes grave one due his nuclear capabilities

I was gone for many hours since last evening (NYC time) and spent time watching smart people like Trita Parsi and Max Blumenthal on Judge Napilatano; combined, they two are the best resource on understading USA-Iran-Israel geopolitics. Some take away:
1) There is indeed a nascent formation of two distinct alliances with Turkey-KSA-Egypt on one side vs Israel-UAE on the other side; though Pakistan wasn't mentioned by those two, other sources mention Pakistan because Pakistan is definitely on KSA's side.
2) Both analysts said J.D.Vance is not fully behind this escalation against Iran but he is basically being shut out by Israel-firsters like the White House Chief of Staff who, incidentally, was Netanyahu's campaign person for his 2020 elections!!
3) Even if round of escalation defuses, there will be another one, for as long as the two people sit in the offices offices (Netan and Trump).
4) Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey see Israel as bigger threat now than they saw Iran once and hence #1.

#2: I have said it many times here: This is Trump's personal war, driven for Netanyahu, and not America's war! If today Trump has a heart attack and Vance takes over then we will likely see a de-escalation. So much so for 'democracy'!!

 

[BHAN85]

War is coming in next 2 days ....

... since 2008

Interesting year 2008, it reveals what is really behind USA intentions towards Iran war.

2008 financial crisis year.

From USA point of view: Iran war is about world economy things, and it's not about security things.

The decline of USA as world empire, in favor of China, it makes something good for USA interests to just create mayhem in all Eurasia economies.

In fact, USA tariffs is another face of same coin. And something like Trump tariffs it could be foreseen in the beginning of 2010 decade when Iran war plans became serious.

USA is not interested in Eurasia order anymore. And they become a rogue empire, with all kind of lies to hide real intentions (lies like the concerns about Iran nuclear program)