Trump Attacks Iran: Now is The Time of Monsters

How “America First” Became Israel First…

and put the rest of the world one step closer to World War III

“We have completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran, including Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan. All planes are now outside of Iran air space. A full payload of BOMBS was dropped on the primary site, Fordow.”

So declared President Donald Trump on Saturday, announcing with characteristic bravado that American stealth bombers had joined Israel’s week-long assault on Iran. The man who promised to keep America out of “costly foreign conflicts,” who mocked the value of American interventionism, who built his political brand on “America First”, that man just dragged the United States into direct warfare with Iran.

The transformation is complete. The dealmaker who claimed he could negotiate with anyone has chosen bombs over bargaining. The populist who railed against endless wars has launched them. The president who promised America First has delivered Israel First with 30,000-pound bunker busters and a boastful victory lap that would make his neoconservative predecessors blush.

Welcome to the latest chapter in American imperial overreach, dressed up in the rhetoric of strength but delivered with the strategic wisdom of a schoolyard bully.

Trump’s message to the Iranian regime was short, simple and direct: come to the negotiating table, or more strikes will come.

“If they do not, future attacks will be far greater,” he said. “And a lot easier.”

In the lead-up to the attacks, Trump had repeatedly – at least publicly – left room for negotiations to continue.

Now, he continues to leave the path open, but with the threat of further American strikes looming over Iran’s leadership.

“There will be either peace, or there will be tragedy for Iran far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days,” he said.

Notably, Trump did not explicitly mention the possibility of regime change in Tehran. Instead, he made it clear the US considers the operation largely over. But if – and only if – Iran comes to the table.

The US has moved considerable military assets to the region, which suggests, as Trump noted, that the US is ready to move extremely quickly if the president so chooses.

The Mask Slips

Having observed political theatre from both military service and journalism, I can recognise when performance becomes policy and rhetoric becomes reality. Trump’s Iran strikes weren’t defensive actions; they were the logical endpoint of a presidency that confused posturing with strategy and mistook destruction for diplomacy.

For over a week, Israel systematically demolished Iran’s air defences, bombed its missile capabilities, and targeted its nuclear facilities while the world watched with mounting dread. Each day brought new escalation, new risks, new opportunities for sanity to prevail. Instead, Trump chose to double down, deploying American military might not to de-escalate but to obliterate.

The three sites he targeted, Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan, represent decades of Iranian nuclear development. Their destruction may temporarily set back Tehran’s enrichment capabilities, but it has permanently shattered any pretence that this conflict serves American rather than Israeli interests. When Netanyahu gushes that Trump’s “bold decision” will “change history” and thanks him for denying “the world’s most dangerous regime the world’s most dangerous weapons,” the subservience becomes unmistakable.

This is how American sovereignty dies, not through foreign conquest, but through voluntary subordination to an ally whose regional ambitions consistently conflict with American interests and global stability.

The Betrayal of America First

Remember the promises? “I will never send our finest into harm’s way unless American lives are directly threatened.” Remember the criticism of previous administrations’ Middle Eastern adventures? “They spent $8 trillion fighting in the Middle East and got nothing for it except death and destruction.”

Every word rings hollow now that American bombers are dropping American ordnance on Iranian nuclear facilities while Trump celebrates the carnage on social media. The president who mocked “endless wars” has launched one. The candidate who promised to prioritise American workers over foreign conflicts has prioritised Israeli security over American lives.

The strategic justification remains as threadbare as it was before the first bomb fell. Iran had not made the political decision to weaponise its nuclear programme, both American and Israeli intelligence agencies acknowledged this reality, even as their political masters prepared for war. But facts, that inconvenient concept, interfered with the narrative of imminent threat that justified pre-emptive destruction.

Now those facts matter less than the new reality Trump has created: a direct American war with Iran, fought not for American interests but for the satisfaction of Israeli strategic objectives and the domestic political needs of two leaders facing their own accountability crises.

The Regional Powder Keg Ignites

Trump’s “successful attack” has guaranteed the very regional conflagration his advisors warned against and his voters thought they were avoiding. Iran’s promise to retaliate against American involvement wasn’t bluster; it was strategic communication. Now that American bombers have destroyed Iranian nuclear facilities, every American base, every American ally, every American interest across the Middle East becomes a legitimate target for Iranian response.

The proxy networks Tehran spent decades building are mobilising. The Houthis have already declared they will target American ships. Hezbollah calculates its options while Iraqi militias prepare for renewed conflict. Iranian Revolutionary Guard cells across the region await their orders. What was once Israel’s fight has become America’s war, complete with American targets and American casualties to come.

Iran has influence across Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and Gaza. Its proxy forces possess missiles, drones, and suicide boats. Its cyber capabilities can disrupt everything from power grids to financial networks. Its asymmetric warfare doctrine specifically targets the kind of sprawling, vulnerable American presence across the Middle East that Trump’s strikes have now endangered.

The president who promised to bring American troops home has instead made them targets in a war that serves Israeli rather than American strategic objectives.

Britain’s Dangerous Complicity

While Trump drops bunker busters on Iranian nuclear sites, Britain maintains its peculiar tradition of mistaking alliance loyalty for independent thinking. We follow American leadership into conflicts we didn’t choose, serving interests that conflict with our own, while pretending that automatic support constitutes foreign policy.

The implications for British security are immediate and terrifying. Iran’s proxy networks span European capitals, and Tehran’s current desperation makes retaliation against American allies not just possible but probable. Our recent experience should humble us: if Palestinian activists can breach RAF Brize Norton with bolt cutters and scooters along the runway to spry a big Red splodge a ‘Fuck Off’ on the unguarded bombers then what might Iranian sleeper cells accomplish now that their homeland burns under American bombs?

And let’s not pretend that Fortress Britain offers meaningful protection against determined adversaries. Iranian operatives don’t need to parachute from military aircraft or arrive via diplomatic pouches; they can simply blend into the thousands of undocumented arrivals who crossed the Channel last week, last month, or last year becomes academic when our security apparatus lacks the resources to conduct thorough background checks on people arriving from regions where Iranian intelligence operates extensive networks. The uncomfortable truth is that our government doesn’t know who’s already here, our security services can’t track what they can’t identify, and our border controls remain more theatre than substance.

The question isn’t whether Iranian retaliation will come, it’s whether Britain will be ready when it does.

The Logic of Endless War

Trump’s celebration of his “very successful attack” reveals the deeper pathology of American foreign policy: the belief that military superiority can substitute for strategic wisdom, that destruction constitutes achievement, and that short-term tactical victories justify long-term strategic disasters.

“NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE!” Trump declared after dropping a “full payload of BOMBS” on Iranian nuclear facilities. This is the logic of eternal warfare disguised as peace through strength, create chaos, claim victory, then demand gratitude for the stability that never arrives.

Netanyahu’s effusive praise tells us everything about who benefits from this arrangement. “Your bold decision to target Iran’s nuclear facilities with the awesome and righteous might of the United States will change history,” he gushed, thanking Trump for acting “with a lot of strength.” The subservience is complete: American power deployed for Israeli objectives while American politicians celebrate their own subordination.

This is how empires exhaust themselves, not through external conquest, but through the gradual subordination of national interests to allied demands, until the distinction between American and Israeli policy disappears entirely.

The Monsters Revealed

Antonio Gramsci warned that “the old world is dying, and the new world struggles to be born. Now is the time of monsters.” The monsters aren’t hiding anymore, they’re holding press conferences, dropping bunker busters, and celebrating the destruction of facilities that posed no imminent threat to American security.

The monster isn’t Tehran’s nuclear programme, which American intelligence acknowledged posed no immediate threat. The monster isn’t Iranian regional influence, which diplomatic engagement could have managed. The monster is the institutional machinery that transforms manufactured crises into actual wars, campaign promises into strategic betrayals, and alliance relationships into imperial subordination.

Trump promised to drain the swamp. Instead, he’s become its most enthusiastic inhabitant, deploying American military might not for American interests but for the satisfaction of foreign allies and the applause of domestic constituencies who mistake destruction for strength.

The real threat to global stability isn’t Iranian enrichment capabilities, it’s American presidents who confuse military superiority with strategic wisdom, who mistake alliance obligations for national interests, and who believe that dropping bombs constitutes diplomacy.

What Remains To Be Done

With American bombers returning from Iranian nuclear sites and Trump celebrating their “very successful attack,” what options remain for sanity?

First, we must acknowledge reality: America has now entered direct warfare with Iran, guaranteeing the regional conflagration that every serious analyst warned against. The escalation Trump claimed to prevent through strength has instead been accelerated by his decision to join Israel’s bombing campaign.

Second, we must demand immediate Congressional oversight of this escalation. Trump’s decision to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities represents a fundamental shift in American policy that occurred without legislative authorisation or public debate. Democratic accountability cannot be retroactive but it can still constrain future escalation.

Third, we must prepare for Iranian retaliation against American interests worldwide. Tehran’s promise to respond wasn’t diplomatic posturing; it was strategic communication. American bases, American allies, and American citizens across the Middle East now face threats that diplomatic engagement could have avoided.

Finally, Britain must reclaim its agency. Our automatic support for American military adventures serves neither British interests nor global stability. We possess diplomatic capital, UN Security Council influence, and economic leverage that could contribute to de-escalation if we choose to use them independently rather than as American surrogates.

The monsters Gramsci warned about thrive on our acceptance of their violence as inevitable, their escalation as necessary, their wars as unavoidable. But they can still be constrained not by more bombs or stronger alliances, but by clear thinking, institutional courage, and the recognition that America First turned out to mean Israel First while Britain followed along for the ride.

Trump’s “very successful attack” has guaranteed more conflict, more casualties, and more instability across a region that desperately needed less of all three. The question now isn’t whether this was avoidable, it’s whether its expansion can still be prevented.

We’ve been here before. We know how these stories end. The only question is whether we’ll choose a different conclusion before the monsters consume everything in their path.

Paul Knaggs