LOTS OF POSTS IGNORED BY BLOGGER.....

OR REMOVED ON THEIR WHIM!

ALL POSTS ARE AVAILABLE ON

MIDDLEBORO REVIEW AND SO ON

BLOGGER DOESN'T LIKE TRUTH OR FACTS!

BLOGGER DOESN'T LIKE FUND RAISERS AND DELETES

POSTS THAT INCLUDE FUNDRAISING THAT 'VIOLATES THEIR

UNDEFINED COMMUNITY STANDARDS SO ALL 'FUND RAISING'

IS DELETED - CONTRIBUTE AS YOU ARE INCLINED TO SUPPORT

IMPORTANT ISSUES! THESE ARE NOT SOLICITATIONS

Watch now

American Power Under Hegseth: Purges, A Culture of Fear, and Strategic Flailing

Watch the new episode of Meidas Defense

Joe Plenzler and MeidasTouch Network Sep 4

By Joe Plenzler, Meidas Defense

When military campaigns stall, Washington’s instinct is often to double down—hoping a few more strikes will break a stalemate. But when victory fades from view, American strategy frequently slips from trying to win to simply trying not to lose.

In this episode, host Joe Plenzler sits down with New York Times national security reporter Greg Jaffe to pull back the curtain on the Pentagon’s growing culture of silence. They analyze the direct line connecting the “sunk-cost” mindset of Afghanistan to current operations in the Middle East. Together, they examine the ongoing purge of senior military leaders, leadership voids at key commands, ideological overhauls at service academies, and why static bases in Bahrain and Kuwait leave U.S. forces dangerously vulnerable on the modern, sensor-saturated battlefield.

Key Takeaways & Themes

• The “Critical Care” Strategy: How American campaigns degrade from strategic victory into endless stall tactics designed solely to pass political failure to the next administration.

• Leadership Vacancies & Purges: The operational fallout of leaving top Army posts unstaffed—and pushing out high-performing commanders who adapt to autonomous and drone warfare.

• The Pentagon’s Silence: How clamped-down communications destroy transparent dialogue with Congress, the press, and the public.

• The Chokepoint Dilemma (Strait of Hormuz): Why forcing open vital maritime channels requires an appetite for ground commitment or high-value naval loss that Washington cannot sustain.

• Obsolete Footprints: How modern long-range precision missiles and cheap drone salvos have rendered massive forward operating bases in the Middle East almost unusable.

• Ideological Overhauls: The chilling effect on West Point and service academies as classic literature, climate science, and foundational concepts are purged from curricula.

Full Episode Transcript Timestamps

00:00 - Introduction and Welcome

00:23 - The Pentagon Press Corps Crackdown: Losing Access and Communication

02:25 - A Culture of Fear: Silence, Media Restrictions, and Missing Updates

03:09 - Pentagon Leadership Voids: Vacant Chief of Staff and TRADOC Positions

04:41 - Purging Effective Commanders: The Removal of Gen. George and Gen. Donahue

06:54 - The Revolution in Drone Warfare and Electronic Combat

09:24 - Ukraine vs. Russia Lessons: How Battlefield Maneuver Has Changed

10:25 - CENTCOM Unpreparedness and the Draining of Precision Interceptors

12:20 - Clausewitz and Strategic Failure: Lacking Empathy for Enemy Motivation

13:46 - Political Retaliation in the Ranks: Pulled Promotion Lists and Masters Theses

18:35 - Five Flag Officers Left: The Strategic Impact of Empty Four-Star Seats

21:17 - Innovation Blocked: How the Culture of Fear Stops Learning from Allies

28:09 - “Critical Care” Strategy: Comparing Afghanistan Drift to the Iran Blockade

31:30 - “Just Get Everyone Home Alive”: Tactical Paradoxes on the Front Line

33:00 - Military Options in the Strait of Hormuz: Escalation vs. Naval Losses

37:27 - Unusable Bases: Why Forward Operating Footprints Are Sitting Targets

40:03 - Thought Police at the Academies: West Point Book Purges and Tenure Removal

44:30 - Lack of Strategic Empathy: Repeating Afghanistan’s Mistakes in Iran

45:45 - Political Appointments: Analysis of Hung Kao for Secretary of the Navy

52:14 - Veteran Grievance, Partisanship, and Pete Hegseth

53:40 - Over the Horizon: Transparent Battlefields and Unmanned Systems

55:06 - Outro and Closing Thoughts

Notable Quotes

“Rather than trying to win, we’d given up on the notion of winning. So we were just gonna try to not lose... like a critical care doc who doesn’t want the patient to die on their watch. Just keep it alive till the next doc comes on shift.”

— Greg Jaffe

“Bases in places like Bahrain and Kuwait have proven to be almost unusable. Our whole way of fighting was predicated on these big forward operating bases that we would fight out of, and we’re gonna have to rethink that in a big way.”

— Greg Jaffe

“Anything that gives off an electronic signature can be spotted and found and killed... If we get into a fight that’s larger than Iran, it’s gonna be a real awakening for us.”

— Greg Jaffe

Meidas+ is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

About the Guest

Greg Jaffe is a national security reporter for The New York Times covering defense policy, military affairs, and international security. He was previously part of a Pulitzer Prize-winning reporting team at The Wall Street Journal and spent over a decade covering the Pentagon and White House for The Washington Post.

A guest post by Joe Plenzler Unapologetic Patriot. 🇺🇸 Loyal to America, always, & to our leaders when they deserve it. 🪖Decorated Marine Corps combat veteran. 🦅Eagle Scout. Mountaineer. Trekker. ☠️GenX punk☠️. World's Ok-est guitar player. Sic Semper Tyrannis. 🏴‍☠️

                                                    

LOTS OF POSTS IGNORED BY BLOGGER.....

OR REMOVED ON THEIR WHIM!

ALL POSTS ARE AVAILABLE ON

MIDDLEBORO REVIEW AND SO ON

BLOGGER DOESN'T LIKE TRUTH OR FACTS!

BLOGGER DOESN'T LIKE FUND RAISERS AND DELETES

POSTS THAT INCLUDE FUNDRAISING THAT 'VIOLATES THEIR

UNDEFINED COMMUNITY STANDARDS SO ALL 'FUND RAISING'

IS DELETED - CONTRIBUTE AS YOU ARE INCLINED TO SUPPORT

IMPORTANT ISSUES! THESE ARE NOT SOLICITATIONS

Watch now   Rep. Eugene Vindman on Ukraine, Iran, and the Crisis Facing America: Meidas Defense Rep. Eugene Vindman joins Meidas Defense to discuss restoring trust in government, confronting global threats, and the leadership America needs now. MeidasTouch Network, Joe Plenzler, Eugene Vindman, and Valor Media Network Aug 7 In this episode, host Joe Plenzler sits down with Representative Eugene Vindman to discuss his journey from a Soviet refugee to a 25-year Army veteran, National Security Council official, and now member of the U.S. House of Representatives. The conversation offers a candid look at the state of American democracy, the urgent need for ethics reform in government, and critical national security concerns—including the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, controversial U.S. military operations in Latin America, and the escalating war with Iran. Key Takeaways & Topics Covered The American Dream and Service: Rep. Vindman shares his family’s story of fleeing Soviet Ukraine in the late 1970s as refugees with under $800, growing up in New York, and finding a path to the middle class through union jobs. He reflects on how a sense of gratitude led him and his brothers to serve in the U.S. Armed Forces, culminating in his service as a platoon leader in the 82nd Airborne Division and a 25-year military career. Tackling Political Corruption: Vindman outlines his new anti-corruption press release and legislative agenda aimed at restoring public trust: Individual Stock Bans: Prohibiting members of Congress, the President, executive branch officials, and judges from trading individual stocks to prevent insider trading and conflicts of interest. Lobbying Bans: Restricting former members of Congress from turning around and lobbying former colleagues on behalf of corporations. Prediction Market Restrictions: Prohibiting public officials and government employees from using classified or non-public information to bet on prediction markets. The War in Ukraine and Global Order: As a native of Ukraine with extensive foreign policy experience, Vindman analyzes the strategic importance of Ukraine in its fifth year of defending against Russian aggression. He emphasizes that defending democratic nations against authoritarian expansion is directly tied to U.S. economic stability and national security, warning that a Russian victory would destabilize Europe and embolden Chinese aggression toward Taiwan. Legal and Moral Concerns Over “Operation Southern Spear”: Former Army JAG officer Vindman and host Joe Plenzler analyze reported U.S. military strikes targeting suspected drug-smuggling vessels off Central and South America. Vindman raises severe legal, moral, and operational concerns: Ineffectiveness at stopping the flow of illicit drugs like fentanyl. Potential violations of international law, including the targeted killing of non-combatants and shipwrecked survivors. Loss of crucial human intelligence by sinking targets rather than apprehending suspects. The Expanding Conflict with Iran & Pentagon Leadership: The discussion shifts to the 150+ day military conflict with Iran. Vindman expresses strong criticism of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the administration’s strategic approach: Lack of Strategy: Operating without clear objectives, an exit plan, or regional alliances. Military and Civilian Casualties: 18 US Servicemembers have been killed and more than 600 wounded. More than 3,500 Iranians have been killed. Tens of thousands have been wounded and hundreds of thousands displaced from their homes. Rising Costs: The human toll of fallen service members, alongside massive economic costs contributing to energy and supply chain inflation. Transparency Failures: Inaccurate casualty reporting and a lack of executive accountability to Congress. Bipartisanship and the Path Forward: With over 60 bills introduced—the vast majority with bipartisan support—Vindman reiterates his commitment to pragmatism and common-sense solutions, stressing the importance of congressional oversight and reclaiming the House majority to restore balance among government branches. Meidas+ is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. A guest post by Joe Plenzler Unapologetic Patriot. 🇺🇸 Loyal to America, always, & to our leaders when they deserve it. 🪖Decorated Marine Corps combat veteran. 🦅Eagle Scout. Mountaineer. Trekker. ☠️☘️GenX punk☘️☠️. World's Ok-est guitar player. Sic Semper Tyrannis. 🏴‍☠️ A guest post by Eugene Vindman A guest post by Valor Media Network Invite your friends and earn rewards If you enjoy Meidas+, share it with your friends and earn rewards when they subscribe. © 2026 Meidas Media Network LLC 548 Market Street PMB 72296, San Francisco, CA 94104

How Trump’s Reckless War and His Islamabad MOU Degraded American Power

                                                                                                                   

 LOTS OF POSTS IGNORED BY BLOGGER.....

OR REMOVED ON THEIR WHIM!

ALL POSTS ARE AVAILABLE ON

MIDDLEBORO REVIEW AND SO ON

BLOGGER DOESN'T LIKE TRUTH OR FACTS!

BLOGGER DOESN'T LIKE FUND RAISERS AND DELETES

POSTS THAT INCLUDE FUNDRAISING THAT 'VIOLATES THEIR

UNDEFINED COMMUNITY STANDARDS SO ALL 'FUND RAISING'

IS DELETED - CONTRIBUTE AS YOU ARE INCLINED TO SUPPORT

IMPORTANT ISSUES! THESE ARE NOT SOLICITATIONS

Joe Plenzler

How Trump’s Reckless War and His Islamabad MOU Degraded American Power

The United States exists this war weaker, poorer, and more isolated from allies

Joe Plenzler, Brett Meiselas, and Kristofer Goldsmith

Jun 19, 2026

---

(Original photo: Reuters)

At its core, war is a test of wills. Raw asymmetry in material wealth and technological firepower is meaningless if it is divorced from strategic clarity and political endurance. In the early months of 2026, President Donald Trump launched Operation Epic Fury (more like Operation Epic Blunder)—a joint U.S.-Israeli surprise bombardment of Iran—under the presumptuous delusion that international statecraft is dictated by pure bullying. He assumed that a relentless campaign of bombing would trigger an immediate capitulation from Tehran. Instead, the Iranian regime demonstrated a massive tolerance for absorbing severe blows - far more than the political leadership in Washington ever anticipated. Driven by an abject lack of a coherent grand strategy, the Trump administration rapidly impaled itself on the sharp horns of a classic military dilemma. It could not achieve a definitive victory without executing a massive, politically toxic, and logistically ruinous ground invasion of the Iranian coastline to control the Strait of Hormuz. Conversely, it could not withdraw US forces without suffering an unacceptable, historic loss of face on the global stage.

This Substack is reader-supported. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

The fecklessness of this strategy is perfectly mirrored in the intellectual gymnastics of Washington’s chief war hawks, epitomized by Senator Lindsey Graham. Barely 100 days ago, Graham was practically orgasmic over the potential for an all-out war with Iran, wildly and incoherently boosting the conflict on every right-wing news talk show. Yet today, as the catastrophic reality of Trump’s strategic failure becomes undeniable, Graham has seamlessly pivoted from bloodthirsty warmonger to obsequious sycophant. He is now publicly touting Trump’s disastrous retreat as a historic triumph, declaring that the conflict will go down as “one of the most successful military operations in American history” if it yields regional peace. This shameless reversal exposes the utter hollow intellectual bankruptcy of the GOP establishment. Having cheered America into a burning house, they are now celebrating the smoke inhalation as a sign of progress and locking the door behind them.

The resulting Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), signed with hollow fanfare following the G7 summit at the palace of Versailles, is the direct byproduct of this strategic exhaustion. (The Germans once signed a letter of capitulation at Versailles at the end of WWI. Trump got played here by Macron. LOL.) Negotiated out of sheer desperation by Vice President JD Vance and a frantic American delegation in Pakistan, the agreement represents a total failure of Trump’s primary, self-declared objective: the complete elimination of Iran’s nuclear program. Rather than dictating terms of unconditional surrender, Washington has accepted a fragile 60-day placeholder framework that is structurally, legally, and strategically far worse than the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) that Trump spent a decade deriding and later unilaterally abandoned.

To understand the depth of this capitulation, one must contrast the mechanics of Vance’s Islamabad MOU with the strict, sequential architecture of the JCPOA. The 2015 accord operated on a bedrock principle of verified performance: Iran received no substantial sanctions relief until the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) physically verified that thousands of centrifuges had been dismantled and Tehran’s enriched material had been shipped entirely off Iranian soil. The 2026 Trump deal completely upends this logic through preemptive economic surrender. To merely secure a temporary ceasefire and cajole Tehran into a 60-day negotiating window, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the U.S. Treasury immediately issued sweeping waivers on Iranian crude oil exports and international banking channels. By releasing this vital economic leverage upfront, the administration has allowed Tehran to immediately refill its depleted coffers before long-term nuclear concessions have even been drafted. Worse still, the physical containment of fissile material has been severely degraded. Under the MOU, the administration conceded to a compromise where Iran’s highly enriched uranium stockpile will be down-blended on Iranian soil. Leaving this material within Iran’s sovereign borders—even under IAEA camera monitoring—is an egregious blunder that permanently shortens the regime’s potential nuclear breakout time should the current, highly unstable framework collapse next month.

The strategic wreckage extends far beyond the nuclear file. The most alarming revelation of Operation Epic Fury is what it exposed regarding the limits of American conventional power projection. For over half a century, global maritime security has rested on the implicit guarantee that the United States Navy possesses both the capability and the unyielding political will to keep international choke points open. Trump’s war shattered this paradigm. When Iran retaliated by seeding the Strait of Hormuz with undersea mines and deploying high-density swarms of low-cost anti-ship ballistic missiles and kamikaze drones, the U.S. military command balked. The conflict exposed a terrifying reality to the world: the U.S. Navy lacked the operational appetite or the political courage to risk multi-billion-dollar super carriers and Aegis destroyers against asymmetric saturation attacks in confined waters. Rather than aggressively clearing the lanes, the administration resorted to a reactive, counter-productive naval blockade that only finalized the closure of the waterway. This retreat delivered a profound, irreversible lesson to America’s adversaries: Iran learned that it does not require a fully functional nuclear weapon to achieve theater-wide strategic effects. By utilizing cheap, readily available conventional weapons to threaten global shipping and choke off 20% of the world’s petroleum supply, a regional power successfully brought the global economy—and the American presidency—to its knees.

The invoice for this strategic misadventure has now come due, and the numbers are staggering. This brief, inconclusive conflict has left the United States government at least $50 billion poorer in direct, unbudgeted military expenditures—capital burned on fuel, emergency deployments, and the rapid depletion of high-end munitions. Simultaneously, the disruption of global supply chains and the energy spikes caused by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz have left American consumers more than $100 billion less well-off due to systemic inflationary shocks. This domestic economic pain is playing out with devastating political consequences across American swing states, where skyrocketing gas prices at the pump and rising retail costs have completely erased any narrative of economic stability.

Yet, the economic damage pales in comparison to the structural degradation of America’s global standing. The United States emerges from this conflict profoundly more isolated on the world stage. By dragging the international community to the brink of a global depression for a war of choice, the administration deeply alienated its closest Western allies. European partners, who were entirely sidelined during the frantic, back-channel negotiations mediated by Pakistan, watched in horror as Washington jeopardized their economic stability. Traditional alliances have been severely degraded, replaced by deep skepticism regarding America’s reliability and intellectual competence as a global security guarantor.

Furthermore, the conflict has fundamentally weakened the American military in ways that will take years to remediate. The intensive, weeks-long effort to defend naval assets and regional bases from Iranian missile and drone salvos completely exhausted theater stockpiles of critical interceptor missiles, such as the SM-3, SM-6, and Patriot systems. These sophisticated, slow-to-manufacture munitions cannot be easily or quickly replaced, leaving American forces dangerously exposed and less prepared for a potential high-intensity conflict in East Asia or Eastern Europe.

The broader geopolitical ledger paints an equally grim picture of a nation in structural retreat:

• The Proliferation of the “Iran Model”: Middle-tier revisionist states across the globe have just witnessed a blueprint for defying a superpower. The success of Iran’s asymmetric defiance will likely accelerate the proliferation of anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) technologies among smaller regimes worldwide.

• The Normalization of Regional Extortion: By agreeing to a clause in the MOU where the United States and its regional partners must develop a massive, $300 billion plan for the reconstruction and economic development of Iran, Washington has effectively established a precedent where international aggression and maritime blockade are rewarded with massive financial windfalls.

• The Fracturing of Regional Deterrence: By entering into an agreement that openly puts the long-term presence of U.S. forces in the region up for negotiation, the administration has signaled to regional allies like America’s Gulf partners that Washington is looking for an exit strategy, leaving a security vacuum that will inevitably be filled by Beijing and Moscow.

Trump’s war with Iran was a vivid, tragic demonstration of what happens when tactical vanity replaces rigorous statecraft. In his desperate attempt to prove he could bully an adversary where his predecessors sought diplomacy, he exposed the critical vulnerabilities of American military projection, depleted our finest strategic stockpiles, damaged our economy, and ultimately settled for an unstable, dangerous interim deal that leaves Iran richer, closer to a breakout capacity, and strategically vindicated. It stands as one of the most self-inflicted strategic defeats in the history of American foreign policy.

This Substack is reader-supported. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

14 Likes∙

6 Restacks