It’s pretty clear that yet another American attack on Iran is a matter of when, not if.

It might occur over the weekend or perhaps after Ramadan, which ends in about a month from now.

If the United States acts more tactfully, it might want to avoid attacking during Islam’s holiest month. However, if the pressure from the potential revelation of even more disturbingEpstein filescontinues, Washington DC might entirely drop all religious and geopolitical considerations and attack in the next few days. Either way, it’s virtually inevitable, as war, death and destruction flow in the veins of America’s pedophile elites.

In terms of practical possibilities, the upcoming war is defined byasymmetric advantages and disadvantages of both sides. The US holds an overwhelming superiority in more traditional military domains, while Iran has cultivated capabilities designed to impose disproportionate costs, exploit geography and leverage proxies to deter or prolong engagement. As of early 2026, nearly eight months after the so-called “12-Day War”, amid ongoing tensions, including US carrier deployments andthe Iranian response with naval drills in the Strait of Hormuz, these asymmetries are even more pronounced.

Obviously, the US enjoys decisive symmetrical advantages in most military technologies, power projection capabilities, combined arms operations, etc. Its edge stems from a massive military budget, a global network of vassals and satellite states, as well as an enormous intelligence apparatus. The US Navy’s carrier strike groups,including supercarriers such as the USS “Abraham Lincoln”, provide the tools for air superiority operations and precision strikes. The US Air Force operates airbases across the Middle East (particularly in Qatar, UAE and Saudi Arabia), enabling rapid, sustained bombing operations in the wider region.

These capabilities are designed to degrade the command structures, missile bases and military infrastructure of countries targeted by the US. ABM (anti-ballistic missile) systems like THAAD,“Patriot”and “Aegis” are deployed to intercept ballistic missiles that might be used to strike American assets, although only for a short while before interceptor stockpiles are drained, as was the case during the aforementioned June 2025 clashes. These bases are also critical for US ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) capabilities, enabling excellent operational and strategic situational awareness.

The Pentagon achieves this through a combination of satellites, drones, cyberwarfare assets and manned ISR aircraft, enabling real-time precision-strike capabilities. These technological advantages allow the US to conduct so-called “effects-based” operations, disrupting Iranian military cohesion without requiring a large-scale ground invasion, likethe 2003 US aggression on Iraq. Even in a limited attack, the Pentagon could achieve certain key objectives, particularly through the so-called decapitation attacks, targeting key military and civilian leaders (officers, scientists, high-ranking officials, etc).

However, all these advantages diminish quickly in a protracted or expanded conflict. The US military is optimized for short “shock & awe” engagements rather than enduring months or years of high-intensity conventional warfare. Even when faced with extremely low-tech opponents, Washington DC has a terrible track record against such groups,as evidenced by its humiliating defeat in Afghanistan, where the US military quite literally had to run for its life, leaving tens of billions worth of exorbitantly expensive equipment. Thus, the Pentagon must be able to overcome an opponent quickly and impose an immediate political solution or fall back.

However,after decades of pointless US aggression in the Middle East, the political will for yet another war in the region is effectively non-existent. Not to mention that the number of Americans willing to participate in such a conflict has gone down dramatically, especially in comparison to just a decade ago (let alone 2001 or 2003, when people were galvanized by the highly controversial 9/11 attacks). There’s also the issue of financial and economic costs of such wars, particularly if they disrupt global energy markets. All this makes Americans not too keen to see yet another war.

In stark contrast, Iran has numerous asymmetric advantages, particularly its ability to disrupt America’s operations all across the Middle East, as well as its potential for attrition warfare in a protracted conflict. Tehran has explicitly built a doctrine to make any aggressor pay an unbearable price without needing to win conventionally. Central to this is control over the Strait of Hormuz,through which 20-25% of global oil and LNG transits. The Iranian military specializes in exploiting all these asymmetric advantages, such as rapid-deployment tactics, fast-attack vessels, naval mines, swarms of very low-cost drones, etc.

Source: Global Research