Dr. Fouad Izadi
U.S. President Donald Trump reposted a report by The Wall Street Journal stating:
“Iran’s top politicians call for an end to the war; the president and parliament speaker say Tehran should negotiate its way out of the current situation and work to strengthen its economy.”
By reposting this report, Trump wants to convey the following:
1. That the policy of economic pressure on Iran has succeeded.
2. That Iranian officials have no choice but to negotiate, and that the serious use of military capabilities is not on the table.
3. That Iranian officials are being managed by the United States, and that continuing the war will not impose significant material or human losses on America.
4. No one anywhere in the world changes a successful policy. Therefore, the war will continue in this manner.
Dear Dr. Pezeshkian,
Dear Dr. Ghalibaf,
Your statements are being translated.
Therefore, if you deem it appropriate, we ask you to focus on the following points:
Although the country is under economic pressure, the possibility of resistance remains entirely viable.
• The experience of negotiations has not been successful. The “Islamabad Agreement” is no longer a source of pride.
And Iran will not wait for Trump to return to the Islamabad Agreement.
If the war continues, hundreds of billions of dollars in profits from American investments in the southern Gulf states will fall to zero, while the number of American casualties will increase sharply.
🏴☠️
Bibi’s Latest Masterpiece: Iran, Miami and the Son’s Security Detail
Netanyahu’s political toolbox appears to be running out of tricks. So, when the battlefield narrative stops delivering, Miami enters the script.
The latest claim that Iran attempted to assassinate one of Netanyahu’s sons in Florida sounds less like a carefully substantiated intelligence case and more like another episode in the long-running Bibi production of permanent victimhood.
The logic is difficult to ignore.
Iran, facing enormous strategic, economic and military pressures, would supposedly decide that targeting Netanyahu’s son in a Miami high-rise is worth the diplomatic fallout, while offering little obvious strategic gain. If the allegation is real, it requires serious evidence. If it is being presented without convincing evidence, then the public is being asked to substitute fear for facts.
And politically, the timing is convenient.
Netanyahu has repeatedly relied on the language of existential threats, security emergencies and Iranian menace to consolidate support and justify extraordinary security measures. Now the threat has apparently followed his family all the way to Florida.
The plot is familiar:
When Netanyahu needs to explain failure, invoke Iran.
When he needs to justify escalation, invoke security.
When political pressure rises, invoke an assassination threat.
But there is a problem with this formula: repetition does not turn allegations into evidence.
After years of promising to eliminate Iran’s strategic threat, weaken its capabilities and restore Israeli deterrence, Netanyahu still needs Tehran as the permanent villain in every chapter.
That may say less about Iran’s capabilities than about the limits of Bibi’s political imagination.
If this is the new strategy—turning a family security detail in Miami into a geopolitical crisis—then the real secret weapon may not be Iran at all.
It may be Netanyahu’s desperate need for another threat to distract from his failures.