THE LIMITS OF AMERICAN POWER

OUT OF OPTIONS,

U.S. PRES. SPEAKS OF “ANNIHILATION”

The most recent American war, a brutal and murderous military campaign waged against the nation of Iran and its ninety-three million people, and which began on February 28^th 2026, with the sudden blitz-like attack that killed Iran’s Supreme Leader in one place before slaughtering 168 schoolchildren in another, is not only shaping up to be another American “quagmire” that will cost the American taxpayer billions of dollars, but is also providing a real time demonstration of the limits of American power.

Unable to precipitate prolonged internal chaos within Iran and incapable of conjuring up a repeat of the Venezuela operation, the Americans have now found their list of war options to be a very short list indeed. Faced with a totally new scenario, where meddling in another country’s domestic affairs does not produce the desired effect of internal chaos or coup d’état, and decapitation strikes kill individuals but fail to destroy the organisational structure of government and state administration due to the application of deep-layered succession management, the Americans turned to the seaborne siege before retreating their naval vessels to safer waters due to the threat of being sunk.

In short, we have witnessed the United States employ three different methodologies of attack against Iran, all of which have failed to subjugate the Iranian state. We are therefore now at the stage of the fourth mode of attack, perhaps best encapsulated by United States President Trump’s words spoken at the United Nations (23-09-2026): “… do I annihilate the Islamic Republic, and do it quickly, never giving them a chance …” This reference to swift annihilation can only mean the offensive deployment of American nuclear weapons.

Screenshot | ABC News (USA) | YouTube | link above

Bear in mind that it has taken only seven months of war for this progression of events to unfold. One may ask that if the Americans know what they are doing, then why do they continue to fail?

Considering this, it may be useful to identify some characteristics of each methodology and from there, glean a very basic understanding of the American philosophy of war as it appears in 2026.

The initial American philosophy of war was something akin to “we will get them to kill each other” by fomenting discontent that may in turn erupt into riot and insurrection. However, infiltration of Iranian society by western-backed groups failed to engineer any long term social chaos within Iran. This approach, which began in the final days of December 2025, lasted around three months and ended shortly after the decapitation strikes that occurred on 28-02-2026.

When this strategy failed and the Iranian state did not collapse, the Americans adopted an alternative approach best described as “we will kill their leaders.” American military planners seemingly believed that carrying out a string of political assassinations would in turn undermine Iranian society to such an extent that any surviving remnants of a battered Iranian state would call for immediate surrender on the terms of the enemy. But events did not play out that way. Under immense pressure from a determined adversary, Iran has displayed visible resilience to the American assassination campaign, notably through the application of pre-planned succession management. It has by now become apparent that Iran cannot be defeated through a bloody leadership purge orchestrated from afar and that relies upon offshore-based airpower.

Realising these two approaches to pursuing a war with the ancient Persian civilisation had so far generated nothing more than meagre results, the Americans then invoked a third iteration of their war philosophy. This time round, the underlying thinking can be understood as “we will starve them out.” It remains a strategy which is reliant upon a maritime blockade imposed by US naval ships stationed within the Strait of Hormuz and further south in the wider Persian Gulf.

However, given Iran’s extensive land borders and overland connections to many trading partners who continue to trade with the Iranian nation, the seaborne siege was never likely to cause anything other than minimal discomfort. More recently, these same American warships have now significantly retreated from the vicinity of the Strait of Hormuz, due to the recent Iranian demonstration of its latest missile technology. A single Iranian Castle Breaker missile can sink an American naval ship, hence, the American withdrawal to safer waters.

Lastly, we have now heard United States President Trump’s most recent public statements regarding the American war on Iran. Trump, in essence, has argued that it is his choice whether or not the American war machine will go forward and “annihilate” Iran. And whilst this may sound like war bluster borne from frustration it should be carefully noted that when the US President makes a public statement many others receive his words and comments as quite literal announcements.

To elaborate, as the US military has been unable to subjugate the Iranian state and remains incapable of winning the hearts and minds of the Iranian people, the American President has now declared that a complete extermination, a sudden and dramatic elimination, and a total annihilation of Iran and it’s ninety-three million people is on the cards and a distinct possibility. To accomplish this barbaric act, multiple nuclear-armed weapons would have to be fired into Iranian airspace that would then land upon the densely populated cities and towns of Iran and detonate. Here, and undoubtedly so in this last case, the American philosophy of war is quite simply “either America wins or everybody dies.”

This was a rather strange speech for President Trump to make at the United Nations. Surely even Trump knows, or someone close to him knows and can easily inform Trump, that if America does deploy nuclear weapons against Iran, then the act of deployment will itself signal to other nuclear-armed nations that they may also disable and destroy antagonists, including perceived antagonists, in a similar way. Additionally, no one really knows the full extent of the Iranian arsenal and an unpleasant surprise may lurk within for any nation that attempts to destroy Iran in such a cataclysmic manner.

As we have seen, the four stages of the American philosophy of war to date are, in turn, we will get them to kill each other, we will kill their leaders, we will starve them out, and finally, either America wins or everybody dies. The first three have failed to bring about the desired collapse of Iranian society. The fourth presently appears to be the worst kind of war bluster, where Trump’s use of the term “annihilate” evokes vivid memories of past acts which have since been universally condemned.

Crimes against peace, war crimes, and crimes against humanity are serious matters that are not be taken lightly. Suggesting in public that you might participate in these vile acts, and doing so whilst delivering a speech to the UN, cannot be read as a clever move.

Identifying nuclear weaponry as an offensive military option, as opposed to simple nuclear deterrence, may seem foolhardy to a reasonable person, but to a United States President who is losing a war he started, it may very well constitute all that he can say, because everything else that should be said bears a scar that describes a defeat for the United States and its military.

In sum, it has become increasingly clear that the United States cannot win this war with Iran. No viable military options exist for the Americans to conquer the Iranian nation. Nuclear weapons cannot be used because of the catastrophic blowback the US would experience if they moved to deploy. Iran will continue to exist and will not be subsumed by American military power. American invaders will not install a puppet government in Tehran. Iranian management of the maritime traffic travelling through the Strait of Hormuz will persist. All of which clearly demonstrates the limits of American power.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

ABC News. Trump threatens to “annihilate” in UN speech. YouTube. 23-09-2026.

Al Mayadeen English. Tanker hit by projectile off Oman, engine room disabled. Al Mayadeen. 25-08-2026.

Bahreini, Ali. Minab: When the world’s most precise missile chose a classroom. Al Jazeera. 15-03-2026.

International Law Commission. The Nuremberg Principles (1950) in Resource Collection on the Nuremberg Principles. International Nuremberg Principles Academy. 2020.

Siddiqui, Usaid. What is Iran’s Castle Breaker missile used against US bases? Al Jazeera. 02-09-2026.