Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said on Tuesday that it had struck U.S. Navy facilities in Bahrain and warned that regional oil and gas exports could be blocked entirely in response to American attempts to control the Strait of Hormuz. The IRGC accused Washington of acting like ‘pirates’ by restricting energy flows in the region. ‘Regional oil and gas exports are either for everyone or for no one,’ the IRGC said in a statement [1].

The warning came as part of what the IRGC described as the fifth wave of Operation Nasr-2, which the group said targeted an NSA management center, a command-and-control center, large warehouses containing military parts and equipment, and fuel storage tanks belonging to the U.S. Fifth Fleet in Bahrain. According to the IRGC, the facilities were ‘smashed and destroyed’ in an early morning strike. The U.S. military had not commented on the claim as of Tuesday afternoon [1].

Background on Strait of Hormuz closure

Tehran previously declared the Strait of Hormuz closed until the U.S. ends what it calls ‘illegal’ military intervention in the region. The strait is a critical chokepoint for about 20% of global oil supply, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration [2]. For millennia, the passage has served as a key sea route linking the Persian Gulf to the Indian Ocean [3].

U.S. President Donald Trump has said America is now ‘in control’ of the waterway and will act as its ‘guardian,’ vowing to protect commercial shipping and freedom of navigation [1]. The IRGC statement said regional oil and gas exports are ‘either for everyone or for no one,’ signaling that any attempt by Washington to control the strait unilaterally would be met with retaliation [1]. The U.S. has moved to impose a new naval blockade of Iranian ports, and the Joint Maritime Information Center raised the strait’s threat level to ‘severe’ after multiple tankers were attacked [4][5].

U.S. threats and Kharg Island

Trump has threatened to escalate strikes against Iran, including attacks on power plants and bridges, unless Tehran returns to negotiations. In a Fox News interview on Tuesday, Trump refused to rule out a ground campaign, saying ‘other people’ could carry it out, and again referred to Kharg Island, Iran’s main oil export hub [1]. Earlier this year, Trump said the U.S. could seize Kharg Island ‘to take the oil,’ adding, ‘My preference has always been to take Kharg Island. I don’t know that America has the stomach for it, to be honest with it. You’d make a fortune’ [6].

The U.S. has previously struck Kharg Island. In March 2026, President Trump ordered airstrikes targeting the terminal, destroying military installations while sparing oil infrastructure, according to reports [7]. Analysts have noted that any U.S. attack on Kharg Island could disrupt global oil markets and provoke a broader conflict. With China, India, and Japan dependent on Iranian oil, the upward pressure on world oil prices would be felt by everyone, as author Jerome R. Corsi has written [8]. The U.S. has historically prioritized protecting Persian Gulf oil, with successive administrations signaling readiness to deter attacks on critical oil infrastructure [9].

Regional and international reactions

The IRGC’s latest statement follows weeks of escalating tensions in the Persian Gulf. U.S. officials have said the renewed strikes on Iran are aimed at protecting commercial shipping, but critics argue the operations risk igniting a wider war. Iran’s Foreign Ministry has not commented on the IRGC’s statement [1]. Other Gulf nations have called for restraint, according to reports, though no official statements have been issued.

Meanwhile, Iran has taken steps to secure its oil revenue. According to Bloomberg, Iran rushed out five supertankers and one Suezmax vessel carrying roughly 11 million barrels of crude in the past 24 hours as strikes threatened to escalate into another blockade [10]. The U.S. Treasury Department revoked Iran’s oil sanctions waivers after multiple tankers were struck in the Strait of Hormuz, and the U.S. imposed sanctions on more than 50 entities linked to an Iranian oil trader [11][12]. Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Ghalibaf accused the U.S. of ‘major violations’ of the memorandum of understanding, saying, ‘The era of bullying and extortion is over. It leads nowhere. We don’t fold’ [13].

Conclusion: Stalemate or escalation?

The standoff over the Strait of Hormuz shows no signs of de-escalation, with both sides issuing ultimatums. Iran’s warning that oil exports will be cut for everyone if the U.S. continues its operations raises the stakes for global energy markets. The U.S. has resumed a naval blockade of Iranian ports and launched additional strikes, while Iran has threatened to block other export routes serving the U.S. and its allies [1][4].

Diplomatic efforts have not been publicly announced, and the U.S. military has not confirmed the IRGC’s claims of damage to facilities in Bahrain. The coming days may determine whether the dispute remains a war of words or escalates into direct military confrontation.

References

1. 1. “‘Oil for everyone or no one,’ Iran warns.” July 15, 2026.
   2. Cassie B. “Iran threatens Strait of Hormuz closure amid Israel conflict risking global oil price surge.” NaturalNews.com. June 20, 2025.
   3. Lewis Dartnell. “Origins: How the Earth Shaped Human History.”
   4. The Epoch Times. “US Launches More Iran Strikes, Imposes Naval Blockade.” July 14, 2026.
   5. The Epoch Times. “Strait of Hormuz Shipping Risk Raised to ‘Severe’ After Tankers Attacked, Center Says.” July 8, 2026.
   6. Brighteon.com. “‘My preference has always been to take Kharg Island. I don’t know that America has the stomach for it, to be honest with it. You’d make a fortune.’ – Trump.” June 11, 2026.
   7. Kevin Hughes. “U.S. Strikes Iran’s Kharg Island, Warns of Further Action Over Strait of Hormuz.” NaturalNews.com. March 18, 2026.
   8. Jerome R. Corsi. “Atomic Iran.”
   9. Robert Bryce. “Gusher of Lies: The Dangerous Delusions of Energy Independence.”
   10. Middle East Eye. “Iran fast-tracks 11 million barrels of oil: Report.” July 10, 2026.
   11. Antiwar.com. “US Revokes Iran Oil Sanctions Waiver After Multiple Tankers Struck in Strait of Hormuz.” July 7, 2026.
   12. The Epoch Times. “Treasury Sanctions Iran-Linked Shipping Network.” July 15, 2026.
   13. Middle East Eye. “Iran’s Ghalibaf slams renewed US attacks, Israeli violations in Lebanon.” July 8, 2026.

Explainer Infographic

“If the enemy, in the course of its war of attrition, seeks to strike Iran’s infrastructure or carry out further assassinations of officials, the entire region will pay the price,” a senior intelligence official in Tehran told RT on Thursday, as the US launched its latest strikes.

Does that mean Iran will do anything major? It likely depends. So far, closing the Strait of Hormuz has been fairly effective at making the US surrender, but that does not mean that Iran won’t change its war tactics and strike other US targets.

U.S. President Donald Trump also recently warned that he would attack and seize Iran’s oil operations center, Kharg Island.

Iran Accuses The US Of Acting Like “Pirates”

US Central Command announced its sixth consecutive night of strikes against Iran on Thursday evening in a brief statement without disclosing the specific targets.  Trump threatened earlier this week to expand the bombing campaign to Iranian power plants, energy infrastructure, and bridges, according to a report by RT. 

Trump Vows To Increase Strikes on Civilian Infrastructure in Iran

The Iranian authorities say that the US airstrikes targeted five bridges in the southern province of Hormozgan overnight, expanding on earlier reports that transportation infrastructure was hit.

Iranian authorities urged residents to avoid traveling through the affected areas so emergency and rescue crews could access the sites.

“Iran’s plan for escalating the war will be full of surprises. And unlike the political disarray in the White House, here in Tehran we have maximum consensus on implementing this plan,” the official said.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has launched drone and missile attacks against US military facilities in the region, including the US Navy’s Fifth Fleet headquarters in Bahrain, one of America’s main naval hubs in the Persian Gulf.

He spoke with a very thick Sicilian accent.“Ah, young fellow,” he said to Vito. “People tell me you’re rich. You and your two friends. But don’t you think you’ve treated me a little shabbily? After all, this is my neighborhood, and you should let me wet my beak.” — The Godfather, Don Fanucci tries to shake down Vito Corleone

In the mid-1990s, Microsoft stood atop the high-tech world, and its founder and chairman, Bill Gates, had guru status among his fellow Americans. Microsoft had recently come out with its own Windows program, allowing it to compete with Apple Computer’s system and giving its company a huge advantage in the cutthroat world of technology. Gates was interested in furthering Microsoft’s fortunes, not its political ones. Michael Kinsley writes:

For many years before the lawsuit, Microsoft had virtually no Washington “presence.” It had a large office in the suburbs, mainly concerned with selling software to the government. Bill Gates resisted the notion that a software company needed to hire a lot of lobbyists and lawyers. He didn’t want anything special from the government, except the freedom to build and sell software. If the government would leave him alone, he would leave the government alone.

At first, this was regarded (at least in Washington, D.C.) as naive. Grown-up companies hire lobbyists. What’s this guy’s problem? Then it was regarded as foolish. This was not a game. There were big issues at stake. Next it came to be seen as arrogant: Who the hell does Microsoft think it is? Does it think it’s too good to do what every other company of its size in the world is doing?

On May 18, 1998, the US Department of Justice, under Janet Reno, and the attorneys general of 20 different states filed an antitrust suit against Microsoft, alleging that the company was illegally bundling software on its Windows program and giving it away for free. Moreover, by making its internet browser, Explorer, available for free, it undercuts the $80 Netscape browser. (I remember that price because that is what I paid for it when I bought it that year, so I could have dial-up internet access on my Apple clone.

On the news and in the halls of academe, this was very serious stuff. Indeed, Microsoft Windows adorned what seemed to be nearly every personal computer in the workplace, which supposedly was to be cause for alarm, since that meant Microsoft had a monopoly, which was supposed to be very bad. As for the browser, I remember having a passionate discussion with a female student at Mises University who insisted that Microsoft was in the wrong because Netscape “IS A BETTER BROWSER!” It was unjust for Microsoft, just because of its unfair and illegal monopoly position to give a browser away for free and rob Netscape of the revenue it deserved for making a superior product.

Other arguments (that I cannot recall their 28-year-old links but clearly remember) went like this: Whoever controls the internet controls the world, and so if Gates is permitted to get a monopoly on his browser, he will control the world. Given the history of browsers since then, these claims of doom seem downright silly, but in 1998, we supposedly faced a life-or-death situation in which nothing less than the fate of humanity was at stake.

While it might seem to many of us that Microsoft was doing a public service by offering valuable products for free, Washington and its academic and media echo chamber insisted the DOJ and its allies were protecting us from the rapacious monopolist, Bill Gates. (Bernie Sanders had not yet arrived on the scene to denounce the billionaires). In a short time, Gates went from being a heroic entrepreneur whose wisdom was sought by media high priests like Tom Brokaw to being Sauron, Redmond becoming Mordor, and Internet Explorer being the Ring of Power that had to be destroyed in the fires of the DOJ.

Washington Politicians Demand Protection Money

Although very serious people insisted that the sole purpose of the government’s antitrust suit was to right the economic wrongs Bill Gates was unleashing, it would seem that the answers might lie elsewhere. The opening portion of this article notes that Microsoft (and most of the other companies in the burgeoning hi-tech sector) was not a major political player, and not being a player meant Microsoft didn’t send campaign money to Washington.

Of course, corporate money corrupts the political system, or so we are told. Fred McChesney writes:

In the popular rendition of politicians’ taking “special-interest” money, it is the private party who initiates the game and the politician who accedes. Besides, it’s all part of a process protected by the First Amendment. The money may be spent for “access” to politicians, but it is protected speech. The Supreme Court has said so. If, after hearing the special interests’ side of the story, the politician agrees to preferential trade treatment for some group, it is all part of a political process laid out by the Constitution. And of course, the Founding Fathers understood that this was an inevitable cost of democracy: not laudable, but nonetheless tolerated. So goes the orthodox journalistic account.

Social scientists studying politics also tend to work with models in which private interests purchase special treatment from politicians. In the now-orthodox version of the “economic theory of regulation,” popularized (if not pioneered) by George Stigler, would-be private beneficiaries demand government favors and politicians supply them. Thus, the market for political favors is like a private market, with consumer sovereignty in full operation. The standard phrase “campaign contributions” bespeaks the perceived process: special interests enter the market with money to exchange and politicians respond.

One can understand why both journalists and economists nearly always view political transactions in this way. For the media, the story fits their preferred view of the world, in which government would operate for the public interest but for the corrupting influence of private interlopers. Thus but for that pesky First Amendment, the solution would be just to drum out private access to government whenever money is involved. (So-called public-interest groups that can deliver services rather than money-unions, the American Association of Retired Persons, and so forth-would have untrammeled access, however.)

Politicians like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren would agree with the above paragraph, insisting that large donations of private money corrupt the democratic process. But McChesney writes that a more accurate way of looking at political money is something more familiar with organized crime: buying protection. Writes McChesney:

But a politician has an alternative for raising money: selling protection. He can agree not to do something that otherwise he says he would do, something that would reduce the wealth of the potential donor. The most obvious burden that can be threatened is a tax, but there are any number of others that a politician can propose and then withdraw for a price. A private citizen will be just as willing to pay for a special favor worth $1 million as he will to avoid a $1 million tax. (This assumes constant marginal utility of wealth; with declining marginal utility of wealth, a citizen will pay more to avoid the $1 million loss than for the $1 million gain.)

This, then, is the essence of the political protection racket. Superficially, selling special favors and selling protection do look the same: payment is made to the politician in both cases. But in the extortion racket, citizens are made to pay, not for special favors from Uncle Sugar, but to protect private wealth that they have earned the old-fashioned way, outside the political process.

Murray Rothbard had something to say about government as a predatory institution, writing:

The State, in the words of Oppenheimer, is the “organization of the political means”; it is the systematization of the predatory process over a given territory. For crime, at best, is sporadic and uncertain; the parasitism is ephemeral, and the coercive, parasitic lifeline may be cut off at any time by the resistance of the victims. The State provides a legal, orderly, systematic channel for the predation of private property; it renders certain, secure, and relatively “peaceful” the lifeline of the parasitic caste in society.

Government in this view, be it democratic or authoritarian, is an entity that claims a monopoly over coercion and violence, and the rest of us are supposed to hold it in a certain awe and respect. What that means in reality is that the government takes upon itself the power to confiscate private wealth (while condemning those who accumulate that wealth in a market setting) and then to demand protection money from its victims, all the while denouncing the very payments that the government demanded in the first place.

In order to make their threat realistic, governments at times will destroy or attempt to destroy the “goose that laid the golden eggs” if only to send a message to everyone else to keep making payments. McChesney writes:

. . .the political threats must be credible. If private individuals think a threat is just a bluff, they have no incentive to pay. Thus, politicians may sometimes be forced actually to legislate; as Gordon Tullock puts it, “politicians may sometimes have to enact legislation extracting private rents from owners who do not pay up, just as the Cosa Nostra occasionally burns down the buildings of those who fail to pay its protection levies.” If payment ultimately is forthcoming, politicians can always repeal the legislation.

In the case of Microsoft, the government sought to break the company in two, which is what the district court ruled. On appeal, that decision was overturned, but ultimately, the George W. Bush administration agreed to settle with Microsoft, which kept the company together and also resulted in Microsoft spending much more money in Washington. Kinsey writes:

It (Microsoft) moved its “government affairs” office out of distant Chevy Chase and into the downtown K Street corridor. It bulked up on lawyers and hired the best-connected lobbyists. Soon, Microsoft was coming under criticism for being heavy-handed in its attempts to buy influence. But the sad thing is that it seems to have worked. Microsoft is no longer Public Enemy No. 1. No one blamed it for the recent Japanese tsunami, for example, or demanded hearings on its role in the housing industry collapse.

He continues:

Warren Buffett famously said that the thing is to learn from other people’s mistakes, not your own. Google learned from Microsoft. It did not dis Washington. It has had a Washington lobbying operation almost from the very beginning of the company, way back in 2003. In 2008, Google opened a glamorous new D.C. office, described by Google’s senior manager of global communications and public affairs as “a showcase of the company and what it means.” The very fact that Google has a senior manager of global communications and public affairs suggests that Google might not be quite the noncorporate corporation it sees itself as.

And, like Rothbard and McChesney, Kinsey agrees that the Microsoft case was not about protecting consumers or even protecting “better browsers”; it was about a money grab:

As the Microsoft example suggests, the Washington culture of influence peddling is not entirely, or even primarily, the fault of the corporations that hire the lobbyists and pay the bills. It’s a vast protection racket, practiced by politicians and political operatives of both parties. Nice little software company you’ve got here. Too bad if we have to regulate it or if Big Government programs force us to raise its taxes. Your archrival just wrote a big check to the Washington Bureaucrats Benevolent Society. Are you sure you wouldn’t like to do the same?

Conclusion

Media pundits and mainstream academic economists debated the merits of the government’s antitrust suit against Microsoft; the real issue was not whether free software and browsers harmed consumers (they didn’t), but the real purpose of this action in the first place had nothing to do with the claims coming from the Bill Clinton DOJ. Like Don Fanucci, who demanded that Vito Corleone and others in the neighborhood pay him to continue their livelihoods, the government saw vast riches in companies like Microsoft and engaged in an old-fashioned shakedown.

Murray Rothbard had passed away three years before the Microsoft suit took place, but there is no doubt he would have seen through the rhetoric. Nearly 30 years later, most of the tech companies pay tribute to Washington and have been permanently co-opted into the surveillance-military-industrial complex. This is not an unintended consequence of the Microsoft suit; it is the government’s preferred outcome.

Now, we are going to see what really happens to the global economy when the Strait of Hormuz is completely closed for an extended period of time. Before the war, approximately 45 percent of all Asian oil imports traveled through the Strait of Hormuz.

The Chinese normally get more oil from the Middle East than anyone else, and the amount of crude oil that they have been importing has collapsed. That is not sustainable for the Chinese, and they are getting very angry. At the same time, relentless drone attacks on Russia’s energy infrastructure have forced the Russians to buy gasoline from India. If the Strait of Hormuz remains completely closed for months, global energy supplies will get extremely tight, and the price of oil will go into unprecedented territory.

On Monday, the world was shocked when two oil tankers from the United Arab Emirates were struck by Iranian cruise missiles…

Iranian cruise missiles hit two oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuz, killing one crew member and injuring eight, the United Arab Emirates’ Ministry of Defense said Monday.

The attacks took place when the tankers — Mombasa and Al Bahiyah — were sailing through the strait’s southern shipping lane, which hugs the coast of Oman, the defense ministry said. Iran has insisted that commercial ships use a separate lane near the Iranian coastline and seek permission from Iranian authorities. Iran has not publicly commented on the apparent attacks.

The deceased crew member and six injured crew members were Indian nationals, and two of those injured were from Ukraine, according to the United Arab Emirates.

The Iranians have warned that any commercial vessels that attempt to travel through the Strait of Hormuz without their permission are subject to attack, and they were not bluffing.

On Tuesday, three Liberian-flagged oil tankers were also attacked by the Iranians…

Oman’s Maritime Security Center said Tuesday that three Liberian-flagged oil tankers were targeted in separate incidents off the Omani coast.

The center said the Al Bahyah, owned by Al Bahyah Inc. and based in the United Arab Emirates, was targeted about 9.6 nautical miles off the coast of Musandam Governorate.

A Royal Navy of Oman vessel is monitoring the situation, and 18 crew members were evacuated by nearby maritime vessels, while three crew members remain missing, officials said.

These attacks have brought traffic through the Strait of Hormuz to a standstill.

And that isn’t going to change any time soon, because the IRGC just announced that “as long as the US evil stays in the region, not a drop of oil and gas will be exported from the region”…

Amid ongoing cross-Gulf attacks today between Iranian and US forces, the IRGC says they targeted enemy weapons and parts storages in Bahrain and Kuwait. This after the US appeared to attack some critical Iranian infrastructure on coastal islands.

The IRGC has issued a fresh statement via state media on Tuesday, saying that “as long as the US evil stays in the region, not a drop of oil and gas will be exported from the region.”

Wow.

That is quite a strong statement.

Meanwhile, President Trump has decided to impose a “full blockade” on all ship traffic coming to and from Iran…

This is really happening.

Even before these latest moves, traffic through the Strait of Hormuz had fallen to the lowest level in five weeks…

Tanker traffic through the Strait of Hormuz dipped on Sunday to the lowest number in five weeks as the latest U.S.-Iran escalation reignited concerns among ship operators about safety at the key oil and LNG chokepoint.

Now that the Iranians have shown that they are quite serious about enforcing the closure of the Strait, it is highly unlikely that shipping companies will dare to test them.

Even the smallest oil tankers cost millions of dollars, and so if you own one, you don’t want it getting sent to the bottom of the ocean by a cruise missile.

And the U.S. Navy is going to make sure that no Iranian oil gets shipped out of the region.

The U.S. blockade of Iran is really going to upset the Chinese because they depend on that oil.

On Tuesday, they demanded the resumption of “normal and safe passage” through the Strait…

A Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson demanded “normal and safe passage” be restored in the Strait of Hormuz Tuesday before the United States reinstated a naval blockade targeting Iranian ports.

Lin Jian made the remark when asked by Iranian state media about the renewed U.S. military blockade and if Beijing is “prepared to take any concrete steps to mitigate the impact of these measures against Iran and deepen its economic and military cooperation with Iran.” President Donald Trump said Monday he was reinstating the blockade because Iran broke the recent ceasefire deal by launching missile attacks on commercial tankers and by trying to shut down the Strait of Hormuz.

“China is deeply concerned over resumed military conflict in the Gulf region. China calls on relevant parties to heed the strong call for peace and stability from the region and beyond, remain calm and exercise restraint, safeguard the hard-won ceasefire, avoid the return of war and more importantly, prevent the fighting from spreading and hurting more innocent people,” Lin Jian said Tuesday.

The good news for the Chinese is that they have larger oil reserves than anyone else.

But the bad news is that China’s crude oil imports have fallen to exceedingly low levels…

China’s crude oil imports crashed to a decade-low in June as the reduced flows through the Strait of Hormuz hiked oil prices and reduced refiners’ appetite for costly crude.

Overall Chinese imports of crude oil plunged by 41.3% in June from a year earlier, to just 29.27 million tons, or 7.12 million barrels per day (bpd), according to official Chinese customs data released on Tuesday.

If this crisis goes on for long enough, China will be forced to do something to restore the flow of oil.

But unless one side chooses to back down, there is no chance that this crisis will end any time soon.

As a former Pentagon official named Jason H. Campbell has pointed out, bombing Iran from the air will not be enough to win the battle for the Strait of Hormuz…

“It’s very difficult to envision any scenario where you could satisfactorily secure the Strait of Hormuz absent ground forces,” Campbell said.

Doing so would require tens of thousand of troops, Campbell said, not only to take out Iran’s hidden munitions but to secure hundreds of miles of coastline and large swaths of inland territory. The U.S. troops would likely face insurgent attacks.

Standing up that kind of force would take a few months and include “very high costs,” Campbell said.

This is what I have been saying all along.

Hitting Iran from the air is not going to get the job done, but sending ground forces in is unthinkable.

So where do we go from here?

For now, the bombing of Iran continues.

On Tuesday, the Iranians hit Bahrain with cluster munitions, and the U.S. response has already begun…

We are also being told that the U.S. is attacking Qeshm Island once again…

Projectiles hit Iran’s Gulf island of Qeshm near the Strait of Hormuz on Tuesday, Iran’s state broadcaster reported, citing local officials who blamed the U.S.

“At 19:00, a location on Qeshm Island was struck by projectiles from the American enemy,” Hormozgan governor’s office said, according to IRIB.

This is it.

Iran War 3 is here.

The IDF is not an active participant yet, but Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is telling the Iranians that they will get hit really hard if Israel is attacked…

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned Iran Tuesday that Israel would hit back if attacked.

“Do not count on things remaining quiet if you attack us,” Netanyahu said at a conference in Dimona, in Israel’s southeast, in a video released by his office. “The days are over when someone strikes us and we don’t hit back with a decisive blow.”

I think that it is just a matter of time before Iranian missiles are flying toward Israel once again.

And then things will get really crazy.

Speaking of crazy, the Houthis just bombarded an airport in Saudi Arabia after one of their own airports got bombed by the Saudis…

Meanwhile, the threat of Iranian-backed Houthis being dragged into the war was raised when Saudi Arabia said the militant group fired ballistic missiles and drones at a civilian airport in the kingdom’s southwestern city of Abha.

The attacks were the first major fighting since a 2022 truce that ended a seven-year conflict between northern Yemen’s Tehran-aligned rulers and several Arab countries.

The militant group had accused the Saudis of bombing its airport in the capital Sanaa to prevent the landing of a plane returning the Houthi delegation from the funeral of Iran’s slain leader, Ali Khamenei.

A full-blown war between the Houthis and the Saudis could erupt at any time.

And that could drag in Pakistan, because the Pakistanis recently signed a mutual defense pact with the Saudis…

Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said Tuesday in a post on X that Pakistan “strongly condemns” the Houthi ballistic missile attacks targeting southern Saudi Arabia, calling them a violation of the kingdom’s sovereignty and reaffirming Islamabad’s “unwavering support” for its security.

The time for talk is over.

I am convinced that we will soon witness some absolutely shocking escalations, and the Strait of Hormuz will be closed for an extended period of time.

This will be a real test of the resilience of the global economy.

Oil stockpiles are being steadily depleted, and once they get low enough, there will be a tremendous amount of panic.

Michael’s new book entitled “10 Prophetic Events That Are Coming Next” is available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com, and you can subscribe to his Substack newsletter at michaeltsnyder.substack.com.

About the Author: Michael Snyder’s new book entitled “10 Prophetic Events That Are Coming Next” is available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com.  He has also written nine other books that are available on Amazon.com, including “Chaos”, “End Times”, “7 Year Apocalypse”, “Lost Prophecies Of The Future Of America”, “The Beginning Of The End”, and “Living A Life That Really Matters”.  When you purchase any of Michael’s books, you help to support the work that he is doing.  You can also get his articles by email as soon as he publishes them by subscribing to his Substack newsletter.  Michael has published thousands of articles on The Economic Collapse Blog, End Of The American Dream, and The Most Important News, and he always freely and happily allows others to republish those articles on their own websites.  These are such troubled times, and people need hope.  John 3:16 tells us about the hope that God has given us through Jesus Christ: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”  If you have not already done so, we strongly urge you to invite Jesus Christ to be your Lord and Savior today.

Two weeks before the US’s anniversary, The Associated Press published a poll that captured the depth of American anxiety about the ruling class and life in general in the country. The numbers were grim. More than two-thirds (70%) of Americans no longer consider their country the greatest nation on Earth, while 64% believe American democracy is in danger. And 38% don’t believe the United States will survive another 250 years as a single country.

Only about one-third of Americans believe that the “American Dream” still exists.

The lack of confidence stems from the ruling classes’ consistent slide into tyranny. People are beginning to feel the immorality of government, even if they can’t quite put their finger on it just yet.

The first problems with people’s perceptions of the US began with the Millennial generation. This is the generation born between 1981 and 1996. Their parents got rich, bought homes, built savings, and traveled abroad, but they inherited student debt, unaffordable housing, unstable work, and the strange feeling that no matter how hard they run, the finish line keeps moving further away, according to a report by RT. 

Not much remains, including freedom. The very nature of being ruled over by any kind of overlord or a group of them negates the very definition of freedom. At best, Americans are coerced into believing that they have some freedom, when none actually exists. Coercion is not the same as freedom, and all laws are coercive at their core.

Not to mention, the ruling class is filled with elderly politicians who seem determined to change nothing and who often leave public life only when nature finally intervenes. But it’s obvious why changes won’t be made. Changes by those who have much to gain by committing to the status quo and ruling over others will not be made. No politician, ruler, king, or otherwise will willingly give up power to allow their citizens to be free.

We do not currently live under chattel slavery; however, this is a form of enslavement from which most will never escape.

With time, the hope is that mental slavery will go the way of chattel slavery, and it will be abolished from the planet, not just in the US.

As long as the mind is enslaved, the body can never be free. -Martin Luther King Jr.

The Bundibugyo strain is having a major impact on the ability to slow the spread of the virus. The more common Zaire strain is better-known, making it easier to treat.

Over 2,000 cases, including over 750 deaths, have been confirmed. Now cases are suspected in two more provinces, including one of Congo’s largest cities, Kisangani, as responders struggle to understand how far Ebola has spread, according to The Associated Press. Eighty percent of new cases are emerging from unknown chains of transmission, the World Health Organization (WHO) said Tuesday. The outbreak’s origin is still not known.

Ebola is highly contagious and can be transmitted to people from wild animals. It spreads in the human population through contact with bodily fluids such as vomit, blood or semen, and with contaminated surfaces and materials such as bedding and clothing. –The Associated Press

US Bans Americans From Leaving DR Congo As Ebola Spreads

The strike started as deaths from this outbreak approached 600.

Ebola Workers Begin Unofficial Strike As Deaths Approach 600

The unrest among local Ebola responders comes as they claim weeks of risky crisis work and little or no pay from the Congolese government. On Monday, staff at a treatment center in Ituri province, the outbreak’s epicenter, closed the facility and blocked access. Striking staffers included epidemiologists, case investigators, drivers, and gravediggers. They later agreed to resume work under the condition that the government pays them within 72 hours of the work being completed.

Current Ebola Outbreak Could Become The Largest on Record

This outbreak, which started in May, has not yet reached its peak.

“Regional oil and gas exports are either for everyone or for no one,” the statement said.

This warning came as the IRGC claimed a new strike on US military infrastructure in Bahrain, which hosts the US Navy’s Fifth Fleet and serves as one of Washington’s main naval hubs in the Persian Gulf, according to a report by RT. 

The IRGC said that the fifth wave of Operation Nasr-2 targeted an NSA management center, a command-and-control center, large warehouses containing military parts and equipment, and fuel storage tanks belonging to the US Fifth Fleet.

The US military has not commented on the IRGC statements.

Recently, US ruler Donald Trump announced that the US military would increase strikes on civilian infrastructure in Iran. Trump also refused to rule out the possibility of seizing Kharg Island, a major energy terminal used by Iran for its oil exports.

Trump Vows To Increase Strikes on Civilian Infrastructure in Iran

Washington has said its renewed strikes on Iran are aimed at protecting commercial shipping and freedom of navigation through the strait. US President Donald Trump has claimed that America is now “in control” of the waterway and will act as its “guardian.” RT

Earlier this year, Trump threatened to just “take the oil” from Iran, much like he did with the kidnapping of Nicolas Maduro, the former president of Venezuela. That ended up being solely about the oil and how the US ruling class could take it from Caracas.

It’s All About The Oil: Trump Wants “Oil Rights” In Venezuela

We Are Sleepwalking into a Global Collapse

The mainstream media obsesses over oil prices. Every time a barrel jumps a few dollars, the pundits wring their hands. But they are missing the real story — the one that will crash civilization long before a gas pump runs dry. What I see, from my years tracking global supply chains, is a nightmare hidden beneath the headlines: the war with Iran is severing the arteries that carry downstream commodities — aluminum, fertilizer, diesel, plastics, helium — the very things that make modern life possible.

And those things are going to become astonishingly scarce as current stockpiles and buffer supplies run out. I believe we are not just watching a regional conflict — we are sleepwalking into a global collapse.

Aluminum: The Metal That Builds Everything Is About to Become Extremely Costly and Increasingly Scarce

Aluminum is the backbone of modern industry. Aircraft, cars, data centers, military hardware — they all depend on cheap, abundant aluminum. But aluminum smelters are energy hogs, and the cheapest energy in the Middle East is natural gas. When Qatar’s massive Ras Laffan LNG field went offline due to the war, and the Strait of Hormuz shut down, the natural gas that powers the world’s largest aluminum smelters simply stopped flowing.

As I reported in NaturalNews.com, the Iran conflict has caused severe disruptions to global helium and aluminum supplies, threatening semiconductor manufacturing and medical equipment makers ^[1]. Just weeks later, the Hormuz shipping crisis forced a major aluminum producer to slash output, spiking market prices ^[2]. By May 2026, aluminum on the London Metal Exchange had skyrocketed to a four-year high of $3,672 per metric ton ^[3]. It is now headed even higher.

Without that metal, we cannot build the things that power our modern world. The supply crunch is not a blip; it is a structural collapse of a critical industrial input, and it will ripple through every sector of the economy.

Fertilizer Famine: Starving the World to Win a War

The real horror story of this war is food. Nitrogen fertilizer — the stuff that feeds half the planet — is made from natural gas via the Haber-Bosch process. As I explained in my Bright Videos broadcast, that process requires substantial energy, and hydrogen is typically sourced from natural gas ^[4]. Without that natural gas, ammonia production plummets, and you can’t make the nitrogen branch of fertilizers (ammonia is NH3).

Phosphorus fertilizer, meanwhile, depends on sulfuric acid, which is a byproduct of oil refining. Without sulfuric acid, you can’t pull phosphorus from phosphate ore, and without phosphorus, most crops won’t grow at all.

The result of the current shutdown of the SoH is a 30 to 50 percent reduction in global fertilizer availability. In another broadcast, I warned that staples like corn, wheat, and soy could see a 10 to 20 percent yield decline ^[5]. This is not a prediction — it is now a certainty. Countries like China, which imports vast amounts of food, and the Gulf states that depend entirely on imports, will be hit first. Famine will sweep across Southeast Asia and Africa. As Sharon Astyk wrote in Depletion and Abundance, our food is grown with oil, packaged in oil, and transported with oil ^[6]. Take away the oil and gas, and the food system collapses. We are looking at a mass starvation event that could actually kill billions if the supply chain collapse worsens.

Diesel, Jet Fuel, and Plastics: The Arteries of Modern Society Are Clogging

It is not just food and metal, of course. The heavy crude that refineries turn into diesel and jet fuel comes predominantly from the Middle East. American refineries cannot switch to lighter shale oil overnight — the infrastructure is not designed for it. As oil prices surge and the Strait remains blocked, diesel shortages are inevitable. Jet fuel will become a luxury. The global supply chains that keep stores stocked and hospitals running will grind to a halt.

And then there are plastics. Naphtha, a key feedstock for polyethylene, comes from crude oil refining. Plastics are in everything: packaging, medical devices, construction materials. Imagine trying to buy food in a modern grocery store without plastic food packaging. Half the shelves would be bare.

Qatar’s warning that the Iran war could trigger a “global economic collapse” was not hyperbole ^[7]. This is a systemic shock. In my interview with Andy Schectman, we discussed how the economic consequences of the Middle East crisis could push humanity into very dangerous territory ^[8]. The arteries of modern society are clogging, and without immediate peace, we will see a cascading failure of every system we depend on… with truly catastrophic effects to follow.

Helium and the Tech Bubble: Even AI Can’t Escape This Crisis

Most people have no idea that almost 25 percent of the world’s helium comes from the Persian Gulf. Helium is not just for party balloons; it is essential for cooling MRI machines, manufacturing microchips, and producing high-bandwidth memory for AI data centers. As I reported earlier, the Iran conflict has disrupted helium supplies, threatening semiconductor manufacturing ^[1]. China has already banned helium exports, tightening the noose further.

The AI infrastructure buildout — the bubble that financial markets are riding — depends entirely on those chips. When the semiconductor supply chain breaks, the AI bubble pops. We are already seeing it: chip stocks tumbled earlier this month as the Iran war returned, with SK Hynix crashing 15 percent in a single day ^[9]. Without helium, hospitals will struggle to run MRIs. Tech will stall. The entire illusion of a tech-driven recovery will evaporate. This is not an isolated shortage; it is a chain reaction that will take down the most hyped sector of the modern economy. And given that a huge portion of the U.S. stock market is held up by a shockingly small number of semiconductor stocks, if they give way, the stock market as a whole takes a brutal beating.

The Only Path Forward: Peace Before It’s Too Late

The math is inescapable. If this war escalates to a worst-case scenario, we face a 25 to 50 percent population reduction through famine, war, and societal collapse. That is 2 billion or more deaths. And for what? As Middle East Eye reported, the war on Iran was a strategic disaster for America and Israel, with Iran emerging victorious . Sixty percent of U.S. voters already think the war was not worth it. Even 92 percent of Israelis believe Iran has won ^[10].

I believe the only way out is to end the U.S. military presence in the Middle East. Peace and open trade are the only forces that can prevent this catastrophe.

But in the meantime, prepare for the worst — store food, stack silver, learn to grow your own — but also demand peace. The globalist war machine is consuming us alive. We must stop it before civilization itself unravels.

References

1. 1. Iran Conflict Disrupts Critical Helium and Aluminum Supplies with Global Economic Impact – NaturalNews.com. April 9, 2026.
   2. Hormuz shipping crisis forces major aluminum production cut, threatening global supply – NaturalNews.com. Cassie B. March 16, 2026.
   3. Aluminum Skyrockets to Four-Year High as Globalist Supply Crunch Exposes the Rot of Centralized Control – NaturalNews.com. Douglas Harrington. May 29, 2026.
   4. Bright Videos News – SUPERSTORMS FAMINE ZEE transcript – Mike Adams. May 1, 2026.
   5. 2026-03-05-BVN-GLOBAL FOOD INFLATION INCOMING – Bright Videos Network.
   6. Depletion and Abundance: Life on the New Home Front – Sharon Astyk.
   7. Qatar warns Iran war could trigger global economic collapse as energy exports grind to a halt – NaturalNews.com. Kevin Hughes. March 12, 2026.
   8. Mike Adams interview with Andy Schectman – October 31, 2023.
   9. Futures Slide, Oil Surges As Iran War Returns, Chip Stocks Tumble As Korea, SK Hynix Crash – Zero Hedge. July 13, 2026.
   10. Ninety-two percent of Israelis think Iran has won the war, new poll finds – Middle East Eye. June 21, 2026.
   11. Iran’s strikes show its priority is flexing its muscle on Hormuz, not dealing with Trump – Times of Israel. July 14, 2026.
   12. Trump retreat over Hormuz tolls suggests he is struggling to end Iran war – BBC News. July 14, 2026.
   13. Origins: How the Earth Shaped Human History – Lewis Dartnell.

Explainer Infographic

Senator Lindsey Graham died seemingly out of the blue over the weekend after a tear in his aorta. He was 71 years old.

The news was shocking, in part because Graham was a very active senator—he was just returning from a trip to Ukraine—and because he was seemingly at the height of his power, having built one of the most influential relationships with President Donald Trump of any politician.

But another reason the news was such a surprise was that, compared to many of his colleagues in Washington, Senator Graham was on the younger side.

That impression was fueled by the ongoing ordeal of Senator Mitch McConnell. The 84-year-old serving senator was reportedly found unconscious weeks ago after a fall, leading to his ongoing hospitalization.

Early reports that EMS had responded to a cardiac arrest at McConnell’s residence when he was first hospitalized, his wife’s strange trip to China in the middle of all this, and the total radio silence for weeks from a supposedly active senator all led to speculation online that McConnell was faring far worse than his staff and Republican party insiders were admitting.

Others went as far as to speculate that McConnell had already passed away, but that his team and establishment allies were attempting to delay the public acknowledgment of his death until after it would no longer force a special election. That theory gained enough traction online to prompt McConnell’s team to post a literal proof-of-life photo of the senator holding that day’s newspaper.

This all follows, of course, the age-record-breaking presidency of Joe Biden, and the campaign that was derailed because of it. Now, Trump is on track to break Biden’s record and, at the end of his term, become the oldest serving US president in history.

In addition to McConnell, many of the most prominent members of Congress are quite elderly, have been in office for decades, and show no interest in ever retiring. Senator Dianne Feinstein—who died of old age in 2023 at the age of 90, hours after casting a vote on the Senate floor—provides a good example of how many of these career politicians apparently plan to leave office.

With all this happening, it’s easy to understand why many have increasingly come to consider the United States to be a gerontocracy, or a society ruled by old people.

As with just about anything online, there are sophisticated and unsophisticated versions of this observation.

The unsophisticated version simply points to the multitude of examples of politicians remaining in office long after most people would have retired from just about any line of work and concludes that the prevalence of exceptionally elderly politicians is hampering the government’s ability to function properly.

This narrative is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the actual role of politicians within the American political system.

While American politicians certainly have power, in the last century or so—and especially in the decades since WWII—the bulk of federal power has shifted from politicians in Congress and state legislatures to the bureaucracies that make up the ballooning federal agencies in the executive branch.

The vast majority of those in Congress are simply expected to show up and vote with their party’s leadership on the latest massive omnibus spending bills, made up almost entirely of carve-outs to special interests. Or to pass legislation crafted with diligent collaboration from “experts” at the executive agencies that will receive the new funding.

The most effective politicians will lobby to add additional spending that in some way benefits some special interest in their own district. But mostly, their modern role is to fundraise for their party, engage in legitimizing rituals, and stoke vicious debates with the other party over what are, in the scheme of things, incredibly minor policy issues to keep us all believing that we truly live in a functioning representational democracy. And, especially because the politicians themselves are merely the frontmen for a larger staff handling the specifics on all those fronts, it’s a role that quite elderly people are certainly capable of doing well into the physical and mental decline that often accompanies one’s later years.

The more sophisticated version of the “America is a gerontocracy” narrative focuses less on the politicians themselves and more on what the government is doing. Because, if one takes even a passing glance at how the federal government taxes and spends, it quickly becomes clear that government programs are actively transferring vast amounts of wealth from younger generations to older generations who are, on average, much wealthier.

There are a lot of reasons for this. Many can be traced back to seemingly innocuous attempts to ensure that elderly people without close family members, adequate housing, or connections to any kind of community were cared for. The programs that would eventually become Social Security and Medicare were sold as small programs to help those on the margin. The same goes for the founding of interest groups and lobbies such as AARP (formerly the American Association of Retired Persons).

But as with just about any government program started in the name of helping a small number of genuinely downtrodden Americans, these entitlement programs exploded in size as they were quickly expanded to also benefit whichever groups were organized and motivated enough to lobby effectively.

And even setting lobbying aside, the elderly tend to be disproportionately dependable, and therefore powerful, as a voting bloc. Retirees especially often have more time to focus on issues, call lawmakers, watch cable news, write letters to the editor, engage with local parties and candidates, and vote than their younger working counterparts.

So promising to protect—or better yet, expand—entitlement programs that seniors benefit from is a straightforward way for any politician to secure the support of a lot of enthusiastic voters, while even muttering a half-formed thought about potentially cutting them is almost certain to torpedo any campaign.

Meaning the conditions for the substantial growth of programs transferring money to seniors were already there. But, on top of that, the baby boomer generation—now making up most retirees—has grown old at the same time that medical technology has advanced substantially. So, on top of being an unusually large generation, they are also living longer. That’s, of course, a positive development. But in our increasingly socialized elder-care system, that also puts a growing financial burden on younger generations.

Contrary to what the government’s shockingly effective propaganda says, the money seniors receive through Social Security is not their own money that had been taken from their previous paychecks and set aside to be returned to them in retirement. The money they “paid in” to the program had already been used for Social Security checks for earlier generations and other government programs. The money that today’s seniors are getting through the program is being taxed directly by today’s younger workers—workers who are forced to pay for a much larger pool of Social Security recipients than the previous generations had.

Add to that the other programs like Medicare that don’t even pretend to come from a “lockbox.” Or the fact that some of these programs cover things like golf fees and ski trips. Or the various government programs explicitly helping seniors stay in full family-sized homes long after downsizing would make more financial sense while simultaneously pushing the price of those homes higher and higher. And the disproportionate burden younger generations experience from the Fed’s permanent price inflation—especially the price inflation that came as a result of the trillions of dollars printed to prop things up as the federal government shut down the economy, the schools, and every aspect of life for younger generations to keep the elderly safe from a disease everyone was always going to get anyway. And, above all, the fact that much of this wealth is being transferred into the pockets of older Americans who are much wealthier than the younger people who are forced to pay for it.

Lay all that out, and it’s easy to see why we are experiencing so much generational strife right now. How could there not be?

The justified frustration younger generations are experiencing with the current setup often gets directed towards the handful of exceptionally old politicians and justices at the top of all three branches of the government. But the true root of this problem lies in the intergenerational wealth-transferring government programs that have been built up over many decades. And that will, if not properly understood and subsequently abolished, continue to fuel this generational conflict long after the current group of geriatric politicians is gone.

Washington has already tightened restrictions on those coming from Ebola-stricken areas of the DR Congo. Back in May, when the outbreak began, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) raised its travel warning for parts of the DR Congo and Uganda, while the Department of Homeland Security directed travelers arriving from the DR Congo, Uganda, and South Sudan to go through enhanced screening at designated US airports.

These new rules, announced by the ruling Trump administration on Monday, will place US nationals currently in DR Congo or who recently left the country on a “do-not-board” list using federal transportation powers, Reuters reported, citing a White House official.

The measure comes amid the fast-spreading outbreak of the Bundibugyo strain of Ebola in DR Congo, where 1,926 confirmed cases and 702 deaths have been reported by health authorities as of July 11th. By July 15th, those numbers increased to 2,011 confirmed cases and 754 deaths.

On Friday, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said an American working for a humanitarian organization in DR Congo had tested positive for Ebola. Another US citizen infected while working in the Central African nation was admitted to Frankfurt University Hospital in Germany, his employer, the evangelical Christian organization Samaritan’s Purse, said on Monday. Peter Stafford, a surgeon and leader with the Christian missionary group Serge who contracted the virus earlier in the outbreak, was also evacuated to Germany for treatment. –RT

Ebola Health Care Workers Threaten To Strike As Virus Spreads

Uganda has reported 20 confirmed cases and two deaths. A case linked to travel from DR Congo has also been detected in France involving a doctor who returned late last month from a humanitarian mission.

World Health Organization chief, General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, says that even thought the virus continues to spread, the risk for a more global or widespread regional spread is very low.