America's expensive, pathetic "blockade" is destroying any sympathy they might still enjoy

[Mahmoud Ahmadinejad]

The world is paying the price for America’s war​

Conflict with Iran hurts American wallets, but it’s far more devastating for people in the global south.

There’s little doubt that the standoff between the United States and Iran imposes economic costs on Americans.

The price at the pump is up by more than a third since the start of the war, and economists project inflation rising and growth slowing.

According to a recent poll by Ipsos, six out of 10 Americans disapprove of the conflict, and a majority believe US military action in Iran will have a negative impact on their personal financial situations. (Only 1% believe the war will have a positive impact on personal finances, and less than a quarter of Americans surveyed think the conflict has been worth it.)

Meanwhile, a poll conducted across six countries in the global south shows seven out of 10 respondents “very concerned” about the cost of living.

The heightened sensitivity to events in the Gulf can be explained in part by the fact that, unlike the United States, a majority of the world’s nearly 200 countries are net importers of energy.

Asia, in particular, accounts for 40% of the world’s energy demand, making its countries particularly sensitive to price shocks.

Developing economies often lack the fiscal room to subsidize energy for their citizens, who in any case earn far less than Americans do and disproportionately suffer when energy prices spike. Additionally, just as a strong dollar helps American importers, it hurts countries that have to spend more rupees or pesos to buy commodities traded in US dollars.

The oil-rich Gulf economies are usually well-positioned to navigate a global economic shock, but they are, of course, particularly mired in the current conflict. In contrast, the US is geographically blessed with no adversaries nearby. Put together, Washington’s unique advantages mean that its citizens have so far suffered less than most other people around the world.

 

[Mahmoud Ahmadinejad]

Naval strategist warns US blockade risks global economic collapse​

The war launched by the US and Israel against Iran on 28 February has triggered a major political and economic crisis.

The aggressors failed to secure a quick victory, and for the past 40 days, a “fragile ceasefire” has prevailed.

The world is now trying to understand where US President Donald Trump's blockade is leading.

Public opinion openly criticizes US and Israeli aggression, and distrust toward the west is deepening further.

After 40 days of war, the Trump administration has shifted from threats of “destroying a civilization” to a fragile ceasefire and now a blockade strategy. What is Washington trying to achieve?

Trump speaks in contradictions. One moment, he says, “If they don’t accept, we will destroy them,” the next, “We will make a great deal.” It’s a stream of contradictory statements.

Meanwhile, the US has three aircraft carriers in the region: the USS Gerald R. Ford has re-entered the Red Sea, the USS George H. W. Bush is moving from the Cape of Good Hope toward the Arabian Sea, and the USS Abraham Lincoln is positioned in the Arabian Sea outside Iran’s missile range. In addition, B-52 and B-1B bombers have intensified their flights over the Eastern Mediterranean–Gulf corridor with heavy tanker support.

Against this backdrop, Trump’s move toward an “indefinite ceasefire” is striking.

The blockade decision is shaped not only by Iran maintaining the initiative and refusing negotiations, but also by military, economic, and political constraints.

Iran is already prepared for war. By keeping the Strait of Hormuz card open, it aims to push back US presence in the Gulf, force Israel into ceasefires on surrounding fronts – especially Lebanon – and establish a long-term balance that prevents future threats. Iran understands that every concession to the US or Israel returns later as greater military pressure.

At the same time, Washington faces serious constraints.

Despite claims by Donald Trump that stockpiles have been replenished, open sources indicate that precision munitions such as JASSMs, Tomahawks, and SM-3s are under significant strain, with limited ability to quickly restore capacity.

Even recent operational setbacks, including a costly air rescue mission involving multiple aircraft for one pilot, have drawn domestic criticism.

Trump needs a success narrative – but there is none. Claims of “20,000 targets hit” contrast with a far less decisive reality.

Instead, symbolic actions are highlighted, such as the USS Spruance intercepting a container ship after prolonged pursuit, presented more as spectacle than strategy.

However, these measures lack strategic effect. A blockade over such a vast maritime space cannot be decisive, and imposing it during a ceasefire is inherently contradictory, undermining de-escalation.

As long as the blockade continues and the Strait of Hormuz remains disrupted, the crisis will expand beyond the region, turning energy disruption into systemic global pressure.

 

[Mahmoud Ahmadinejad]

South Asia has turned against the American aggressors


Pakistan has garnered headlines for mediating peace talks between the United States and Iran, but what has received less attention is how much Islamabad needs the war to end.

Pakistan imports 80% of its energy from the Gulf.

The conflict in the Middle East sent petrol and diesel prices in Pakistan to record highs.

As a result, Islamabad instituted a four-day workweek for government offices, ordered half its federal staff to work from home, shuttered schools for two weeks, and asked cabinet ministers to forgo two months of salary.

Meanwhile, Pakistan was forced to turn to Saudi Arabia for a $3bn bailout as it struggles to service debt payments and liquidity commitments made to the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

Pakistan’s woes are reflected across South Asia.

Bangladesh, which imports 95% of its energy needs and holds less than a month’s worth of reserves, has imposed daily limits on fuel sales amid panic buying. Dhaka shut universities and ordered shopping centres to close by 8 in the evening. Local prices for liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), which is used widely from cooking to powering rickshaws, are up by nearly half since the start of the conflict. For a garment worker earning the equivalent of $4 a day, a 50% rise in the price of cooking gas translates to painful daily sacrifices.

Sri Lanka, too, has moved to a four-day workweek. In Nepal, transport strikes have driven up the price of rice and vegetables in a country where rural households already spend more than half of their income on food.

Even Bhutan, the self-proclaimed happiest nation in the world, has long queues at its gas stations.

 

[Mahmoud Ahmadinejad]

"Some plan": Iran's envoy accuses US of thwarting formal security mechanism for Strait of Hormuz


In a sharp critique of Western maritime policy, Dr Mohammad Hossein Ziyaeenia, the Deputy Representative of the Supreme Leader of Iran in India, has accused the United States of deliberately rejecting a proposed structured framework for security in the Strait of Hormuz.

Speaking with ANI on Tuesday, Ziyaeenia suggested that Washington's opposition to a formal transit mechanism hints at a plan to maintain instability rather than foster global trade security.

Ziyaeenia emphasised that Iran has actively proposed a sovereign maritime framework to ensure the safe passage of goods through the strategic waterway, a chokepoint vital for energy markets in Asia and Europe. He questioned why a global power like the US would oppose such an order.

"So Iran is suggesting this mechanism. But they say no, there should be no mechanism. Why? Are they against the order? The issue is what they want; they have some plan. So they understood that their plan would not work with this, so they said that the Strait of Hormuz should be blocked," the Deputy Representative said.

Addressing long-standing allegations that Tehran is responsible for maritime harassment and blockades, the Deputy Representative turned the narrative back on the US Navy. He argued that Iran, as a regional power, has the most to lose from a closed Strait.

"We need this Strait of Hormuz; the people in the region need this Strait of Hormuz, and the people in the world need this Strait of Hormuz. So we are all responsible for this, to put pressure on those countries that are putting a blockade on this Strait and to make it open," he added.

Ziyaeenia noted that Iran relies on the waterway for its own economic survival, making a blockade counterintuitive.

"First of all, we have to consider that no one is benefiting from the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. Because we are living in this region, and our benefit is that the Strait of Hormuz remains open, and because this is also the way and the path that we require," he said.

He also addressed allegations that Iran was responsible for initiating disruptions in the waterway, rejecting claims made by external actors.

"The US Navy is saying that we are the ones who have put a blockade on the Strait of Hormuz, right? So if it is like that and they want to shoot at the ships, you have seen that they have shot, they have targeted our ships," the Deputy Representative added.

He suggested that incidents during periods of conflict are often misattributed to Iran.

"So now this is the possibility that when the ships come, because the situation is a war situation, someone would target them and then attribute it to the Islamic Republic of Iran," he said, adding that Iran has consistently denied involvement in such incidents.

When asked whether he was implying false flag operations, he responded, "Yes, definitely. Because we saw it. During the war, it happened not a single time but more than four or five times."

The Deputy Representative concluded by framing the security of the Strait as a collective global responsibility. He urged the international community to shift its pressure toward those actually obstructing the waterway.

 

[serenity]

The world is paying the price for America’s war​

Conflict with Iran hurts American wallets, but it’s far more devastating for people in the global south.

There’s little doubt that the standoff between the United States and Iran imposes economic costs on Americans.

The price at the pump is up by more than a third since the start of the war, and economists project inflation rising and growth slowing.

According to a recent poll by Ipsos, six out of 10 Americans disapprove of the conflict, and a majority believe US military action in Iran will have a negative impact on their personal financial situations. (Only 1% believe the war will have a positive impact on personal finances, and less than a quarter of Americans surveyed think the conflict has been worth it.)

Meanwhile, a poll conducted across six countries in the global south shows seven out of 10 respondents “very concerned” about the cost of living.

The heightened sensitivity to events in the Gulf can be explained in part by the fact that, unlike the United States, a majority of the world’s nearly 200 countries are net importers of energy.

Asia, in particular, accounts for 40% of the world’s energy demand, making its countries particularly sensitive to price shocks.

Developing economies often lack the fiscal room to subsidize energy for their citizens, who in any case earn far less than Americans do and disproportionately suffer when energy prices spike. Additionally, just as a strong dollar helps American importers, it hurts countries that have to spend more rupees or pesos to buy commodities traded in US dollars.

The oil-rich Gulf economies are usually well-positioned to navigate a global economic shock, but they are, of course, particularly mired in the current conflict. In contrast, the US is geographically blessed with no adversaries nearby. Put together, Washington’s unique advantages mean that its citizens have so far suffered less than most other people around the world.

YOu want to understand the secret force behind Karma?

Humanity uses old world traditions to govern new world order every generation gap the human population was never same ancestors lived twice conceived since inception of ancestral lineages progressing forward one lifetime at a time daily here.

That rhythm is the results of a universal perpetual balancing between all movements proportionately displaced specifically here going on now.

not in 7 days a week mentality. This applies to each molecular characteristics of the chemical chart of molecular results of combined atoms sustaining universal positions in plain sight by combined chromosomes of ancestral lineages native to one universal lcoation.

Prime working example this planet by personal experience of each reproduction still specifically evolving one at a time forward now. Iran is as guilty as America ignoring the natural outcomes happening here.

Zero sum gain evolution and the current total sum left so far.
Your choice to continue following social consensus or be honest about all you were since conception because realities of humanity are completely corrupting each ancestor added to the species 24/7 employing relative time theology for their respective God and country.