So essentially, over the years other countries have learned that U.S. leaders & diplomats are a bunch of bullies / liars with no integrity / shitweasel opportunists with big guns, a lot of planes & nuclear weapons (which we've proven we were willing to use once-upon-a-time.) So now, they don't trust us. What a surprise!!!
Credibility is cumulative...and once a country burns through enough of it...the rest of the world starts interpreting every move through THAT lens.
A lot of what we’re watching now...is the long tail of that reputational damage.
When power gets used selectively...rules get preached but not followed...and “principles” seem to shift with convenience....trust collapses...and goes all to shit.
Once that happens...even legitimate diplomacy....gets filtered through BS detector.
That doesn’t mean EVERY U.S. official, action...or alliance is identical. But...your larger point is dead-on: countries REMEMBER hypocrisy...coercion...and double standards.
Jack has identified the psychological mechanism. Let me name the historical one.
What he describes has a name: escalation dominance failure. It is how wars begin that no one intended to fight.
August 1914 is the cleanest example. Every major power believed pressure would produce a short, manageable conflict. Each escalation was meant to signal resolve. The system ran itself anyway. Four years. Industrial slaughter. No one intended it. Everyone enabled it.
Jack is right that neither side believes backing down is an option. That is always the tell. When political survival and national survival become the same calculation, the space for rational decision-making disappears. Not because leaders are irrational. Because the incentive structure makes rationality indistinguishable from surrender.
One word is missing from the analysis: legitimacy. Trump does not seek a deal. He seeks a demonstration. Demonstrations do not end. They escalate until they produce an image strong enough to declare victory — or until the costs become impossible to conceal.
The P.S. is correct. This is a perception problem. And the side that controls perception in an escalation loop is rarely the side that fired first. It is the side that best defines what firing first meant.
Afghanistan managed through 10 years of Russian aggression and then 20 years of our "intervention". Iran is a far more cohesive entity. And Trump just might be stupid enough to think a "limited" nuclear attack will be just the ticket. Enter a real possibility of WWIII if he is that stupid. And since he is surrounded with fealty, it's difficult to find someone who might be the adult in the room.
Afghanistan’s fragmentation vs. Iran’s cohesion changes the ENTIRE risk profile.
You also nailed it about assuming “limited” actions will stay limited, being one of the most dangerous miscalculations leaders can make.
Where your point really lands is on decision-making environment:
When DISSENT gets filtered out....and only reinforcing voices remain...the margin for error shrinks fast. That’s when risk isn’t just about capability...it’s about judgment UNDER PRESSURE.
Yes, you are correct, Jack. They are differing structures. But I think the common thread here is a severe miscalculation of the complexity of the environments, despite their differences. I like your comparison "fragmentation vs. cohesion". That is also a fair comparison of us vs. Iran (we being the fragmented).
And yes, Trump and his team of misfits severely lack anything close to appropriate judgement, and the sycophants lack the courage and sense of responsibility to challenge the schoolyard bully. There was not adequate planning (rather obvious). So like the tariff "war", we are watching a tennis match, but with a far heavier human and economic toll.
One of the most interesting courses I ever took was on negotiation. Conflict is not inherently bad; indeed it is a fundamental part of life. Good negotiation skills let you navigate conflict such that the pie becomes larger and all parties can get some, if not all, of what they want. Trump sees a zero sum game where he wins if the other side loses. Negotiation requires being able to put yourself in the other side's shoes so you can understand their underlying motivations, not just the positions being proffered. Donald Trump does not have the capacity for empathy. He only knows how to browbeat and bully people into submission. Sadly this approach is revered as being what "real men" do in this country. The result, as you laid out so clearly, is that we have entered into a predictable cycle of escalation.
You’re getting at something so many people miss: the difference between positions...and underlying interests.
When someone treats everything as zero-sum...they never even look for ways to expand the pie...so conflict just HARDENS...instead of evolving.
Without the ability (or willingness)...to see how the other side is thinking...negotiation turns into PRESSURE...not strategy.
That last point you made is especially important...the CULTURAL piece. When force gets mistaken for strength...it reinforces exactly the kind of escalation cycle you’re describing.
Trump has always treated his businesses as transactional, performative, and with strong arming inflexibility. His flunkies continue to praise him instead of truthfully telling him such tactics that worked in his business transactions to do not transfer in the same manner as in global military conflicts. Other sovereign leaders do not think like him, and he doesn’t realize it in order adjust his messaging to them.
You’re seeing the core mismatch: what works in a closed...controlled business environment does NOT translate to a world of independent actors...with their own power... history...and incentives.
When no one around him corrects that...when it’s all REINFORCEMENT instead of reality...you end up with strategies that assume everyone else will respond the same way.
They DON'T. They WON'T. And that gap is where things start to break down fast!
You’re pointing out a level of rigidity where it’s not JUST misreading situations...but an inability to step outside of a fixed internal narrative.
When someone operates from THAT kind of closed loop...it’s not just about getting facts wrong; it’s about not having the self-reflection needed to adjust in real time.
That’s when decisions stop being adaptive...and start becoming locked-in...regardless of changing reality.
Trump was not an unknown quarantine. My previous association with a large religious bloc responsible for his election, supporting Armageddon demonstrates THIS IS NOT NEW.
I saw a similar pattern at a meeting in Dallas at the SMU Heritage Foundation.
Nice addition, Dr. Black. That perspective adds an important layer. What you’re pointing to isn’t something that suddenly appeared...it’s a set of beliefs...incentives... and alliances that have been building and reinforcing each other for a LONG time.
Excellent points throughout. I'm reminded of Deep Throat's words to Bob Woodward: "You've got to remember: these are not very smart guys. And things got out of hand." Except what's worse is that these are not very smart guys...only, they think they are very smart guys. So things are only going to get more "out of hand".
My thoughts are simple. More dead American soldiers. Moms, dads, sons, daughters, nieces, nephews, cousins, grandchildren, neighbors. All those lives soon to be gone, because of ignorant, unstable, weak men.
Jack everything you say is true about drumpf. And there are no real people in the room to be guardrails. I watched a substack by Walter rhein with a nuclear physicist Robert Danna that worked for the government that did a talk with one of the writers I follow and it was truly fascinating. HE went in to the deep chemistry about making a uranium bomb and he explained in great simple detail why Iran was not anywhere near able to build a bomb. I know you like science so you. This is going to get scaryier as drumpf becomes more unhinged...
Jack, the more you explain the structure, patterns and now the psychology in this whole mess…. the more I understand my bodily reaction when the initial bombing started. It knew…. that this ultimately was not going to be good….. that a Pandora’s box of sorts was unleashed….. and he had no clue what he was walking us into or how to fix it.
Iran has existed for way longer than the US, has an entrenched culture and the leaders are not dumb. It appears they understand pattern very well. How this ends…..? I wish I had a really positive feeling around it and I just don’t. I’m not doom & gloom, I simply don’t know how bad this is going to get. It’s unsettling.
Than you for the analysis! It is really helping me get clear.
This is an excellent description of a feedback loop cycling out of control. The next thing we need to consider (and I don't know who "we" is, exactly) is what can be done to interrupt it -- e.g., if they pull the 25th amendment on trump and get some decent antiHegseth advisors behind jdv, can the US in fact pull out without making things much worse? If we have to wait until after midterms and there's congressional muscle (what's that?) and maybe an impeachment, will that be too late?
So essentially, over the years other countries have learned that U.S. leaders & diplomats are a bunch of bullies / liars with no integrity / shitweasel opportunists with big guns, a lot of planes & nuclear weapons (which we've proven we were willing to use once-upon-a-time.) So now, they don't trust us. What a surprise!!!
Rebecca...yep!
Credibility is cumulative...and once a country burns through enough of it...the rest of the world starts interpreting every move through THAT lens.
A lot of what we’re watching now...is the long tail of that reputational damage.
When power gets used selectively...rules get preached but not followed...and “principles” seem to shift with convenience....trust collapses...and goes all to shit.
Once that happens...even legitimate diplomacy....gets filtered through BS detector.
That doesn’t mean EVERY U.S. official, action...or alliance is identical. But...your larger point is dead-on: countries REMEMBER hypocrisy...coercion...and double standards.
-Jack
We weren't named The Ugly American for nothing.
Jack has identified the psychological mechanism. Let me name the historical one.
What he describes has a name: escalation dominance failure. It is how wars begin that no one intended to fight.
August 1914 is the cleanest example. Every major power believed pressure would produce a short, manageable conflict. Each escalation was meant to signal resolve. The system ran itself anyway. Four years. Industrial slaughter. No one intended it. Everyone enabled it.
Jack is right that neither side believes backing down is an option. That is always the tell. When political survival and national survival become the same calculation, the space for rational decision-making disappears. Not because leaders are irrational. Because the incentive structure makes rationality indistinguishable from surrender.
One word is missing from the analysis: legitimacy. Trump does not seek a deal. He seeks a demonstration. Demonstrations do not end. They escalate until they produce an image strong enough to declare victory — or until the costs become impossible to conceal.
The P.S. is correct. This is a perception problem. And the side that controls perception in an escalation loop is rarely the side that fired first. It is the side that best defines what firing first meant.
#HOLDFAST
Jane...that distinction...who controls the meaning of the first move...is where this whole thing actually gets decided.
Most people think escalation is about actions.
It’s not.
It’s about INTERPRETATION.
Once one side successfully frames WHY something happened…everything that follows ...starts to feel justified...even when it ISN'T.
That’s how these cycles gain momentum...without most people realizing what’s happening...in real time.
#HOLDFAST
-Jack
Afghanistan managed through 10 years of Russian aggression and then 20 years of our "intervention". Iran is a far more cohesive entity. And Trump just might be stupid enough to think a "limited" nuclear attack will be just the ticket. Enter a real possibility of WWIII if he is that stupid. And since he is surrounded with fealty, it's difficult to find someone who might be the adult in the room.
SGR...you’re drawing a damn sharp distinction!
Afghanistan’s fragmentation vs. Iran’s cohesion changes the ENTIRE risk profile.
You also nailed it about assuming “limited” actions will stay limited, being one of the most dangerous miscalculations leaders can make.
Where your point really lands is on decision-making environment:
When DISSENT gets filtered out....and only reinforcing voices remain...the margin for error shrinks fast. That’s when risk isn’t just about capability...it’s about judgment UNDER PRESSURE.
-Jack
Yes, you are correct, Jack. They are differing structures. But I think the common thread here is a severe miscalculation of the complexity of the environments, despite their differences. I like your comparison "fragmentation vs. cohesion". That is also a fair comparison of us vs. Iran (we being the fragmented).
And yes, Trump and his team of misfits severely lack anything close to appropriate judgement, and the sycophants lack the courage and sense of responsibility to challenge the schoolyard bully. There was not adequate planning (rather obvious). So like the tariff "war", we are watching a tennis match, but with a far heavier human and economic toll.
Thank you for the correction and making us think.
One of the most interesting courses I ever took was on negotiation. Conflict is not inherently bad; indeed it is a fundamental part of life. Good negotiation skills let you navigate conflict such that the pie becomes larger and all parties can get some, if not all, of what they want. Trump sees a zero sum game where he wins if the other side loses. Negotiation requires being able to put yourself in the other side's shoes so you can understand their underlying motivations, not just the positions being proffered. Donald Trump does not have the capacity for empathy. He only knows how to browbeat and bully people into submission. Sadly this approach is revered as being what "real men" do in this country. The result, as you laid out so clearly, is that we have entered into a predictable cycle of escalation.
Carol Anne...this is SUCH a sharp read.
You’re getting at something so many people miss: the difference between positions...and underlying interests.
When someone treats everything as zero-sum...they never even look for ways to expand the pie...so conflict just HARDENS...instead of evolving.
Without the ability (or willingness)...to see how the other side is thinking...negotiation turns into PRESSURE...not strategy.
That last point you made is especially important...the CULTURAL piece. When force gets mistaken for strength...it reinforces exactly the kind of escalation cycle you’re describing.
-Jack
Trump has always treated his businesses as transactional, performative, and with strong arming inflexibility. His flunkies continue to praise him instead of truthfully telling him such tactics that worked in his business transactions to do not transfer in the same manner as in global military conflicts. Other sovereign leaders do not think like him, and he doesn’t realize it in order adjust his messaging to them.
CC...exactly.
You’re seeing the core mismatch: what works in a closed...controlled business environment does NOT translate to a world of independent actors...with their own power... history...and incentives.
When no one around him corrects that...when it’s all REINFORCEMENT instead of reality...you end up with strategies that assume everyone else will respond the same way.
They DON'T. They WON'T. And that gap is where things start to break down fast!
-Jack
Very thoughtful analysis
Very precisely, easily comprehensible
Historically accurate.
Psychologically sound.
Reminds so much of last 3500 years
Dr. Black...I really appreciate that. Thank you.
That last line is exactly the lens that makes this all click: once you step back and see the long arc of history...the patterns become hard to ignore.
Different names...yes, different eras...yes… but...same underlying dynamics playing out again and again.
-Jack
I don’t believe it’s even a perception problem - Trump does not have the insight necessary to “perceive”. This is delusion
Terry..I get what you’re saying.
You’re pointing out a level of rigidity where it’s not JUST misreading situations...but an inability to step outside of a fixed internal narrative.
When someone operates from THAT kind of closed loop...it’s not just about getting facts wrong; it’s about not having the self-reflection needed to adjust in real time.
That’s when decisions stop being adaptive...and start becoming locked-in...regardless of changing reality.
-Jack
"The U.S. believes pressure creates leverage" ... I believe you meant to say "Trump believes pressure creates leverage"
Trump was not an unknown quarantine. My previous association with a large religious bloc responsible for his election, supporting Armageddon demonstrates THIS IS NOT NEW.
I saw a similar pattern at a meeting in Dallas at the SMU Heritage Foundation.
They've always loved this. T
Nice addition, Dr. Black. That perspective adds an important layer. What you’re pointing to isn’t something that suddenly appeared...it’s a set of beliefs...incentives... and alliances that have been building and reinforcing each other for a LONG time.
-Jack
Thank you! It's the SILENCE. Turning their anger on themselves. I don’t know how to go further on that
Ha...yes, CLF...that is a better match. Point taken!
-Jack
Excellent points throughout. I'm reminded of Deep Throat's words to Bob Woodward: "You've got to remember: these are not very smart guys. And things got out of hand." Except what's worse is that these are not very smart guys...only, they think they are very smart guys. So things are only going to get more "out of hand".
My thoughts are simple. More dead American soldiers. Moms, dads, sons, daughters, nieces, nephews, cousins, grandchildren, neighbors. All those lives soon to be gone, because of ignorant, unstable, weak men.
Jack everything you say is true about drumpf. And there are no real people in the room to be guardrails. I watched a substack by Walter rhein with a nuclear physicist Robert Danna that worked for the government that did a talk with one of the writers I follow and it was truly fascinating. HE went in to the deep chemistry about making a uranium bomb and he explained in great simple detail why Iran was not anywhere near able to build a bomb. I know you like science so you. This is going to get scaryier as drumpf becomes more unhinged...
#HOLDFAST
Teri
The only way this stalemate truly ends is when Cheetolini takes a dirt nap or is removed from office and exposed for crimes committed...
Jack you got us paying attention. # HOLDFAST
Jack, the more you explain the structure, patterns and now the psychology in this whole mess…. the more I understand my bodily reaction when the initial bombing started. It knew…. that this ultimately was not going to be good….. that a Pandora’s box of sorts was unleashed….. and he had no clue what he was walking us into or how to fix it.
Iran has existed for way longer than the US, has an entrenched culture and the leaders are not dumb. It appears they understand pattern very well. How this ends…..? I wish I had a really positive feeling around it and I just don’t. I’m not doom & gloom, I simply don’t know how bad this is going to get. It’s unsettling.
Than you for the analysis! It is really helping me get clear.
This is an excellent description of a feedback loop cycling out of control. The next thing we need to consider (and I don't know who "we" is, exactly) is what can be done to interrupt it -- e.g., if they pull the 25th amendment on trump and get some decent antiHegseth advisors behind jdv, can the US in fact pull out without making things much worse? If we have to wait until after midterms and there's congressional muscle (what's that?) and maybe an impeachment, will that be too late?
Even trump's pressure is weak. Iran didn't have to do anything to get sanctions on oil lifted (even if they can't ship that much oil right now).