The conflict with Iran, conducted by Israel and the United States in a manner that violates every legal and moral norm, already appears lost. The consequences are preordained: Western hegemony belongs to the past, the fate of the EU and NATO hangs by a thread, West Asia will acquire new masters, and Iran, as one of the world's oldest states, will reclaim its rightful role. Peter Hanseler, an analyst for Forum Geopolitica, analyzes the final outcome, which he considers predictable as the power balance and the endurance of those involved are evident. The only variable is how deep the bloodshed required to achieve this result will be.
The South takes over West Asia
A year ago, Hanseler predicted in a series of articles that the power transition from the West to the Global South would be bloody and long. He did not, however, foresee that the US would invade Iran not once, but twice during diplomatic negotiations, violating both American and international law. Scott Ritter and other analysts have already pointed out the arrogance and lack of restraint of the US, which proved particularly dangerous with the repeated attacks following the summer of 2025.
Iran's capacity for endurance and counterattack
Iran possesses both passive and active military capabilities that exceed those of the US and Israel. Passive capacity: The endurance of pain and death. Iranian Foreign Minister Araghchi states: "We are not afraid of death." Conversely, Western societies view death as the ultimate evil. Geographic advantage: Iran is 67 times larger than Israel, making any attack more dispersed and difficult to be catastrophic for the entire country. On an active level, the Iranian missiles and drones initially deployed have been replaced by more powerful, modern missiles—fewer in number but with vast destructive capacity. The attack on Iran's infrastructure is serious, but the dispersal of facilities allows Tehran to withstand the strikes, whereas Israel has limited infrastructure and vital ports that have already sustained hits. Reports suggest Israelis are abandoning the territory, leaving behind cities and infrastructure, while wealthier citizens flee en masse, undermining the country's internal cohesion.
Risk of escalation
Hanseler notes that the US and Israel have limited options for escalation: American aircraft carriers are under constant attack and must maintain a safety distance of approximately 1,000 km. Most US bases in the Gulf have been destroyed. Losses of F-16, F-18, F-35, and A-10 fighters, as well as helicopters, are mounting, while more tankers and AWACS are being destroyed. In contrast, Iran maintains the capacity for a precise and devastating counter-offensive. The Israeli invasion of Lebanon has failed, with Hezbollah inflicting serious losses on Israeli tanks, mirroring the events of 2006.
Reaction of populations and anti-Israelism
The Israeli government has moved toward measures including the death penalty for Palestinians, which analysts describe as the legalization of genocide. Public opinion in the country, according to journalist Gideon Levy, supports this policy at a rate of 93%. Hanseler points out that the West, through its media and politicians, largely supports these policies, fueling anti-Israelism and, inevitably, antisemitism.
Media and international perception
Roger Köppel, director of Weltwoche, has expressed public support for Israel's choices, calling the Iranian government a "mullah regime," downplaying the capabilities and education of Iranian leaders. This media stance demonstrates support for Western strategy and a complete absence of a critical approach.
Potential American ground operation
The possibility of a US ground operation is considered high-risk: experienced analysts warn that American forces already in the Middle East will be destroyed in the event of an attack. Recent changes in US military leadership by Pete Hegseth, which included the abrupt dismissal of several generals, are seen as a likely sign of an attempt to force obedient officers into a "suicide mission."
European participation
Europe, according to Hanseler, is in a state of geopolitical weakness and allies itself with whoever can support its security, even with dangerous figures like Ahmed al-Sharaa (also known as Abu Mohammad al-Julani). The reception by European leaders such as Friedrich Merz, Emmanuel Macron, Keir Starmer, and King Charles shows the intense anxiety and panic in European capitals.
Shift in power
Hanseler concludes that the power shift in West Asia is inevitable, with the Global South gaining ground. The scale of the bloodshed depends on the decisions of the US and Israel and their escalation capabilities, while the involvement of other powers, such as China, may affect the duration and intensity of the conflict. The fate of Israel as a state is uncertain, while the potential revival of Palestine could allow for the peaceful coexistence of Muslims and Jews after the clearing of extremist Zionists, according to the analyst.
Pentagon buried simulation that "saw" defeat by Iran with 20,000 dead
While US President Donald Trump constantly proclaims that Iran has been "decimated," the reality on the battlefield spectacularly contradicts Washington's propaganda narrative. A US Air Force F-15E Strike Eagle was shot down over Iranian territory in Khuzestan province, in an incident that may prove to be a turning point in the war. This event is not just another episode of an escalating conflict; it is a powerful symbol of the shifting balance of power in the Middle East. For decades, American military superiority was presented as almost indisputable. However, the downing of one of the most advanced American fighters by Iranian air defenses showed that this narrative is beginning to collapse. At the same time, news that the Pentagon ignored a classified document from a military think tank—which, based on a war simulation, warned of a catastrophic defeat in a war with Iran—is causing a real earthquake in American society. It was based on a series of parameters and focused on the fact that the US had not faced a militarily strong opponent in the last 27 years.
Bombshell revelation: Pentagon ignored war simulations that warned of defeat – Buried the loss
A real earthquake is shaking the US following the revelation that the Pentagon ignored a specific, classified war simulation warning of a catastrophic defeat in a confrontation with Iran. This specific simulation was conducted a few months ago and reached a clear conclusion: do not venture into a war with Iran; defeat will follow. Specifically, it categorically ruled out ground military action, as it predicted a literal bloodbath. In fact, the most shocking simulation predicted a defeat with 20,000 dead. It is worth noting that many war simulations in the United States had already warned of the danger. Military think tanks and Pentagon agencies reached similar conclusions: a war against Iran could prove catastrophic.
The reasons are manifold:
-
Iran possesses a vast missile stockpile.
-
US bases in the Persian Gulf are vulnerable.
-
Amphibious operations would be under constant threat.
Simulations showed that US landing forces could face massive strikes from missiles and drones. Simply put, an invasion of Iran would be unlike any of the campaigns the US has carried out in the last 30 years.
Millennium Challenge: The most famous "defeat" of the US in a simulation
The most well-known military exercise was Millennium Challenge, one of the largest and most expensive war simulations in United States history.
-
Cost: approximately $250 million
-
Participation: approximately 13,500 military personnel
-
Purpose: to simulate war against a Middle Eastern state with characteristics similar to Iran.
In the simulation:
-
The "Red Team" (the opponent representing Iran)
-
Used asymmetric tactics and simple communications instead of satellite systems.
The result was stunning:
-
16 American warships were destroyed
-
Approximately 20,000 US soldiers were simulated dead within minutes.
The exercise was considered so shocking that the scenario was restarted with restrictions on the opponent to allow the testing to continue. This exercise is used to this day as an example of how dangerous a conflict can be in an environment where Iran utilizes missiles, speedboats, drones, and saturation attacks.
Modern simulations for war in the Persian Gulf
In recent years, many think tanks (such as the Center for Strategic and International Studies) have conducted simulations for a potential conflict. The key findings are repetitive: the war would not be short. Simulations show that even if the US wins the initial air battles, the conflict could turn into a prolonged war of attrition.
The reasons:
-
The size of the country
-
The difficult geographic terrain
-
The existence of large urban centers
-
Losses could be high
In ground invasion scenarios:
-
Intense urban combat is predicted
-
Use of IEDs, ambushes, and guerrilla warfare. This means an invasion could turn into a long-term occupation with heavy casualties.
The moment the myth of "aerial omnipotence" collapsed
The F-15E carried two crew members. One was rescued by a Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR) operation, while the fate of the second remains a real thriller, with both warring sides claiming to have him. American forces conducted search operations under extremely dangerous conditions as Iranian forces and local groups mobilized to locate the pilot. The fact that such an incident occurred so shortly after Donald Trump's triumphant statements has immense symbolic significance. American rhetoric of "overwhelming victory" stands in stark contrast to developments in the field. The downing of an F-15E is no simple matter. It is one of the most advanced multi-role fighters in the world, designed to survive even in hostile environments. Yet, when faced with a determined and well-prepared Iranian air defense system, the result was clear: the aircraft was destroyed. This image raises serious questions about whether the American military machine is truly ready to face a strong, technologically capable opponent.
A war the US was not used to
The last time the United States faced a serious threat to its air sovereignty was in 1999 during the Kosovo War, when Serbian air defenses shot down an F-117 stealth and an F-16. Since then, the military reality for the US has been entirely different. Operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, and the war against ISIS were conducted in environments where opponents lacked effective air defense systems. In other words, American forces fought for years in wars where air superiority was taken for granted. Iran, however, is not Afghanistan or 2003 Iraq.
The Iranian military strategy is based on a multi-layered defense network:
-
Advanced air defense systems
-
Long-range missiles
-
Drones
-
Asymmetric tactics
The result is a battlefield in which even the most advanced air forces can suffer serious losses. The downing of the F-15E was a powerful reminder that war against a state like Iran cannot be approached with the arrogance that characterized American operations of recent decades.
Unprecedented military crisis in Washington
The situation is becoming even more dramatic due to the internal crisis in the American military leadership. US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth proceeded with an extensive "purge" in the top command of the armed forces. Among the officers removed were Army Chief Randy George, General David Hodne, and General William Green. The removal of these top commanders during wartime is extremely unusual. Even more concerning is that it appears related to disagreements over plans for a potential ground invasion of Iran. Reportedly, Randy George had expressed serious reservations about the plan. The reasons were obvious: massive economic cost, high risk of heavy casualties, and strategic uncertainty. Instead of taking these warnings into account, the political leadership chose to replace the generals with figures considered more "loyal" to the political vision of Donald Trump. This development has caused intense concern about the politicization of the military of the United States.
Iran shows strategic composure
On the other hand, Iran appears to be operating with greater strategic cohesion. The Iranian armed forces have demonstrated effective use of missiles, flexible use of drones, and strong air defense, while managing to exert maximum psychological pressure on the opponent. The downing of the F-15E was not just a military event; it was also a communicative victory. The Speaker of the Iranian Parliament, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, did not hesitate to publicly mock the incident on social media, presenting it as proof that American power is not invincible. In a war where psychology plays a huge role, such moves can have a major impact.
The beginning of a new geopolitical reality
The downing of an American fighter over Iran may prove to be much more than an isolated incident. It is a symbol of a deeper change. For decades, the military power of the United States was presented as almost absolute. But the world has changed. States like Iran have invested in technologies and strategies that can challenge this superiority. The result is that future conflicts will be much more dangerous for the great powers.
Washington's dilemma
Washington now faces a difficult dilemma: to escalate the war or seek a diplomatic exit. If the missing pilot is indeed in Iranian hands, pressure for negotiations will increase dramatically. And then the image that will remain in history may be this: not the image of a superpower imposing itself, but of a power forced to reckon with the limits of its strength.
Turning point in the war – Myth of American omnipotence collapses
The downing of the American F-15E and the potential capture of the pilot mark a critical moment in the war. Iran showed it can resist one of the world's strongest military forces, while the United States now faces not only an external opponent but also internal political and strategic crises. The actual outcome of the conflict remains uncertain. One thing, however, seems increasingly clear: the myth of absolute American military dominance has begun to crack.
www.bankingnews.gr
Readers’ Comments