Vanquished and Victors ::::: "Certainly God is not on America’s side", notes Iranian Prez's son Yousef Pezeshkian ::: Trump does not get to decide when the conflict ends; that key is perhaps with Tehran,

“Yes, we have faults. We have made mistakes. We are not infallible. But our mistakes are not at a level that justifies America and Israel in this war or makes us guilty. 

I say with certainty that God is not on America’s side," notes Iranian Prez's son Yousef Pezeshkian.

He notes that writing the diary can be hard: “Sometimes the words and thoughts I want to express become like a mosquito buzzing around my head; when I reach out to catch them, they fly away. 

This makes writing so exhausting.” 

In another entry, Pezeshkian is certain that Iran’s leaders are in the right, asking: “Which side lies? Was Iran seeking a nuclear bomb? 

Did Iran want to attack America? Did the government kill 40,000 people?” – a seeming reference to the bloody crackdown on anti-government protests in January, where death toll estimates range from the thousands to more than 35,000. “Well, when one side constantly lies, why trust them?”  

He does however address decision making over the war, reflecting debates within Iran: “What is seriously disputed is how long we should fight? For ever? Until the complete destruction of Israel and the withdrawal of the US? 

Until the complete destruction or surrender of Iran? We must review the end-of-war scenarios. Which scenario is more likely? Which one is desirable for us?”

Look what's happening in the US and around the personality called Donald Trump.  

The US President is dealing with a trickier landscape now. 

The November midterm elections loom and he is underwater in opinion polls. Americans didn’t approve of this war from the get-go and their opposition has increased as the average price of gas at the pump has risen to near $4 a gallon. 

The OECD forecast that US inflation will surge to 4.2% this year. Trump’s challenge is that his objectives are in conflict, writes Eduardo Porter in 'The Guardian'.

Of course, Trump "desperately needs" to end the war and bring the fleet home. 

"And he desperately needs to unblock the supply of oil through the strait of Hormuz, which Iran now controls," goes the article.

In Iran yet again; President's son mentions in his diary (as reported in social media widely) -- 

He expresses anger about the internet blackout imposed by the Iranian government, the censored news and gripes about his father’s apology to the Gulf states, who have been on the receiving end of Iranian missiles.

In one conversation in an empty park his friend recounts how “a few nights ago he dreamed that a missile fell near their house. The next day, he took essential supplies from the house and sent his children to their maternal grandmother’s house. Yesterday his dream came true. Their house was destroyed.” 

Sometimes the news shakes him: “From 3 o’clock, news of the martyrdom of  (a key Iranian military officer) Ali Larijani, his son, some of his deputies, and the Basij commander spread on social media. I really didn’t want to believe it. 

We must not allow the enemy to have another successful assassination. If we cannot stop the Zionists’ assassination machine, we will be defeated,” he writes. 

With Trump of course, they say the US President no longer has control of events in Iran. "He does not get to decide when the conflict ends. Markets are figuring out that that will probably be up to Tehran," runs the article in 'The Guardian'.

Oil rebounded on Tuesday and stocks gave up much of their Monday gains after Iranian officials denied the “productive conversations” Trump claimed had taken place “regarding a complete and total resolution of our hostilities”, and sent waves of missiles into Israel, Iraq and other American allies in the Gulf.  

Tehran’s incentive to back down is minimal. It probably calculates that the only way to prevent future attacks is to demonstrate how much damage it can inflict in response. 

And there is nothing the US can do about this unless it puts boots on the ground, which would raise additional political problems in Washington.

ends