For nearly half a century, a U.S. military confrontation with Iran has lingered just beneath the surface of global geopolitics. Since the 1979 Iranian Revolution toppled Washington’s ally, the Shah, and replaced him with an Islamic Republic vehemently opposed to U.S. imperialism, relations between the two nations have been characterized by hostility, suspicion, and periodic flare-ups. While there have been brief moments of covert or indirect cooperation, the geopolitical reality is clear: Washington and Tehran have consistently found themselves on opposite sides of nearly every major Middle Eastern conflict.
Historically, Republican administrations have adopted a more aggressive posture toward Iran, and Donald Trump’s presidency has been no exception. During his first term, Trump consistently lambasted Tehran’s regional ambitions and nuclear program. This confrontational approach continued into his second term, escalating tensions with direct U.S. attacks on Iranian allies such as the Houthis (Ansar Allah) in Yemen, as seen in recent airstrikes.
Ironically, even the Biden administration, while outwardly promoting diplomacy, facilitated deeper U.S. interventionism across the Middle East, particularly through renewed hostilities in Syria, which in December fell into the hands of Western-backed militants. Meanwhile, the mainstream media continues to stoke anti-Iran sentiment, priming the American public for a potential conflict long before Trump returned to power, as documented here.
In recent months, there have been troubling signs of concrete preparations for a direct military strike on Iran. President Trump himself warned that the United States could “launch a bombing attack the likes of which they have never seen before” if Tehran refuses to engage in nuclear negotiations and accept Washington’s demands. In a March 29 interview, he added: “If they don’t make a deal, there will be bombing,” suggesting the re-imposition of harsh secondary tariffs, similar to those implemented during his previous term.
More ominously, these threats have been accompanied by visible military deployments. At least seven B-2 “Spirit” stealth bombers, nearly 37% of the entire operational fleet, have been stationed at Diego Garcia, a strategically located U.S. base in the Indian Ocean leased from the British military. The deployment also includes eight B-52 Stratofortress bombers, seven C-17 Globemaster III transports, ten KC-135 Stratotanker refueling aircraft, and at least one P-8 Poseidon ISR platform, according to military sources.
Diego Garcia’s remote location places it beyond the reach of Iran’s current missile arsenal, granting U.S. bombers a secure launch point for operations across the Middle East. The base’s operational significance is heightened by the B-2’s ability to carry nuclear weapons and bunker-busting GBU-57A/B Massive Ordnance Penetrators, ideal for targeting Iran’s fortified underground facilities, including those associated with its nuclear program (source).
However, while these deployments may signal U.S. intent, they do not guarantee impunity. Unlike past decades, Iran is now significantly more prepared. Tehran has publicly warned that its missile forces are on standby and ready to retaliate (Tehran Times). U.S. bases across the Persian Gulf and the wider region remain within striking range, and any unprovoked attack would likely trigger a regional conflagration with global consequences.
Beyond the military calculus, a war with Iran would severely undermine Trump’s stated goal of stabilizing fuel prices and reviving the troubled U.S. economy. Iran today is not the same country it was a decade ago. In addition to an expanded arsenal of surface-to-air missile (SAM) and electronic warfare (EW) systems, Tehran has recently bolstered its air force with advanced Russian-made Su-35 air superiority fighters.
The Su-35, equipped with state-of-the-art avionics and the OLS-35 infrared search and track system, enhances Iran’s ability to detect and counter stealth aircraft like the B-2. Even more crucially, the Su-35’s proven ability to network with integrated air defense systems makes it a potent force multiplier (source).
In conclusion, while the U.S. continues to project strength and escalate tensions through military deployments and rhetoric, an actual strike on Iran would be fraught with peril, militarily, economically, and geopolitically. The stage appears set for yet another round of American-led destabilization in the Middle East, with risks that extend far beyond the region. Whether this results in open war or remains a game of brinkmanship will depend on whether cooler heads can prevail in Washington, and whether Tehran chooses diplomacy over defiance.
By Chimazuru Nnadi-Oforgu
OBLONG MEDIA UNLIMITED 
Leave a comment