Podcast

President Trump Declares War Against Iran

Darrell Castle talks about the war, declared by President Trump, against the nation of Iran. Does he have Constitutional authority to declare war; why would he do so; and what does it mean?

Transcription / Notes

PRESIDENT TRUMP DECLARES WAR AGAINST IRAN

Hello, this is Darrell Castle with today’s Castle Report. This is Friday the 6th day of March in the year of our Lord 2026. My beat is war today and war is obviously the most important story in the world right now as President Trump, unilaterally it seems, decided to make war against a nation that apparently had not harmed the U.S. and was not a threat to the U.S.

Why then did President Trump do it. I’ll give my thoughts on that but first let’s look at what he did. The U.S. spent a few months building up forces in the Middle East region while negotiating or pretending to negotiate a settlement. The U.S. demands became increasingly more difficult for the Iranians to comply with including give up the use of peaceful nuclear power except for medical purposes. Surrender all enriched uranium that you currently possess and allow international inspection. Give up all offensive missiles and drones. Cease all support for your terrorist proxies across the region. Finally, you must change your head of state and give up your oppressive theocratic government.

Well, those are some bitter pills for a sovereign country to swallow and some people believe they were designed to lure the Iranians into complacency while a serious attack was always the plan. The battle forces assembling in the region would have said to me were I head of state in Iran, prepare for serious war. I would have made defensive preparations such as moving my leadership and especially myself to a safe area. Iran didn’t do that and with the Ayatollah’s rejection of the peace proposal on Friday, he was dead within 24 hours.

Once again, the U.S. war machine and the high-tech war fighting ability of the U.S. are amazing and a demonstration for the world. Two carrier battle groups including the largest warship in the world. Two hundred fighter jets which, by the way, cost $10,000 for each hour of flight operations so if they were all in the air at once which they often were, that’s $2 million per hour. The last time I looked these figures up it cost about $25 million per day to keep a carrier battle group at sea and in-flight ops. Fifty thousand U.S. personnel, we are told, are currently engaged in combat.

Six U.S. soldiers are known dead having been killed in Kuwait from an Iranian missile or drone strike. It seems that the Iranians misread he reactions of their neighbors because they reacted by attacking everyone in the region, thus driving the entire region into a military alliance with the U.S. The U.S. at the time of this recording has launched over 2000 sorties against Iran and the Iranians have fired over 500 missiles and over 2000 drones about 10% of which get through,.  Iran attacked U.S. bases and civilian targets in countries including Israel, The Gulf Arab States, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Iraq. Only one has been fired at Turkey even though the U.S. has bases in Turkey. These figures don’t consider the Israeli attacks which were, of course supplied by the U.S. for the most part. The arrangement was apparently that Israel would attack command and control systems and assassinate personnel including the head of state while the U. S. attacked the ability of Iran to retaliate with missiles and drones.

So, does the President of the United States have the Constitutional authority to take the nation to war. My short answer is no but ever since the Korean War the U.S has held the view that as Commander-in-Chief the President can constitutionally command the military to do what he wants but that is not my view and it was not the view of the founders. Commander-in-chief means that once war is declared by congress he runs it. Our system of government does not allow one individual to put the entire population at risk by unilaterally and individually making war.

What about the War Powers Resolution passed in 1973 which gives the President authority to commit troops to battle anywhere in the world for 90 days without congressional approval. Anyway, he said he briefed the 8 leaders of congress known as the gang of 8. My opinion is that the War Powers Resolution is unconstitutional. No one seems to care anymore what that document says or what it means and very few want to be limited by its words. So, to prevent the restraint it requires, congress passed a resolution essentially amending it and as I said that is unconstitutional.

However, I admit that the resolution is what he used and even though it is misused and misapplied it gives him a pretty good argument for unlimited power. Most in congress will no longer argue that the President does not have authority to do what he has done. So, having looked at what he did now we ask why he did it.  Part of the answer was the usual i.e. the Iranians are terrible people who arrest a protester and hang him the next day. Prison guards routinely rape virgin girls who are arrested by the moral police because they believe that when they murder the girls they will be barred from heaven.

Most of the explanation he gave had to do with nuclear weapons. Although just a few months ago he “obliterated” their nuclear program they were, he said, rebuilding it. The International Atomic Energy Agency of the UN said that Iran was enriching to 60% and only nuclear armed countries did that. Iran was supplying the whole hostile world including Russia with drone and missile technology. My understanding is that Iran’s hypersonic technology came from China. There is an elephant in the room that he did not mention and that is Israel. This entire war is so obviously at the behest of Israel that I can’t understand why the U.S. is not a little humiliated by it. Netanyahu said publicly that what Israel and the U.S. are doing is something he has dreamed of doing for 40 years.

The real reason diplomacy could not work was not any of the things listed but something Marco Rubio announced to reporters on Monday.

“It was abundantly clear that if Iran came under attack by anyone, the United States or Israel, or anyone, they were going to respond and respond against the United States. We knew there was going to be an Israeli action, we knew that would precipitate an attack on American forces, and we knew that if we didn’t preemptively go after Iran before Israel launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties.”

So, if you reason this out and apply logic the reason we attacked Iran, killed many civilians, destroyed much infrastructure was that if we hadn’t our ally would have gone rogue and launched its own war thus exposing the U.S. to much higher casualties. In that sense, then operation Epic Fury was an act of self-defense, against Israel. The nation of Israel puts Israel first so I wonder why the U.S. won’t do the same.

Why won’t U.S. leaders tell our ally you launch your jets which you got from us and you will lose all American support and all-American bases in the Middle East or you can restrain your murderous impulses and remain our ally. The answer to that question probably explains the whole war but who knows the answer for sure. Maybe the answer is in the Epstein files but who knows. I know that when JFK gave Israel a firm no on their development of nuclear weapons he didn’t live long and LBJ quickly reversed his decision.

So, whatever the relationship between U.S. presidents and Israeli leaders throughout Israel’s history President Trump is inclined to listen to Bibi and neocons in America rather than his Maga base. He promised the Maga people he would not start another disastrous, stupid, pointless, and very costly Middle East war but here we are. It appears that for the second time in President Trump’s second term he used negotiations as a cover for a decision already made to go to war. Launching a military strike during negotiations could have the long-lasting effect of destroying trust in U.S. diplomacy so it’s risky.

Another reason for this that I admit is not obvious but this attack is an attack on China and Russia as well as the other BRICS. The U.S. does not want WWlll in the traditional sense because in today’s nuclear world that would result in a worldwide catastrophe with no winners, only losers. Instead, today’s war is about trade, money, commerce, etc. Who gets to run the world order of today. World orders come and go and they have throughout the centuries. In fact, the world order that emerged in 1648 formed by the Peace of Westphalia or the treaty by that name makes the most sense to me. It lasted It ended the 30 years war in which Europe was devastated and starving. It lasted from 1648 to 1803 when it was destroyed by Nepoleon. The treaty involved much of old Europe including the Holy Roman Empire and it allowed a world in which nations agreed they would stop unprovoked attacks on each other and would not assassinate each other’s leaders. It brought peace and allowed the people of Europe to prosper and be fed again.

Eventually, world orders and peace agreements always break down into violence and bloodshed. Today, the new order of the world is trying to form and it has devolved into proxy wars, economic wars, cyber wars, biological wars, sabotage wars, and information wars. Russia and China resent U.S. dominance and attempt to topple it while the U. S. will hold it by any means necessary.

In conclusion, I don’t know anything about this war for certain but I try to use logic to make the best guess possible. I know that China has stopped export of oil and gas and restricted its domestic use.  China imports 11 million barrels per day 45% of which comes through the gulf. Perhaps Chinese tankers could buy the new U.S. provided insurance thus bypassing Lloyds of London which has run shipping for over 100 years. Could that result in a new U.S., China, Russia alliance, who knows.

Finally, folks, I close with the words of Ron Paul now 90 years old but as wise as ever. “Here’s a plan: End this today. Return the destroyed U.S. bases to the countries where they are located. And just come home. That is what a real “America First” movement looks like.”

At least that’s the way I see it,

Until next time folks,

This is Darrell Castle,

Thanks for listening.

3 Comments

  • Jonathan Robert Taub

    trying to find a glass half full scenario I would say if they can get iran to trade in petro dollars that might do something for inflation and actually be good for russia since china would need to get all its oil from russia or pay full price in dollars….not good for BRICS but good for russia

    if they cannot get iran to trade in petro dollars i guess its another trillion dollars gone and more money printing and more inflation

    Trump made good on his campaign promise to not allow iran to get nukes when he destroyed their facilities with the bunker busters so he had a “get out of this war for free card” which he chose not to do….the optics do not look good….

  • Jonathan Robert Taub

    I got the following from abatehate.com….I do not know if this is true or not?…if it IS true very disturbing seems like this war does not make as much sense in the context IF this is true?…I do realize people CAN twist numbers but my gut feeling is that this is true.

    Blacks are deadlier than terrorists by a wide margin

    In America, Blacks kill three to five times more people than terrorists do—and that count only includes White victims of Blacks, but all terrorist victims.

    I sat down at my computer, intent on doing my nightly search of black-on-white (and white-on-black) homicides, when I came across a meme that read, “White men with guns are America’s biggest terrorists.” The image included contradicting statistics and an inset photo of Stefan Molyneux. Not that I would dare question Molyneux, I still wanted to fact-check the meme.

    I discovered that Blacks commit 13.75 firearm homicides for every one committed by Whites per 100,000. That prompted digging deaper and the outcome is below.

    Summary: Black Americans face homicide victimization rates over six times higher than White Americans, according to recent federal statistics.

    Similar patterns hold for homicide perpetrators.

    In 2023, the overall U.S. homicide rate was 5.9 per 100,000 residents, but Black individuals experienced 21.3 per 100,000—compared to 3.2 for Whites—while firearm homicides showed even starker gaps in prior CDC data.

    If only Whites lived in America, the homicide rate would almost be cut in half, from 5.9 to 3.2 per 100,000 residents. The violent crime rate would likely reflect that cut. Allow East Asians and Pacific Islanders to live among us, and the violent crime rate would nudge a bit lower.

    Black victims accounted for over half of known cases in recent years, despite comprising about 14% of the population. Most incidents remain intra-racial, yet public views often misalign with these realities due to media focus on the small number of white-on-black homicides.

    Homicides rose sharply during the pandemic but have since declined notably through 2024, reports say.

    Victim rates

    Stark racial disparities persist in U.S. homicide victimization and perpetration rates, with Black Americans experiencing risks several times higher than those of White Americans, federal data indicates, underscoring a gap between actual threats and common public views on crime dangers.

    According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the overall homicide victimization rate stood at 5.9 per 100,000 U.S. residents in 2023. Black individuals faced a rate of 21.3 per 100,000, more than six times the 3.2 rate for White individuals. Rates for other groups included 1.4 for Asians, 4.2 for American Indians or Alaska Natives, and 6.5 for Native Hawaiians or Other Pacific Islanders.

    Perpetrator rates

    Similar patterns hold for homicide perpetrators.

    These patterns have evolved over recent years. Homicide rates climbed sharply from 2019 to 2021 amid the COVID-19 pandemic, peaking at levels not seen in decades, the CDC reported. For Black Americans, the firearm homicide rate jumped from 20.5 per 100,000 in 2019 to 30.4 in 2021 before easing to 27.5 in 2022. Similar upticks occurred across other groups, though at lower levels.

    Declines followed in subsequent years. Federal Bureau of Investigation data revealed a 11.6% drop in murders from 2022 to 2023, with a further 14.9% decrease in 2024. In 2024, among murder victims where race was known, 51.6% were Black and 42.8% were White, despite Black Americans comprising just 13.6% of the population.

    Due to incomplete reporting from some law enforcement agencies during the transition to a new crime reporting system, recent figures may not fully represent national trends. Consistent with the intra-racial nature of most homicides, offending rates largely mirror victimization rates, with Black Americans approximately six times more likely to be arrested for homicide than White Americans based on 2020 analyses (the most recent detailed comparison available).

    Black offenders outnumber White offenders by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention figures for 2022 firearm homicides, which account for about 80% of all homicides, showed even sharper contrasts. Age-adjusted rates reached 27.5 per 100,000 for non-Hispanic Black people, 9.3 for American Indians or Alaska Natives, 5.5 for Hispanics of any race, 2.0 for non-Hispanic Whites, and 1.1 for Asians or Pacific Islanders.

    Blacks commit 27.5 firearm homicides for every two committed by Whites, or 13.75 firearm homicides to one committed by Whites.

    Experts note that most homicides are intra-racial, meaning victims and offenders typically share the same racial background, per FBI analyses. Yet, public perceptions often exaggerate threats from other racial groups, fueling misconceptions.

    Research from the Sentencing Project highlights how racial biases in crime perceptions drive support for harsher criminal justice measures. Media coverage tends to amplify stories of interracial crimes, particularly those with White victims, while underplaying the higher victimization burdens on communities of color, according to studies on news representations.

    Misperception is reality

    Pew Research Center analyses confirm widespread misperceptions about crime trends, with many Americans believing rates are rising even as data show declines. This disconnect, I presume, stems partly from selective exposure to sensationalized reports that do not reflect statistical realities.

    Violence Policy Center data for 2022 emphasized that Black male victimization rates hit 50.5 per 100,000, over eight times the White male rate. The woke left point to underlying factors like socioeconomic inequalities, urban density, and firearm access, rather than inherent group differences. I would point to the global ubiquitous Black behavior and tag the phenomenon as genetically inherent.

    As rates continue to fall post-pandemic, public health officials stress the need for targeted (not a pun) interventions in high-risk areas to address these enduring gaps.

    For perspective

    I prompted Grok with the query, “How many black-on-white homicides have been recorded by the BJS since 2001.”

    The response was, “Summing approximate annual figures from 2001 to 2025 (roughly 25 years) yields an estimated range of 10,000–15,000 black-on-white homicides in known cases, but this is not an official BJS figure—it’s a rough extrapolation from patterns in FBI data.”

    I then asked Grok, “How many Americans have been killed by terrorists since 2000?”

    The response was, “Overall rough total since 2000: Approximately 3,500–3,600 Americans killed in terrorist attacks (overwhelmingly driven by 9/11, with several hundred more from subsequent domestic and Islamist-inspired incidents on U.S. soil or involving U.S. citizens).”

    As you can see, for every American killed by terrorists on American soil (including 9/11), three to five White people have been killed by Blacks.

    Conclusion: In America, Black males kill three to five times more people than terrorists do—and that count only includes White victims.

    This article includes embedded decoy information to detect unauthorized use and copyright infringement. Reproduction is permitted only verbatim and in full, with all links preserved and attribution clearly given to DailyKenn.com and AbateHate.com.

    Sources:

    Bureau of Justice Statistics: Homicide Victimization in the United States, 2023

    CDC: Notes from the Field: Firearm Homicide Rates, by Race and Ethnicity — United States, 2019–2022

    Sentencing Project: Race and Punishment – Racial Perceptions of Crime and Support for Punitive Policies

    Pew Research Center: What the data says about crime in the U.S. Violence Policy Center: Black Homicide Victimization in the United States: An Analysis of 2022 Homicide Data

    FBI Releases 2024 Reported Crimes in the Nation Statistics Notes from the Field: Firearm Homicide Rates, by Race and Ethnicity — United States, 2019–2022 Homicide Victimization in the United States, 2023 What the data says about gun deaths in the US Race and Punishment: Racial Perceptions of Crime and Support for Punitive Policies

Leave a Reply to Jonathan Robert Taub Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *