General Flynn on the qualities that separate successful wartime presidents from failed ones, and what America needs from its leaders now.

There has been little written about the basic military order of battle of Iran’s conventional forces. A strategic assessment of the Artesh Ground Forces, their structure, and their capabilities.

Dear America,

Never forget that in warfare the enemy has a vote & they also have spies everywhere, to include inside the very decision making systems we believe we control.

Additionally, don’t take our eyes off Russia nor any of the “watch” conditions surrounding China’s actions. Our actions (or lack of them) equate to their strategic counteractions (all sides).

Then what are the strategic indicators that a nation is about to go to full scale war?

Key signs a nation is preparing for full scale war include sudden military mobilization, stockpiling supplies, heightened cyber activity, & aggressive rhetoric from leadership. Watch for diplomatic evacuations, sanctions buildup, or unusual troop movements near borders. These often signal intent before shots are fired.

Russia & Ukraine are well past these steps.

We need to ask the question, what is China’s posture just across the straits of Taiwan?

Does America have all the options in place for our success there (ie., if we decide to go full scale into Iran)?

Does movement of strategic assets such as NUCLEAR weapons, ballistic weapons, large-scale logistics capabilities indicate additional scaling up of major WAR preparation?

Movement of these type capabilities is one of the strongest indicators & there appears to be some of these indicators in Russia. When you see NUCLEAR or ballistic missile repositioning, especially to forward bases or hardened sites, this is among the strongest indicators of escalation intent. Large-scale logistics like fuel convoys (especially unusual types of fuel), ammunition trains, or hospital ship deployments signal sustained conflict prep, not just posturing. When you see all three together, it’s rarely a bluff. However, sustaining the sustainers is a monumental task for any nation.

Have we pre-positioned any military or strategic assets that indicate total war in and around the Persian Gulf? Are we ready for a breakout in the Pacific?

In the Middle East, the answer is YES. The U.S. has significantly reinforced the Persian Gulf with at least two carrier strike groups, with their dozens of destroyers, Marine expeditionary units, additional fighter squadrons, & mine countermeasures ships.

This buildup, the largest since 2003 (pre-invasion of the disastrous Iraq invasion), supports ongoing operations against Iran, with forces positioned for sustained combat, blockade enforcement, & potential escalation. No public evidence of NUCLEAR weapons movements, but the scale of conventional assets signals high readiness for major conflict.

Are there any U.S. Marine or Army logistics units that have been deployed to the Middle East (these are major indicators for ground operations)?

At least two Marine Expeditionary Units have deployed to the region with their full logistics combat elements for self-sustainment. Reported Army units like elements of the 82nd ABN and others are there too, which always bring attached sustainment & logistics support. No standalone large Army logistics units have been publicly flagged, but the overall force posture in the ME is robust.

Assume our President has all this information as well as many other strike & sustainment packages required for large scale Middle East operations.

Are we prepared elsewhere around the world or do we only possess a one Major Regional Conflict military?

Decades of sustained WAR & deterioration & diminishment in the ranks of key leaders for slog it out type warfare are questions our nation MUST address.

WARs (or Stupid Wars), once engaged (and we are fully engaged in the ME & are in close contact in Eastern Europe & in the Pacific region), MUST achieve victory at all costs. Any other outcome will change the strategic direction of the United States forever.

Our nation MUST pray for our President & peace. However, if America is placed in a position where we MUST fight, then we MUST win.

There are no other acceptable outcomes.

Michael T. Flynn, LTG USA (Ret.) is the chairman of the Gold Institute for International Strategy, a Washington, DC-based think-and-do tank.

The Doomsday Clock reads 89 seconds to midnight.

Reflecting growing concerns about multiple risks, including:

• Nuclear weapons and increasing geopolitical tensions.
• Biological threats and advances in biotechnology.
• Failures of international leadership and cooperation.
• Artificial Intelligence.

Nine nations are widely recognized as possessing nuclear weapons, yet many of the major Cold War-era nuclear arms control agreements have either expired, been terminated, or are no longer being implemented. This is the reality we face, and we must be prepared to navigate it with resolve, adaptability, and purpose.

What we are witnessing leaves no room for complacency. This is a defining moment that calls on all of us, across the globe, to awaken to the challenges before us and respond with the urgency they demand.

In February 2026, the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty expired. For fifteen years, that treaty capped Russian and American deployed nuclear warheads at 1,550 each. The treaty was imperfect and compromised by counting rules that permitted ambiguity. But it existed. It provided communication channels between Moscow and Washington. It established red lines that both sides understood. It reflected an assumption that both superpowers feared nuclear war more than they feared each other.

That framework no longer exists. There is no successor agreement in place. The United States and Russia are not engaged in arms control negotiations. There is no bilateral dialogue on nuclear doctrine, escalation thresholds, or crisis management. Moscow is modernizing its arsenal without constraint. Beijing is doing the same. Washington is debating whether nuclear weapons should even be part of American strategy.

This represents strategic malpractice at the highest levels.

The reality we face is stark and demands clarity. Russia maintains approximately 5,977 nuclear warheads, with over 1,700 deployed on active systems. The United States possesses roughly 5,044 warheads, also heavily deployed. Together, these two nations control 87% of the world’s nuclear inventory. China operates about 600 warheads and is expanding aggressively, with projections placing its arsenal at over 1,000 by 2030. France maintains 300 warheads. The United Kingdom holds 225 warheads. India and Pakistan each possess roughly 160 warheads, locked in a rivalry that erupted into open military conflict in May 2025 and could escalate to nuclear war at any moment. North Korea has assembled roughly 50 warheads and is receiving technological assistance from Russia. Israel maintains approximately 90 warheads under a policy of deliberate strategic ambiguity.

That is the picture confronting the United States. Nine nuclear powers collectively control 12,200 warheads without an international framework constraining deployment or use.

Five flashpoints demand American attention and immediate strategic focus:

• Russia and NATO. Moscow’s military doctrine explicitly permits nuclear first-use in response to a conventional attack deemed to threaten Russian territory, and with New START expired, Russia operates under no numerical ceiling on warhead deployment.
• Iran and the Middle East. The Trump administration correctly assesses that Iran does not currently possess nuclear weapons, yet significant uncertainty remains regarding Iran’s intentions, the status of its nuclear program, and Tehran’s willingness to escalate regional conflict in ways that could trigger miscalculation and uncontrolled escalation between American, Israeli, and Iranian forces.
• India and Pakistan. These two nations clashed militarily for 88 hours in May 2025, involving drones, missiles, and active nuclear brinkmanship, and the boundary between controlled conflict and uncontrolled escalation remains razor thin.
• North Korea. The regime is actively developing intercontinental ballistic systems and receiving technological assistance from Russia in exchange for troops deployed to Ukraine.
• China and Taiwan. China is preparing military options for the unification of Taiwan, while the United States has committed to Taiwan’s defense, creating a scenario where escalation from conventional conflict to nuclear exchange becomes plausible.

These are not theoretical exercises or academic scenarios. These are operational contingencies that military planners in Washington, Moscow, Beijing, New Delhi, and Seoul are actively preparing for.

The non-proliferation regime that successfully prevented nuclear proliferation for decades is collapsing. Saudi Arabia signed a mutual defense agreement with Pakistan in recognition of shifting regional security dynamics. South Korea and Japan are publicly discussing weapons programs. Turkey and Poland are questioning the credibility of American nuclear guarantees and considering whether domestic nuclear capability is necessary for security. France has announced plans to expand its nuclear arsenal. When the political leadership of allied nations concludes that America’s nuclear umbrella cannot be relied upon, they pursue their own deterrents. This proliferation cascades. When one regional power acquires nuclear weapons, others inevitably follow. Proliferation becomes self-reinforcing, creating instability that benefits no one.

The collapse of the international framework that managed nuclear risk for fifteen years demands strategic reckoning at every level of American leadership and society. The absence of successor agreements, the silence on bilateral communication channels, and the decision to permit two decades of arms control progress to evaporate represent a fundamental departure from the strategic discipline that defined the Cold War and the post-Cold War era.

American forces must be prepared for contingencies that we hope to avoid but must nonetheless plan to manage or defeat. The assumptions that governed military planning for the past thirty years are no longer valid. Doctrine, training, force posture, and strategic communication must reflect the world as it exists, not as we wish it to be.

American citizens must understand that this is not a foreign policy abstraction debated by specialists in think tanks. It is a foundational question about whether the nation can sustain the principles and institutions that have governed its survival. The nation has a Constitution that limits executive power and preserves civilian control over matters of war. The nation has inherited from previous generations a strategic position earned through military sacrifice and strategic discipline. The nation has a responsibility to the generation that will inherit the consequences of today’s choices. That responsibility cannot be outsourced or delayed.

For eighty years, since Hiroshima, no nuclear power has employed a nuclear weapon in anger. Not once. That record is remarkable and reflects deliberate decisions made by political and military leadership to constrain escalation and fear the consequences of nuclear war more than they feared each other. Those decisions are no longer being made. The political will to restore strategic frameworks has evaporated. The sense of shared vulnerability that once unified adversaries around mutual survival has dissolved into competitive posturing and strategic ambition.

The moment to rebuild strategic stability is here. American leadership, military and civilian alike, must act now with the clarity and urgency that characterized the Cold War generation.

The price of delay is incalculable and irreversible.

Michael T. Flynn, LTG USA (Ret.) is the chairman of the Gold Institute for International Strategy, a Washington, DC-based think-and-do tank.

Iran fired multiple waves of ballistic missiles toward northern Israel tonight, marking the first direct Iranian attack on Israeli territory since the April 8 ceasefire that ended the U.S.-Israeli military campaign against Iran.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) launched the strikes under the codename “Operation True Promise 5,” triggering widespread air-raid sirens across northern and central Israel. Israeli air defenses intercepted at least four Iranian missile barrages, and the IDF confirmed all missiles were intercepted.

No confirmed casualties as of this writing but do not be deceived by that outcome.

The intent was not ambiguous.

Iran fires ballistic missiles at a sovereign nation and calls it a warning.

Iran threatens American and Israeli targets across the entire region and frames it as a proportional response.

This is the regime that the world is being asked to negotiate with in good faith.

@realDonaldTrump urged both sides to avoid further escalation and told Iran to return to talks, saying the missile launches were “certainly not going to help negotiations” and calling on Tehran to “get back to the table and make a deal.”

I respect the President’s instinct to pursue a resolution. But the American people deserve honesty about what they are watching.

Initial U.S. / Iran talks in Pakistan in April already failed to reach a peace deal.

President Trump then announced an open-ended extension of the ceasefire and a continuation of a U.S. blockade until negotiations concluded “one way or the other.”

The regime in Tehran spent that entire period reconstituting, probing, and waiting for an opening. Tonight was that opening.

A ceasefire is not a peace agreement. I have said this publicly for months. Ceasefires buy time. The question is always who uses that time more effectively.

Iran used it to reload and to watch. The moment conditions allowed, they launched. That is not a failure of diplomacy. That is the Iranian regime behaving precisely as the Iranian regime always behaves.

Iran’s Revolutionary Guard issued a statement today warning that “should these acts of aggression be repeated, the responses will be broader in scope and will encompass all American and Zionist targets throughout the region.”

The men running Tehran do not want a deal that constrains them. They want a deal that protects them long enough to outlast American political will.

The ceasefire left unresolved the core issues: Iran’s ballistic missile program, Hezbollah’s arsenal, and Tehran’s nuclear ambitions. None of those issues resolved themselves during the pause. They were simply waiting in the background, exactly where the Iranian regime needed them to be.

This is fifth-generation warfare operating simultaneously on the kinetic, diplomatic, and information fronts. Iran fires missiles, claims victimacy in the international press, threatens American bases, and positions itself as the aggrieved party in negotiations.

Eyes open, America. The Strait of Hormuz, the proxy networks, the ballistic missile inventory, and the unresolved nuclear program do not disappear because diplomats are talking in a conference room. The threat does not pause because we want it to.

Pray for the men and women in the region serving under our flag tonight 🙏🏼🇺🇸