Lose Hormuz, Lose the Dollar, Lose Hegemony: Game Over | Jeffrey Currie

Jeffrey Currie, former Goldman Sachs head of commodities and a lifelong insider of the dollar system, defines the one red line America cannot cross: handing control of the Strait of Hormuz to Iran is not a tactical retreat; it is the formal end of the US as a global hegemon and the death of the dollar as the world’s reserve currency.

For the Epstein class, the only acceptable Iran is one

that caves in to the hegemon and its dollar scheme.

In 1945, the US made a deal the world still lives under: it would control every major shipping lane with its navy, and in return, the world would use the dollar and recycle capital through New York. Oil was the strategic commodity that made the bargain stick. After Nixon broke the gold standard in 1971, that same arrangement evolved into the petrodollar system that still funds American living standards today.
 

» Give Iran the Strait, and the dollar dies. « 

If the US walks away and allows Iran and Oman to manage the Strait under any fee structure, the rest of the world will see that the big-stick policeman has quit. Every other chokepoint on earth immediately becomes fair game. The Fifth Fleet would then need Iranian permission to enter or leave its own base in Bahrain—an image that ends the illusion of global hegemony overnight.

Currie points to Switzerland, where a 30-year fixed mortgage can sit around 50 basis points because global capital floods into a perceived safe currency. That is the kind of privilege the US still enjoys. The country currently spends about 7 percent more than it produces; remove the forced global demand for dollars, and that gap becomes direct economic pain.

 

» We're fighting wars. It's not possible for us to take care 

of Medicare, daycare, Medicaid, all these things. « 

 Orange ape guns and butter salad, July 27, 2026.

 

History offers no comforting precedent. No previous hegemon—Britain, Spain, or any other—lost control of the world’s most important sea lanes and remained the hegemon. The US can retreat to a Monroe/Donroe/Technate of America Doctrine posture and control only the Western Hemisphere, but then it is no longer a global power and the dollar is no longer the reserve currency. 

 

Reference:

Jeffrey Currie (July 28, 2026) - Iran Rejects $6 Billion in Return for Free Hormuz Passage. (video)

 

Iran Conflict Now Existential for US Global Hegemony—No Exit Allowed | General Wesley Clark

Former NATO Supreme Allied Commander General Wesley Clark, a centrist-to-hawkish democrat, has laid out what he describes as the real thinking inside Washington. According to him, this is no longer simply about Iran; it is about whether the United States remains the global hegemon or watches its power collapse in real time. Stopping is not an option—that is the hard line now being drawn. Clark makes clear that if America pulls back and allows Iran to retain control of the Strait of Hormuz, the damage to U.S. global leadership would be permanent. He warns that such a retreat would undermine American deterrence, weaken influence in Asia, and compromise European security all at once. This moment represents a critical decision point: failure here would not be a temporary setback but the end of the post-1945 international order.

Clark rejects any notion of simply walking away or accepting a weaker deal. “Pulling back, that’s no good,” he states without hesitation. In his view, a memorandum of understanding worse than previous agreements would signal American weakness to every rival watching. China and Russia are already encouraged by the current trajectory, and he insists they should not be allowed to celebrate any further gains.There is no easy military solution, yet retreat would be far worse. The immediate focus must remain on keeping the Strait open and isolating the theater of operations. Any pause would only give Iran time to rebuild, rearm, and entrench itself more deeply. At the same time, Clark emphasizes that the longer-term threats posed by Iranian missiles and nuclear capabilities cannot be ignored.

In the end, Wesley Clark speaks not as a pundit but as a former NATO Supreme Commander with deep insight into how key circles in Washington view this conflict. For them, the war has become existential for American global power, and stopping is no longer on the table.

  

"Prepare for US War on Iran within 72–96 Hours" | US Col. Douglas Macgregor

The US is on the verge of launching an air and missile war against Iran. It appears likely to begin within the next 72 to 96 hours. The goal of this operation is to inflict such horrific destruction on Iranian infrastructure and society that the leadership is forced to submit. A key factor in this timing is the Ford Carrier Strike Group. Having recently passed through the Strait of Gibraltar, it is expected to reach its position in the Eastern Mediterranean by Sunday. This group provides essential reinforcement for air and missile defense in Israel. Once this defensive shield is in place, the trigger could be pulled as early as Monday, February 23.
 

Surpassing post-Iraq benchmarks, a massive US mobilization—anchored by 50 stealth fighters,

150 transports, 35 warships, and 50,000 personnel—converges with peak IDF combat and rescue

readiness to signal a 90% strike certainty within a Trump-projected weekend window.

The political objective is not necessarily regime change, but rather forcing Iran to comply with a specific list of demands originally outlined by Prime Minister Netanyahu and adopted by the Trump administration (total nuclear cessation, ballistic missile dismantlement, abandonment of the Axis of Resistance including Hezbollah and various Shiite populations in the Emirates, Yemen, and the Gulf).

It is unlikely that Iran will submit. Unlike the 12-day conflict seen last June, this would be a "fight to the finish." Iran has built immense redundancy into its command-and-control structures. If the leadership is neutralized, local commanders have standing orders to continue missile launches automatically. With an arsenal of thousands of missiles, Iran could potentially sustain launches 24 hours a day for weeks. Furthermore, their air defenses—potentially bolstered by untested but advanced Chinese technology—could prove far more capable than anticipated. They claim the ability to identify targets at ranges of 700 kilometers, reaching deep into Iraq, Syria, and the Caucasus.

Tehran’s blockade of the Hormuz choke point—the artery for 20% of global petroleum

—leveraged alongside Sino-Russian naval maneuvers, would catalyze a systemic global

meltdown of vertical oil prices and runaway inflation.

 

This conflict will not be a "cakewalk." We must anticipate significant casualties—potentially hundreds, if not a thousand, if things go poorly. Beyond the immediate battlefield, the geopolitical consequences are vast. We should expect Iran to activate proxies throughout the region and perhaps even in the Western Hemisphere via cooperation with drug cartels. Turkey is increasingly hostile toward Israel and the US meddling in what they consider their "backyard." A war would create a massive refugee crisis that Turkey desperately wants to avoid, potentially pushing them to provide direct or indirect support to Tehran. Russia and China have invested billions in Iran. While they may not intervene directly, they will likely provide the Iranians with every possible resource to ensure they survive the onslaught.

This war is tied to a larger struggle over the future of the global financial system. We are seeing the rise of BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, and others), which represents an alternative to Western institutions like the IMF and the World Bank. If the US appears militarily weak or unable to achieve its objectives in Iran, it could accelerate the collapse of the US bond market. Experts have long warned that if the 10-year Treasury yield hits the 5% mark, it could signal "game over" for the current global financial order.

Wars are easy to start but notoriously difficult to end. If we maintain the position that we will not negotiate—labeling every opponent as a "Stalin" or "Hitler"—we leave ourselves no path to peace other than unconditional surrender, which is rarely achieved through airpower alone. We risk entering a conflict that we cannot stop, resulting in a strategic defeat similar to Vietnam.

Reference:
Colonel Douglas McGregor (February 19, 2026) - Prepare For Iran War in 72-96 HOURS! (video)

 

United States of Epstein Island: BREAKING—Rep. Lieu said Full
Epstein Files Show Trump Raping Children, February 19, 2026.

 

Gusano Rubio evokes the return of Western colonialism—and Europe applauds. 

Munich Security Conference, February 14, 2026.

 

See also:

Bradley F. Cowan (February 12, 2026) - Heliocentric Uranus Cycle and American War (2026-2033).

Alexander L. Chizhevsky (1922) - Mass Excitability during Solar Cycle 25 (2019–2030).