The "40 Days War" and the Future Fall of Tehran

Let us count the dead and assess the aftermath.

Hey, before we go any further, read this, it is a lot of fun:

Now, as my readers know, the Mullahs came to power because of help from the CIA, which wanted to toppled the Shah. This is Wikipedia tier knowledge, yet people still ignore it. Yes, the Shah was originally put into power with the help of the British, and was an ally of Israel for most of his reign, allowing them to set up (and run) Iran’s notorious secret police goon squads (the SAVAK), as well as setting up the pipeline deal with Israel, which may or may not have been in operation until quite recently. But, the Shah was also toppled by his supposed allies and the Mullahs that replaced him were Washington-approved.

The main reason for this installment of the Mullahs was because the USSR had a Communist officer ready to take power via coup of the Shah. This was to be accomplished via military invasion from Baku, thereby bringing Iran into the USSR’s orbit.

What happened next, was Comrade Andropov (Fleckenstein) of the KGB managed to successfully thwart the planned invasion on the eve of its launch, and to divert energy and resources into Afghanistan instead. From there, the KGB worked overtime to make sure that the Soviet army lost the war, by working hand in hand with the CIA to conduct drug operations, weapons smuggling, arming of the Mujahadeen, and misinforming the USSR military the whole while.

The KGB that emerged out of the Afghan war was a full-blown crime syndicate, and it went to war against the Soviet government both openly and covertly as it expanded rapidly and morphed into a state within a state. And the same process was occurring in America, with the CIA and its various proxy and drug wars. They too worked closely with the new Mullah government, via their friends and intermediaries the Israelis, to run the so-called “Iran-Contra” job. This scheme relied on smuggling drugs and weapons, and hijacking the interests of at least three supposedly sovereign states simply to enrich private crime syndicates aka intelligence agencies.

Then, the United States was also led into Afghanistan a decade after the Soviets left by their own CIA.

And a curious thing occurred next.

To prosecute their hoax war, the Americans reached out to Putin’s KGB/FSB for help in reconstituting something called “The Northern Alliance”. So, the Americans ended up fighting the exact same war as the Soviets had done, in the same territories, using the same strategy and arming the same auxiliaries. What are the odds of that? More importantly …

What even is the point of that?

A decade from the end of the Cold War and Washington was using old Soviet alliances and assets as if they had inherited them, while Putin was eagerly doing all he could to facilitate the transition and handover of this Soviet legacy strategy.

Curious, no?

Personally, I am surprised that Afghanistan was not split into two before the Americans left. Most countries that America gets involved in military are partitioned into North v South or East v West.

• North Vietnam v South Vietnam

• North Korea v South Korea

• West Germany v East Germany

• South Sudan

• Panama was carved off of Columbia

• West Russia (Ukraine) v East Russia

But then this clashes with another investigation that I’ve been conducting about the American withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021. Me, I have come to believe, like the Russian conspiracy theorists that I read on LiveJournal and Telegram, that Washington knew that the SMO was coming, and that Putin was about to commit Russia into a disastrous war. Once this became clear, they had to move quickly, abruptly even, and rapidly redeploy their supplies to the European theater. Thus, the retreat from Afghanistan was closely related to the coming war in Ukraine and possibly Iran too.

Also, these traps are actually quite predictable and formulaic even.

Look at Afghanistan, a “trap” for the USSR that they were driven into by the KGB chief Andropov who had the written up intention of detonating the USSR.

Look at Afghanistan 2.0 for the Americans, a quagmire entirely of their own making, based on the supposed presence of a CIA asset named Bin Laden that they could never leave … until the prospect to make even more money off of war appeared on the horizon.

Look at Saddam falling for the obvious American trap to invade Kuwait.

Look at the Mullahs in Iran, bleating about how they had been mislead in negotiations with the Americans when signing that disgraceful ceasefire and getting bombed by Israel anyway.

Which begs the question: what will happen to Iran next?

The Israeli Invasion Route Into Iran

Put simply: just like how the Americans inherited the USSR’s “Northern Alliance” in Afghanistan, I believe that they will soon inherit the USSR’s mothballed special military operation to take Iran via Baku. From a purely military-geographic standpoint:

• Northern Iran is close, flat, and contiguous with Azerbaijan

• The Caspian corridor and border regions are logistically accessible

• and Israel has already been heavily bombing along this exact NW Iran invasion corridor

Now that some distance has been put between us and the events of the second round of the bombing campaign, perhaps we can analyze what occurred cooly and clinically now in the lull before the next round of even bigger bombs start going off over Iran. Many things happened on the ground that escaped the attention of the major ideological shills on social media.

Here are some key details of what indisputably happened:

1 — Iranian officials and media came out repeatedly and claimed that Azerbaijan enabled Israeli strikes on Iran, including drone incursions launched Azerbaijani territory with the help of Baku.

2 — Iran’s security establishment announced that it had shifted focus toward “close enemies” allegedly complicit in Israeli attacks, with Azerbaijan at the top of that list.

3 — Azerbaijan is a major arms client of Israel and has deep intelligence ties to them, via the KGB legacy and more recent tie fostering.

4 — Azerbaijan is also the main strategic energy supplier to Israel.

5 — Baku claimed that Tehran struck their airport, killing 4 Azeri civilians (this was a false flag attack), and threatened retaliation.

6 — Baku then also came out and claimed that Tehran had attempted an antisemitic hate crime attack on the Israeli embassy, that their agents foiled at the last minute.

All of this led to Baku mobilizing its troops and 7 — deploying to the border with Iran, leave for all soldiers cancelled and the Ministry of Defence, the State Border Service, and the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Emergency Situations all going onto a war footing mode.

8 — This is Wikipedia-tier knowledge, not something I got through occult scrying:

9 — Iran’s military began threatening Baku with retaliation and striking Azerbaijan. Here:

Even allowing for the heated rhetoric and behavior of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), it was ominous to see a March 7 statement warning Azerbaijan it would face attack if links with Israel were not severed.

The statement followed the March 5 drone strike on Azerbaijan’s Nakhchivan exclave. One hit the terminal of Nakhchivan airport, another injured a village nearby, while the Azerbaijani air defenses shot down a third.

In response, Azerbaijan closed parts of its airspace and limited border crossings for cargo trucks with Iran. The threat to Azeri airspace has global implications — with Iran and Russia closed to air traffic, Azerbaijan and Georgia to its west provide a narrow channel for planes flying east-west between Europe and Asia.

10 — the Guard then threatened to strike the Israeli - Azeri pipeline next.

11 — all of a sudden, everything froze in place, and we are now waiting for the next shoe to fall.

…

So, what occurred to suddenly break off the escalation? The answer to that is quite simple: Erdogan got cold feet, or rather, he began to demand better terms from the Israelis and began to hold the NW Iran front hostage. The 40 Days War is similar then to Putin’s initial Spring 2021 saber-rattling maneuvers aimed at getting Kiev to stop going after the oligarchs of Donbass.

Because of Erdogan’s stubbornness, the Israeli media pivoted to demanding his toppling while they were still bombing Iran. From the Jerusalem Post:

Yoni Ben Menachem, a researcher at the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs, cautions that Turkey is emerging, in his view, as an increasing strategic threat to Israel. He argues that the policies led by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan go far beyond public rhetoric. According to him, “Turkey is the new Iran.”

He claims that Ankara is quietly working to establish a new Sunni bloc in the Middle East, based on the assumption that the Iranian regime will weaken or even collapse. Such a development, he says, would create a regional vacuum following the decline of the Shi’ite axis. Turkey, he adds, aims to fill this vacuum alongside Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Pakistan, in a move intended to reshape the regional balance of power.

Ben Menachem’s assessment corresponds to steps taken by Ankara in recent years to position itself as a regional leader, partly by taking an active role in defending the Palestinian cause and opposing Israeli interests in the region.

On Sunday, Erdogan accused Israel of carrying out atrocities against Palestine and Lebanon and threatened potential military action against the Jewish state, similar to its past interventions in Karabakh and Libya.

Ankara has so far been cautious about approaching southern Syria, due to concerns over a direct confrontation with Israel

These latest comments, along with the already strained relations between Ankara and Jerusalem, could lead the two regional powers to sever ties completely, as MK Amichai Eliyahu suggested in his response to Erdogan on Sunday.

Alongside the diplomatic front, Turkey is also strengthening its military presence in Syria, in coordination with Ahmed al-Sharaa. However, Ben Menachem notes that Ankara has so far been cautious about approaching southern Syria, due to concerns over a direct confrontation with Israel.

Ben Menachem believes these steps reflect far broader regional ambitions that extend beyond Syria or Iran alone. According to him, Turkey seeks to expand its influence across the Middle East, including around the issue of Jerusalem and in the international arena, developments that Israel must take into account already now.

Regarding Turkey’s leadership, Ben Menachem described Erdogan as the most dangerous figure from Israel’s perspective and also identified Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan as another key power player in Ankara. He noted reports of tensions between the two, linked to Fidan’s alleged ambitions to eventually succeed Erdogan, though he added it remains unclear whether such a scenario will materialize.

The Israelis even flooded Twitter with AI videos of Erdogan being hanged.

But why the sudden vitriol directed at Erdogan in the middle of an Iranian and Lebanese campaign? If anything, before the Americans and Israelis attacked, there was a fear that Turkey would invade Iran instead, under the pretext of tackling the Kurdish terrorist problem in Iran’s East. There was a manufactured “Kurdish uprising” threat being manufactured at the time, with reports that several towns had revolted, remember?

But then Erdogan did a 180 degree about face and expressed great sadness over the Judeo-American strikes. What gives? Here is a summary of what I am talking about:

Prior to the start of US and Israeli military strikes against the Islamic Republic of Iran, Turkey attempted to maintain a poker face, urging de-escalation and denying rumors of planned action from Ankara. Now that an attempt is underway to remove Iran’s theocratic regime, the United States must remain vigilant about Turkish military actions.

Turkey’s government, led by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, has refrained from taking part in the conflict. Instead, despite several US allies coming around to support the military action, Erdogan has chosen to condemn the strikes. Erdogan even expressed “sadness” for the death of Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, who was eliminated in the opening hours of the war.

Turkey’s reticence to take part in this evolving regional war for now does not mean that its actions will be limited to rhetoric indefinitely. Erdogan is calculating his next moves to best capitalize on what may become an opportune crisis. For now, Ankara is highlighting national security concerns arising from migratory pressures along its eastern border with Iran. Erdogan has taken to calling regional counterparts in the Arab Gulf in a fruitless round of telephone diplomacy, attempting to garner support for a ceasefire—without which he claims the Middle East will be engulfed in a “ring of fire.”

Ankara has chosen not to participate in combat operations with Washington, its treaty ally, to remove the regime in Tehran. This helps to explain why Iran has not targeted military assets in Turkey thus far, as it has done with several Arab states like the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar.

But a conflict that grinds on for several weeks could compel Ankara to position its military inside Iran. And the most likely catalyst that would lead Ankara toward military action is a determination that a Kurdish threat to Turkey could emerge from an Iran in turmoil.

And that possibility may soon appear on the horizon: President Donald Trump recently held a telephone call with regional Kurdish leaders. If the president intends to precipitate a Kurdish uprising inside Iran to topple the regime, this could very well be the pretext Erdogan needs to enter Iran.

How Turkey Is Playing Up an Iranian Kurdish Threat

When the prospects of US military action rose sharply in January 2026, Turkish leaders sued for negotiations on Tehran’s behalf, even platforming the regime’s foreign minister at an eleventh-hour press conference in Istanbul on January 30. Since then, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan have harried Washington and NATO to avoid a military response, citing regional destabilization as their chief fear.

Ankara’s supposed preparations for a worst-case scenario—Iranian regime collapse and chaos on the border—have drawn broad attention. While the Turkish Communications Directorate quickly denied “plans to invade Iranian territory for security reasons,” speculation on Turkey’s course of action has abounded. If Turkey acts militarily, the most likely justification it will give is an operation to prevent “terrorist attacks” arising from Iranian Kurds affiliated with Iran’s Kurdistan Free Life Party (PJAK). PJAK is an offshoot of Turkey’s separatist Kurdish movement, the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), which Turkey, the United States, and the European Union consider to be a terrorist organization.

On February 22, PJAK joined with four other Iranian Kurdish parties to form a coalition for “the struggle for the liberation of Eastern [Iranian] Kurdistan.” Turkish ultranationalist outlets have already begun raising alarm over what they deem PJAK’s inevitable plan to establish a “terror corridor” on Turkey’s eastern border, akin to Kurdish forces’ former zone of control in Syria.

Turkey’s Military Posture

As of late February, Ankara’s military posture indicated readiness to conduct cross-border operations should Turkish leaders deem them necessary or opportune. Despite opposing military intervention in Iran, Turkey has permitted NATO airborne early warning and control (AWACS) aircraft to fly monitoring missions over eastern Turkey. These planes are designed to monitor the movements of hostile aircraft and will provide Turkey with valuable intelligence on immediate developments.

Neither Turkish nor international sources have yet reported major movements from Turkey’s Second Army, the field army responsible for securing the borders with Syria, Iraq, and Iran. However, coverage of supposed cross-border plans has exploded throughout Turkey and Western outlets, with the possibilities remaining vague.

Turkish statements currently reflect a mix of denial and open-ended justification on the matter of cross-border operations into Iran. Addressing rumors of incursion plans in the event of a US strike, the Turkish Defense Ministry reasserted that such claims “do not reflect the truth” on February 26. On the other hand, Erdogan cited Turkish readiness for unilateral military action: “Wherever there is a threat, we will eliminate them at the source without seeking permission from anyone.”

Turkish military adventurism over the last decade has demonstrated Ankara’s flippancy in respecting neighbors’ territory. Despite Erdogan’s persistent claims that Syrian territorial integrity is a “strategic necessity” for Turkey, Ankara’s army continues to occupy large swaths of northern Syria, the fruits of three invasions between 2016 and 2019. This could be an option that Turkey considers as the situation in Iran unfolds.

What Might Trigger Turkish Military Action

International media have cited a possible refugee crisis as a sufficient cause for Turkish cross-border activity. Turkey’s border with Iran—while with military observation posts—could be strained by mass civilian displacement, even considering the remote and hazardous terrain.

Yet the most salient pretext for major Turkish cross-border operations or territorial seizure in northwestern Iran is the PJAK issue. Should PJAK’s freedom of maneuver grow with major strikes on Iran’s government, Turkey may launch cross-border operations. PJAK is not involved in the PKK’s current disarmament process with the Turkish government, which may soften the political heat Erdogan would face at home in intervening against the Iranian Kurds. Ankara has also previously targeted PJAK elements in Iran and elsewhere. Kurdish outlets reported in September 2020 that Turkish artillery shelled alleged PJAK positions near the Iran-Turkey border. In August 2022, a Turkish drone strike killed a senior PJAK officer during a visit to Syria.

Independent Turkish press described two possible scenarios for Turkish military action: an early-stage push to establish border shelters for a refugee crisis, and later incursions into Iran to secure a buffer zone if the Iranian state fails. Turkey’s intervention in northern Iraq—combining extensive airstrikes with a network of ground outposts in a mountainous, insurgent-sheltering hinterland—holds clues as to what such a buffer zone might look like in Iran. Nevertheless, the magnitude of PJAK or Kurdish coalition activity in a collapsing Iran would be the final determinant.

Erdogan has a concrete interest in limiting cross-border operations. Turkey’s next election is two years away at most, and the president appears poised to set his son, Bilal Erdogan, up for the leadership of the Justice and Development Party (AKP). An extensive and costly military deployment is not conducive to his party’s political future, and any military incursions will most likely be balanced with a concern for domestic electability.

But to really explain what is happening in Turkey, and the previous coup attempts against Erdogan, I have to dedicate a separate essay or two to the topic. Luckily, I now have Swarthland Chronicles up and running, so I’ll eventually share with you what former Russian intelligence officers say about the internal situation in Turkey.

As for the future Azeri invasion of Iran …

So.

Like.

You see it now too, right?

Guys, I think we can now confirm with 80% certainty that this was indeed the plan.

Like, we just saw the dress rehearsal for it, hello!

And I wasn’t even expecting them to go in until months of bombing had concluded, to be honest. The Americans bombed Iraq with extreme intensity for a month straight before going in, and Iran is four times larger, more populated and more mountainous, so it would require far more bombs — at least that was my logic. Also, this ceasefire in which dying still occurs but America isn’t saturation bombing southern Iran was an unexpected twist. I did not really expect the Iranian government to sink so low as to shake hands with the people that just killed their leaders and their leaders’ children and give them time to rearm and blocade their country.

The Iranians have not even tried to sink a single American ship.

All the Israelies need to do next is to somehow take care of the Erdogan problem with either a stick or a carrot. In the meantime, they will continue bombing the NW corridor into Tehran.

…

As for Iran, the killing of their supreme leader, the maiming/wounding of his son (maimed and missing limbs and a typical London-style homosexual confirmed) the summer bombings and the 40 days of bombings — these are all key points on a timeline, even if we can’t see this quite yet.

As things stand now, the Americans have blockaded the straits and are demanding a toll be paid for the energy that passes through them. Having its only revenue stream cut off by a hostile power parked in their own waters that they are either unable or unwilling to push out. This, if you believe Resistance media, is a sign that Iran is WINNING, somehow though. These are also the same major influencers that claimed that Tel Aviv had been flattened by Iran’s missiles and that the American forces in the Middle East were wiped out on their own bases (40-50K KIA).

But if we look at the official reported casualties from Israel and America as a result of the 40 Days War, we have:

• 18 IDF soldiers dead

• 26 Israeli civilians dead

• 15 American soldiers dead

And on the other side of the equation:

Now, you can dispute these figures and say that the Americans and Israelis are hiding casualties or soon-to-be casualties in their list of wounded, which vary from about 150-500.

Who knows.

All I know is that I expressed extreme skepticism about the effectiveness of the Iranian salvos and I claimed, specifically, that I would be personally surprised if the total kill count for the Americans and Israelis topped 300. So far, I have no reason to believe that it has, and, in fact, if I were to bet again, I’d say that the Israelies are overstating the damage because of widespread insurance fraud and insolvent real estate development projects that fortuitously went up in flames.

As for the next round of bombing, some analysts are saying that the bombs will be flying again within a week. The headlines report that negotiations are “at a breaking point”. This should be interpreted to mean that Israel and America have almost finished restocking their bombs, to my mind, because that is all that this was ever about. If Tehran agrees to the toll so that America makes money off their exports while using that money to bomb them, then we will have a full-blown carbon copy of the Russia-NATO situation again. This strikes me as very likely, by the way.

Also: I cannot predict when things will happen, only that they will happen.

Strelkov has the same problem. Almost all of his predictions have come true at this point and all of his critics have been proven laughably WRONG. But the timeline that he gave for the unfolding of these predicted events was too quick, and this elicited derision at the time.

Now though … well … all I’m hearing is worried tittering on occasion.

The only way to win a fight is to actually fight it.

Tehran has simply refused to fight back so far.

This is because their government is composed of Western assets with property and family in the West.

Simple as that.