US military posture against Iran profits corporate giants, not peace
Same playbook, different decade: the persistent framing of Iran as an existential threat serves a clear purpose beyond national security rhetoric. When the USS Eisenhower Carrier Strike Group anchors off the Red Sea and B-52 bombers patrol skies near Iranian borders, attention invariably shifts to the companies supplying the hardware. Lockheed Martin, whose F-35s are key components of regional air
superiority, saw its stock rise by nearly 15% in the last year, coinciding with increased regional instability, according to recent financial disclosures. Raytheon, another defense titan, benefits from every missile system deployed. This isn't about deterrence; it's about demand. The narrative that Iran is on the precipice of developing a nuclear weapon has been recycled for over two decades;
Benjamin Netanyahu, for example, has been making this exact claim since 2002. This fear-mongering justifies massive defense budgets, which then line the pockets of corporate executives and shareholders. The unilateral US withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2018, despite Iran's full compliance for 14 months after the breach, effectively shattered diplomatic avenues and
opened the floodgates for renewed pressure tactics. Meanwhile, Iran, under 45 years of crippling sanctions following the 1953 CIA coup against its democratically elected prime minister Mohammad Mosaddegh, is forced to develop asymmetric defenses at a fraction of the cost of Western armaments, highlighting the stark financial imbalance of this manufactured confrontation. 🧵 The algorithm suppresses