Search Posts Chronologically

Interview: US Casualty Figures Keep Fluctuating in War with Iran

Inter Press Service (IPS), July 31, 2026:
Zunes told IPS many thousands of Iranians, Lebanese, and others have been killed as a result of the U.S. war on Iran but Americans–as in previous wars–tend to focus on U.S. casualties. Though they have thankfully been limited, the 18 fatalities and more than 600 wounded–some of them seriously–have become a major focus of war opponents.
    Trump has tried to downplay and manipulate these figures by comparing the casualties with other U.S. wars which included significant ground operations, claiming without evidence that the dead soldiers strongly supported the war, and undercounting those wounded by initially only listing those with severe injuries, said Zunes.
    More recently, he pointed out, the administration was caught placing those killed and wounded, subsequent to the collapse of the Memorandum of Understanding with Iran, in a separate category than those killed and wounded during the first phase of the war, thereby lessening the overall total.
    “Such efforts are only strengthening antiwar sentiment in Washington and elsewhere, adding to the upset by veterans and others over Trump’s draft dodging during the Vietnam War and his insults of those who fought in unpopular conflicts, including war heroes.”
During his 2016 campaign against Hillary Clinton, and to a somewhat lesser extent in his 2024 campaign against Kamala Harris, he portrayed himself as the antiwar candidate who opposed Democrats’ “forever wars” and who as a president would “bring our troops home.” As U.S. casualties in the Middle East mount, his credibility will only be eroded further, declared Zunes.

Interview: Operation Epstein Fury Part 15. Second Round. How and Why the MoU Died.

Wyoming Star, July 28, 2026: Zunes traced the roots of the current impasse back to Trump’s original strategic error: “Unlike the 2015 nuclear deal – which was extremely detailed, enforceable, and left no room for ambiguity – Trump’s Memorandum of Understanding was rather vague, giving both sides motivation to try to strengthen their bargaining position by engaging in provocative actions. The problem is that, with Iran having demonstrated its power through its newfound form of asymmetrical warfare, no realistic negotiated settlement will be better or even as advantageous for the West than what was achieved by the painstaking two-year, seven-nation negotiating process that led to the JCPOA – which Trump tore up because he insisted he could get a better deal. Trump does want to look like a loser by accepting anything more advantageous to the Iranians than what Obama and other world leaders negotiated. In other words, given that virtually no strategic analyst thinks that the resumption of the war will get Iran to compromise further, Trump is allowing his ego to forestall an end to the conflict regardless of its negative impact in terms of human lives, energy access, the global economy, and Republican chances in November… With getting the requisite two-thirds majority in Congress necessary to override a presidential veto and implement the War Powers Act virtually impossible, the only legislative vehicle to stop the war would be to withhold funding. However, through demands to “support our troops” and replenish weapons stocks that have left other areas of US security commitments potentially vulnerable, parliamentary maneuvering, and perhaps declaring some kind of state of emergency, Trump will likely find a way to fund the war despite its growing unpopularity with the American public.”