千變萬化的飛俠

2026年5月7日星期四

2026年5月6日星期三

Trump’s Iran Adventure: Clumsy Business Tricks Collide with Battlefield Drones

Trump’s military strikes against Iran are caught in a dilemma, and one could even say they have already failed. A long-term military presence in Iran is impossible, and launching a ground offensive is unrealistic. In fact, Iran’s military strength has already been severely damaged. What Iran is now carrying out are sporadic special attacks against America’s Middle Eastern allies and the Strait of Hormuz.Trump’s reasons for striking Iran are twofold: on the one hand, he was misled by Israel—just as Putin believed he could solve the Ukraine problem in 48 hours; on the other hand, the capture of Maduro led to a misjudgment, making Trump think Iran could be easily dealt with.

In Venezuela, the people were destitute and the government had lost support. Maduro could only rely on Cuban personnel for security. Weapons supplied by China and Russia proved ineffective, and Russia even betrayed Maduro’s whereabouts as a bargaining chip. Moreover, Venezuela is a small Latin American country with limited military strength, which ultimately led to the president being easily captured. Iran, however, is a vast country with a large population, strong military power, long-standing war experience, a complete weapons production industry, and nuclear development capability. It has long been ruled by a theocratic government and is a leading force in the Middle East opposing Israel and the U.S., with open support from China and Russia. America has the strength to strike Iran, but it does not have the ability to resolve the Iran problem in the short or medium term.

Iran’s nuclear development has already been monitored under the UN framework. Its nuclear facilities have been repeatedly attacked and largely destroyed, delaying its nuclear progress significantly. Much of its military power has been eliminated, and many leaders have been killed. Restoring Iran’s military strength will require enormous manpower, resources, foreign aid, and time. The harsh U.S.-Israeli strikes have already achieved their purpose; now the question is how both sides will end the conflict.

Trump’s “maximum pressure” only works on small countries with limited strength. Against major powers with countermeasures, it is ineffective. This clumsy businessman’s tricks may work briefly but often fail in international politics. Although the U.S. is the world’s military hegemon, it cannot fully cover its Middle Eastern allies, and it struggles to cope with Iran’s low-cost drone and missile attacks. Trump’s military strikes were intended to boost his midterm election prospects, cover up failures in the U.S.-China trade war, his collusion and inaction in the Russia-Ukraine war, and his incompetence in stimulating the domestic economy. If America cannot decisively defeat Iran, eliminate its ability to strike U.S. allies, and fully secure the Strait of Hormuz, then this military action is a failure. America cannot repeat the quagmire of Afghanistan; a ground war against Iran is impossible, and a complete solution to the Iran problem is unattainable. On the contrary, with Chinese and Russian support, Iran is launching “unrestricted warfare” against the U.S., complicating the regional situation and gaining results.

The blockade of the Strait of Hormuz has driven up oil prices, dragging down global economic growth. Attacks on neighboring countries prevent the U.S. from withdrawing from the Middle East battlefield. In negotiations, America cannot gain absolute advantage, and “maximum pressure” has lost its effectiveness. Iran’s low-cost special attacks make Trump’s military action meaningless: it cannot force the Iranian government to collapse or compromise, cannot boost his midterm election campaign, cannot divert attention from domestic problems, and cannot please the MAGA faction. Even Israel’s strikes against Hamas required years of street-by-street, tunnel-by-tunnel clearing under overwhelming military superiority—how much more difficult against Iran, a Middle Eastern military power. After decapitating leaders, replacements quickly emerge. Leaderless decentralization means Iran’s armed forces fight independently, but the regime’s structure remains intact. Losing hundreds of leaders does not destroy the government or military.

Iran’s theocratic government, secular intellectuals, Revolutionary Guards, state army, and local militias all continue to operate without central checks. Without ground assaults, the Iranian government still controls the country, and its armed forces remain largely intact. Trump now faces Iran’s “unrestricted warfare,” guided for years by China. Fortunately, it is still in its early stages. If it develops further, it will inevitably lead to terrorist attacks on U.S. soil and assassinations of American leaders. Should domestic security be compromised, Trump’s government would collapse, and he himself would face retribution.

In reality, striking Iran has partially lifted restrictions on Russian energy, giving Moscow the foreign exchange needed for war. China, meanwhile, benefits from the energy crisis by boosting exports of new energy products. Russia is an energy giant, China has reserves and years of new energy development—continued war in Iran benefits both, while offering little to the U.S. and Israel, and severely harming Europe, Japan, South Korea, and Southeast Asia, which depend on Middle Eastern energy.

Global recession, worsening U.S. inflation, and economic decline all point to the need to end the war against Iran quickly, or to produce a ceasefire plan acceptable to both sides. But in reality, Trump seems to have exhausted his options. Beyond continued military strikes and “maximum pressure,” he has no strategy. Iran has already grasped Trump’s bottom line. America lacks the ability to solve the Iran problem, and Iran is gradually gaining the upper hand at the negotiating table. Trump’s Iran problem mirrors his trade war: loud in rhetoric, weak in results, ultimately a failure. As for reversing his midterm election disadvantage—that is out of the question.

特朗普的伊朗大冒險：蹩脚的商場套路撞到戰場的無人機

特朗普針對伊朗的打擊行動進退兩難，甚至可以說已經失敗。在伊朗長期軍事存在不可能，發動地面攻勢更不現實，事實上伊朗的軍事實力已經被摧毀，現在伊朗發動的是針對中東地區美國盟國和霍爾木茲海峽的零星特種攻擊。特朗普打擊伊朗的原因有兩個，一方面是受到以色列的誤導，正如普京聽信了48小時解決烏克蘭問題一樣，另一方面是活捉馬杜洛造成了誤判，認爲能夠輕鬆解決伊朗問題。

委內瑞拉民不聊生政府失去支持，馬杜洛只能依靠古巴人保障安全，中俄支援的武器根本沒有起到作用，俄國還出賣馬杜洛的行蹤作爲交換籌碼，況且委內瑞拉美洲小國軍事實力有限，最終導致總統輕易被抓捕。伊朗是國土面積廣大，人口衆多，軍事實力強橫，有常年戰爭經驗，擁有完整武器生產產業，擁有核武製造能力的國家，而且長期被神權政府統治，在中東地區是抗衡以色列和反美的主導力量，背後還有中俄的公開支持。美國有實力打擊伊朗，但沒有能力中短時期內解決伊朗問題。所謂伊朗核武發展已經在聯合國的框架下受到監管，經歷多次打擊伊朗核設施被大部份摧毀，發展核武的進程被大幅延後，軍事力量大部被消滅，領導人被集體斬首，伊朗軍事實力的恢復需要大量人力，物力，財力，外援和時間。美以嚴厲打擊伊朗的目的已經達到，現在就是看雙方如何收場。

特朗普的極限施壓只適用於實力有限的小國，對於有一定實力和反制能力的大國無效，這種蹩腳商人的伎倆運用在國際政治上的結果就是一時有效，經常無效。美國雖然是世界軍事霸權，但沒有能力全覆蓋中東盟友，對於伊朗低成本的無人機導彈攻擊難於應付。特朗普發動軍事打擊的目的是為中期選舉造勢，掩蓋他在中美貿易戰上的失敗，俄烏戰爭上和普京的勾結和不作爲，刺激國內經濟方面的無能，現在如果美國對伊朗不能徹底取勝，完全消除伊朗打擊中東盟國的軍事手段，徹底安全開放霍爾木茲海峽，此次針對伊朗的軍事行動就是失敗。美國不可能再蹈覆轍陷入阿富汗一般的戰爭泥潭，對伊朗發動地面戰沒有可能，如此徹底解決伊朗問題也沒有可能，相反伊朗在中俄支援下對美國發動超限戰，將地區形勢複雜化取得成效。

霍爾木茲海峽的封鎖刺激了油價上漲拖累世界經濟發展，對周邊國家的打擊使得美國不能脫離中東戰場，兩國之間談判美國難以獲得絕對優勢，所謂極度施壓完全失去效能。伊朗低成本的特種攻擊使得特朗普的軍事行動顯得毫無意義，既不能逼迫伊朗政府瓦解讓步，也不能為即將到來中期選舉造勢，更不能轉移國內問題的視綫，取悅MAGA派也談不上。以色列打擊哈馬斯都在絕對軍事優勢下，逐街，逐巷，逐地道地清掃了數年之久，更何況是中東軍事強權伊朗。斬首各級領導後會有新人補充，去領導人化全斬首失去了談判對象，伊朗軍事去中心化導致武裝力量群龍無首各自爲戰，況且整個伊朗政權架構並沒有遭到徹底破壞，無非是喪失幾百個政府和軍隊的領導人而已。

神權政府，世俗文人政府，革命衛隊，政府軍，地方武裝等等，各派勢力沒有中央的制衡各自發展，在缺乏地面的武裝打擊下，伊朗政府仍然控制著國家，軍隊武裝力量仍然完整，軍事打擊能力仍然有限保存。特朗普面對的是伊朗在中國多年指導下發動的超限戰，現在值得慶幸的是仍然屬於初級階段，再發展下去必然是針對美國本土的恐怖襲擊，暗殺美國領導人的行動已經再次發生，真走到影響國內安全保障這一步特朗普則很難控制了，他本人和領導的政府必然垮臺，他下臺後必遭清算。從現實看打擊伊朗解禁了部份俄羅斯的能源，使其得到了支持戰爭急需的外匯，中國通過能源危機促進了新能源產品的出口，中俄一個是能源大國，一個有能源儲備和發展新能源多年，伊朗戰爭持續下去對中俄有利，對美以意義不大，對其他依賴中東地區能源的歐洲日韓東南亞國家打擊重大。

國際經濟陷入衰退，美國通脹加劇經濟惡化，無論從哪個角度看都應該儘快結束對伊戰爭，或者儘快拿出兩國都能接受的停戰方案，但從現實看特朗普似乎已黔驢技窮，除了持續軍事打擊和極度施壓外無能爲力，伊朗已經捉摸到特朗普的底牌，美國沒有能力解決伊朗問題，現在伊朗已經開始在談判桌上逐步取得主動。特朗普面對的伊朗問題正如他發動貿易戰一樣，聲勢浩大，收效甚微，最終失敗，不了了之，至於扭轉中期選舉劣勢就不用去考慮了。

Chelsea Crumbled by Forest: Slumping Back to the Pre-Roman Era

Chelsea have fallen once again, losing 1-3 to Nottingham Forest. The squad looks completely demoralized, with only João Pedro’s overhead kick offering a momentary flicker of pride. The goals conceded were a disaster: the first saw Cucurella failing to put in the effort, allowing a cross-turned-header while Tosin was caught out of position. The second was a penalty gifted by Gusto’s clumsy tug, and the third came from Caicedo losing possession, leading to a clinical counter-attack tap-in.

It wasn’t that Chelsea lacked chances—Cole Palmer missed a penalty, largely due to a ten-minute injury stoppage that killed his rhythm—and Enzo hit the post. Yet, the overall state of the Blues is abysmal. As Chalobah once noted after a previous sacking, it’s not that the players aren't trying; they are exhausted and simply don't know how to win anymore. Whether facing Man Utd’s substitutes or Forest’s rotated side, the performance was amateurish. There are deep-rooted tactical failures: this so-called "possession football" fails to break lines or create shots. It’s an endless loop of sideways and backward passes that never penetrate the box. The players look lost, their movement is stagnant, and the entire system is passive and inefficient.

The core of the crisis lies in Maresca’s departure. He had simply requested one quality defender in the winter window, recognizing that while they had numbers, they lacked elite quality. The board viewed this as a challenge to their authority and forced him out, replaced by the novice Rosinha. While things held steady at first by mimicking Maresca’s style, Rosinha’s attempt to go his own way led to a total breakdown with the squad. In a meeting with fans, the hierarchy even had the audacity to claim that, statistically, "a manager's impact is very limited," which inevitably sparked fan protests. Now, the players are disillusioned, stars are looking for an exit to save their careers, and everyone is playing cautiously to avoid injury before the World Cup. With the club and fans at odds, the stadium was half-empty long before the final whistle.

The management consists of arrogant businessmen who understand nothing about football. Their commercial logic of mass-purchasing youth players for future profit has successfully turned Chelsea into "Brighton’s B-team." In the cutthroat Premier League, the "Big Six" take turns falling from grace; now it’s Spurs and Chelsea’s turn. While they might avoid relegation, the club is plagued by internal and external strife—specifically the looming financial crisis, with UEFA far less forgiving than the FA. Selling key players this summer to balance the books is inevitable, which will cripple future recruitment. Billions have been spent only to tear the team apart; from being top of the league late last year, the collapse started with a simple refusal to buy one defender.

The "Golden Chairs" of these management moguls belong in an incinerator. We’ve even seen the American owners nearly get into brawls with fans—a total farce. Any new manager must be a proven winner with Chelsea history—Mourinho, Ancelotti, Conte, or Tuchel. Unless they land someone of Guardiola or Klopp’s caliber, they will fail. The owners, however, remain oblivious. Next season looks even bleaker as Chelsea fades from the European elite into mediocrity. Decades of progress have been wiped out overnight, regressing the club twenty years to the pre-Abramovich "Ken Bates era." The "BlueCo Out" banners are flying high—American arrogance has officially hit a wall in England.

車路士再負森林“辛辛苦苦幾十年，一覺回到解放前”

車仔再輸森林1-3，全隊士氣全無，只靠祖奧帕杜的淩空掛射挽回少許面子。第一球是古古尼亞防守沒有盡力，對方橫傳頭球破門得分，托辛沒在位子上。第二球是古斯度拉人送點，第三球是卡斯度失球被突破，打反擊門前推射。

車仔也並非沒有破門機會，12碼彭馬失機，主要是比賽傷停拖了十幾分鐘，他射門狀態缺失，安素也有中柱球，但總體上藍軍狀態不足。在炒掉前教練時查洛巴曾說並非球員不盡力，相反是筋疲力盡但就是贏不了，對陣曼聯替補陣容和本場對方的避戰陣容，表現都十分差勁，幾乎就是不知道如何踢。這裏面有很深層的戰術原因，車路士球員的所謂傳控踢法，不能撕開對方防綫，形成不了射門，橫回傳球過多，根本打不進禁區，空有控球沒有實際效用，隊員根本不知道如何走位，整體打法被動而低效。

這裏最主要的原因是馬列斯卡的離職，他當初只是要求球會冬窗購買一名後衛，因爲後衛數量夠但質量不足，結果遭拒後憤然離職，因爲球會視其要求為挑戰權威，隨後才有了菜鳥羅仙尼亞的救場。開始仍沿用老馬的打法成績尚佳，後來想自行其是球員不能適應導致決裂。在球會高層與球迷組織的對話中，前者居然稱根據統計教練的功用非常有限，結果發生了球迷的抗議事件。現在藍軍球員離心離德，主力想走另謀發展，世界盃臨近不想受傷，球會與球迷對立，本場比賽未完觀衆離開大半。

球會管理高層全部是不懂管理足球，態度傲慢的商人，所謂通過大量購入青年球員，培養謀利的商業邏輯，最後成功將車仔打造成了“白禮頓二隊”。英超本來就內捲嚴重，所謂的六大班霸輪流墮落，現在排到熱刺和車仔，藍軍雖不至於降級但也內憂外患，特別是揮之不去的財務問題，英足縂網開一面，歐足聯窮追猛打。夏窗賣主力償債勢在必行，引援方面肯定受影響，花費數十億英鎊的投入，居然將球隊搞得分崩離析，去年底還是曾經排名第一的球隊，起始於原因只是一名買後衛。

管理層老爺的黃金座椅應該送進焚化爐了，美國老闆還曾經發生過現場和球迷打鬥的鬧劇。聘請新教練只能從帶過車路士取得過成績的知名老教練中找，莫連奴，安察洛迪，甘地，杜曹中的一人，其他除非哥迪奧拉，高普級別的，否則不會成功，但老闆還在雲山霧罩。下一賽季估計也是江河日下，藍軍脫離歐洲強隊身份歸於平庸，“所謂辛辛苦苦幾十年，一覺回到解放前”，時光倒流到20多年前，沒被俄國老闆收購的“修爾斯時代”。球迷已經打出”Blue Co Out”的旗幟，美國人的傲慢和自以爲是，在英國再一次翻了車。