US-Israel Decapitation of Khamenei: A War Game Between Two Octogenarians

 

The US and Israel launched an attack on Iran, publicly stating in advance that it would last four days. However, within just one day, Iran's Supreme Leader Khamenei, along with more than 40 other senior officials and even some of his close relatives, were decapitated and killed in targeted strikes.The United States primarily focused on striking Iranian military facilities, while Israel took responsibility for eliminating key figures. Israel's intelligence penetration has reached a microscopic level: as soon as Iran's highest leader, even when hiding in a heavily protected bunker, shows any sign of appearing, he can be immediately assassinated. 

The so-called multi-day negotiations beforehand were nothing more than a tactic to lure him out into the open.Trump, now approaching eighty years old, launched this targeted elimination of the 86-year-old theocratic leader in order to reverse the declining momentum ahead of the midterm elections. This war between two elderly men was even announced with a specific start time in advance, after which adjustments could be made depending on the situation.Believing there was still a chance if the few days operation persisted, Khamenei naturally came out to rally morale — only to walk straight into the trap. In reality, behind the scenes, people encouraging him to appear were likely influenced by Israeli intelligence agencies.The current so-called "limited" military operation remains confined to airstrikes. 

It is almost impossible for the US and Israel to deploy large-scale ground forces for sweeping operations; otherwise, they would not have publicly declared the timeframe of the military strikes in advance.Overall, this is a coordinated effort to support internal chaos in Iran, with the aim of forcing the theocratic regime to collapse as quickly as possible. Iran has been experiencing internal unrest for several years, but large-scale uprisings have only recently erupted, with citizens taking to the streets to protest and attack government buildings. Under international public pressure, the United States felt compelled to respond — especially given that Trump, after courts ruled his tariffs illegal, needed a military strike against Iran to divert domestic attention.He originally had no intention of striking Iran. 

The earlier so-called negotiations were merely extreme pressure tactics. The eventual launch of military action involved some   occational factors, as well as Israel's unilateral commitment: once the operation began, they would definitely decapitate Khamenei. Now that the objective has been achieved, the current military action is essentially a follow-up to the earlier strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities. The only real threat Iran posed to the US and Israel was its nuclear program, which has now been basically eliminated.As for whether the theocratic government can maintain power, the killing of the Supreme Leader has plunged the country into even greater internal chaos. 

During the negotiation period, the Iranian government continued to suppress popular uprisings while hoping for support from China and Russia.Russia's Putin is Trump's ally. After already betraying Venezuela's Maduro, he doesn't mind sacrificing one more — Khamenei — in exchange for the US withdrawing military aid to Ukraine, indirectly leading to the dissolution of NATO.China remains a relatively insignificant player in this scenario. Its role is mainly economic — purchasing 90% of Iran's oil and helping sustain the theocratic regime financially. However, in political, military, and diplomatic terms, Iran's dependence on Russia far outweighs its reliance on China. Since Trump took office and adjusted his policy toward Russia, Russian support for Iran has begun to shift. Losing Russia's backing is fatal for Iran. China's assistance is limited to economic blood transfusions, and China's influence in the Middle East has always been mostly rhetorical. While it is undoubtedly an economic powerhouse, it has almost no real presence in international politics. 

It is essentially just a tool exploited by Russia and Iran.In the face of US-Israeli bombing, the air defense systems provided by China and Russia proved completely ineffective. Neither China nor Russia offered meaningful support for Iran at the United Nations.In the short term, it is unrealistic for the heir of the Pahlavi dynasty to return and take power. The current international focus is on how the Iranian government and military will react under the theocratic regime.So-called "targeted retaliation" has so far been quite limited — merely dozens of haphazardly launched missiles from neighboring areas. The greatest threat — nuclear weapons — has been neutralized, and the theocratic religious leader has been decapitated. 

The next focus is on how the current Iranian regime will negotiate and compromise with the United States. Bargaining between the two sides is expected to continue, accompanied by further military strikes, and this process may last for a considerable period.At present, military strikes are secondary; political pressure is primary. The Iranian issue may be resolved more quickly than many expect. Moreover, Trump will not allow Iran to blockade the Strait of Hormuz, which would cause sustained rises in oil prices.

 

美以斬首哈梅内伊一場8旬老人之間的戰爭游戲

 

美以出手攻打伊朗，並且聲明先打4天，然而僅僅一天伊朗宗教領袖哈梅內伊和另外40多名高官，甚至他的近親都被斬首炸死了。美國主要負責打擊伊朗軍事設施，以色列負責清除重點人物。以色列的情報滲透是微米級別的，只要龜縮在防護體內的伊朗最高領導出現，就能夠立刻被斬殺。之前所謂的多日談判無非就是引蛇出洞而已，特朗普年近八旬爲了奪回中期選舉的頹勢，對86歲的神權領袖發動定點清除，這場2位老人之間的戰爭，居然還提前通知時間，然後再看情況酌情加減。

哈梅內伊看到堅持4周仍有轉機，自然是要出來鼓舞士氣，結果最後自投羅網。實際上幕後鼓動他出現的人，也有以色列情報機關的影子。現在的 所謂有限度的軍事行動仍然停留在空襲階段，美國和以色列出動地面部隊大面積清剿幾乎不可能，否則也不會公開聲明軍事打擊時間。總體上這是對伊朗內亂的策應，目的是逼迫伊朗神權政府儘快垮臺。伊朗內部騷亂持續數年之久，但最近才引發大規模起義，民衆走向街頭抗議衝擊政府，美國在國際輿論下不得不做出反應，何況特朗普在被法院判定關稅違法的情況下，需要發動對伊朗的軍事攻擊轉移國內視綫。

他原本沒有打擊伊朗的打算，之前的所謂談判是極限施壓，最後發動軍事行動有一些偶然因素，另外就是以色列的單方面承諾，只要開打就必定斬首哈梅內伊，現在行動的目的達到了。所以目前的軍事行動其實是之前打擊伊朗核武設施的後續，該國能夠威脅美國以色列的無非就是核武器，現在已經被基本清除。至於神權政府是否能夠繼續維持權力，現在最高領袖被殺內部更加混亂。談判期間伊朗政府一直在鎮壓民衆起義，並且希望得到中俄的支持。

俄羅斯普京是特朗普盟友，出賣了委內瑞拉馬杜洛後，不在乎再多一個哈梅內伊，條件是美國退出支援烏克蘭的軍事援助間接解散北約。中國始終是個無足輕重的角色，而且其作用只是體現在經濟上，購買伊朗9成的石油，維護神權基本統治，在政經軍事外交上伊朗對俄羅斯的依賴遠大於中國。特朗普上臺後對俄羅斯的政策有所改變，如此俄國對伊朗的支持也開始轉態。失去俄羅斯的支持對於伊朗是致命的，中國的援助只限於經濟輸血，何況中國對於中東的影響力歷來停留在口頭上，該國無疑是經濟強國，但是在國際政治上幾乎沒有存在感。就是俄羅斯和伊朗利用的對象罷了。

面對美以的轟炸中俄援助的防空武器完全沒有起到任何作用，中俄甚至在聯合國都沒有給予伊朗有力的支持。短期內讓伊朗巴列維王朝繼承人回國執政並不現實，現在國際關注的焦點是伊朗神權政府統治下政府和軍隊的反應。所謂針對性的報復是相當有限的，直到目前爲止也就是周邊胡亂發射的幾十枚導彈而已。威脅最大的核武已經被滅，神權宗教領袖也被斬首，後續關注的是伊朗現政權與美國如何妥協，估計兩者之間的討價還價還會伴隨進一步的軍事打擊，持續相當一段時間。現在是軍事打擊爲輔，政治施壓爲主，伊朗問題徹底解決可能比想像中更快一些。更何況特朗普是不會讓伊朗封鎖霍爾木茲海峽，而導致石油價格持續上升的。

Americans may handle Iran, but in football they’re amateurs — Chelsea fall again to Arsenal

 

Chelsea lost again away to Arsenal, 1–2, and the performance was quite poor. The main reason was that manager Loxenia, after losing to the Gunners in the League Cup, wanted to win this time at their home ground. His tactics emphasized passing in midfield and defense to draw the opponent’s pressing, then exploiting space behind. In the League Cup, the first encounter was an open attacking game, Chelsea lost by one goal. But against Arsenal, no team in the world benefits from trading attacks. In the second leg, playing positional football, Chelsea conceded late, but tactically that was actually correct. Against Arsenal, you can only play positional football, not transition football. You must deny them the chance to use their speed advantage. If you prevent them from organizing attacks, then counterattacks are more effective. Of course, if the squad had a powerful striker like Drogba, individual brilliance could also decide the match.

In this game, frequent passing in the backline exposed the lack of experience and ability of defenders Sarr and Hadou. Their repeated mistakes affected goalkeeper Sánchez, and the entire defense was squeezed with almost no space, unable to play the ball out. Arsenal pressed aggressively up front, packed the midfield, and Chelsea’s attack was disconnected. Ultimately, multiple corner kicks led to defeat, with all three goals essentially scored by Arsenal. The corner defense was problematic: Arsenal’s so-called corner routines were basically blocking the goalkeeper, keeping their main attackers outside the box before the kick, then suddenly charging into pre-set zones towin headers. The late red card was self-inflicted, also due to poor defending.

Although Chelsea still have two competitions to fight for, overall this season looks like ending empty-handed. The squad lacks experienced leaders; young players are too inconsistent—strong against weak teams, weaker against strong ones. When in form they can score, when out of form they concede. Such instability makes breakthroughs difficult. This year’s signings João Padu and Estevão were relatively successful, while Della and Garnacho were mixed, functional players but not decisive. The rest can be ignored.

Using inexperienced youngsters in big matches inevitably leads to defeat. Injuries may play a part, but the coach’s tactical philosophy is also responsible. Cole Palmer is better suited to organizing centrally rather than playing as a striker. João Padu offers little threat on the wing, Padonitu was completely contained on the right, and Enzo up front failed to link play—at most James’s forward runs provided some threat. The club’s obsession with hoarding wingers while neglecting defensive reinforcements already led to Maresca’s departure, leaving problems that are hard to fix. The backline has numbers but poor quality. Bringing in experienced players would cost little and deliver immediate impact. Chelsea historically were famous for solid defenders who could also attack.

Now the club focuses on business, ignoring football’s development rules. Their so-called “bold exploration” is just signing youngsters on long contracts with low wages to make the accounts look good. Without results, the club itself bears the pressure. Chelsea do have many talented young players, and the team’s framework is basically in place. What they need are: (1) experienced veterans to lead, and (2) a proven coach. Both are indispensable. Loxenia is a good coach, but not the best choice for a big club. Managing Chelsea helps his personal growth, but the team’s development benefits are limited.

Objectively, Chelsea are now just a mid-table team, half Brighton starters and half Manchester City youth players. It’s unclear where American owner Boehly wants to take the Blues. Americans may be fine with Venezuela or Iran, but in football they are certainly weaker.

 

美國人打伊朗行搞足球是外行車路士再輸兵工廠

 

車路士客場再輸1-2給阿仙奴，而且場面相當難看，主因是藍軍主帥羅仙尼亞在聯賽杯輸給兵工廠後，本次在對方主場想贏比賽。術上強調中後場傳球，吸引對方拼搶，然後打身後空檔。聯賽杯首次對賽雙方打對攻，車路士1球小負，與兵工廠打對攻全世界球隊都占不到便宜，次回合陣地戰結束階段被對方打入一球，然而在戰術上反而正確。打阿仙奴只能用陣地戰不能用運動戰，不能將對方速度優勢發揮出來，只要讓對方無法組織起進攻，再打反擊把握更大。如果隊內有強力鋒霸杜奧巴之類，當然也可以依靠個別球員的能力取勝。本場比賽中後場頻繁傳球，打主力的確是經驗能力不足的後衛薩爾和哈杜，頻繁失誤下守門員桑切斯也受影響，整個後衛綫被壓縮得幾乎沒有空間，而且根本傳不出球，對方在前場積極逼搶，中場囤積重兵，車仔組織不起攻勢前後脫節。最後雙方多次角球下藍軍敗北，所進3求基本都是兵工廠打進。

角球多是防守有問題，阿仙奴的所謂角球戰術也無非是遮擋守門員，開球前主力攻擊球員不進禁區，罰球點訓練時演練過，突然衝入預設區域，爭取搶點破門。比賽最後階段的紅牌是咎由自取，也是因爲防守不到位造成的。藍軍目前雖然還有2綫比賽爭取，但整體看今年估計是四大皆空的局面。隊內沒有領軍人物有經驗的球員，年輕人起伏太大，遇弱不強，遇強更弱，狀態好能得分，狀態差必失分，如此球隊成績不穩下難以取得突破。今年引援祖奧帕度，埃斯迪華奧比較成功，戴拉和加納曹得失各半，作爲功能性球員難當大任。其餘兩個可以忽略不計。

在大賽用毫無經驗的年輕球員，最後只能導致輸球收場，雖有主力受傷之嫌，但與教練的戰術思想分不開。高爾彭馬適合中路組織而非頂在前面打中鋒，祖奧帕杜打邊路威脅不大，帕度尼圖在右路完全被節制，前場安素也起不到銜接作用，最多是詹士後上傳球有些威脅而已。球會對於囤積邊路選手的癡迷，忽視後防球員的引入，導致了馬列斯卡的離任，對現在的球隊造成了難以解決的問題。後方人員雖多但實力差勁，引進有經驗的球員事實上花費不大，而且在效果上立竿見影。藍軍歷來是以後衛堅固帶刀著名的。

然而球會現在只重視經營，忽視足球發展的規律，所謂的勇於探索，也無非是長約低工資找年輕球員，把賬目弄得好看些而已。沒有了成績保障受壓力的還是俱樂部本身。藍軍目前有很多有天賦的年輕球員，球隊發展也已經基本成型。需要的一是有經驗實力的老球員帶隊，還有就是有實績的名教練指導，兩者缺一不可。羅仙尼亞是個好教練，但不是大球會的最佳選擇，讓他帶隊練級對他個人有利，但對整個球隊發展效果有限。

客觀說車路士現在也就是實力中游的球隊，隊內一半是白禮頓正選和一半曼城青年軍。真不知道美國老闆伯利想把藍軍帶到哪裏去，反正美國人打委內瑞拉和伊朗行，搞足球是肯定差一些了！

蓼沼優衣

 

はのんまゆ