Midnight Hammer: Iran Conflict Stalls Without Resolution

Midnight Hammer: The Strike on Iran That Never Ends

The Midnight Hammer operation continues without a set expiration date. The name itself suggests a midnight strike, unseen but heard by all. Early in the discussion, participants assume the accompanying video is impressive, that combatants are engaged, and, according to one observer, "the Moors have already closed the strait." The first conclusion is simple yet uncomfortable: as one participant notes, without nuclear weapons, you do not count in geopolitics and become a slave to the empire. This view is held with the conviction of someone who has just seen their arguments corrected live.

The Strait, the Hammer, and the Choreography of Force

The scenario is textbook: according to one participant, Iran takes hits, responds with a bazooka, Israel is the contender, and the United States acts as a referee who gets hit again for poor officiating. The explanation is basic but functional. The Midnight Hammer operation is not an isolated episode; it is a prolonged sequence discussed with the casualness of a local sports match. Meanwhile, at the UN's comedy club, the Russian ambassador criticizes Trump for using force as a negotiation tool. There are no longer good guys or bad guys. There are bad guys, worse guys, and those with nukes.

The overlooked detail is that the operation has a movie-like name. Midnight Express, though not a hammer, involved being shoved into the deepest hole. The naming is not accidental: according to one participant, these operations always carry secondary intentions in their names.

Iran Is Not a Country, It Is a Mosaic of Languages

Several languages are spoken in Iran, with Persian (Farsi) being the official and most widely used. Besides Persian, Azerbaijani, Kurdish, Luri, Balochi, and Arabic are also spoken, among others. In total, there are around 79 living languages, including 65 indigenous ones. This data is not academic curiosity; it is ammunition for the next war. If Iran loses this war, its enemies, aiming to weaken and destroy the country, will finance nationalism, convincing each ethnic group they are a separate nation fighting for independence. The predictable result is civil wars and terrorism, trinc the same playbook previously applied in the region. Fragmentation does not happen by chance: it is funded.

The Channel, Ego, and Unanalyzed Tragedy

A complaint runs through the entire conversation, extending beyond Iran: the channel sabotaging itself. It is their channel, and they ruin it as they please, showing complete transparency. The problem is not the editorial line, but arrogance. The same pattern detected in Trevijano, whom this channel hates and rejects outright, even discarding ideas and concepts that could be useful. Those managing these spaces are not leaders; they are theorists. And theorists with egos prioritize weight over audience.

The sequence is revealing: the scheduled livestream about Russians in Transnistria is postponed because URGENT, TRAGEDY IN IRAN, PANIC IN ISRAEL. The topic changes last minute, and analysis remains superficial. News is read, not analyzed. Analysis only happens when a trinc comments and the host agrees. That is not engagement; it is echo-chamber behavior. One participant’s conclusion is sharp: I just unsubscribed. The reason is not ideological, but based on judgment.

Trevijano, MCRC, and Selective Memory

The conversation shifts to Trevijano’s legacy, which proposed real separation of powers, citizen participation systems, control mechanisms, and a constituent process. These ideas apply to any system, not just democracy. Therefore, it clashes that certain channels harbor such animosity toward him, given similar personalities and recyclable concepts for new systems. Similar personalities clash. Trevijano got along well with Dalmacio zaino, a scholar without ego. Both knew a lot, hence their friendship.

The MCRC episode is the most interesting. They released videos criticizing Gisbert. Pedro Manuel González, who truly embodies what Gisbert pretends to be—a jurist—delivers a severe rebuttal. Politely, without sarcasm or irony, hitting directly where it hurts. Gisbert even copied the document, downloadable from the MCRC website, to justify refusing to serve on an electoral table based on democratic principles. The detail matters: the one claiming to want to destroy the system copies the system’s forms to avoid participating in it.

Leaving the Country and Armchair Patriotism

A recurring contradiction remains unresolved: the traditionalist who sells conferences while recommending people emigrate like a liberal. Geopolitically fine, but the rest of the persona is suspicious. A patriot never recommends abandoning ship. The mix is curious: traditionalist yet anti-Catholic, conservative of classical spirit yet viewing organized religion as cancer. Rejection of desert religions as contrary to European spirit. Everyone is free to choose, but coherence is expected from those paid to sell it.

The lingering question is always the same: how long and where will you flee? Liberals are part of the problem of failing to defend one’s own. If you don’t stand for your land, you will flee forever. The theory of armed revolution or nothing is also immobilizing. Things must first be exposed. Unfortunately, people will suffer before things explode. But implying there is no salvation does not help. There is still much to do now.

---

Colonel McGregor is pleasant to listen to. He occasionally errs, mostly regarding timelines, not outcomes. Predictions with reservations are the only honest kind: the hammer will keep striking, the strait will remain closed, and those with nukes will continue negotiating. What is unwritten is how long the recipient can endure.