Individual Economists

Ending Iran War Will Be Mutual Decision With Israel, Trump Says

Zero Hedge -

Ending Iran War Will Be Mutual Decision With Israel, Trump Says

Authored by Victoria Freedman via The EPoch Times,

U.S. President Donald Trump on March 8 said the decision on when to end the Iran War will be a mutual one that he will make with input from Israel.

“I think it’s mutual ... a little bit. We’ve been talking. I’ll make a decision at the right time, but everything’s going to be taken into account,” Trump told The Times of Israel in a telephone interview.

Asked whether he thought it would be necessary for Israel to continue their campaign even after the United States decides to stop its airstrikes, the U.S. president said, “I don’t think it’s going to be necessary.”

Trump also said that Iran was “going to destroy Israel and everything else around it,” adding, “we’ve worked together [with Israel]. We’ve destroyed a country that wanted to destroy Israel.”

On Feb. 28, the United States and Israel jointly launched an attack on Iran, with the Islamic Republic’s leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, being killed in the first salvo of the war.

On March 9, the Iranian regime chose Mojtaba Khamenei, the son of Ali Khamenei, as the next leader.

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said in a March 4 post on X that whoever is appointed to replace the deceased Iranian leader “will be an unequivocal target for elimination.”

“[Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu] and I have instructed the [Israel Defense Forces] to prepare and act by all means to carry out the mission as an integral part of the objectives of Operation ‘Lion’s Roar,’” Katz said, using Israel’s term for the military offensive against Iran and its proxies.

Trump similarly told ABC News on March 8 that Iran’s next leader is “not going to last long” if he does not get approval from the United States.

No Expansion of Objectives

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said on March 6 that Washington expects Operation Epic Fury “to last four to six weeks” to achieve its objectives, “and we are well on our way to achieving those objectives.”

Leavitt told reporters during a press briefing outside the White House that, during the operation to date, more than 30 Iranian vessels and ships have been sunk and that the Iranian navy has “been deemed combat ineffective.”

She added that the United States has taken out the ballistic missile threat posed by Iran, and that in six days since the war started, “retaliatory ballistic missile strikes from Iran are now down 90 percent.”

“Ultimately, the president has made it very clear: He wants to take out the threat of Iran to the United States, and Operation Epic Fury as well on its way to doing that.”

Operation Epic Fury is the name for the United States’s offensive against Iran.

Last week, the Pentagon said there is no expansion of military objectives in Iran and that the operation was moving onto its next phase.

Adm. Brad Cooper, the head of U.S. Central Command, said on March 5 during a news briefing at U.S. Central Command headquarters in Tampa, Florida, that the next objective is to destroy Iran’s ballistic missile industrial base.

“We’re not just hitting what they have—we’re destroying their ability to rebuild,” Cooper said. “As we transition to the next phase of this operation, we will systemically dismantle Iran’s missile production capability for the future, and that’s absolutely in progress.”

Tyler Durden Mon, 03/09/2026 - 12:45

US Orders Americans Out Of Southeast Turkey After Reports Of CIA Arming Kurds

Zero Hedge -

US Orders Americans Out Of Southeast Turkey After Reports Of CIA Arming Kurds

Within the opening days of the Iran-US-Israel war, the State Department urged Americans across 14 countries in the Middle East region to urgently depart. There's since been an ongoing US government facilitated evacuation effort. Private tour groups have also been coordinating to get people out.

For example, stranded tourists in Israel have rushed south, across the Egyptian border on buses, where they can safely arrange flights from Cairo. For the first time of the war, Turkey has just been added to the list - a rarity given it has long been viewed as a place of stability and is a prime tourist destination. 

via Duvar English

But the new State Department travel advisory has yet to be extended over the whole of the country, instead Americans are being warned not to visit southeast Turkey and for anyone currently there to depart immediately.

It warns of the potential terrorism, armed conflict, and arbitrary detentions, according to the advisory - at a moment bombs between Iran, Israel, the US and Gulf countries continue to fly. And importantly, a staff draw down:

Washington has advised non-essential staff to leave its consulate near the southern Turkish city of Adana near a key NATO base and ordered US citizens to leave “southeast Turkey,” the US embassy to Ankara said Monday.

There are American troops at several bases in Turkey, particularly at NATO's major Incirlik air base, near Adana

"On March 9, 2026, the Department of State ordered non-emergency US government employees and US government employee family members to leave Consulate General Adana due to the safety risks," the US embassy said on X.

It further declared that "Americans in southeast Turkey are strongly encouraged to depart now."

Last week saw a couple of very serious developments which impact Turkey. First, a ballistic missile from Iran flew over the large Asia minor country and was intercepted by NATO defenses in the Mediterranean.

Also, days ago there was an avalanche of global headlines alleging the CIA was preparing Kurdish groups based in Iraq for a cross-border attack on Iran.

Some of these are the very groups Turkey has long been bombing just across its eastern border in northern Iraq. While Iraq as well as the Iraqi Kurdistan government of the north denied that this was happening - the alleged plan has the potential to destabilize part of southeast Turkey.

The State Dept alert could be alluding to the tense geopolitical situation with the Kurds in the following: "Terrorists may attack tourist locations, transportation hubs, markets, malls, hotels, and places of worship," the advisory warned.

Tyler Durden Mon, 03/09/2026 - 12:25

Gigantic US Error Or All Part Of A Plan?

Zero Hedge -

Gigantic US Error Or All Part Of A Plan?

Via Rabobank,

Anybody thinking US payrolls, even at -92K, matters much in the current environment is probably at the head of the queue to be replaced by an AI soon. That data series is always volatile and 2.5m undocumented workers are estimated to have left the US since Trump was re-elected: 394K foreign-born workers lost their jobs in the reported month while the native-born series rose 877K, albeit after a shocking 2.5m drop of its own the month before. How can anyone take these numbers seriously even if the underlying signal is deadly serious?

This is eclipsed by Brent oil this morning trading over $110 with WTI at $107: both look to be going exponential, perhaps even opening up the $150 scenario the GCC warn of. Worse, that doesn’t account for more dramatic moves in diesel, jet fuel, fertilizer, key chemicals like sulphur, and gases like helium, without which not a lot moves in the industrial economy, grows in the agricultural economy, or is produced in terms of metals like copper and tech goods like chips.

In short, this is now starting to look like a potential combination of the 1973 post-Yom Kippur War oil shock, the 2022 Russia-Ukraine War commodity shock, and the 2020-21 Covid supply chain shock. 

The longer this goes on, the more exponential the damage becomes in a domino effect, which is exactly what oil is now showing to a market that saw some takes last week that ‘things could be a lot worse.’ Well, now they are: and if we are still in the same position this time next week, things could be quite terrifying.

Yet while credible estimates today are that if all fighting were to suddenly cease, it would take two weeks to start to right the ship and a further two months to get back to normal, what we should call Gulf War 3 is showing many signs of widening its geography and escalating within it.

On geography: even if Trump is reportedly now against using the Kurds as a military wedge against Tehran (perhaps due to Turkish opposition), Azerbaijan, which was recently struck by Iran, is another matter. So is Pakistan, which has underlined its mutual defence pact with the Saudis. EU member Cyprus has reported that the drone which struck it was fired by Hezbollah in Lebanon, and was a Russian Shaheed model, not an Iranian one. Russia has also openly said that it isn’t neutral in this conflict, and favours Iran, alongside reports that it’s providing Tehran with data to help it strike its opponents. In Lebanon, Israeli actions are intensifying.

On escalation: after an apology to its neighbours from Iran’s president was rebuffed by the IRGC, the weekend saw strikes on energy facilities against both sides, where Iran came off worse. Moreover, we saw several reports of attacks on desalination plants: if those critical facilities were to go in the region, much of its population would have to as well. Trump is reportedly weighing the introduction of special forces ground troops into Iran, while a third carrier strike group is now on the way. Moreover, Tehran has appointed Mojtaba Khamenei, the son of the former Supreme Leader, to replace him. He is clearly unacceptable to both the US and Israel and reflects the hardest of lines from the regime rather than any possible compromise, Venezuela style.

It’s also time to take a deep breath and note energy expert Anas Alhajji is asking if this is a gigantic US error or part of a plan. 

I’d flagged 2026, besides telling 2025 to “hold my beer”, was logically going to see the US use its military to disrupt upstream supply chains heading to China to counterbalance the downstream and rare-earths midstream (i.e., processing) dominance Beijing can coerce it with. The goal was cheap commodities for them and pricey ones for others.

Alhajji takes this further to note that the US is *relatively* less impacted by the tidal wave of economic and market chaos heading our way

  • the US (with the Americas) is relatively energy self-sufficient: what if the US were to stop exporting oil, its historic policy norm, to bring WTI down sharply, for example? Could we, as others float, see $200 oil globally and $50 oil State-side?

  • Likewise, US LNG is now the lowest risk global choice: who will trust the Gulf as a secure provider again unless the entire region is brought under a true Pax Americana?

  • The US, with the Americas, is also self-sufficient in many commodities being choked off directly or indirectly via Hormuz. That includes fertilizer, which means US and LatAm food supplies could remain secure when others’ aren’t. It also includes helium, which allows for the manufacture of semiconductors, when others may be about to fall short.

By contrast, Europe is again in a bad position in this looming crisis, as are energy- and commodity-reliant Asian exporters already struggling with US tariffs.

China will have to rely on its stockpiles for a while, then Russia, which greatly strengthens Moscow’s hand in that relationship.

Perhaps this is paranoia or looking for a strategy in a geopolitical miscalculation; or it could have been a plan B if Iran didn’t ‘do a Venezuela’; or it might just be a happy coincidence the US can now take advantage of if it wishes.

Yet the Donroe Doctrine ‘Shield of the Americas’ project launched at the same time as Gulf War 3, the increased likelihood Cuba flips to the US camp, following the pressure on Greenland, and the evident lead set by US economic (and military) statecraft is quite the coincidence if this is all just random.

Indeed, it’s incredibly important to grasp that this *might* be the Great Game being played, because if it is, assuming “because markets” will bail us out (“Iran/Trump can’t let this happen”) could be false hope.

Oil vey, indeed.

Week ahead

Tuesday: sees more of Japan Q4 GDP, Aussie NAB business confidence, German trade data, Chinese trade data, and the US NFIB small business survey and existing home sales.

Wednesday: has US CPI. Again, irrelevant right now.

Thursday: it’s US trade data and initial claims, housing starts and building permits.

Friday: sees UK industrial production and trade data, Canadian employment, US personal income and spending and the PCE deflator, durable goods, initial claims, JOLTS data, and Michigan inflation expectations.  

Tyler Durden Mon, 03/09/2026 - 12:05

New York's Medicaid Program Under Federal Investigation For Alleged Fraud

Zero Hedge -

New York's Medicaid Program Under Federal Investigation For Alleged Fraud

Authored by Sylvia Xu via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Dr. Mehmet Oz launched a federal investigation into New York’s Medicaid program on March 3, citing the unusual spending trend in the state.

Dr. Mehmet Oz, administrator for the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, speaks at a press conference in the Library of the Eisenhower Executive Office Building in Washington on Feb. 25, 2026. Travis Gillmore/The Epoch Times

“Heart surgeons are trained to look at the numbers. When something doesn’t add up, you don’t ignore it; you investigate,” Oz, administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and a former heart surgeon, said in a video posted on X.

“Right now, the numbers coming out of New York’s Medicaid program don’t add up,” he said.

New York far outspends other states on its Medicaid program, both on a statewide and per beneficiary basis, according to Oz’s letter to New York Gov. Kathy Hochul.

Numbers

New York’s Medicaid program spends more than $90 billion a year, the second-highest total in the nation, Oz said. That’s roughly 10 percent of the nation’s $900 billion in Medicaid spending for 2024.

New York’s average spending on each beneficiary is more than $12,500, which is 36 percent higher than the national average. The state’s per-resident spending is the highest in the country, nearly 80 percent higher than the national average.

As of January, about one-third of New Yorkers—6.7 million individuals—have enrolled in Medicaid.

That is nearly 14 percentage points higher than the national average of 20 percent Medicaid enrollment, according to November data from the federal government.

“That alone demands scrutiny, but it gets worse,” Oz said in the video.

In addition to New York’s Medicaid enrollment size, Oz cited the workforce delivering long-term care, particularly home-based personal care services, as another driver of New York’s high Medicaid spending.

Between 2023 and 2024, 38 percent of job growth in New York was from the home health and personal care aide category.

“Now, New York has turned this [Medicaid] program to help our most vulnerable into a massive jobs program reimbursed by federal taxpayers,” Oz said.

Personal care services include daily living assistance such as eating, bathing, and dressing. Patients need such services due to aging, chronic illness, or disability.

From 2023 through mid-2025, New York state provided personal care services for nearly 75 percent of its Medicaid enrollees at a cost of $45 billion.

In fiscal year 2024, the state’s Medicaid spending on personal care services was $18.5 billion, nearly 70 percent more than other states’ combined spending on this item, according to The Epoch Times’ analysis of open data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

“That level of utilization is unheard of,” said Oz.

New York state allowed problems such as being “easily distracted” to qualify for a personal care system, making personal care services the number one occupation in the state, Oz said.

Demand for Documentation

He said officials must send documents on how they handle fraud, waste, and abuse, or their federal payments will be put on hold.

“We ask hard questions; we expect an honest answer,” Oz said.

On March 4, Gov. Hochul said the Trump administration was targeting New York for political reasons. She added that she would “show them the facts” to prove them wrong and promised to help fight any actual fraud, according to The Associated Press.

The federal government temporarily deferred $259 million in Medicaid payments to Minnesota over alleged fraud on Feb. 25.

Oz said the money would be released after Minnesota proposes and acts on a “comprehensive corrective action plan to solve the problem.”

Minnesota sued the federal government on March 2 to stop it from withholding funding. The state warned that freezing these funds could force cuts to medical care for low-income residents.

Tyler Durden Mon, 03/09/2026 - 11:25

"Let Them Keep Playing Games": Iran Warns Of $200 Crude Oil

Zero Hedge -

"Let Them Keep Playing Games": Iran Warns Of $200 Crude Oil

G-7 finance ministers are holding an emergency meeting on Monday morning to discuss options to cap skyrocketing energy prices, with Brent and WTI trading in triple-digit territory as the Middle East conflict threatens to unleash a global energy shock. As the U.S.-Iran conflict intensifies heading into the new week, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has warned of $200-a-barrel oil.

IRGC spokesman Ebrahim Zolfighari said on Monday that the U.S. has begun a new chapter in the conflict by targeting Iran's energy infrastructure.

"If they can afford the price of oil at $200 per barrel, let them keep playing this game," Zolfighari said in a video message posted by Al Jazeera on X.

Over the weekend, Israeli strikes on major oil facilities around Tehran, combined with production shut-ins by major Gulf producers and IRGC retaliatory attacks on energy facilities across the Middle East, sparked panic in energy markets worldwide, with Brent crude briefly topping $119 per barrel in Asian trading.

On Friday, Goldman analyst Daan Struyven wrote four reasons why oil prices are moving higher:

  • Shipping has stopped. We estimate that shipments passing through the Strait of Hormuz are down 90% from normal, curtailing 18 mbpd from the global market (~18% of global oil).

  • Pipeline pressures. We estimate only about 25% of the theoretical redirection of oil in the Middle East through pipelines is currently being achieved, partly due to physical disruptions. We estimate only ~0.9 mbpd are incrementally coming to market through Middle East pipeline initiatives.

  • No quick shipping solutions. Our conversations highlight that most shippers are in a wait-and-see mode while physical risks in the SoH are high.

  • Demand destruction may be necessary. With no supply relief in sight, oil prices may need to go to demand-destruction levels even more quickly than history and simple models focusing on Persian Gulf exports alone suggest.

Goldman's Rich Privorotsky commented on the speculation of SPR dumps, indicating:

Such a release would buy time. If the disruption proves temporary, a coordinated SPR release makes sense. If the disruption persists for months, those reserves might arguably be more valuable at higher prices or in a more acute shortage.

Additionally, energy economist Anas Alhajji warned UBS analysts last week about SPR limitations:

"The impact of the U.S. SPR is limited. Saudi Arabia is completely out of the picture. All of that spare capacity in OPEC is out of the picture. So what do we do? We are then left relying on demand destruction to curb"

Related:

What's evident is that Operation Epic Fury, which initially focused on military, nuclear, missile, and IRGC sites, is now targeting economic high-value assets, with Iran's Kharg Island now in focus (read). 

Tyler Durden Mon, 03/09/2026 - 11:05

Key Events This Week: CPI, PCE, ADP, Durable Goods And More

Zero Hedge -

Key Events This Week: CPI, PCE, ADP, Durable Goods And More

With the Fed in their self-imposed blackout period, the economic data will get a chance to do the talking ahead of the March 18th FOMC meeting. Of particular note will be the inflation data, namely Wednesday’s CPI report for February and Friday’s core PCE reading for January, but there will also be some scattered labor market data to help put context around last Friday’s disappointing February employment report. Of course, all of that assumes that traders can be dragged away from the latest Iran war headlines fro more than 5 minutes. 

Turning to this week's main event, the February CPI report will get top billing. DB's expectations are for a 1.0% increase in energy prices to boost headline CPI (+0.27% forecast vs. +0.17% previous) relative to core (+0.24% vs. +0.30%). This translates to a year-over-year rate of 2.40% (vs. 2.39% previous), while the latter would tick down by 4bps to 2.46%. Within the CPI basket, DB looks for tariff-related strength in core goods, particularly apparel. In addition, recent gains in wholesale used car prices have the potential to begin adding to price pressures over the next couple of months. On the services side, expect more rental disinflation, though recent upward revisions to the repeat-rent indices suggest caution around the speed at which that can occur. Also look for payback from January’s particularly large increase in airfare prices, though recent moves in energy prices could add to airfares going forward. 

Also of note on the inflation front this week will be Friday’s personal income (+0.4% forecast vs. +0.3% previous) and consumption (+0.1% vs. +0.4%) report for January, which will contain that month’s reading on core PCE, the Fed’s preferred inflation measure. Based on the January CPI and PPI data, DB is expecting a 0.42% increase (vs. +0.36%), which would take the year-over-year rate up a tenth to 3.1%. The Fed will have to wait until the morning of their March 18th meeting for the PPI data to get a more complete read on February’s core PCE. Based on our component-level CPI forecasts, our prior expectation is for a 0.18% February gain, which would have the year-over-year rate decline to 2.8%.

In terms of the labor market data, ADP’s weekly data on Tuesday covering the week of February 21st will provide an initial view on net hiring trends beyond February’s survey week. Similarly, Thursday’s jobless claims and Friday’s January JOLTs release will give additional context on gross labor market flows.

The remainder of the data this week will help forecasters sharpen their views on current quarter growth. Growth data will also feature. Revisions to the second estimate of fourth quarter GDP (Friday) will update the baseline from which to judge early 2026 momentum. Tuesday’s existing home sales (3.81mn vs. 3.91mn) for February and Thursday’s housing starts (1.325mn vs. 1.404mn) and permits (1.450 vs. 1.455mn) for January will provide an update on the residential sector. We will also get a preliminary look into the health of the factory sector with January’s durable goods orders (+0.4% vs. -1.4% headline / +0.4% vs. +0.8% core) on Friday as well.

Friday will also see the preliminary release of the University of Michigan survey for March. While DB expects a decline in sentiment (55.0 vs. 56.6), due to the recent hostilities in the Middle East, also important for the Fed will be consumers’ inflation expectations.

Over in Europe, the focus will be on the monthly GDP for January in the UK (Friday), German January factory orders and industrial production (today) and the trade balance (tomorrow), and February CPIs in Norway and Denmark (both tomorrow).

Rounding out with earnings, there will be reports from Oracle and Adobe in the US as well as Inditex, Rheinmetall, Volkswagen and BMW in Europe. Finally, the focus will be on the Saudi Aramco earnings tomorrow amidst the big rise in oil prices last week.

Fed reaction

The emergence of shale production in the US has helped to limit the impact of oil price spikes on the economy. Indeed, within the Fed’s FRB/US model, a $20/bbl increase in oil prices only increases unemployment by about 2bps and has almost no impact on core PCE inflation. However, with downside risks to the labor market while inflation has run above target for almost five years in a row, the response for the Fed to such a supply shock is not clear. Indeed, looking at the Fed’s prior responses to energy shocks does not yield a regular pattern (see “What does history tell us about the Fed's response to oil price shocks?”). Sometimes, the Fed emphasized the threat to the inflation side of their dual mandate while other times, it sought to protect against any deterioration in the labor market.

In the current episode, with inflation expected to be on a downward trajectory, the market could give the Fed some leeway to “look through” another supply-side shock. That said, inflation has been too high for too long, and the latest data calls into question how much disinflation can reasonably be expected, especially if there are increases in measures of inflation expectations (e.g., Friday’s Michigan data). On the flipside, growth looks strong but there are concerns on a forward-looking basis, for example, due to the potential for AI to disrupt the labor market.

In summary, the February jobs report, as well as January’s, makes it clear that one month’s data should never be taken in isolation. San Francisco Fed President Daly made this point in the wake of last Friday’s release, noting that while February’s data gives her some concern, all the moving parts like the strike and the change in population controls make it harder to interpret.

While the more dovish members will likely point to the February employment report as justification for more policy support, the Committee, as a whole, will likely need more data to ascertain the underlying state of the labor market. We continue to expect the Fed to cut rates only once this year, should disinflationary pressures become clear in the second half of 2026. However, if February’s weakness is confirmed in subsequent months (not our base case), that could open a path to an earlier reduction

Courtesy of DB, here is a day-by-day calendar of events:

Monday March 9

  • Data: US February NY Fed 1-yr inflation expectations, China February CPI, PPI, Japan February Economy Watchers survey, bank lending, January labor cash earnings, BoP current account, trade balance, leading index, coincident index, Germany January factory orders, industrial production
  • Central banks: ECB’s Elderson speaks
  • Earnings: CATL, Constellation Software, HPE

Tuesday March 10

  • Data: US February NFIB small business optimism, existing home sales, China February trade balance, Japan February PPI, machine tool orders, M2, M3, January household spending, Germany January trade balance, France January trade balance, current account balance, Italy January PPI, Sweden January GDP indicator, Norway February CPI, Denmark February CPI
  • Central banks: ECB’s Simkus and Muller speak
  • Earnings: Saudi Arabian Oil, Oracle, Volkswagen, Partners Group
  • Auctions: US 3-yr Notes ($58bn)

Wednesday March 11

  • Data: US February CPI, federal budget balance
  • Central banks: Fed’s Bowman speaks, ECB’s Guindos and Schnabel speak
  • Earnings: Inditex, Rheinmetall, Telecom Italia
  • Auctions: US 10-yr Notes (reopening, $39bn)

Thursday March 12

  • Data: US January trade balance, housing starts, building permits, Q4 household change in net worth, initial jobless claims, UK February RICS house price balance, Canada January international merchandise trade, building permits
  • Central banks: Fed’s Bowman speaks, ECB’s Villeroy speaks
  • Earnings: Adobe, Generali, BMW, RWE, Dollar General
  • Auctions: US 30-yr Bond (reopening, $22bn)

Friday March 13

  • Data: US January PCE, personal income, personal spending, durable goods orders, JOLTS report, March University of Michigan survey, UK January monthly GDP, Germany February wholesale price index, January current account balance, Italy January industrial production, Canada January manufacturing sales, February labour force survey
  • Central banks: BoE inflation attitudes survey

Focusing on just the US, Goldman writes that the key economic data releases this week are the CPI report on Wednesday and the durable goods and core PCE reports on Friday. Fed officials are not expected to comment on monetary policy this week, reflecting the blackout period ahead of the March FOMC meeting. 

Monday, March 9 

  • No major economic data releases scheduled. 

Tuesday, March 10 

  • 10:00 AM Existing home sales, February (GS +0.5%, consensus -0.8%, last -8.4%) 

Wednesday, March 11 

  • 08:30 AM CPI (MoM), February (GS +0.18%, consensus +0.3%, last +0.2%); Core CPI (MoM), February (GS +0.17%, consensus +0.2%, last +0.3%); CPI (YoY), February (GS +2.34%, consensus +2.4%, last +2.4%); Core CPI (YoY), February (GS +2.42%, consensus +2.5%, last +2.5%): We estimate a 0.17% increase in February core CPI (month-over-month SA), which would lower the year-over-year rate by 0.1pp to 2.4% on a rounded basis. We expect softer autos inflation, reflecting a 0.5% decline in used car prices, a slight increase in new car prices (+0.2%), and a decline in the car insurance category (-0.3%). We expect a smaller contribution from travel services inflation (airfares: flat vs. +6.5% in January; hotels: +0.5% vs. -0.5% in January), reflecting signals from alternative price data. We forecast a benign increase in the shelter categories (rent: +0.22%, OER: +0.22%), reflecting a continued slowdown in their underlying trend. We expect unchanged medical services prices, reflecting a continued decline in medical insurance prices (-1.0%). We expect upward pressure from tariffs on categories that are particularly exposed (such as recreation) worth +0.05pp. We estimate a 0.18% rise in headline CPI, reflecting higher food (+0.1%) and energy (+0.5%) prices.

Thursday, March 12 

  • 08:30 AM Trade balance, January (GS -$63.0bn, consensus -$66.0bn, last -$70.3bn) 
  • 08:30 AM Initial jobless claims, week ended March 7 (GS 215k, consensus 215k, last 213k); Continuing jobless claims, week ended February 28 (consensus 1,850k, last 1,868k)
  • 08:30 AM Housing starts, January (GS -2.0%, consensus -4.6%, last +6.2%) 

Friday, March 13 

  • 08:30 AM Personal income, January (GS +0.6%, consensus +0.5%, last +0.3%); Personal spending, January (GS +0.3%, consensus +0.3%, last +0.4%); Core PCE price index, January (GS +0.39%, consensus +0.4%, last +0.4%); Core PCE price index (YoY), January (GS +3.07%, consensus +3.1%, last +3.0%); PCE price index, January (GS +0.30%, consensus +0.3%, last +0.4%); PCE price index (YoY), January (GS +2.85%, consensus +2.9%, last +2.9%): We estimate that personal income and spending increased by 0.6% and 0.3%, respectively, in January. We estimate that the core PCE price index rose 0.39% in January, corresponding to a year-over-year rate of +3.07%. Additionally, we expect that the headline PCE price index increased 0.30% in January, or increased 2.85% from a year earlier.
  • 08:30 AM Durable goods orders, January preliminary (GS +1.0%, consensus +1.1%, last -1.4%); Durable goods orders ex-transportation, January preliminary (GS +0.5%, consensus +0.5%, last +1.0%); Core capital goods orders, January preliminary (GS +0.5%, consensus +0.5%, last +0.8%); Core capital goods shipments, January preliminary (GS +0.6%, consensus +0.5%, last +1.0%): We estimate that durable goods orders increased by 1% in the preliminary January report (month-over-month, seasonally adjusted), reflecting an increase in commercial aircraft orders. We forecast a 0.5% increase in core capital goods orders and a 0.6% increase in core capital goods shipments—the latter reflecting the increase in orders in the prior month.
  • 08:30 AM GDP, Q4 second release (GS +1.6%, consensus +1.4%, last +1.4%); Personal consumption, Q4 second release (GS +2.4%, consensus +2.4%, last +2.4%): We estimate a 0.2pp upward revision to Q4 GDP growth to +1.6% (quarter-over-quarter annualized). Our forecast reflects a downward revision to business fixed investment growth based on softer software spending details in the quarterly services survey (QSS) that is more than offset by upward revisions to residential fixed investment and inventory accumulation. We estimate a modest upward revision to consumer spending that leaves the rounded Q4 growth rate unchanged at 2.4%.
  • 10:00 AM University of Michigan consumer sentiment, March preliminary (GS 54.5, consensus 55.3, last 56.6): University of Michigan 5-10-year inflation expectations, March preliminary (GS 3.5%, last 3.3%)
  • 10:00 AM JOLTS job openings, January (GS 7,000k, consensus 6,750k, last 6,542k)

Source: DB, Goldman

Tyler Durden Mon, 03/09/2026 - 10:55

Hims & Hers Erupts In Epic Squeeze As Novo Nordisk Ends GLP-1 Feud

Zero Hedge -

Hims & Hers Erupts In Epic Squeeze As Novo Nordisk Ends GLP-1 Feud

Novo Nordisk confirmed Monday morning that its months-long GLP-1 feud with telehealth firm Hims & Hers Health has, at least for now, been put on ice, with the Danish drugmaker set to sell Wegovy and Ozempic through HIMS' platform by the end of the month. The feud's end was first reported by Bloomberg late Friday and has sparked a panic short squeeze in heavily shorted HIMS shares in New York premarket trading.

Bloomberg headlines crossed around 8:30 a.m. ET, stating that HIMS will no longer offer knockoff GLP-1 drugs on its telehealth platform and will instead offer NOVO's GLP-1 shots and the Wegovy pill. In return, NOVO has withdrawn its patent infringement lawsuit against Hims.

"We see tremendous growth opportunities in the US with the expanding assortment of branded GLP-1 medications," said HIMS CEO Andrew Dudum.

Dudum continued, "I'm excited to have a great partner in Novo Nordisk as we work to create a new model that works for everyday people. This collaboration reflects what's possible globally when drugmakers, biotech companies, and diagnostic leaders partner with consumer platforms to support scaled distribution of their latest medical innovations."

As we noted over the weekend, the move is very surprising because NOVO and HIMS have been locked in an epic GLP-1 feud for months. Just last month, Novo sued HIMS over a copycat Wegovy pill and patent infringement tied to Ozempic and Wegovy. Even the head of the FDA recently stated that telehealth firms were put on notice about copycat GLP-1s.

Leerink Partners analyst Michael Cherny told clients over the weekend that the NOVO and HIMS news via the Bloomberg report from Friday is a "surprise and an unabashed positive for Hims' stock."

And positive it is for the heavily shorted stock, with 39.1% of its float short, or 81 million shares.

HIMS shares are up 52% in premarket trading.

Novo shares in Copenhagen are marginally higher, as we believe both firms making amends was largely driven by investor pressure to halt year-to-date sharp stock losses at both companies.

Friends again. How long will this last? 

Tyler Durden Mon, 03/09/2026 - 09:20

Dem Lawmakers Demand Probe Into Pentagon Officials Saying Iran War 'God's Divine Plan'

Zero Hedge -

Dem Lawmakers Demand Probe Into Pentagon Officials Saying Iran War 'God's Divine Plan'

Via The Cradle

Dozens of US Democratic lawmakers have called for an investigation into allegations that military commanders are portraying the war on Iran as part of biblical prophecy, according to reporting by Military.com, citing complaints from service members and a letter sent to the Department of War inspector general last week.

The request follows hundreds of reports that officers told troops the campaign against Iran is "divinely ordained" and that President Donald Trump has been "anointed by Jesus".

Image source: White House

Lawmakers warned that invoking religious prophecy to justify military operations could violate constitutional protections and War Department rules requiring religious neutrality.

The controversy began after an anonymous non-commissioned officer contacted the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) on behalf of several soldiers in a unit stationed outside the Iran combat zone

The individual wrote that a commander urged personnel to view the war as "all part of God’s divine plan," while citing passages from the Book of Revelation.

According to the complaint, the officer told troops that "President Trump has been anointed by Jesus to light the signal fire in Iran to cause Armageddon and mark his return to Earth."

MRFF founder Mikey Weinstein told Military.com that the organization logged more than 200 similar complaints between Saturday and Tuesday afternoon, with reports coming from personnel stationed at 50 military installations across all branches of the US armed forces.

In a letter sent to Inspector General Platte B. Moring III, members of the Congressional Freethought Caucus and other lawmakers warned that "justifying a war based on interpretations of biblical prophecies" and telling troops they are risking their lives to advance a religious vision raises serious constitutional concerns.

The lawmakers also asked investigators to determine whether statements by War Secretary Pete Hegseth or other officials have contributed to the spread of biblical rhetoric within military ranks, warning that such public remarks could promote similar messaging in operational briefings.

Lawmakers asked investigators to determine if troops who reported the issue faced retaliation and whether additional safeguards are necessary to maintain religious neutrality in the military chain of command.

Independent journalist Jonathan Larsen initially reported over a hundred complaints from soldiers to the MRFF, claiming that commanders are describing the Iran war as divinely ordained and connected to biblical prophecy. 

One non-commissioned officer said the rhetoric was "so toxic and over the line" that it shocked troops and "destroy[s] morale and unit cohesion."

Weinstein warned the reports show commanders treating the war as "biblically sanctioned" and linked to the approaching "End Times," while noting similar religious rhetoric has appeared in remarks by US political figures discussing West Asia.

Tyler Durden Mon, 03/09/2026 - 08:45

Federal Appeals Court Upholds Temporary Protected Status For Over 300,000 Haitians

Zero Hedge -

Federal Appeals Court Upholds Temporary Protected Status For Over 300,000 Haitians

Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A federal appeals court has upheld a lower court’s ruling that the Department of Homeland Security had unlawfully terminated the Temporary Protected Status designation for several hundred thousand Haitians living in the United States.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security in Washington on Feb. 17, 2026. Madalina Kilroy/The Epoch Times

In a 2–1 split decision issued on March 6, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit denied the Trump administration’s emergency request to suspend a lower court order that had blocked the termination of Haiti’s Temporary Protected Status (TPS). The decision leaves in place protections for about 330,000 Haitian nationals while the underlying legal challenge proceeds.

The majority argued that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) failed to prove that it would suffer irreparable harm if the lower court’s order were allowed to stand. The plaintiffs, Haitian TPS recipients who sued to prevent the revocation of the humanitarian immigration status, would face “substantial and well documented harms,” the majority wrote.

“As the district court detailed at length, the termination of TPS would have ‘devastating’ consequences for the plaintiffs, including risk of detention and deportation, separation from family members, and loss of work authorization,” reads the majority opinion, from which one judge dissented.

In dissent, Judge Justin Walker argued that TPS was never meant to be permanent and that the government should not be blocked from revoking the special protections, first granted 16 years ago.

“The Government is irreparably harmed by ‘an improper intrusion by a federal court into the workings of a coordinate branch of the Government,’” Walker wrote, adding that the Trump administration is likely to prevail in the underlying lawsuit as the government’s foreign policy decisions are generally not subject to judicial review.

The Epoch Times has contacted DHS and the Department of Justice, which represents DHS in the case, with a request for comment, including whether the administration intends to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Previously, DHS said it disagreed with the lower court’s decision to block the agency’s decision to terminate the special protections for Haitians.

Lawsuit Challenges TPS Termination

The case stems from a broader legal battle over the Trump administration’s attempt to terminate TPS protections for Haitians, which DHS announced in November 2025.

Temporary Protected Status is a humanitarian program that allows nationals of certain countries experiencing armed conflict, natural disasters, or other extraordinary conditions to live and work legally in the United States for a limited period.

Haiti was first designated for TPS in 2010 following a devastating earthquake that killed more than 200,000 people and severely damaged the country’s infrastructure. The designation has been repeatedly extended by successive administrations.

More than 330,000 Haitians currently live in the United States under TPS protections, according to the National Immigration Forum.

Several Haitian nationals filed the lawsuit in July 2025, arguing that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s decision to end TPS was inconsistent with the reality of conditions in Haiti.

The plaintiffs argued that the revocation violated the Administrative Procedure Act because the decision was “arbitrary [and] capricious,” and that it also violated the Fifth Amendment’s due process protections.

They said Haiti remains deeply unstable and unsafe for mass returns, pointing to the growing influence of violent gangs and the collapse of government authority in many parts of the country.

“Haiti is a nation in chaos,” the plaintiffs wrote in their complaint. “Violent gangs have taken over Haiti, establishing a mafia-like model that is so entrenched the country can barely function without their consent.”

U.S. District Judge Ana C. Reyes agreed with the plaintiffs in a Feb. 2 ruling, concluding that the administration’s termination decision violated federal law.

Reyes wrote that DHS had failed to properly consult with other government agencies before issuing the termination order, a step required under the TPS statute.

The ruling prevented TPS for Haitians from expiring on Feb. 3, the date the administration had scheduled for the program’s termination.

The Trump administration appealed the decision within days and asked the D.C. Circuit to lift the lower court’s order while the case proceeds.

The Trump administration has sought to revoke TPS designations for several countries, including Venezuela, Ethiopia, South Sudan, and Burma (also known as Myanmar). Many of those decisions have also been challenged in federal court.

Arjun Singh contributed to this report.

Tyler Durden Mon, 03/09/2026 - 07:20

Why Nuclear Energy Is More Vital Than Ever

Zero Hedge -

Why Nuclear Energy Is More Vital Than Ever

As geopolitical tensions in the Middle East have escalated into direct conflict involving Iran, the global energy market is once again reminded of its precarious dependence on critical chokepoints. Shipping through the Strait of Hormuz slowed to a crawl amid threats and attacks, while QatarEnergy halted LNG production following strikes on its facilities.

Oil prices jumped…

...and European natural gas benchmarks surged by as much as 45-50% in a single day.

For economies reliant on imported fossil fuels, it’s a stark warning.

In contrast, nuclear power plants around the world continue to hum along largely unaffected, chugging steadily forward while fossil markets panic. With fuel assemblies stockpiled for one to two years or more of operation, nuclear facilities don’t rely on daily tanker shipments or volatile global supply chains. Their high capacity factors provide consistent baseload power regardless of weather, politics, or the status of distant straits. This resilience stands in sharp relief to the chaos in oil and LNG markets.

The current disruptions highlight nuclear energy’s unique advantages for energy security. Uranium fuel is compact and can be sourced from diverse, stable suppliers or even domestic reserves in many nations. Once loaded, a reactor operates independently of the geopolitical storms that buffet fossil fuel transport routes like the Strait of Hormuz, which handles roughly 20% of global oil and significant LNG volumes from Qatar.

Europe finds itself particularly exposed. The continent’s energy import dependency is already over 50%, with countries like Germany historically even higher. Decades of policy prioritizing renewables and phasing out nuclear power, epitomized by Germany’s failed Energiewende, left the region overly reliant on imported natural gas and LNG. After the loss of cheap Russian pipeline gas, Europe turned to seaborne LNG, much of which now faces indirect risks from Middle East instability. The irony is hard to miss: nations that shuttered reliable nuclear plants in the name of safety and green ideals are now scrambling as fossil fuel prices soar, contributing to industrial strain and higher consumer costs.

France, by maintaining a robust nuclear fleet accounting for about 70% of its electricity, has enjoyed relatively greater stability and lower import dependence. Its experience suggests that a balanced energy mix with substantial nuclear baseload offers a buffer against external shocks. Even German Chancellor Friedrich Merz recently acknowledged that the nuclear phase-out was a “severe strategic mistake,” underscoring the long-term costs of those earlier decisions.

Beyond security, nuclear power aligns with decarbonization goals. It produces low-carbon electricity at scale without the intermittency challenges of wind and solar. As demand surges from data centers, AI, and electrification, nations are eyeing a nuclear renaissance.

Of course, nuclear isn’t without challenges. High upfront costs, lengthy regulatory approvals, and lingering public concerns from past incidents require careful management. Waste disposal and proliferation risks demand ongoing attention. Yet, the technology’s track record for safety and reliability, combined with modern engineering, makes it a worthy path forward.

The latest events in Iran and the Gulf should serve as a catalyst for policy reevaluation. Governments would do well to streamline permitting for new reactors, invest in domestic fuel cycles, and educate the public on nuclear’s role in a secure, affordable, low-emission future. Short-term pain from energy price spikes may finally translate into long-term strategic gains if it accelerates the adoption of power sources immune to the whims of distant conflicts.
 

Tyler Durden Mon, 03/09/2026 - 05:45

Rep. Darrell Issa Ends Reelection Bid After California Redistricting

Zero Hedge -

Rep. Darrell Issa Ends Reelection Bid After California Redistricting

Authored by Bill Pan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) said he will not seek reelection in his southern California district, which had been redrawn to favor Democrats in last year’s redistricting.

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) speaks at a hearing on oversight of the Federal Trade Commission in Washington on July 13, 2023. Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times

On March 6, the longtime congressman announced, shortly after the candidate filing deadline passed, that he would retire at the end of his term.

This decision has been on my mind for a while, and I didn’t make it lightly,” Issa said in a statement announcing the end of his reelection bid.

Issa said he had built a strong campaign operation, enjoyed broad support, and believed polling showed he could win. But after roughly a quarter-century in Congress and another quarter-century in business, he said it was time “for a new chapter and new challenges.”

“First, we built the right campaign infrastructure, support has been overwhelming—including from President [Donald] Trump—and our polling was unmistakable: We would win this race. But after a quarter-century in Congress—and before that, a quarter-century in business—it’s the right time for a new chapter and new challenges.”

Issa endorsed San Diego County Supervisor Jim Desmond, a fellow Republican, to succeed him. Desmond filed paperwork on the morning of March 6 amid uncertainty over whether Issa might be dropping out of the race.

He understands this community, was born and raised here, and will make a terrific Congressman,” Issa said of Desmond.

A former Army officer and tech entrepreneur, Issa was first elected to a San Diego-area House seat in 2000. He chaired the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee from 2011 to 2014, overseeing high-profile investigations during the Obama administration, including probes into the 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, and “Operation Fast and Furious,” where ATF agents allowed illegal gun purchases in an effort to map Mexican cartel networks but lost track of many of the weapons.

Issa left Congress in 2018 after Trump, then in his first term, nominated him to head the U.S. Trade and Development Agency. Although his nomination never advanced in the Senate, he mounted a successful comeback in 2020, winning a seat that had remained safely Republican until the latest remapping shifted the partisan balance of his 48th District.

After the lines shifted, Issa briefly floated the idea of running in Texas, but later said he would stay, declaring he “wasn’t quitting on California.”

Several Democrats are already in the race for the now-bluer 48th District, including San Diego City Council member Marni von Wilpert and Navy veteran Ammar Campa-Najjar, and Democrats quickly framed Issa’s decision as a sign the seat is ripe for a flip.

“Issa abandoning his voters now is the clearest sign yet that Republicans know he can’t win,” Anna Elsasser, spokesperson for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said in a statement. “Any Republican who tries to parachute into this race with the same extreme agenda will face the same fate.”

Republicans, meanwhile, praised Issa’s tenure and said they expect to remain competitive in the district even as the party defends a narrow House majority. Republicans currently hold a 218–214 edge in the chamber, with vacancies.

We are grateful for Congressman Darrell Issa’s decades of dedicated service to the people of California and our nation,” a spokesperson for the National Republican Congressional Committee said in a statement to The Epoch Times. “We are optimistic that this district will continue to be represented by a Republican.”

Issa’s announcement capped a day of California election shake-up. Rep. Kevin Kiley, a two-term Republican, on March 6 filed to run in the 6th District as “no party preference,” citing frustration with congressional “hyper-partisanship” and gerrymandering.

“It is no secret I’ve been frustrated, at times disgusted, by the hyper-partisanship in Congress,” he said in a statement.

“In the last year, it’s led to the longest government shutdown in U.S. history, a massive increase in healthcare costs, and, of course, a pointless redistricting war. The epidemic of gerrymandering has spread from Texas to California to states all across the country. Both parties are complicit.”

Tyler Durden Mon, 03/09/2026 - 05:00

India To US: We Don't Need Permission To Buy Russian Oil

Zero Hedge -

India To US: We Don't Need Permission To Buy Russian Oil

India has really been walking a careful geopolitical tight-rope, wanting keep relations on good terms with the Trump administration, but also wanting to defend its energy sovereignty and decision-making.

On Saturday the government issued a somewhat surprisingly feisty statement, in terms of its tone, after the United States just granted a sanctions waiver that allows for Russian oil shipments currently stranded at sea to be unloaded to Indian buyers.

India's Press Information Bureau wants the world to know New Delhi was never dependent on "a short-term waiver" to buy Russian oil.

This is clearly a bit of a loud brush-off to Washington, and Moscow is certainly going to welcome it:

"India has never depended on permission from any country to buy Russian oil," the government said in a statement.

And further, as the AFP also reports, the New Delhi statement reminded the West: "India is still importing Russian oil even in February 2026, and Russia is still India’s largest crude oil supplier."

via MR online

Meanwhile in Washington US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has clearly indicated the Trump administration is considering lifting sanctions on more Russian oil. 

As a reminder of the initial huge Thurs-Fri complete U-turn, coming months after Trump slapped tariffs on Indian goods in a bid to pressure Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government to abandon energy purchases from Russia, which of course India never did...

"To enable oil to keep flowing into the global market, the Treasury Department is issuing a temporary 30-day waiver to allow Indian refiners to purchase Russian oil,” US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a post on X. “This deliberately short-term measure will not provide significant financial benefit to the Russian government as it only authorizes transactions involving oil already stranded at sea.”

Since China gets ​about 45% of its oil from the Strait, should Iran agree to allowing Chinese ships through, and should Russia be able to fully supply India's needs, and if Saudi Arabia can reroute as much as 7 million bbl/d from the gulf to Yangbu via the East-West pipeline, as we touched upon earlier...and suddenly the Hormuz blockade will seem far less ominous, as most of the oil blocked finds alternative ways to continue on its way to its final destination. 

Tyler Durden Mon, 03/09/2026 - 04:15

Kurds Do Not 'Trust' US To Use Them As Proxy Force Against Iran

Zero Hedge -

Kurds Do Not 'Trust' US To Use Them As Proxy Force Against Iran

This should be obvious to any observer of Middle East history and US foreign policy over the last half-century, but a new Axios report cited Kurdish officials who say they don't 'trust' the United States, especially in wake of recent reports suggesting the Kurds will be used as proxy ground forces against Iran. 

Iraq's Kurds have already made clear they oppose joining the US-Israeli attacks on Iran and warn they could face severe Iranian retaliation without ground or air defense support, Axios reported Saturday.

Source: Intrepid Times

An earlier CNN report claimed the CIA began working to arm Kurdish forces hostile to the Islamic Republic of Iran after the United States and Israel launched Operation Epic Fury.

Initially, President Trump openly voiced support for Kurdish involvement in the conflict but then soon reversed that position on Saturday.

"The Kurds must not be the tip of the spear in this conflict," Axios reported, citing a senior official from the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), which is the semi-autonomous region in northeastern Iraq.

The Iraqi Kurds are "staying neutral" because "there is no clarity" on whether Washington seeks full regime change in Iran or only a "change in personnel" - the KRG official said. Trump has stated the United States will be involved in deciding who leads Iran in the future but has not explained how that would really work in the end. The war objectives have seemed to shift rapidly, especially when it comes to daily public facing White House interactions with reporters.

Some military analysts and Middle East pundits online recently attempted to count the number of times the Kurds were effectively "thrown under the bus" in their total history of working with Washington, and concluded that it's been at least nine times.

The last 'betrayal' was merely months ago - when the Pentagon quickly withdrew from northern Syria and simply told the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) to become integrated into the Syrian state and army. The only thing is the Jolani/Sharaa government and its HTS militants hate the Kurds.

The SDF had long battled against the Sunni hardliners now ruling from Damascus at this point. The US also regularly failed to step in over years of Turkish aerial bombardment of both Syrian and Iraqi Kurds.

via BBC

As for the idea of some kind of proxy Kurdish invasion force to use against Iran - some see the idea as being destined for failure, given an Iranian nation of 90+ million with a powerful IRGC ruling military structure would likely feel it as merely a pinprick. It's anything but certain that it would actually have an impact on leaders in Tehran. Instead, blowback would fall hardest on Kurdish communities across the region, and Shia militias in Iraq might get involved on the other side as well.

Currently, many Kurdish leaders are outraged that US officials 'leaked' the arm the Kurds plan, given it effectively puts a big target on every Iranian Kurds' back in eyes of military leadership in Tehran.

Tyler Durden Mon, 03/09/2026 - 02:45

Martyrdom, Maps, & Munitions: Jim Rickards' Most Surprising Iran Takes

Zero Hedge -

Martyrdom, Maps, & Munitions: Jim Rickards' Most Surprising Iran Takes

Authored by Adam Shapr via DailyReckoning.com,

I’ve been a fan of Jim Rickards’ work for around 10 years.

He came onto my radar in 2016 when he predicted Donald Trump would win the election. I saw a clip of him saying the polls were crooked. And that turned out to be a great call.

Jim is never afraid to speak his mind. And his contrarian predictions have uncanny accuracy.

So I’ve been following Jim’s work on the Iran situation closely. Just today he put out a new Iran writeup with surprising, even disturbing ideas in it.

This is what Jim does. His research is sometimes unnerving, but it is always well thought out and logical.

Today, we’re going to cover a few key aspects of Jim’s new report and add context with maps and graphics.

Let’s get started…

Can Iran Wait it Out?

In a section titled, Can Iran Win?, Jim begins by acknowledging that the U.S. and Israeli forces have done far more damage thus far:

Notwithstanding Iran’s limited success in counterattacks, it’s clear that the U.S. and Israel have inflicted far more damage on Iran than Iran has inflicted on the region.

That asymmetric damage ratio will continue to grow. The U.S. and Israeli attacks will expand even as Iran’s capacity to strike back is being heavily degraded.

However, there are deeper considerations here. For example, while taking out the 86-year old Ayatollah Khamenei was satisfying to many, it also handed the Iranian regime a propaganda victory. Here’s Jim:

Martyrdom – The first point is that the deaths of Ayatollah Khamenei and many of the top leaders of Iran may not have been unwanted by them. This is something the Western mind can barely comprehend.

In Islam, martyrdom is considered a blessing from Allah. It guarantees the martyr a place in paradise.

Is it possible that Khamenei and other leaders gathered in one place intentionally knowing that they would eventually be hunted down and killed by the U.S. and Israel? Why not gather in one place and become martyrs together?

This idea of martyrdom applies to the successors and replacements of those killed on day one. Many of those successors have been killed also. To the secular West, this is counted as a military victory.

But to the theocratic Muslim, martyrdom is the victory. This process unites almost all of Iran in a celebration of Allah’s divine will. The more martyrs we create, the stronger Iran becomes as an Islamic Republic.

Again, this is hard for the Western secular mainstream to grasp, but killing their leaders is making Iran stronger. There’s an almost Nietzschean vibe for the Iranian survivors.

This is the type of analysis you won’t see on cable news. Martyrdom is a powerful force in the Islamic world, and there is a decent chance that Khamenei embraced the prospect of death. Even if this isn’t objectively true, what matters is how it is perceived by the world’s 230 million Shia Muslims. And they take this stuff very seriously.

The Ayatollah’s killing could lead to a more unified Iran, and even spread to neighboring Shia populations in Bahrain, Iraq, and beyond.

Challenging Topography

Jim goes on to describe how challenging a ground invasion would be due to Iran’s terrain:

The Terrain – Westerners also have little idea just how big Iran is. It’s the 17th largest country in the world by area out of 195 countries. It also has the 17th largest population in the world with 86 million people.

Iran is not a giant like India or Brazil, but it is far larger than Americans realize. The terrain is challenging with large mountain ranges and deserts. This is not a country ripe for a land invasion like Iraq or Syria.

Iran is far larger than Ukraine, which is still holding out against Russia after four years of war. Iran has what military strategists call strategic depth, which offers the ability to retreat without surrender. Iran isn’t going anywhere and it will not easily be subdued.

Here is a topographical map of the country. Note how mountainous Iran is compared to Iraq directly to the West.

Compared to Iran, Iraq is about as flat as Illinois. It would make an extremely challenging ground invasion. Still, President Trump is not ruling out the prospect of boots on the ground.

How Long Will U.S. and Israeli Munitions Last?

The next item Jim tackles is perhaps the most challenging. A looming shortage of key munitions.

A U.S. Munitions Problem – Most importantly, the U.S. and Israel are running low on offensive and defensive bombs and missiles. This is the result of the massive bombing attacks on Iran, the need to fire thousands of anti-missiles to shoot down thousands of incoming drones and missiles, the fact that the U.S. has allowed its military industrial capacity to atrophy, and the large number of weapons wasted in Ukraine.

The U.S. sent seven Patriot anti-missile batteries to Ukraine at about $1 billion each. All seven were destroyed by Russian hypersonic missiles. I’m certain the U.S. wishes it had those batteries today to protect U.S. bases and troops near Iran. The senile Biden and neocon warmongers may be to blame, but the damage is done.

The U.S. and Israel have inflicted enormous damage on Iran and will continue to do so in the short run. But within weeks, the magazines will run low, and the U.S. will be scrounging around in South Korea and Japan for replacements.

Good luck with that.

U.S. industrial output of 800 cruise missiles per year cannot keep up with Israel and the U.S. launching 100 per week. Ships need to reprovision. Repairs cannot be neglected. Diego Garcia is days away from the battlespace. The U.S. will be badly stretched.

So Jim estimates that America produces around 800 cruise missiles per year. And we’re currently launching about 100 per week. Maybe more. Not great. There are stockpiles, of course, but those are supposed to be for emergency use only. Does this qualify?

Additionally, many U.S. bases close to Iran have been hit by Iranian missiles and drones and have essentially been abandoned. Fortunately U.S. soldiers are largely out of the line of fire. But it also makes refueling and re-arming challenging.

Here’s a map, via the Wall Street Journal, showing the approximate positions of U.S. bases and naval assets in theater:

Source: WSJ

(Note: Since this map was published, the U.S.S. Gerald Ford carrier strike group has moved through the Suez Canal into the Red Sea, likely headed to the Arabian Sea.)

To refuel, re-arm, and repair, The U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group would normally go to Bahrain or another nearby base. But those bases have been hit hard. So now they will likely have to go to Diego Garcia, which is thousands of miles away. Here’s a map:

Source: RT

Jim closes his report with a note about the uncertain outcome of a war of attrition.

Iran has a united population; reports of internal protests are greatly exaggerated, especially after the ayatollah ordered the killing of 5,000 protestors just weeks ago.

It has a robust political system despite decapitation strikes. Drones are cheap and easy to manufacture. They can do just as much damage as an F-15 strike when targeted properly.

Iran has strategic depth, allies in Russia and China, and a strong survival instinct.

In a war of attrition, really a war for survival, victory goes to the last man standing.

That may be Iran.

This is why we read Jim Rickards. Smart contrarian takes you won’t hear on mainstream media.

In war, the number one mistake is to underestimate your opponent. We should be careful to heed this historic warning.

This war has the potential to escalate in unpredictable and dangerous ways. Economically, geopolitically, and kinetically.

Tyler Durden Mon, 03/09/2026 - 02:00

Price Controls Arrive: South Korea, Taiwan Impose Fuel Price Cap

Zero Hedge -

Price Controls Arrive: South Korea, Taiwan Impose Fuel Price Cap

It’s a bloodbath across Asian markets this morning with Asia being the world’s largest oil-importing region. Based on a Goldman analysis of the impact of higher oil on real GDP growth (chart below), China is the most insulated from supply-driven oil price increases compared to other emerging Asian economies, with $15/bbl higher crude oil prices leading to 0-0.1pp lower GDP growth and 0.1-0.2pp higher headline CPI inflation. This resilience is partly due to the country's economic structure and the potential for government intervention to dampen the pass-through of global price increases to consumers. Increased oil stockpiling last year - some estimates put China's strategic oil resere at 1.5 billion barrels - and very low inflation over the past few years also make China less vulnerable to rising energy prices.

Conversely, Singapore, followed by Taiwan and Korea, will bear the brunt of it with a -1.6% hit to GDP growth and this is only assuming $85 oil. Brent has now crossed the $100 handle with risks to the upside. 

Seen in this light, it is probably not a big surprise that South Korean President ​Lee Jae Myung ‌said on Monday that authorities would ​cap domestic ​fuel prices for the ⁠first time ​in nearly 30 ​years to contain a spike in prices after ​the conflict ​in the Middle East ‌sent ⁠global crude prices sharply higher.

Speaking at an emergency ​cabinet ​meeting, ⁠Lee said in the ​government would "swifly implement ​and ⁠boldly impement" a maximum price ⁠system ​on ​petroleum products.

The current crisis "is a significant burden on ​our economy, which is highly dependent on global trade and energy imports from the Middle East," Lee said in opening remarks.

He added ​that South Korea will also look for sources of ​energy beyond supplies shipped via the Strait of Hormuz.

Having emerged as the most cartoonish "market" in the world - whether it is stocks, crypto, or oil, and where even the smallest downtick has to be stabilized by the government or else watch the momentum-chasing lemmings run over the cliff - Lee said a 100 ‌trillion ⁠won market stabilization programme should be expanded if needed, and called on the government and the central bank to prepare additional measures to respond to the volatility of ​the financial and ​foreign exchange ⁠markets.

South Korean shares slumped 8% on Monday to activate circuit breakers for a second ​time this month on the escalating Middle East ​conflict, ⁠while the won dropped more than 1% to trade near a key psychological barrier of 1,500 per dollar. The Kospi plunged 12% last Wednesday before surging by 12% on Thursday. 

Sure enough, shortly after Korea's announcement, the Commercial Times reported that Taiwan would set a weekly cap on oil-price increases as it seeks to cushion the economy from the impact of the Middle East war. 

The Taipei-based newspaper reported the limit on Monday, citing Premier Cho Jung-tai and unidentified officials. Cho had previously told reporters on Sunday that the government had activated a price-stabilization mechanism to absorb oil price increases. That came after the Ministry of Economic Affairs said the day before that domestic fuel prices would only rise about 5% this week.

On liquefied natural gas, Taiwan’s Economy Minister Kung Ming-hsin told reporters the island only needs to find two more cargoes for March and April. “We won’t have a power shortage, and no additional coal-fired generation will be needed in March and April,” he said on Monday. “We can proceed as planned and safely navigate the period.”

Taiwan’s unleaded gasoline prices rose by as much as 5.5% after the government activated stabilization measures, the ministry said in the statement. Under the floating oil-price adjustment mechanism, prices should have climbed by as much as 19.7% this week, it said, with the government absorbing costs to reduce the impact on households and businesses and maintain domestic price stability.

How long can Taiwan keep prices artificially low, thus ensuring that the snapback will be especially brutal? According to officials cited in the Commercial Times repor, there are currently no concerns that Taiwan will run out of crude oil or natural gas, which simply means that nobody has done the math. The government plans to increase oil and gas purchases from outside the Middle East, and coordinate with Asian countries such as Japan and South Korea to swap LNG cargoes to ensure stable supply, the newspaper reported.

While one can debate the prudence of such price controls until one is blue in the face, the reality is that unless oil stabilizes and reverses, expect similar price caps all across the world coupled with strategic petroleum reserve releases, because a 25% one-day surge in the price of oil - if sustained - not only guarantees a global recession, but it also ensures social unrest, as well as a comprehensive sacking of every incumbent politician. 

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/08/2026 - 23:30

When Reagan (Wisely) Cut & Run From The Middle East After Marine Barracks Bombing

Zero Hedge -

When Reagan (Wisely) Cut & Run From The Middle East After Marine Barracks Bombing

Authored by Jim Bovard

In his recent comments justifying a preventive war against Iran, President Donald Trump declared, "In 1983, Iran’s proxies carried out the Marine barracks bombing in Beirut that killed 241 American military personnel." Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has invoked that attack numerous times. The 1983 Beirut barracks attack is one of the most cited and least understood pretexts for the new war with Iran.   

That bombing was one of President Ronald Reagan's biggest foreign debacles. Lebanon had been wracked by a brutal civil war for seven years when, in June 1982, Israel invaded in order to crush the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO). US troops were briefly deployed in August 1982 in Beirut to help secure a ceasefire to facilitate the withdrawal of the PLO forces to Tunisia.

via Wikimedia

US troops exited Beirut after the PLO withdrawal was largely completed. However, in mid-September 1982, the massacre of more than seven hundred Palestinian refugees threatened to plunge Lebanon into total chaos. Lebanese Christian Phalangist militia butchered residents of the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps. The militia was armed, aided, and fed by the Israeli Defense Force, which surrounded and blockaded the camps.

The Lebanese government appealed to President Reagan to send American troops back to Beirut as a stabilizing factor, and Reagan quickly obliged. As fighting escalated between Christians, Muslims, Syrians, and Israelis in Lebanon, the original US peacekeeping mission became a farce. The US forces were training and equipping the Lebanese army, which was increasingly perceived as a pro-Christian, anti-Muslim force. (Most Lebanese were Muslim, though possibly a thin majority at that point.)

On April 18, 1983 a delivery van pulled up to the front door of the US embassy in Beirut and detonated, collapsing the building and killing forty-six people (including sixteen Americans) and wounding over a hundred others. The US embassy was a sitting duck for the terrorist assault: unlike many other U.S. embassies in hostile environments, it had no sturdy outer wall. Newsweek noted, "Delivery vehicles are supposed to go to the rear of the building. Why Lebanese police guarding the embassy driveway would have made an exception in the case of the black van remained a mystery." The attack lacked novelty value, since the Iraqi and French embassies had been wrecked by similar car bomb attacks in the preceding eighteen months.

Five days later, on April 23, 1983, Reagan announced to the press:

"The tragic and brutal attack on our embassy in Beirut has shocked us all and filled us with grief. Yet, because of this latest crime we are more resolved than ever to help achieve the urgent and total withdrawal of all American forces from Lebanon, or I should say, all foreign forces. I'm sorry. Mistake."

But the actual mistake was a US policy that would cost hundreds of Americans their lives.

By late summer 1983, the Marines were being targeted by Muslim snipers. Reagan administration officials seemed surprised at rising attacks on American soldiers. The Reagan administration responded to sniper potshots and scattered mortar attacks on US troops with a massive escalation. On September 13, Reagan authorized Marine commanders in Lebanon to call in air strikes and other attacks against the Muslims to help the Christian Lebanese army. Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger vigorously opposed the new policy, fearing it would make American troops far more vulnerable. Navy ships repeatedly bombarded the Muslims over the next few weeks.

At 6:20 A.M. on Sunday morning, October 23, 1983, a lone, grinning Muslim drove a Mercedes truck through a parking lot, past two Marine guard posts, through an open gate, and into the lobby of the Marine headquarters building in Beirut, where he detonated the equivalent of six tons of explosives. The explosion left a thirty-foot-deep crater and killed 243 marines. A second truck bomb moments later killed 58 French soldiers.

Colin Powell, who was then a major general, commented in his autobiography, "Since [the Muslims] could not reach the battleship, they found a more vulnerable target, the exposed Marines at the airport." A surprise attack on a troop concentration in a combat zone does not fit most definitions of terrorism. However, Reagan perennially portrayed the attack as a terrorist incident and the American media and political establishment accepted that label.

Reagan administration officials scrambled to assert that the administration was blameless. White House press spokesman Larry Speakes declared on the day of the attack that the bombing "definitely was a difficult situation for us" since "people come out of nowhere and perform these acts." Vice President George H.W. Bush rationalized, "It’s awfully hard to guard against that kind of terrorism." Defense Secretary Weinberger announced that "nothing can work against a suicide attack like that, any more than you can do anything against a kamikaze flight." Actually, during World War II, the U.S. Navy quickly responded by placing rows of antiaircraft guns on the sides of its big ships.

In the aftermath of the Marine barracks bombing, Reagan made a mockery of the truth. In a televised speech four days after the bombing, the president portrayed the attack as unstoppable, declaring that the truck “crashed through a series of barriers, including a chain-link fence and barbed-wire entanglements. The guards opened fire, but it was too late.” Reagan claimed the attack proved the U.S. mission was succeeding: “Would the terrorists have launched their suicide attacks against the multinational force if it were not doing its job?…It is accomplishing its mission.” He warned that an American withdrawal could result in the Middle East being “incorporated into the Soviet bloc.” Reagan also declared that the United States was involved in the Middle East in part to secure a “solution to the Palestinian problem.”

Reagan sent Marine Corps commander Paul X. Kelley to Beirut. Kelley quickly announced that he was “totally satisfied” with the security around the barracks at the time of the bombing. Upon returning to Washington, Kelley was summoned to Capitol Hill and bragged to Congress that “In a 13-month period, no marine billeted in the building [destroyed by the truck bomb] was killed or injured” from incoming fire. Kelley inaccurately testified that the Marine guards had loaded weapons and that two of them had been killed in the attack. When congressmen persisted questioning, Kelley became enraged and shouted, “We’re talking about clips in weapons, but we’re not talking about the people who did it. I want to find the perpetrators. I want to bring them to justice! You have to allow me this one moment of anger.”

Even though there had already been numerous major car bombings in Beirut that year and scores of other suicide attacks, Kelley told the committee that the truck bombing “represents a new and unique terrorist threat, one that could not have been anticipated by any commander.” Kelley denied the Marines received any warning of an impending attack. However, on the morning of Kelley’s second day of testimony, The New York Times reported that the CIA specifically warned the Marines three days ahead of time that an Iranian-linked group was planning an attack against them.

Other military officials involved in Lebanon also denied any culpability. Vice Admiral Edward Martin, the commander of the Sixth Fleet, declared, “The only person I can see who was responsible was the driver of that truck.” Martin stressed in an interview, “You have to remember that prior to Oct. 23, there hadn’t been any real terrorism threat.” A New York Times investigation concluded:

“Marine officers in Beirut and the admirals and generals in the chain of command above them did not consider terrorism to be a primary threat even after the embassy bombing, and even though Beirut had been full of terrorists for years.”

Shortly after the bombing, Reagan appointed a Pentagon commission headed by retired Admiral Robert Long to investigate. The commission report, finished in mid-December 1983, concluded that military commanders in Lebanon and all the way back to Washington failed to take obvious steps to protect the soldiers. The commission suggested that many fatalities might have been prevented if guards had carried loaded weapons. The report stated that the only barrier the truck overcame was some barbed wire that it easily drove over. The commission also noted that the “prevalent view” among U.S. commanders was that there was a direct link between the Navy shelling of the Muslims and the truck bomb attack.

When the White House saw the final version of the commission’s report, they issued a stop order. The Washington Post reported that the White House “delayed release of the report for several days, allowing Reagan to respond to its criticism before it became public, and then attempted to play down its impact by vetoing a Pentagon news conference on the document.” On December 27, 1983 Reagan revealed that “we have never before faced a situation in which others routinely sponsor and facilitate acts of violence against us.” Reagan sought to make the report “old news”:

“Nearly all the measures that were identified by the distinguished members of the Commission have already been implemented and those that have not will be very quickly.”

Reagan announced that the Marine commanders in Beirut “have already suffered enough” and should not “be punished for not fully comprehending the nature of today’s terrorist threat.” Reagan then effectively declared that no one would be held accountable. “If there is to be blame, it properly rests here in this office and with this president,” he announced, just before leaving Washington for a vacation in Palm Springs, California.

The Reagan administration blamed its anti-terrorist failures on the Carter administration. White House press spokesman Larry Speakes announced:

“We don’t quarrel with the fact that the CIA and other intelligence-gathering agencies have been crippled by decisions of the previous administration, and we are in the process of rebuilding capabilities. But it takes time…to re-establish our intelligence-gathering methods.”

The following September, shortly after a suicide bomber again obliterated much of the poorly-defended U.S. embassy in Beirut, Reagan blamed the debacle on Carter administration CIA cutbacks. “We’re feeling the effects today of the near destruction of our intelligence capability in recent years before we came here,” Reagan said, falsely asserting that the Carter administration had “to a large extent” gotten “rid of our intelligence agents.”

Reagan quietly withdrew U.S. combat troops from Beirut in early 1984. During the 1984 presidential election, the Reagan administration also responded to its Beirut debacles by attacking the patriotism of Democrats. In the vice presidential candidates debate, George H. W. Bush denounced Democratic candidate Walter Mondale and his vice presidential pick, Geraldine Ferraro. “For somebody to suggest, as our opponents have, that these men died in shame, they had better not tell the parents of those young marines,” he said. Neither Mondale nor Ferraro had said that the Marines “died in shame.” Bush denounced Mondale for running a “mean-spirited campaign,” saying “We’ve seen Walter Mondale take a human tragedy in the Middle East and try to turn it to personal political advantage.” But Mondale’s criticisms of the Reagan administration’s failures in Lebanon were less strident than Reagan’s criticisms of Jimmy Carter for the Iran hostage crisis during the 1980 presidential campaign.

Muslims also responded to U.S. troops by seizing American hostages. Reagan sent military equipment to Iran as a means to entice the Iranians to exert pressure to get hostages released. After the “arms for hostages” deal became public (along with the illegal funneling of the proceeds to the Nicaraguan Contras), Reagan’s credibility was devastated. Reagan went into such a tailspin after the crisis broke that his new chief of staff, Howard Baker, briefly examined invoking the Twenty-Fifth Amendment to remove Reagan from office because of medical unfitness. The Tower Commission report on the debacle concluded, “The arms-for-hostages trades rewarded a regime that clearly supported terrorism and hostage-taking.”

The 1982-84 deployment of U.S. troops in Beirut achieved nothing. The Israelis were far more aggressive against perceived opponents in Lebanon than were the American troops. But even the Israelis were effectively driven out of Lebanon over a decade and a half later, after failing to suppress Hezbollah and losing more than twice as many soldiers there as it lost during the 1967 Six-Day War.

The United States got dragged into a Mideast conflict and then recklessly failed to defend it own troops or American national interest. The 1983 Beirut barracks bombing does not prove that Iran has always been a deadly enemy. Instead, it shows how folly and deception pervaded even a presidency much less imprudent than subsequent administrations.

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/08/2026 - 23:15

US Aims To Exhume And Identify 88 USS Arizona Crew Members Buried As Unknowns After Pearl Harbor

Zero Hedge -

US Aims To Exhume And Identify 88 USS Arizona Crew Members Buried As Unknowns After Pearl Harbor

The U.S. military plans to exhume the remains of 88 sailors and Marines killed aboard the USS Arizona during the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941, part of a renewed effort to identify servicemen who were buried as unknowns in the aftermath of the assault.

A grave marker for an unknown casualty from the USS Arizona is shown at the National Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific, on July 15, 2021, in Honolulu. Caleb Jones/AP Photo

The remains, currently interred at the National Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific, will be disinterred beginning in November or December, according to the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency, which is overseeing the project. Advances in DNA technology and a growing database of genetic samples from family members have made it increasingly possible to assign names to remains that could not be identified more than eight decades ago, AP reports.

Officials said the process will unfold gradually. About eight sets of remains will be removed every two to three weeks and analyzed. The DNA extracted from the remains will be compared with samples provided by relatives of the missing, many of whom have spent years searching for answers about family members lost in the attack.

The bombing of Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941 - known historically as the Attack on Pearl Harbor - destroyed or damaged dozens of ships and killed more than 2,400 Americans. The Arizona was struck by bombs that ignited its forward ammunition magazines, causing the battleship to sink in roughly nine minutes. Of the 1,177 sailors and Marines killed aboard the vessel, more than 900 remain entombed within the wreck, which still rests at the harbor floor and serves as a memorial.

Those remains will not be disturbed. The planned exhumations will apply only to individuals buried as unidentified at the Honolulu cemetery.

The identification effort builds on earlier work that used DNA to identify hundreds of Pearl Harbor casualties from other ships, including the USS Oklahoma and the USS West Virginia. Officials say the new project reflects both technological progress and the growing participation of families willing to provide genetic samples.

Among those following the effort closely is Kevin Kline, a real estate agent in northern Virginia whose great-uncle, Robert Edwin Kline, served as a gunner’s mate second class aboard the Arizona. He was 22 when he died in the attack. For much of his life, Mr. Kline said, his family believed his great-uncle’s remains were still aboard the ship. Only in recent years did he learn that some crew members had been buried as unidentified remains on land.

Kline told the Associated Press that he does not assume his relative will be among those identified, but believes the effort could bring a measure of peace to families whose losses have reverberated across generations. 

For years, the Defense Department had resisted calls to exhume the remains, arguing that identification would be difficult because the military possessed dental records or DNA samples for only a small fraction of the victims’ families. As recently as 2021, officials estimated that samples existed for about 1 percent of the families.

Kline helped found an advocacy effort known as Operation 85, which has spent the past three years locating relatives of the missing and encouraging them to submit DNA samples. He says that family members connected to 626 sailors and Marines - just under 60 percent of those still missing - have now provided samples. Only a small number of people contacted declined to participate.

The remains will be transported to the agency’s laboratory at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam in Hawaii for initial analysis. DNA samples will then be sent to the Armed Forces DNA Identification Laboratory at Dover Air Force Base for further testing and comparison.

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/08/2026 - 22:40

'Small Price To Pay': Trump Says Surging Oil Prices Will 'Drop Rapidly' Once Iran Nuke Threat Over

Zero Hedge -

'Small Price To Pay': Trump Says Surging Oil Prices Will 'Drop Rapidly' Once Iran Nuke Threat Over

It seems someone tapped the President on the shoulder given this afternoon's explosive opening in futures and he has posted X that spiking oil prices are a "small price to pay" for world peace, adding that prices "will drop rapidly" once the Iran nuclear threat is over.

It's Sunday night and the much-hoped for de-escalation has not happened.

This has triggered an explosive move higher in WTI...

...topping $110 for the first time since June 2022... (Goldman nailed that call)

US equity futures have dramatically 'broken the box'...

Treasury yields are up 5bps, recoupling modestly from Friday's 'weak jobs decoupling'...

Gold is down, the dollar up, and crypto ugly.

For all the color you can eat on Iran-related market angst, the following posts should help:

'Everything You Knew About The Market Flipped This Week': Top Goldman Trader 

Goldman Flows Guru Warns Relatively Calm Index Belies 'Fragile' Market With 'Poor Tolerance For Bad News'

Hartnett: US Politics Dictate March De-escalation To Iran War

'10 Sigma': Goldman's Hedge Fund Honcho 'Level Sets' After Extraordinary Week

Goldman Panics, Expects Oil To Hit $100 Next Week And Reach "Demand Destruction" Levels

And don't forget there is a lot more risk than just Iranian stress:

Insurance Companies Crushed As Private Credit Contagion Spills Over

Deutsche Bank Warns Energy Shock "Existential Threat" To Airlines, May Force Some To Ground Fleets

Credit - A Little Bit Louder Now

These moves come as the Trump administration said it is not prioritizing using the US Department of the Treasury to trade oil futures as it weighs ways to ease surging global energy prices, according to Yahoo Finance.

Officials have considered having Treasury buy or sell energy futures, but believe the agency would have limited ability to move such a large and active market.

Daily trading volumes have surged during the recent conflict, diluting the impact any single participant could have.

The White House is also reluctant to immediately tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

Heavy drawdowns under former president Joe Biden left the reserve about 60% full, while repeated withdrawals have created maintenance issues.

Still, officials acknowledge that even a modest release could send a strong signal to calm markets.

Domestic gas (pump) prices soaring (and are about to go even higher)...

The report says that the administration is reviewing a wide range of responses.

Doug Burgum said “everything is being considered,” from immediate steps to longer-term measures, as officials try to contain rising fuel costs that pose both geopolitical risks and political pressure ahead of November’s midterm elections.

$5 gas prices at the pump is imminent!!

Given the current moves we are seeing, we suspect that laissez-faire attitude will shift rapidly and some kind of intervention is imminent.

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/08/2026 - 21:45

Conscientious Objector Group: Phone 'Ringing Off Hook' As Huge Mobilization Underway

Zero Hedge -

Conscientious Objector Group: Phone 'Ringing Off Hook' As Huge Mobilization Underway

An 80-year-old nonprofit that advises conscientious objectors says its phone is "ringing off the hook" as American service members who object to the US-and-Israel-initiated war on Iran are seeking guidance on how to avoid being a part of it. Ominously, the group's executive director says the breadth of force mobilization is much like the run-up to the ground invasion of Iraq.  

"Phone has been ringing off the hook," wrote Center on Conscience & War executive director Mike Prysner on X. "A LOT more units have just been activated for deployment than the public knows about." Founded in 1940, the Center on Conscience and War provides guidance to military service members pursuing a conscientious objector (CO) status or a discharge. The group also opposes military conscription.

In a post on the group's account, the Center said it received a call from someone who is on deployment orders and who "reports widespread opposition to Iran War within their unit...In particular, they conveyed disgust at the US massacre of the girls’ school as well as the attack on the Iranian frigate in international waters."

The US military is reportedly responsible for killing some 150 schoolgirls in Minab, Iran during the opening of the war. In another incident, a US Navy submarine torpedoed an Iranian ship that was departing a largely ceremonial naval event in India that involved 18 countries. Compounding the controversy over sinking a lightly-armed vessel 2,000 miles from the war theater, the Americans apparently left surviving sailors to drown in a violation of the Geneva Convention -- that is, a war crime. At least 87 died. 

Under US military policy, CO status is defined as “a firm, fixed, and sincere objection to participation in war in any form or the bearing of arms, by reason of religious training and/or belief.” That would seemingly exclude service members who stand ready to defend America, but who view the war on Iran as an amoral enterprise being carried out solely to advance Israel's agenda in the region. 

However, the group helps service members pursue other avenues for opting out of the latest US regime-change war in the Middle East. For example, in a Friday night post, the Center said service members who are in their first year in any branch "can *easily* get out just by reporting 'failure to adapt'...The evidence bar is low." 

Prysner, who took on the executive director role on March 1, joined the US Army shortly before 9/11, and was part of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. After discharging, he became an activist against the war. He said what he's hearing from callers indicates a major mobilization on par with the final weeks before the catastrophic invasion of Iraq: 

Prysner also said the mother of a service member in a deployed unit relayed a disturbing account from her son: His commander attempted to build enthusiasm for the mission by saying it would bring about the second coming of Jesus Christ. That account parallels those publicized earlier this week by the Military Religious Freedom Foundation. As described by ZeroHedge contributor blueapples, just a few days into the new war, MRFF had already received more than 100 complaints from troops in 40 units who said leaders were pushing theological rationalizations for war on Iran. One commander allegedly said Trump has been “anointed by Jesus to light the signal fire in Iran to cause Armageddon and mark his return to Earth.”

Some ZeroHedge readers may know Prysner as the filmmaker who has collaborated with journalist Abby Martin on the Empire Files, a series of documentaries and videos that include "Gaza Fights For Freedom," which profiled the 2018 Great March of Return, a protest that saw Palestinians who approached the Israeli border wall shot by IDF snipers -- with 62 slaughtered on a single day. 

Prysner just became the Center's executive director on March 1 -- one day after Israel and the United States initiated an unprovoked war on Iran. "With the first US dead in another immoral war, more troops will be questioning their role," said Prysner at the time. "Our job is to find them, defend them, and help them come home." 

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/08/2026 - 21:30

Pages