Breaking AI & Tech News Analyzed

The possibility of US ground troops being sent into combat on Iranian soil is growing, driven by President Trump's desire to avoid being personally and politically humiliated in a war he started, mismanaged, and cannot end. Such a self-serving escalation could prove catastrophic for Trump and the American people, given the history of US military interventions in the region.Trump insists that the war is all but won, Iran is suing for peace, and talks are making good progress. However, in the real world, Iran is still fighting on all fronts, Israel is still bombing, the Strait of Hormuz remains largely closed, and the Iran-allied Houthi militia in Yemen has joined the war, attacking Israel and potentially blocking Red Sea trade routes.The US and Iran have each issued maximalist demands, but there is no sign of actual negotiations. They are even further apart than they were before Trump, egged on by Benjamin Netanyahu, abandoned diplomacy last month. Sometime soon, Trump will be forced to confront the huge gap between what he wants and what's on offer. At that point, he could turn to the troop buildup in the Gulf and order ground attacks.It's incredible to think that after all the mortal agony and anguish of Iraq and Afghanistan, a US president is once again seriously contemplating boots on the ground in the Middle East. Trump's stumped, hoist by his own petard, stuck between a rock and a hard place, and up the creek without a paddle. The creek in question is, of course, the Strait of Hormuz.Trump is increasingly isolated and out on a limb. His wealthy Arab business cronies no longer trust him. US bases on their territory now resemble a liability, not a defence. When he demanded NATO's help, Europe said: we'll let you know. Likewise, Iran's ethnic Kurds are less than keen to die for a muppet. Support for the war among the US public and the Maga right, always weak, is a fast-vanishing mirage.If Trump were to order ground attacks – both he and Netanyahu have publicly discussed the possibility – the targets would most likely be the coastal batteries, missile defences, and concealed armed speedboat bases dotting the northern flank of the Hormuz strait. An attack on the Kharg oil export terminal further up the Gulf is also predicted.The inherent, inescapable military risks are daunting. Casualties would be inevitable. Even if operations went well in the short term, questions would immediately arise about potential escalation when Iran counterattacked, expansion of the operational area, and duration of the occupation.

French authorities have foiled a suspected terrorist attack targeting Bank of America's Paris headquarters after police detained one suspect who was allegedly attempting to ignite an explosive device outside the building.In a social media post on Saturday, Interior Minister Laurent Nunez said the swift intervention by police had 'thwarted a violent terrorist attack' in the French capital the previous night.The suspect was arrested at about 3:25am local time outside the bank's local headquarters in the city's 8th arrondissement as he tried to light a device consisting of a five-litre container filled with an unidentified liquid and an explosive charge made up of about 650 grams of powder.The National Terrorism Prosecution Office told the Reuters news agency the suspected offences included attempted destruction by fire or other dangerous means in connection with a 'terrorist plot', as well as the making, possession and transport of an incendiary or explosive device with intent to carry out dangerous damage.'Vigilance remains at a very high level,' said Nunez on X, thanking 'security and intelligence forces, who are fully mobilised under my authority' in what he called the 'current international context', seemingly with reference to the escalating situation in parts of the Middle East amid the US-Israeli war on Iran.

Everton is considering a legal challenge against the Premier League for their handling of Chelsea's undisclosed payments sanction. The club feels aggrieved as they were docked eight points during the 2023-24 season for profit and sustainability regulations breaches, whereas Chelsea did not face sporting sanctions.Chelsea were fined £10.75m and given a suspended transfer ban by the Premier League last week after reporting £47.5m of hidden payments to agents and players made over a seven-year period. This punishment has been regarded as lenient by other top-flight clubs.Everton and Nottingham Forest are unhappy with the Chelsea sanction and are taking legal advice. They claim the Premier League has been inconsistent in applying its own rulebook. Everton could still receive a further punishment as a result of their PSR breaches.The Premier League is believed to have explained Chelsea's punishment on the grounds that they felt they would have been unable to secure a conviction without their co-operation, so negotiated from the outset. Chelsea's current ownership of Clearlake Capital and Todd Boehly reported the offences, which they discovered during the negotiations to buy the club from Roman Abramovich four years ago.