If you haven't read Part 1, start there for the main argument and the timeline evidence. This post goes deeper into who the neocons really are and how the con works beyond the war itself.

The Neocon Con: Part 2

What does "neocon" mean?

Michael Harrington, a democratic socialist, coined the term "neoconservative" in a 1973 article in Dissent magazine. He used it as a critical label for former leftist intellectuals who had drifted rightward. The name stuck.

But the real story is who these people were and what they were actually doing. The neocon project was never a genuine conversion to traditional conservatism. It was a hostile takeover of the Republican Party by a faction of former leftists who retained the same messianic, global interventionist impulses they had as Marxists. They just swapped the ideology.

The Trotsky-to-neocon pipeline is not a conspiracy theory. It is documented intellectual history. Irving Kristol, the godfather of neoconservatism, was a Trotskyist in his youth. Max Shachtman mentored a generation of future neoconservatives, including figures like Jeane Kirkpatrick and Elliott Abrams. The common DNA is revolutionary universalism: first class struggle, then “democracy promotion,” both demanding American global hegemony enforced by state power. Domestically, the left pursued cultural revolution; internationally, neoconservatives pursued permanent conquest. Both wings grew from the same root. The system offered no choice between them — until Trump broke the consensus.

Now, if you are a lifelong conservative who came up through the ranks believing in limited government, national sovereignty, and ordered liberty, you might wonder how a bunch of ex-leftists ended up running your party. And it's fair to ask: How did they explain this to themselves and everyone else?

Enter the famous line. Irving Kristol, the man described as the "godfather of neoconservatism," once said he was "a liberal who was mugged by reality."

That line is a brilliant piece of branding. It performs several functions at once.

1. It makes them look like reluctant converts. Men of principle who were forced by hard evidence to abandon youthful idealism. It deflects from the fact they were never really conservatives. They weren't defending tradition, custom, or national sovereignty. They were importing leftist methods into a new vessel. And it shuts down further inquiry. "I was mugged" implies a traumatic, personal epiphany, not a calculated political realignment.
2. I call it what it is. The whole thing was a con job to take over the Republican Party. These people needed an excuse for why they stopped being leftists, and that excuse became the founding myth of a movement that captured a major American political party. The joke writes itself: a man who was literally never a conservative says he was "mugged by reality," and suddenly he's the intellectual leader of American conservatism.
3. And the punchline? They were against street crime but very much for state-sponsored violence on a mass scale when it served their geopolitical agenda. The Iraq War, the Libyan intervention, endless regime change wars. They were "mugged," all right. They just grabbed a bigger gun.

Epstein and Bondi Have Vanished

Iran Goes Kinetic Last Day of February 2026

Bondi is Fired April 2, 2026

Blanche Shuts Door on Epstein Two Weeks Later

This is not a coincidence. This is a tactical liquidation. By March 2026, the DOJ knew the public and the media had zero “attentional spare capacity” left to fight the declaration of closure. They gambled a nation panicked by $4 gas and a widening Middle East war would let the Epstein investigation die in the dark.

The neocon con wins again.

Pakistan has the Bomb

Wikipedia: Pakistan holds an estimated 170 nuclear warheads (2025 estimate). It is not a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. It tested six devices in May 1998 at Chagai, Balochistan. The program began in 1972 under Zulfikar Ali Bhutto after Pakistan’s defeat in the 1971 war with India.

Like Iran, Pakistan is an Islamic Republic. Pakistan’s constitution declares Islam the state religion. Sharia law informs the legal system.

The Strategic Position

Pressenza, May 19, 2026: Pakistan is a nuclear power of 250 million people, sitting between India, China, Afghanistan, Iran, Central Asia, and the Arabian Sea. It is the only Muslim-majority country with nuclear weapons. The bomb compensates for conventional military inferiority against India.

The Saudi Connection

Baltimore Sun, Sep 19, 2025. Breaking Defense, Sep 22, 2025: In September 2025, Pakistan’s government stated publicly that its nuclear program “can be made available to Saudi Arabia.” A Saudi-Pakistan defense pact was described as “bringing a new nuclear player to the region.”

The Hosting Role

Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Apr 12, 2026: In April 2026 — while the US-Iran war was in full kinetic phase — US and Iranian delegations held talks in Pakistan. They left without an agreement.

The Core Tension

Pressenza, May 19, 2026:

“Pakistan is poor in per capita income, but rich in strategic position. It has recurring political crises, but possesses nuclear weapons.”

“The nuclear bomb does not feed children. Corridors do not guarantee democracy. Being a hinge requires a strong state, fine diplomacy, and a less vulnerable economy. Otherwise, the hinge creaks. And when a nuclear hinge creaks, the whole planet hears it.”

Unmasking the True Motives

The Islam question: To repeat: Like Iran, Pakistan is an Islamic Republic. Pakistan’s constitution declares Islam the state religion. Sharia law informs the legal system. Yet the US has never seriously threatened Pakistan’s nuclear program (1972–present, 170 warheads), while Iran (no bomb) gets struck in June 2025 and invaded in February 2026.

Why the difference? It’s not about radical Islam. It’s about globalist strategy:

Factor	Pakistan	Iran
US relationship	Ally/partner since Cold War	Adversary since 1979
Nuclear timing	Got bomb during Cold War when US needed allies	Pursued bomb after US had non-proliferation regime in place
Utility to US	Useful (Afghanistan logistics, Saudi umbrella)	No utility
Saudi factor	Offers nuclear cover to US “ally”	Threatens US “ally”

Pakistan’s bomb was tolerated because Pakistan was useful to the neocons. Iran’s program was bombed because Iran is not. The “radical Islam” framing is selectively applied — it justifies war against globalism’s adversaries and gets ignored for its allies.

This is the dangerous game. The neocons treat every Islamic state as a disposable asset — friend today, enemy tomorrow, depending on utility. None are genuine allies. Pakistan will turn on the US when interests diverge. Saudi Arabia’s ideological exports have already come home to roost. The entire strategy is built on short-term manipulation with no endgame.

We could opt out. We could stop bombing countries that do not threaten us. We could bring the troops home, end the drone wars, and spend the trillions wasted on permanent war on our own crumbling infrastructure — the power grid that fails in every heat wave, the bridges that are rusting into the river, the roads that are falling apart. The choice is not between Iran and Pakistan. The choice is between global empire and national well being — and maybe our survival.

The Iran war was never about non-proliferation. If it were, the 170 Pakistani warheads that Pakistan offered to share with Saudi Arabia in 2025 would have been a higher priority than Iran’s zero.

But Aren't The Saudis Friendly?

Saudi Arabia funded Wahhabi mosques and madrassas worldwide for decades. Wahhabism teaches al-wala’ wa al-bara’: Muslims must not befriend or imitate non-Muslims, and enmity toward them must be visible. According to the Wahhabi teaching funded by the Saudis, those who reject its doctrines after receiving the call — their “blood and treasure are forfeit.”

Current funding of Wahhabism has decreased, and decades of prior investment have built a Wahhabi institutional infrastructure that is largely self-sustaining, making the cuts feasible. These cuts are also strategic for Saudi Arabia to distance itself from Wahhabism to attract western investment and also to enhance its image as the friendly face of Islam. But don’t be fooled. The infrastructure remains intact. The schools still teach. The mosques still preach. The networks still operate. The ideology has been successfully embedded in institutions that do not need Saudi checks to function. The shift in funding is a strategic rebrand, not a defeat of the ideology. Wahhabism is now a self-perpetuating global movement, and Saudi Arabia gets the PR benefit of appearing moderate while the machine it built continues running.

So the threat model is incoherent. If the Iran war was about protecting the world from a radical Islam that has nukes, then Pakistan and Saudi would also be a priority. They weren’t touched.

To Repeat

Here is a question for the Trump voters. What did you hope to get by voting for him? I am guessing you wanted some or all of the things on this list.

1. More parental rights and less School Board or State control over the classroom.
2. The exclusive right of parents to make medical decisions for their children.
3. Local control of police and holiday displays at City Hall.
4. Bring back American manufacturing for America’s critical goods made by Americans.
5. Return to one-day in-person voting except in exceptional cases.
6. Enforce immigration laws and insist immigrants assimilate and learn English.
7. Fumigate the deep state.
8. Fix our crumbling infrastructure.
9. Cheaper gas through domestic sourcing.
10. You can add to this list.

You got a war. They got a closed file. You got higher prices. They got your vote. That’s the neocon trade.

Every Republican you vote for who promises to protect your family will be given a war. That war will be his excuse for not doing anything else. And you will give him a pass because he is ‘our guy’ and the enemy is ‘over there.’ Meanwhile, your border falls open, your schools rot, your factories stay closed, and your children leave the faith. That is not a bug. That is the design. You are being conned by the same people every four years, and you keep falling for it because they use the right words about abortion and guns.

So what do you do?

Next time your attention is pulled to optional foreign wars, think or say:

“Iran war, huh? What about the border? What about the fentanyl? What about our crumbling bridges? What about the schools where my kids are being taught to hate their country? What about the DEI committees running our workplaces into the ground? What infrastructure could we fix at home with the $2 trillion spent on a war? I am an America First voter. What difference does it make if we win there and lose here? What difference does it make if the Strait of Hormuz is open and our own bridges are closed? What difference does it make if Iran is contained and our border is not?”

You do not need to be an expert. You just need to repeat the list. Every time you can.

• ✓ Border
• ✓ Fentanyl
• ✓ Bridges
• ✓ Schools
• ✓ DEI
• ✓ Transgender Mutilation
• ✓ Our own country first

Say it enough times and it becomes impossible to ignore. Do not forget the list.

That is how you break the con.