CMR is the leading provider of funding and management support for small to medium-sized businesses and entrepreneurs 

Summary

• Explosions in Jordan reported amid initial Iranian retaliation.
• Reports of fresh US strike wave on southern Iran, oil soars
• Bessent Says Hormuz Will Be "Worthless Piece of Water" In Two Years
• Iran offers conditional ceasefire: Pezeshkian says Iran will return to talks if the US honors prior commitments, which Tehran says it has violated.
• Tankers hit in Strait of Hormuz: Two supertankers struck exiting Hormuz, escalating energy-market risks.
• Oil prices surge: Brent crude rose above $92/barrel.
• Diesel supply squeezed: Refinery disruptions are driving diesel prices and margins sharply higher.

*  *  *

Iran Targets Marine Barracks in Jordan

Iranian state media is saying that the military retaliation is ongoing, with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Aerospace Force announcing that it launched a heavy ballistic missile attack targeting the US Marine barracks at Camp Titin, located near the Gulf of Aqaba in Jordan - which is at a significant distance, in the country's far southwest corner. State media sources further detail:

According to the IRGC, the strike destroyed multiple military installations and attack helicopters, inflicting heavy casualties on U.S. forces. The operation was executed as the second wave of retaliatory actions under the code name “Ya Rasul Allah.”

And more via state WANA News Agency: "The IRGC stated that the action was carried out in retaliation for a U.S. strike on a residential home during a wedding ceremony in Sirik, which resulted in nearly 50 civilians killed or injured, including children."

Iranian claims of US casualties will as usual be hard to verify, and the Pentagon has yet to give any confirmation or assessment. 

In the wake of the US CENTCOM campaign, which may still be ongoing, Iran's Hormozgan grid is under blackout. Further damage is likely to be assessed and publicized in the coming hours.

Initial unconfirmed footage now widely circulating of alleged IRGC attack on Jordan base...

Footage of an Iranian medium-range ballistic missile hitting a target near Aqaba, Jordan moments ago. pic.twitter.com/OTRmWBiuXL

— OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) September 1, 2026

Iranian Retaliation on regional Bases Begins

Iran is already hitting back, according to some early reports of what looks to be their latest retaliation, despite President Trump having earlier warned the Islamic Republic will be hit harder if it responds.

"If the failed Nation of Iran retaliates for this very justified attack, they will be hit again at a much harder and higher level, but it will not be the biggest attack of them all, that is waiting in the wings and, when it is over, there will be very little left of the Islamic Republic of Iran!" he stated earlier.

The White House indicated it is focused on taking out IRGC targets. But this has triggered the expected reaction:

• Fars: Some Arab sources report that an explosion was heard in Jordan; several explosions were heard from American bases in Jordan
• IRGC says US attacks will tighten the lock on the Strait of Hormuz
• Explosion heard in Erbil, Iraq, reports Fars

The last tit-for-tat instances also saw US bases in Jordan targeted.

One Atlantic Council analyst points out the obvious - today's action is yet another indication that the administration still does not understand how the Iranian government and leadership thinks (unless the intent is actual runaway escalation). Danny Citrinowicz writes:

Threatening Tehran with even more devastating strikes if it retaliates is unlikely to prevent an Iranian response. In fact, it may do the opposite. From Tehran’s perspective, failing to respond to a direct U.S. attack would undermine the very deterrence equation Iran has spent months trying to establish. The Iranian leadership believes it must demonstrate that American military action carries a price. That means Iran is likely to retaliate and it may even conclude that a broader or more painful response is necessary precisely to rebuild deterrence against future U.S. attacks.

This is the fundamental problem with Washington’s approach: it assumes that sufficiently strong threats will convince Iran to back down. But Tehran may draw exactly the opposite conclusion, meaning that backing down under threat would invite additional American strikes. Threats will not solve this problem. If Washington wants to prevent another cycle of retaliation and counter-retaliation, it needs a political strategy for ending the confrontation. Otherwise, each side will continue using force to restore deterrence after the previous round — creating an escalation cycle that becomes increasingly difficult to control.

The latest Pentagon leaks to the Washington Post happened days ago, and now this:

Looks like the high-level Pentagon leaks and resignations of the past week were meant to forestall or prevent exactly what’s happening now. Didn’t work of course. There are no checks on power, unless Israel gets upset. We don’t even have an opposition party to speak of. https://t.co/5m1DaLirOg

— Mark Ames (@MarkAmesExiled) September 1, 2026

More latest via AJ:

• The United States military says it is striking targets in Iran over attempted attacks on shipping as Iranian media reports explosions in Asaluyeh, Jiroft, Bandar Abbas, Qeshm Island, Konarak, Chabahar, Jask, Sirik and Lavan.
• Iran’s army and IRGC promise the US will regret and face “severe punishment” for the aggression.
• US President Donald Trump says “if the failed Nation of Iran retaliates for this very justified attack, they will be hit again at a much harder and higher level”.

Both WTI and Brent crude are up 5% todat, both now trading above $90 a barrel following the escalation of US military strikes on Iran. #economy #oil #energy #markets pic.twitter.com/IYEohy2RIo

— Mohamed A. El-Erian (@elerianm) September 1, 2026

Trump: 'Large & Powerful Strikes' in 'Retaliation' For Mining Hormuz Strait

Confirmation from the President, describing these new airstrikes as ongoing and "large and powerful"... He added that this is retaliation for the Iranians mining the Strait of Hormuz. The full Truth Social post:

Notably he is warning the Iranians will get hit again "much harder" if they don't cooperate with Washington demands.

Early reports of US Strikes on Southern Iran Send Oil Soaring

Rare US strikes against Iran in the middle of US trading hours? Bold move if so. Some breaking headlines:

• REPORTS OF BLASTS ACROSS IRAN'S SOUTHERN REGIONS: STATE TV
• PENTAGON UNLEASHES FRESH ATTACKS On SOUTHERN IRAN
• Al Arabiya: ‘DEFENSIVE’ BOMBING — source to Faytuks
• EXPLOSIONS REPORTED IN KONARAK IN SOUTHEASTERN IRAN: FARS
  US FORCES BEGAN STRIKING IRGC TARGETS IN IRAN AT 12PM ET TODAY

And from Al Hadath: "Explosions heard east of Bandar Abbas and Qeshm Island; Five explosions heard in Qeshm and four near the Strait of Hormuz." CENTCOM has confirmed:

Today at 12 p.m. ET, U.S. forces began striking Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) targets in Iran. The strikes follow recent attempted attacks by the IRGC against commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and against American service members deployed to the region.

Confirmation of the attacks also from the Iranians:

The Deputy Governor for Security and Law Enforcement of Sistan and Baluchestan Province says four projectiles hit the counties of Chabahar and Konarak, Iranian news agency, IRNA, reports.

General Ali Khalil Abadi confirmed the attacks stating: “Expert investigations are underway to determine the details of the incident, potential damages, and further information.”

Oil prices shooting up on the new apparent 'shoot-up', which has been previewed in various reports this week. Trump is now pulling the trigger on Hegseth's plan, it seems:

WTI nears $90...

US attacks on Iran have almost always come in nighttime and overnight hours - and typically only after US market hours close, so a daytime attack is very rare indeed...

Trump is so confident that Bessent can continue suppressing crude oil prices that now is attacking Iran in the middle of US trading hours - bad mistake, very bad

— JustDario (@DarioCpx) September 1, 2026

Bessent Says Hormuz Will Be "Worthless Piece of Water" In Two Years

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told the audience at the Group of 20 finance ministers' meeting in Asheville, North Carolina, that Iran's ability to weaponize the Strait of Hormuz will be reduced to zero because "oil will be going through pipelines across the land."

"Iranians are trying to use the Strait of Hormuz as a chokepoint. It's not a chokepoint for the US, but it is for many other countries. That will be bypassed in 2 years. In 2 years, the Strait of Hormuz will be a worthless piece of water. The oil will be going through pipelines across the land," Bessent said.

Bessent on Iran:

Iranians are trying to use the Strait of Hormuz as a chokepoint.

It’s not a chokepoint for the US, but it is for many other countries.

That will be bypassed in 2 years. In 2 years, the Strait of Hormuz will be a worthless piece of water.

The oil will be going… pic.twitter.com/8z9BhNvGku

— Clash Report (@clashreport) September 1, 2026

Bessent's comments this morning should come as no surprise to readers, since we've detailed the existing pipelines that bypass Hormuz and the new pipeline projects planned by allied Gulf producers.

However, these new 'alternative energy route' initiatives are wrought with an array of unknowns - especially in terms of security and infrastructure/construction protection in an obviously volatile region, cooperation among transit states (in overland routes), as well as immense cost notwithstanding. For but one recent headline example:

Iraq-Syria Pipeline To 'Bypass' Hormuz Likely To Take Four Years, $15BN To Build

And with both these named countries coming out of recent decades-long 'forever wars', and with especially Syria still being largely destroyed and fragmented, efforts to bring to fruition Bessent's anticipated bypass system "across the land" - as he says - will more likely be something that drags on far longer than the Trump administration itself is in power. 

Read the full note here.

Also read Goldman's latest energy flow data through the Hormuz (here).  

Pezeshkian: We'll Return to Ceasefire if US Does

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian on Tuesday reiterated his country's willingness to return to talks with the US, but made clear that Washington must return to its prior commitments made.

"I state explicitly that if the United States returns to its commitments under the ... memorandum of understanding, the Islamic Republic of Iran will immediately take reciprocal action," Pezeshkian said on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan. 

It is significant that he's there at the Kyrgyzstan-hosted summit in person, receiving a welcome from the likes of Putin, Xi, Erdogan, the UN's Guterres, and others.

Pezeshkian still blasted the US for "reneging on its commitments" under the agreement, which unraveled in June - leading to various weeks of sporadic tit-for-tat attacks - the latest which occurred just at the start of this week.

President Trump yesterday told reporters in the Oval Office that there will be a "response" to the Iranian attacks, but also cautioned that this would not mean a return to full-scale war.

US officials have talked about "mowing the grass" with a series of indefinite strikes, while ironically having an aversion to anyone applying the label "forever war". 

It's not a "forever war"; it's just "mowing the lawn."https://t.co/oJTjmdSiHb pic.twitter.com/9JI0lfWaVS

— Brandan P. Buck (@brandan_buck) August 31, 2026

Two Supertankers Hit

Two oil supertankers were struck by unknown projectiles while transiting the Strait of Hormuz early Tuesday, signaling yet another sharp escalation in hostilities along the world's most critical energy chokepoint.

The attacks follow President Trump's warning Monday that additional strikes against Iran remain possible. Traders are pricing in a further war risk premium, pushing Brent crude futures above $92 a barrel, while US diesel crack spreads have breached the critical $100-a-barrel threshold.

Maritime security consultant Marisks reports that Saudi shipping giant Bahri's VLCC Sidr was hit northeast of Khasab, Oman. The Sinokor-operated Senegal Prosperity was reportedly struck by three projectiles farther east. Both tankers were exiting the maritime chokepoint. 

UK Maritime Trade Operations separately confirmed that a tanker completing an outbound transit of Hormuz reported three projectile strikes but did not identify the vessel.

Brent crude futures ripped higher during Asian and European trading on the news, with the benchmark firmly above $92 as of 0600 ET.

More US Strikes on Table, Trump Warns

"President Donald Trump warned Monday that further strikes are possible, pushing Brent back above $91/bbl and driving another bear-steepening move across global bond markets," UBS analyst George Redman wrote earlier. 

US diesel crack spreads were above $100 as of 0600 ET.

As we've extensively detailed, the energy crisis is not necessarily in crude itself but in refined products. Gulf diesel and gasoline shipments have declined amid disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz, while damage to Russian energy infrastructure from Ukrainian one-way attack drones has created a perfect storm in global refining markets in late summer.

'Diesel at Epicenter of Supply Squeeze'

Goldman's energy expert Daan Struyven warned in his most recent note that "diesel is at the epicenter of the supply squeeze."

"Rising strikes on refineries in the Middle East and Russia have further constrained already-stretched global refining capacity, pushing refined-products margins to new highs," Struyven and Yulia Zhestkova Grigsby wrote in the note, adding, "Diesel remains at the epicenter of the rally."

Struyven and his team estimate that global refinery runs are down 7 million barrels per day from last year and have averaged nearly 6 million barrels per day below seasonal norms since March, around the time the US launched Operation Epic Fury and Ukraine ramped up one-way drone attacks against Russia's energy infrastructure.

Meanwhile, there may be some diplomatic traction in the Gulf area, with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian saying on state TV: "I state unequivocally that should the US return to its commitments under the aforementioned Memorandum of Understanding, the Islamic Republic of Iran will also take reciprocal action immediately."

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent's "Operation Economic Outcast" is also ramping up as the Trump administration deploys sanctions to pressure Tehran into submission.

More Latest Developments

via Newsquawk...

• Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesperson Baghaei said Europe cannot claim strategic autonomy while following Washington's orders, stressing that true autonomy means making independent decisions.
• Pakistan's Deputy PM and Foreign Minister met with Iran's Foreign Minister Araghchi in an informal manner in Bishek at the holding room of the SCO Council of Head of States, according to journalist Anas Mallick.
• Gulf Corporation Council condemned Iran's attacks on Jordan, saying they pose a direct threat to the security and stability of the region, according to Al Jazeera.
• Yemeni armed forces targeted early on Tuesday the bases of Saudi and Emirati mercenaries in Al Makha and Al Khuwakh located in the southwest of the country, according to IRIB.
• Hapag-Lloyd's (HLAG GY) CEO said it is reasonable to expect the Strait of Hormuz will remain blocked for the foreseeable future.

The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to uphold its ban on transgender troops serving in the military, appealing a lower court ruling that has, for now, blocked enforcement against service members already in uniform.

The petition targets a June decision by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals finding the ban probably violates the constitutional rights of transgender troops already serving. The decision claimed that the ban "appears to be driven by the bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group: persons who identify as transgender." That ruling barred the Pentagon from enforcing the policy against those specific plaintiffs while their case works through the courts. The administration maintains the policy regulates a medical condition - gender dysphoria - rather than transgender status, and therefore needs only a rational connection to military readiness to survive review.

The June ruling was 2-1 and split the baby: it blocked the Pentagon from discharging the currently serving plaintiffs while leaving the ban on new transgender recruits fully in place. Judges Robert Wilkins (an Obama appointee) and Judith Rogers (a Clinton appointee) formed the majority. Judge Justin Walker, a Trump appointee and the panel's lone Republican nominee, dissented: "because the plaintiffs are service members not civilians, and because we are judges not generals, I respectfully dissent." The Constitution, Walker wrote, assigns that authority to Congress and the Commander in Chief. Notably, a different D.C. Circuit motions panel had ruled the opposite way in December – letting the Pentagon enforce the ban, 2-1 – meaning the same courthouse has now gone both directions depending on which three judges drew the case. Hegseth's response to the June loss was four words: "See you at SCOTUS."

The administration wants the justices to take the case now, before trial – its petition calls the June ruling "gravely erroneous" – rather than let a preliminary injunction, in place in some form since March 2025, run all the way to a two-week trial set for January. That posture has become familiar this year, with the Department of War repeatedly asking the high court to let its personnel decisions stand while litigation over their legality plays out.

The Justice Department's Supreme Court filing describes the Pentagon's authority to decide who serves as a "matter of exceptional importance," language that puts military judgment, not the lower courts' read of the evidence, at the center of the case.

Shannon Minter, legal director of the National Center for LGBTQ Rights, claimed the administration "wants the Supreme Court to rush in and bless the expulsion of proven, decorated soldiers before a single court has issued a final judgment."

The policy traces back to an executive order Trump signed shortly after taking office. It states that "adoption of a gender identity inconsistent with an individual's sex conflicts with a soldier's commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle."

"We will get transgender ideology the hell out of our military. It's going to be gone," Trump told House Republicans the day he signed the executive order during a retreat at his Doral golf resort in Miami.

Pete Hegseth turned that order into policy in February 2025.

Hegseth's memo reasoned that troops who experience symptoms of gender dysphoria "cannot satisfy the rigorous standards necessary for Military Service." He has since folded the ban into a broader push to strip "woke" policy out of the armed forces.

The population at issue is small but not trivial: the Pentagon's own estimate put roughly 4,240 troops with a gender dysphoria diagnosis among a force of about two million, and around 1,000 self-identified for voluntary separation when Hegseth's 2025 deadline hit.

NCLR and GLAD Law filed the underlying case, Talbott v. United States, in January 2025 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, arguing that the Department of War's transgender policy violates the Constitution and discriminates against transgender troops.

The court has scheduled a trial for January 2027, but the Department of War wants the ban enforced against the plaintiffs before then. The justices already weighed in on this policy once before. They allowed the ban to take effect last year in a separate challenge, while that earlier litigation proceeded, a result that suggests a majority already leans toward giving the Pentagon the ability to set its own military readiness standards.

The ruling under appeal covers narrower ground – for now. It protects only the troops who brought this specific suit. But on June 30, District Judge Ana Reyes – whose original injunction called the ban "soaked with animus and dripping with pretext" – certified the case as a class action covering every transgender person serving or seeking to enlist since January 2025, a maneuver designed to route around the Supreme Court's ruling last year curtailing nationwide injunctions. Two months later, the administration was at the high court's door. If the plaintiffs win at the January trial, the remedy no longer stops at 29 names.

"Joe Biden allowed trans insanity to run rampant in our military," White House spokeswoman Olivia Wales said in a statement. "President Trump restored lethality and readiness to our warfighters." She added, "The United States military is the greatest in the world, and President Trump is keeping it that way by focusing on elite readiness standards – not DEI or woke gender ideology."

Whether the Supreme Court agrees to hear the case will determine how long the lower courts' preliminary read of the Constitution can override the Pentagon's own judgment about who meets its strict standards of military readiness.

Authored by James T. Moodey via American Thinker,

The word capitalism was coined in the 1700s. The definition was vague. It generally meant "private property traded freely" or "free markets." However, most non-totalitarian countries had free markets, and these countries in Europe and elsewhere were not particularly wealthy. Their rural people were paupers living off the land, even in England, France, and the U.S. at our founding.

We generally regard capitalism as creating wealth, but free markets are not what created the enormous wealth that occurred in the United States. I knew that and studied our economic history to find out: If it was not free markets, what was it? What specifically were the mechanics of "our capitalism" that created such wealth?

I found the answer. However, I also learned that capitalism cannot be taught without properly defining wealth.

Wealth of a nation is its amount of usable goods. I use the term usable goods to exclude paintings and other speculative items. Poverty is a lack of usable goods, such as clothes or food. A large supply of usable goods brings prices down and reduces poverty. We became wealthy because we produced an enormous amount of usable goods. But how did that happen?

Usable goods are created by factories. It is not the amount we pay factory workers that is important; it is the millions of hammers, shoes, and vehicles they produce that create wealth. Farmers and utility workers can be included with factory workers who produce usable goods for millions of people.

Cyrus McCormick's reaper would supply a large amount of food, but sales were difficult and slow. The reaper would break down on farms far away. McCormick had difficulty traversing the country making repairs and sales. He solved these problems by inventing a unique idea of setting up distributors. He shared significant profit with the distributors. They stocked the product locally, performed repairs, and made sales. Sales grew rapidly, and McCormick Reapers were supplied throughout the country. The United States became an exporter of food.

Here is the key to capitalism's success: When farmers tried to buy direct from McCormick, he refused and made them buy from their respective distributor.

Other manufactures, of home goods, saw McCormick's success and not only set up distributors, but added another discount to include retailers. Again, customers were sent back to the retailers. Retailing became a very profitable business. In the 1850s, general stores appeared in nearly every town.

It was not greed that made capitalism successful; it was nearly the opposite. It was the sharing of profits with all who sold the product.

Prior to this, women made their own soap, household goods, and clothes and tended their own crops. Men planted crops, hand-forged steel tools, and built what they needed. Rather than make their own goods, people began to buy them at a local store. Rural couples were unshackled from the centuries-old life of paupers.

Rural couples had been purchasing limited goods from peddlers who occasionally passed through their valley. Or they bought goods from catalogues. Returns of goods was an enormous problem, and single sales limited mass production at the factories, which kept prices high.

When couples found they could buy any goods they wanted at a general store, demand for home goods exploded. Prices for household goods and farm equipment fell due to the resulting mass production. Farm families soon found buyers for their excess farm produce, and those profits were spent on fast-declining prices of home goods. Men could afford farm equipment, and women bought dresses rather than made them. Rural people and the merchants became wealthy. America soon became known as the "land of opportunity."

Incomes were rising while prices steadily fell for decades, up to and including the Roaring Twenties. Introduction of the income tax reversed the trend. In the 1930s, the lowest income tax bracket was raised to 24 percent and the highest income bracket to 94 percent.

Capitalism is not simply free markets. We are not free to bargain for the price of milk in a store. We are not free to bargain with the factory. The epitome of free markets are barter societies in the Middle East. They are free to bargain with the retailer and the factory. High-volume factories cannot survive in a barter society, and those societies are mired in poverty as a result.

Capitalism is a self-perpetuating economic system designed to increase sales using a structure of profits for all who sell the product, and those profits are protected by the factories. That is what created millions of usable goods, reduced prices, reduced poverty, and created our great wealth.

Bloomberg's NYMEX one-month heating-oil/crude spread, tracked on the Terminal as the HOCL1 Index, breached $100 per barrel early Tuesday before surging to nearly $106 by late morning.

The historic blowout is a major warning that refinery outages in Russia (read Goldman's latest diesel warning), restrictions on industrial fuel exports, and continued disruptions through the Strait of Hormuz are deepening a crisis concentrated in finished fuels rather than in crude availability.

Larger time frame:

We first warned:

Diesel crack spread hits record high, just shy of $100 https://t.co/pxNKK1OUeR pic.twitter.com/uAciv62yPk

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) August 13, 2026

The latest snapshot of the worldwide refined-products squeeze came Tuesday morning from Kelly Chen, a senior economist at DNB Carnegie specializing in China, emerging markets, and energy markets.

Chen noted that China is one of the few countries with enough spare refining capacity to provide meaningful relief to the increasingly strained global market.

However, Chen pointed out that Beijing appears to have little economic or strategic incentive to rescue Western fuel markets.

"Some clients ask us if China can be a potential source of relief for the product markets," the senior economist wrote in the note.

She continued, "As product exports through the Strait of Hormuz remain heavily disrupted and Ukrainian attacks have constrained Russian refining, China is one of the few regions with room to materially raise refinery throughput and exports quickly."

"Beijing did increase its refined product export quotas in July, but they remain well below 2025 levels. The question is whether the authorities have an incentive to raise product exports further," she said.

Chen argued that China is unlikely to rescue global diesel markets, writing, "If US pressure forces China to reduce or halt purchases of Iranian oil, China would have to either compete more aggressively for scarce crude oil barrels or draw further on its own strategic inventories. Either option would weaken China's own energy security to ease a shortage elsewhere. China has already tapped its own buffers to absorb the disruption to crude oil and may not have appetite to do much more. Furthermore, high road-fuel prices could boost global demand for Chinese electric vehicles/energy technologies. Thus, until crude oil supplies become less disrupted, we suspect Chinese authorities have little reason to significantly raise product exports."

Professional subscribers can read the full note here at our new Marketdesk.ai portal.