The Myth of the Iranian Moderate & The "Undecided" War

Summary

Podcast Summary: The Gist – "The Myth of the Iranian Moderate & The 'Undecided' War" (March 21, 2026)

---

Overview

In this episode of The Gist, host Mike Pesca tackles two timely topics:

1. The Western media's portrayal of Iranian politicians like Ali Larijani as "moderates," examining recent Israeli military actions and the logic (or lack thereof) behind labeling Iranian leaders as potential peacemakers.
2. A retrospective analysis of President Trump's approach to US-Iran relations, specifically the so-called "Undecided War" – a style of military engagement characterized by impulsive, indecisive leadership lacking clear strategy.

The episode challenges journalistic assumptions, critiques policy “wish casting,” and dissects the complexities and contradictions of both Middle Eastern power politics and U.S. military decision-making.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Killing of Ali Larijani and the “Myth of the Iranian Moderate”

• Context of the Strike ([06:00])

  • Israeli forces killed Ali Larijani, the most powerful figure left in Iran, following prior high-profile assassinations including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.
  • Despite war not being officially declared, the two nations are in active conflict.

• Media Portrayals and Misconceptions ([06:53]-[11:47])

  • Mainstream Western publications (e.g., New York Times, The Guardian) refer to Larijani as a “pragmatist” or “moderate,” emphasizing his role in negotiations and suggesting his death harms prospects for diplomacy.

  • Pesca challenges this, highlighting Larijani’s brutal crackdowns on protests and questioning what “moderate” means in the Iranian context.

  • Critiques the assumption that removing leaders like Larijani inherently damages peace prospects:

    “An Iranian moderate is a jihadist who's smart enough to place the explosive vest on his friend rather than himself.” — Mike Pesca [08:11]

  • Draws parallels to the killing of Qasem Soleimani, noting that Western coverage often frames such acts as strategic blunders, ignoring the actual power dynamics and intentions within Iran.

• Western “Wish Casting” ([10:45])

  • Pesca argues that much of the media’s response stems from projecting Western assumptions about diplomacy onto actors who have repeatedly shown little interest in de-escalation.

  • "This all reads to me, oh no, they killed Larijani, the man who one day will make peace, while right now he's killing people all over the world. It reads as Western wish casting..." — Mike Pesca [09:55]

2. Strategic Aims & Regime Change

• Israel’s War Goals ([13:15]-[13:43])

  • Discussion with The Guardian’s Deputy Head of International News, Devika Bhatt, touches on Israeli aims—including targeting Iran’s enriched uranium facilities deeply buried underground.
  • Bhatt notes the difficulties inherent in military options due to the facilities’ location.

• Disputing the Narrative of Lost Diplomacy ([13:55])

  • Pesca questions the narrative of missed diplomatic opportunities, noting the ongoing war footing:

    “The evidence that [Larijani] is more inclined towards peace over war is scant.” — Mike Pesca [08:53]

  • He notes the relentless actions by Iran, such as attacking previously neutral countries (Qatar, UAE), as proof that cooling tensions is not on the Iranian agenda.

3. “The Undecided War”: US Policy Toward Iran

• Trump Era Retrospective ([16:32]-[21:55])

  • Pesca revisits the 2019 incident when the US came within moments of striking Iran after a drone was shot down, only for President Trump to call off the attack at the last minute (“cocked and loaded” tweet).

    “We were cocked and loaded to retaliate last night on three different sites.” — Donald Trump (quoted) [18:20]

  • He critiques Trump’s approach as neither decisively warlike nor meaningfully restrained, but rather a vacillating stance that leads to unpredictable—and dangerous—outcomes.

• “Management by Chaos” ([18:30]-[21:55])

  • Pesca lampoons Trump’s lack of process, describing the unfolding conflict as “the dumbest way to do an undecided war ever.”

    “These are the consequences of having a dissolute strategy and no process. Bluster, bluster, sanction, crow, posture…” — Mike Pesca [18:57]

  • Predicts that this approach only encourages Iranian aggression, as the U.S. response seems consistently uncertain and ad hoc.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Iranian Moderates:

  “A moderate in Iran, it's kind of a relative term. An Iranian moderate is a jihadist who's smart enough to place the explosive vest on his friend rather than himself.” — Mike Pesca [08:11]

• On the Killing of Larijani:

  “Israel did not kill a combatant. It would seem like maybe they did. No, they killed a future peacemaker. The evidence being not much beyond the assumption that peace is waiting to be unlocked. If only the right Iranian official is left standing.” — Mike Pesca [14:19]

• On Trump’s War Management:

  “The President's like an inverse Teddy Roosevelt. He caterwalls constantly and wields a tiny twig. But it's not that he never uses it. He did authorize strikes on Syria twice. He did enact tariffs against China. After a series of bluffs and back downs, the pattern isn't all bark and no bite. It's how uncorrelated the biting is to the barking.” — Mike Pesca [19:49]

• On the Consequences of Indecision:

  “I do not know how this ends. I don't know if it ever ends. I just know that Trump isn't managing a process. He's overseeing chaos. It's not even overseeing it. He's causing it...” — Mike Pesca [21:19]

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

• [06:00] – Start of main discussion: Israeli strike on Larijani
• [06:53]-[11:47] – Western media narratives, moderation myth, and critique
• [13:15] – Discussion of regime change and Israeli strategic aims
• [16:32] – "The Undecided War" spiel: Trump’s Iran strategy retrospective
• [18:20]-[18:30] – Trump’s “cocked and loaded” incident, audio clip
• [18:57]-[21:55] – Pesca’s analysis of U.S. military strategy chaos and prediction for future escalation

---

Tone & Style

• Pesca’s commentary is “responsibly provocative”—sharp, humorous, and critical of both left and right, steering away from dogma.
• Frequent use of irony and analogy (“caterwalls constantly and wields a tiny twig”) keep the critique vivid and accessible.

---

Conclusion

This episode of The Gist is a pointed critique of wishful Western journalism and an incisive look at the strategic failures behind America’s military posture toward Iran. Listeners come away questioning easy narratives and with a clearer understanding of why labels like "moderate" can obscure more than they reveal in the context of Middle Eastern geopolitics—and what indecision at the highest levels can mean for the world.

Transcript

[A]

The gist is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. Fiscally responsible financial geniuses, monetary magicians. These are things people say about drivers who switch their car insurance to Progressive and save hundreds. Visit progressive.com to see if you could save Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates. Potential savings will vary. Not available in all states or situations.

[B]

Marketing is hard, but I'll tell you a little secret. It doesn't have to be. Let me point something out. You're listening to a podcast right now and it's great. You love the host. You seek it out and download it. You listen to it while driving, working out, cooking, even going to the bathroom. Podcasts are a pretty close companion. And this is a podcast ad. Did I get your attention? You can reach great listeners like yourself with podcast advertising from Libsyn Ads. Choose from hundreds of top podcasts offering host endorsements or run a pre produced ad like this one across thousands of shows. To reach your target audience in their favorite podcasts with Libsyn Ads, go to Libsyn ads.com that's L I B S Y N ads.com today.

[A]

Hello, it's Saturday. It's the Saturday show and I often bring you one from the vault and one from the week. So our spiel of the week technically wasn't even a spiel because it led the show. It's like if it's whiskey that's not bottled in Kentucky, it can't be bourbon. So our spiel of the week was about the guardians asking the question, truly, honestly, earnestly, why Israel want to kill the head of Iran? So we get into that for a little while. And then I was looking back at some of my past Iran coverage. My past Donald Trump possibly attacking or waging war on Iran. And do you remember this? In June of 2019, Iran shot down an American surveillance drone in the Gulf of Oman. And then President Trump got very upset to the point where he scrambled the jets. There was a scrambling. He then pulled back. He called off a strike. We were cocked and loaded to retaliate last night on three different sites when I asked how many will die. And he framed his decision not to attack as a love of life. So I talk about what was going on then. It's very interesting. Two things. One, whoever was acting Secretary of Defense, I say it in the spiel. I have no idea of who that guy was. What a time, right? But then I look back at where Trump was then and what I don't say because I couldn't cast my head into the Future. I think one difference, difference between 2019 and 2026 wasn't even Iran's actions, although Iran's weakness demonstrated weakness, certainly played into the fact that the Trump administration chose to attack. Now, I think it might have something to to do with Trump's lack of patience. Remember, these attacks happened as negotiations were somewhat stalling or stalling in Donald Trump's eyes. The negotiations between Iran and Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner. Witkoff and Kushner wanted to get the IR to give up their nuclear program and literally give up the uranium. You'll hear that referenced in the first spiel I play from this week, where we talk, or the Guardian talked about maybe they'll have to use force to get the uranium. And I do think the man, as an older man and a man emboldened by, I guess, past successes, is just less patient. And so some of that lack of patience, the human wearing down of wherewithal, results in our current war with Iran. Enjoy, or at least listen to both of these spiels. This episode is brought to you by Pocket Hose, the world's number one expandable hose. What does that mean? Well, you know hoses, they get kinks and creases at the spigot, but Copperhead's pocket pivot swivels 360 degrees for full water flow and freedom to water with ease around your home. And they're rust proof and anti burst. They shrink back down to pocket size for effortless handling and tidy storage. This has genuinely changed my life. You know, hoses demand such a position of prominence in the garden, in the yard. You have other tools that you can put away. Not the hose. The hose demands to be paid attention to, but the pocket hose is the perfect solution. And so when I use the pocket hose and then coil it up and then put it away and it takes up a tiny fraction of what those old streperous hoses used to take up. Pocket Hose has been a life changer. For a limited time. My listeners can get a free pocket pivot and their 10 pattern sprayer with the purchase of any size Copperhead hose. Just Text gist to 64,000. That's just to 64,000 for your two free gifts with purchase. Gist to 64,000 message and data rates may apply. See Terms for details. The gist is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. Fiscally responsible financial geniuses, Monetary magicians. These are things people say about drivers who switch their car insurance to Progressive and save Hundreds of Visit progressive.com to see if you could save Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates potential savings will vary. Not available in all states or situations.

[C]

The Bleacher Report app is your destination for sports right now. The NBA is heating up, March Madness is here, and MLB is almost back. Every day there's a new headline, a new highlight, a new moment you've got to see for yourself. That's why I stay locked in with the Bleacher Report Apple. For me, it's about staying connected to my sports. I can follow the teams I care about, get real time, scores, breaking news and highlights all in one place. Download the Bleacher Report app today so you never miss a moment.

[A]

It's Wednesday, March 18, 2026. From peach fish Productions, it's the gist. I'm Mike Pesca. Ali Larajani, the most powerful political figure remaining in Iran, was targeted and killed by Israeli strikes day, some accounts say assassinated. That's inaccurate. The two countries are at war, even if it's not been formally declared. And Lara Johnny was leading an enemy combatant's effort to kill Israelis and others in the region. This is what happens during war, which makes more flummoxing the confusion over why.

[D]

And so what, what is Israel trying to achieve with this type of strategy? I mean, they've, they've taken out Iran's supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, a couple of weeks ago. A war that has proved much more complex than was perhaps anticipated has continued to take out another senior leader. I mean, what do we think we can understand about its ambitions?

[A]

Why would Israel kill the de facto head of Iran? Because they are at war and Iran is trying to destroy Israel and kill Israelis. The hundreds of missiles sent by Iran would explain the killing of the top decision maker within the country sending the missiles. But to explain how anyone could be confused to the point of stammering out a befuddled question, let's look at first the New York Times coverage of Lara Johnny. In the seventh paragraph of their front page story, the Times writes that despite Lara Johnny's stature within the regime, he was seen as an influential pragmatist with the clout to negotiate with the United States. His death, they suggest, would embolden Iranian hardliners who believe the Islamic Republic can survive only by reinforcing its repressive rule. As context, it was Lara Johnny who orchestrated what I would describe as a quite repressive crackdown that killed tens of thousands of Iranian citizens a few months ago. It is true, and this has long been noted, and I knew this about Lara Johnny, that he was described as a pragmatist or even a moderate in the moderate wing of Iranian politics. He's a smart guy, he's Western educated, he comes from a sophisticated family. He's not one of those dumb backwards ayatollahs. In fact, he's not a cleric and that's why he couldn't become Supreme Leader. But a moderate in Iran, it's kind of a relative term. An Iranian moderate is a jihadist who's smart enough to place the explosive vest on his friend rather than himself. The Guardian in print echoes the same sentiment that Lara Johnny's death represents a future where negotiations will be harder to achieve. It goes so far as to cast Israel's actions as foreclosing diplomacy. Yes, the diplomacy that was in the air and in Donald Trump's head in the fourth paragraph of their piece, quote, Netanyahu is now focused on blocking Trump's pathways for a cease fire and follow up talks with Iran. Lara Johnny would have been the man to get that job done. Uh huh. Now look, I'm not naive. I understand that within the context of Iran, Lara Johnny was less extreme than certain other figures, including the Supreme Leader currently and passed. But the evidence that he is more inclined towards peace over war is scant. Also, you could make a case that a hardliner who wants to fight, fight, fight might in fact bring about Iran demise more than a clever operator who understands Emmanuel can't. The Guardian cites Larijani's past role in negotiations with Russians and Americans over the JCPOA as evidence that he's a born negotiator. But a negotiator doesn't mean someone who's in the West's interests. It doesn't mark Larajani as open minded to lessening Iran's pursuit of of nuclear weapons or killing their own citizens, or trying to kill Israelis through proxies, or in fact Americans through proxies. It marks Lara Johnny of someone capable of recognizing Iran's interest. In fact, you could argue that a less capable figure overall, a more incompetent leader, even if that guy's very angry and doesn't talk about peace and doesn't know anything about Immanuel Kant, that that figure might be better for the West's interests, for everyone in the world's interest, he might be an idiot who so steps in it that Iran's demise is brought about right now. Also, let's make sure to note that there's not much evidence that anyone in Iran sees a cooling of tensions as in their interest. I see no evidence of that. And by evidence I mean let's count the drones. Let's count the missiles. Let's count the countries that they're firing drones at missiles at previous neutral states like Qatar and the uae. You don't keep shooting at them if you're interested in cooling tensions. This all reads to me, oh, no, they killed Lara Johnny, the man who one day will make peace, while right now he's killing people all over the world. It reads as Western wish casting, a tendency also to portray every Israeli action as a current or future blunder. This very much reminds me of the coverage of the killing of Qasem Soleimani. That was an American action which the Israelis cheered on, which at the time, I remember doing interviews. Oh, what a blunder. Oh, this will make Iran mad. And also, there's the next guy up. Well, it turns out, knowing what we know now, that taking Soleimani off the chessboard degraded Iran's ability to project force and coordinate its proxies. And Iran right now, with Soleimani in place, would be a much more formidable adversary. So I did play the question up top. Why would Israel want to kill the head of Iran, a country actively and also for 50 years that has been attempting to destroy and kill its people? But I didn't play the answer. So here is the answer by the Guardian's deputy head of international news, Devika Bhatt.

[D]

And what taking out Lorenzani has done is that it has removed someone who, you know, yes, in many ways was a kind of hardliner, very close to Khamenei, is thought to have been responsible in part for the really brutal crackdown on protesters as security chief, but nonetheless was known as a sort of pragmatist. You know, he was involved in nuclear negotiations. We know in recent weeks, he was quite heavily involved in talking, in talks with Russia, was. Went to met Putin, reportedly.

[A]

Getting more support from the only power in the world in a position to give you support doesn't make you a moderate, it makes you not an idiot.

[D]

He has this kind of. He had this sort of experience in negotiation which others within the Iranian establishment might not have had. And removing him means that there's one fewer person for the US and Israel to negotiate with, but also one fewer

[A]

person to defend against. And right now, there are no negotiations. There is a war. And what he was actively doing right now was coordinating the war, waging the war. He wasn't waging negotiations when he killed tens of thousands of his own people. He's not waging negotiations. Every time he launches a strike that destroys an Emirati, building an Omani Refinery or Kuwait military base. This guy was running a war. And the Guardian looks at all that and says, ah, future diplomat.

[D]

So it does sort of suggest this idea that regime change and the kind of total destruction of the old guard of the Iranian leadership is something that is on Israel's mind.

[A]

Yeah, top of mind, I would say.

[D]

So we know from our own reporting and other reporting out there that one of the key goals for Israel is to deal with this enriched uranium that we understand is sort of buried beneath a mountainside.

[A]

No, no, not sort of. If it was sort of buried, they'd be able to bomb it. It's very much buried, which is also why Israel and the United States is having such a hard time taking it out.

[D]

And so how they do that, it looks like, you know, force is the mechanism through which they want to do that now be on the sort of war footing.

[A]

And I suppose the hundreds of sorties flown into Iranian airspace indicates that they're sort of going about this the forceful

[D]

way, use of force rather than any kind of negotiation, at least with the kind of current leadership.

[A]

What negotiation? The Guardian apparently is not covering the war in Iran. They're covering the pre peace in Iran, the future peaceful country of Iran that is very open to negotiation. The Iranians launch 100 drones a day at UAE, which isn't or wasn't before a couple of weeks ago, even an enemy. These are not peaceniks who have been forced, sadly forced, to take up a post. What absurd analysis. Israel did not kill a combatant. It would seem like maybe they did. No, they killed a future peacemaker. The evidence being not much beyond the assumption that peace is waiting to be unlocked. If only the right Iranian official is left standing. A moderate, one of the very moderates who has maybe killed, I don't know, only a thousand protesters or 5,000, not tens of thousands. That's your moderate. The guy who killed tens of thousands of protesters. You know, in war, sadly, but sadly, mostly for them. You kill the enemy. You don't wait for him to become your negotiating partner because some Western media outlet sort of says so. The gist is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. Fiscally responsible financial geniuses, monetary magicians. These are things people say about drivers who switch their car insurance to progressive and save hundreds. Visit progressive.com to see if you could save Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates. Potential savings will vary. Not available in all states or situations.

[C]

The Global Gaming League is presented by Atlas Earth, the fun cashback app. Hey, it's Howie Mandel and I am inviting you to Witness history as me and my How We do it gaming team take on Gilly the king and wallow. 2 6, $7 million gaming in an epic global gaming league video game showdown plus a halftime performance by multi platinum artist Travy McCoy. Watch all the action and see who wins and advances to the championship match right [e-mail] that's globalgamingleague.com in partnership with Level Up Expo.

[A]

And now the spiel. In the catechism of the Catholic Church, there is the doctrine of the just war. In our popular imagination, World War II was called the good war. Our last president famously said the kind of war he was against was a dumb war. Well, President Trump seems destined to bring about a kind of war that few had ever imagined. The undecided war, which is a war where the US the greatest superpower the world has ever known, never really decides to go to war. It gets decided for us. Due to the most glaring type of mismanagement imaginable. I fear one day it will be said that the US Military was sucked into a conflict with Iran. But in fact, the President purchased the vacuum position the nozzle and flip the switch. Yes, the sucking is coming from inside the house. The White House. So in the wee hours of the morning, President Trump tweeted about calling off an airstrike against Iran. Quote, we were cocked and loaded to retaliate last night on three different sites. That I believe. I do believe that. I frequently believe the president is loaded. And you know, he's gone off half cocked so many times. He's definitely cocked by now. You're all cocked, Mr. President. By the way, if you're scoring at home, one uncocked and loaded is more dangerous than cocked and not loaded. That is true. Some men get surgery just so they can be cocked and not loaded. Reporters say no aircraft were scrambled. Aircraft get scrambled. Tariffs get slapped. These are our assigned verbs. There is no use objecting. So this was the report. I do believe the report. I don't believe the President, but I will play the president. Because he told Chuck Todd that he wanted to unscramble that egg. Or at least he claimed that the egg never got scrambled in.

[C]

They said, so we're about ready to go. I said, I want a better guns in the air. We're planning. We're about ready to go. No, but they would have been pretty soon.

[A]

All right, well, he got around to that a half hour beforehand. Maybe next time he and acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan will book a hotel room and figure it out over the course of four days. I mean, that usually works. But in the end, all Israel heard of the judgment which the King had judged, and they feared the king, for they saw that the wisdom of God was in him to do judgment. Yes, Donald Trump called off the strike in the name of humanity, which seems like maybe a good choice. If he hadn't waited until the last minute to think of the people who would have died if he hadn't scrambled the planes, if he had an actual Secretary of defense, if he hadn't provoked the Iranians in the first place, if he hadn't just announced to the Iranians that human shields, those will work. These are the consequences of having a dissolute strategy and no process. Bluster, bluster, sanction, crow, posture. Japanese tanker gets attacked. Ooh, yelp, howl, threaten, decry, rattle, taunt. US Drone gets downed. Bark, bay, threaten, swear, scramble, cock, load, leak, threaten. And so what? What comes next? What comes next in this sequence? When does it ratchet down? Don't you see a pattern in between all the words and anger? There are actual bad things that the Iranian military does to the US Military or their allies. Why would the Iranians have any incentive not to do more to tweak this President? The worst case scenario is they get attacked and they make him look like a hypocrite for doing so when he said the last time, ooh, the lives involved. The President's like an inverse Teddy Roosevelt. He caterwalls constantly and wields a tiny twig. But it's not that he never uses it. He did authorize strikes on Syria twice. He did enact tariffs against China. After a series of bluffs and back downs, the pattern isn't all bark and no bite. It's how uncorrelated the biting is to the barking. So here's how this time is going to have to go. We're certainly going to get more mischief from the Iranians. They have been given carte blanche to attack targets, especially if they don't kill anyone. They've been told you will not be struck in retaliation. But of course, how these things go is someone's going to get killed. And eventually the United States will counter strike on Iran. And at that point, Tom Cotton will get tumescent. Lindsey Graham will argue that there definitely doesn't need to be any congressional say so for this strike. And the Joint Chiefs will say, who's the new guy who replaced the old guy who replaced Mattis? I do not know how this ends. I don't know if it ever ends. I just know that Trump isn't managing a process. He's overseeing chaos. It's not even overseeing it. He's causing it. Stepping to the side and tweeting and doing a couple angry interviews. And all of this seems like the dumbest way to do an undecided war ever. And that's it for today's show. Corey War produces the gist. Kathleen Sykes runs the gist list, Ben Astaire is our booking producer, and Jeff Craig runs our socials. Michelle Pesca oversees it all benevolently improve and thanks for listening.

[C]

The Global Gaming League is presented by Atlas Earth, the fun cashback app. Hey, it's Howie Mandel and I am inviting you to witness history as me and my how we do it gaming team take on Gilly the king and wallow. 2, 6 $7 million gaming in an epic global gaming league video game showdown, plus a halftime performance by multi platinum artist Travy McCoy. Watch all the action and see who wins and advances to the championship match right [e-mail] that's globalgamingleague.com in partnership with Level Up Expo.