Local’s members,

Our live call is this Saturday, February 21st at 12:00 PM Eastern.

Chuck just returned from Colombia and Syria and will be taking your questions—covering everything from ministry work on the ground in Colombia to the evolving geopolitical situation overseas. This is your chance to go deeper and hear directly from him.

He’ll also be sharing more about the upcoming Frontier Forge Institute summer camp, including its mission to train young men (ages 13–17) in Christian leadership, discipline, and responsibility. 

The conflict between the United States and Iran is doing that strange dance right now. On one hand, you’ve got “negotiations” in Geneva. On the other hand… you’ve got aircraft carriers moving.

Axios reported this morning that we may be closer to striking Iran than most people realize. Not months. Not “someday.” Possibly days. And if you watch the hardware, it tells a clearer story than the press releases.

In just the last 48 hours, reports indicate the U.S. has surged:

• 48 F-16s

• 12 F-22s

• 18 F-35s

• 6 E-3G Sentry AWACS aircraft

• Roughly 40 aerial refueling tankers

Meanwhile, the USS Gerald R. Ford carrier strike group has passed the Rock of Gibraltar and entered the Mediterranean.

And here’s what most people don’t understand:

That carrier does not have to sail into the Strait of Hormuz to be useful.

From the eastern Mediterranean—especially with tanker support—U.S. aircraft can strike targets inside Iran. Which means this could kick off before the Ford ever gets to the Gulf.

These “Talks” Aren’t Really Talks

The negotiations happening in Geneva aren’t face-to-face. There’s no American official sitting across a table from the Ayatollah. It’s shuttle diplomacy.

Omani intermediaries walk between rooms—one room with American envoys, another with Iranian representatives—carrying messages back and forth.

The U.S. says:
“You must give up highly enriched uranium and abandon your nuclear ambitions.”

Iran says:
“We’re willing to talk.”

And then quietly:
“Just not about that.”

That’s not negotiation.

And while the delay continues, the Ayatollah is publicly threatening to sink American carriers, calling them “big targets.”

Can Iran Sink a Carrier?

Let’s be serious for a moment. Yes, Iran has hypersonic missiles. Yes, they have thousands of short-range missiles designed to threaten neighbors like Saudi Arabia. Yes, they have speedboats with guns and some small submarines.

But here’s the problem for them:

Right now, the nuclear talks in Geneva are stalling with Iran. Meanwhile, the United States is building combat power in the region at a level we haven’t seen since the Iraq invasion—two aircraft carriers, dozens of warships, hundreds of combat aircraft, and tens of thousands of troops either in theater or moving that direction.

The U.S. buildup is not subtle—and Iran knows it

From what I’m tracking, the U.S. is moving into the region with:

• Two carrier strike groups (one already in theater and another inbound)

• 300–400 combat jets in the region when you count land-based aircraft

• Patriot and THAAD batteries shifting into place

• Aegis destroyers tuned for ballistic missile defense

• A steady stream of support aircraft—tankers, ISR platforms, and the stuff you don’t talk about on a public livestream

And here’s the point: the United States isn’t putting all that out there to “negotiate harder.” That’s the kind of posture you take when you want your opponent to understand the consequences before you act.

Iran’s information war just leveled up (and yes, the video was impressive)

Iran has been pumping out threat videos for weeks—straight of Hormuz posturing, military drills, the whole production.

But they dropped one recently that honestly looks like a Super Bowl ad for ballistic missiles.

And I’ll say this plainly: it was well-made. Whoever is building their media operation understands modern influence warfare. The goal isn’t just to scare Israel—it’s to scare Americans, spook markets, pressure allies, and make decision-makers hesitate.

The missile they’re showcasing is the Khoramshahr-4 (they’re pitching it as unstoppable, “uninterceptable,” and essentially a war-ending weapon).

So let’s talk about what it can do—and what it can’t.

Khoramshahr-4: a serious threat, but not a war-winner

From the way this missile is being described, it’s a liquid-fueled, medium-range system with roughly 2,000 km range—meaning Israel is in reach, U.S. bases in the region are in reach, and potentially some assets farther out are threatened depending on basing and launch options.

The real concern isn’t just speed. The concern is maneuverability on re-entry—a re-entry vehicle that can adjust course makes interception harder.

But here’s the part that matters strategically:

• A weapon can be terrifying and still not be decisive.

• A missile can get through sometimes and still not win the war.

Even if Iran had a significant number of these—and even if a percentage penetrated defenses—that’s not enough to defeat the combined combat power the U.S. and Israel can bring to bear.

Iran can cause damage. Iran can kill people. Iran can make the cost real.

But Iran cannot win a conventional war against the U.S. and Israel.

That’s why they’re leaning so heavily into the psychological side: if you can’t win the fight, you try to prevent the fight.

The Strait of Hormuz threat has a problem: China