Beyond the death and destruction in Iran, the primary danger of the war launched by Donald Trump against the country is the perpetuation of the conflict. US Congress members are already admitting the possibility of deploying ground troops. This is how 'endless' wars always begin: first, precision and restraint are promised, then the geographical expansion, the multiplication of targets, and the dilution of any red lines are normalised. The next step toward the global precipice will be the multiplication of enemies, the formation of alliances, and the declaration of ruptures between countries, leading to the end—a world war with nuclear weapons at the ready. With insanity reigning, this is, unfortunately, a viable prediction. The second danger is the global economic shock, which is already here. The Strait of Hormuz, closed by Iran, is a vital artery through which about 20 million barrels per day transit, a quarter of the world's maritime oil trade. A significant portion of liquefied natural gas also passes through this corridor. With the war, Washington decided to release 172 million barrels from its strategic reserve, and the International Energy Agency moved toward a record coordinated release. For an energy-importing Europe preparing emergency reserves, for poor countries crushed by external bills, and for families already pressured by inflation, Trump's war has turned into a planetary tax on fuel, transport, and food. We have already begun paying this cost, which will push us into misery. The third danger is the end of International Law, which has saved so many lives in the past. When the world's greatest power normalises a preventive war with shifting motivations, it offers others a moral licence to do the same. With this war, the world is pushed into the jungle of 'might makes right'. The fourth danger is, ironically, the reinforcement of nuclear proliferation. Before the attacks, negotiations were underway between Washington and Tehran, mediated by Oman, and the IAEA itself was preparing additional technical discussions in Vienna regarding safeguards and verification of Iran's nuclear programme. The war destroyed the mechanisms that allowed us to know what the Iranians were doing. The signal many regimes take from this is simple: those without a nuclear weapon can be attacked; those who have one gain a life insurance policy. Few ideas are more dangerous for the 21st century than this. Meanwhile, the argument gains strength that to solve the energy problem, we must build more nuclear power plants—more potentially lethal 'Chernobyls' and 'Fukushimas'. The fifth danger is political and civilisational. The war provides fuel for all authoritarian currents that thrive on humiliation, resentment, bloc logic, xenophobia, and fanatical-religious conflict. In the Middle East, it multiplies radicalisation. In the West, it strengthens governments that demand more military spending and less democratic scrutiny. In the global economy, it creates conditions for energy-exporting states and rival powers to capitalise on the chaos. In the European Union, it gives space for the strong to command the weak and for the end of the unanimity rule among member states on central issues. In Portugal, the Government is positioning us as potential military targets for Trump's enemies. How do we stop this madness?