In 12 Days, the World Has Become Safer

by Farley Weiss March 11, 2026 

The only front of the war not being won by Israel and the United States is the public-relations battle. 

Some of the best arguments are not being made in a cogent, succinct manner. The launching of the war against Iran was done because the regime led by mullahs was producing missiles at an astronomical clip of 100 a month and headed toward several hundred a month. And that would mean Israel would suffer massive casualties if and when Iran was to once again launch those missiles. 

At the same time, Iran still had 460 kilograms of enriched uranium—enough for 11 nuclear bombs. It was reportedly planning to finish manufacturing the bombs in a new facility further underground so U.S. bombers couldn’t reach it. While Iran’s defenses were weakened last summer in Israel’s 12-day war, the country had maintained weapons for future use. And it made clear at the negotiating table that it had no plans on negotiating away its nuclear or ballistic-missile programs.

It appears that the world has forgotten the night of April 13-14, 2024, when Iran directly attacked Israel with more than 300 drones, cruise missiles and ballistic missiles. It did this after financing and supporting the Hamas-led terrorist attacks in southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, and the Oct. 8, 2024 attacks by Hezbollah in northern Israel.

After Israel acquiesced to the Biden administration pressure to respond tepidly to the barrage, an emboldened Iran launched a second attack on Israel on civilian targets of about 200 missiles on Oct. 1, 2024. Backed financially and militarily by Tehran, the Hamas and Hezbollah attacks were efforts to further their repeated goal to destroy Israel.

During negotiations with Iran, which were led by U.S. special envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff and the president’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, Iranian negotiators told the U.S. representatives that Iran had 460 kilograms of uranium enriched at 60%, which is a small step of one week to 10 days to 90% enrichment, which makes it usable for a nuclear weapon. Its goal was to be able to make nuclear bombs, and with their ballistic-missile arsenal, make it too cost-prohibitive for any country to stop them militarily. They also made it clear to Witkoff and Kushner what the United States did not destroy in “Operation Midnight Hammer” last June. In short, they were not going to give up their nuclear-enriched fuel and their pathway to a weapon via talks.  

The consistent policy of every U.S. president was that Iran—as the largest sponsor of terrorism in the world—was not going to be allowed to have a nuclear weapon. But leader after leader hedged. Former President Barack Obama wrongly predicted that with the money Iran would receive from sanctions relief after making the nuclear deal he negotiated in 2015, Iran would use it for its people, and not fund terror and ballistic missiles. 

In his first term, U.S. President Donald Trump understood the disaster of that deal, which would have ended nuclear enrichment restrictions by 2030. He withdrew from it in 2018 and started a “maximum pressure” campaign on Iran. As a result, Iran’s currency reserves plummeted. 

The Biden administration eased sanctions on Iran, despite Iran’s continuation of its enrichment of uranium, and the financing of Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis. He went back to the negotiating table, wasting valuable time in talks while Iran went to work on nukes. Then came Oct. 7. 

In his second term, Trump tried to reinstate a “maximum pressure” campaign of sanctions against Iran and even joined Israel’s 12-day war last summer. On June 21, 2025, the U.S. bombed three of Iran’s nuclear sites, though it was obvious that Iran was not deterred in its pursuit of a nuclear weapon. The mass rallies undertaken by its citizens earlier this year led the government to massacre between 30,000 and 40,000 of its own people, wounding some 200,000 others.

Trump understood that there was no possibility of a negotiated solution that would prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear bombs. Iran had twice attempted to assassinate him. Understanding the military situation and with the domestic uprising in Iran, the president understood that the time was now. He realized that the only way to bring peace was to end the main party creating war. Iran was not only exporting terrorism but also supplying Russia with killer drones for use against Ukraine, emboldening Russia to maintain its war.

Trump acted in a way few leaders would. He saw vulnerability and took action to keep Iran from obtaining weapons that could destroy any country. He ordered the military operation, along with Israel, and the result is a greatly weakened Tehran. It is not nearly the threat it was less than two weeks ago. The world is safer and better off as a result.

 

Iranian Targets Hit in 11 Days

 

The Before and After in ‘Negotiating’ with Iran.

 Leaders of the Islamic Republic do not think or talk like Western nations; to believe that they do is a recipe for disasters, as history recounts.

 (From an article by Harold Rhode, specialist in Iranian affairs)  According to U.S. special envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff, U.S. President Donald Trump is curious as to why the Iranians have not “capitulated,” given the amount of naval and other power Washington has amassed in the Middle East.

 Maybe these thoughts can help provide an answer.

 To answer the question, we must ask ourselves how Iranians, as well as other Middle Eastern powers, understand negotiations and war. Unlike us, they ask themselves two questions. Do their enemies/adversaries have both the capability and the will to use their weapons against their enemies? If they conclude that the answer to both questions is yes, they usually determine that they must accede to their enemies’ demands, in order survive.

In the present case, the Iranians seem to realize that Israel and the USA certainly have the military strength to them out, should we desire to do so. But they seem also to have concluded that there is not the will to do use their forces to do so.

Therefore, from the Iranian perspective, that means that we are weak. And when Iranians smell weakness, they strike. That is why the more we delay completing the action in Iran, the more they raise the ante in the so-called “negotiations” between Washington and Tehran. That is why there are more and more threats coming out of the mouths of Iran’s most senior leaders.

What then is the purpose of negotiations?

From the perspective of the Iranians and others throughout the Muslim world, the time to talk is only after one side wins. At these talks, the winner dictates to the loser the terms of how they will deal with each other. This, in short, means that the loser must surrender. If the loser isn’t prepared to do so, the battle continues until the loser has been destroyed.

 

Not Israel's War, A war for the West

 

Let’s get something straight, because this hasn’t been talked about enough. Seeing people grabbing headlines and posts that agree with their narrative instead of doing their own research is irresponsible.

What’s happening right now in Iran is not Israel’s war. It’s not a Jewish vendetta, it’s not a Middle East skirmish that has nothing to do with the rest of us, and contrary to Tucker Carlson, it has nothing to do with Chabad. You need to know what’s actually going on.

Washington severed diplomatic ties with Iran under the Carter administration after Iranian students stormed the U.S. embassy in Tehran and held 52 Americans hostage. That was 1979.

Since then, EVERY administration, Carter, Reagan, Bush (senior), Clinton, Bush (junior), Obama, Biden, and Trump, has said that a nuclear-armed Iran is unacceptable. The White House recently documented 74 separate instances of Trump making that case, calling it “longstanding, bipartisan American policy.” This isn’t a new position. It isn’t a right-wing position. It’s what every administration has believed for half a century.

So why did it take until now? Because Iran kept moving the goalposts, and the world kept letting them.

By May 2025, the IAEA reported that Iran’s cache of near-weapons-grade enriched uranium had surged by roughly 50 percent in just three months, putting Tehran one step away from having enough material for ten nuclear weapons.

That’s not some little vague threat. That’s a countdown.

The head of U.S. Central Command testified that if Iran decided to sprint toward a nuclear weapon, it could produce enough weapons-grade material for a simple device in one week, and enough for ten weapons in three weeks.

Iran spent years insisting its program was civilian. All the while, it was moving toward weapons capability. According to reporting sourced by the Institute for International Political Studies, Khamenei had authorized development of miniaturized nuclear warheads for ballistic missiles as recently as October 2025.

Now let’s talk about China, because this piece of the picture is pretty darn critical.

China is not a bystander in this story. Iran is central to Beijing’s entire overland trade and energy strategy. Iran sits at the heart of China’s Belt and Road Initiative, the infrastructure network connecting East Asia to Europe through land-based transport and Persian Gulf energy routes. Without stable access through Iranian territory, Beijing’s supply chains have no viable alternative. Iran exported more than 520 million barrels of crude oil to China in 2025 alone. Only Saudi Arabia supplied more. China buys over 80 percent of Iran’s oil. This isn’t ideological solidarity. It’s a dependency that neither side wants disrupted.

Which brings us to the Strait of Hormuz.

Roughly 13 million barrels of oil per day moved through the Strait in 2025, about 31 percent of all seaborne crude in the world.

About 45 percent of China’s oil imports pass through it. Iran has threatened to close it. And here’s what that threat actually produced: China is now in direct talks with Iran, pressing Tehran to allow crude oil and LNG vessels safe passage and to hold off on targeting tankers or key export hubs. When Beijing’s energy supply is on the line, the anti-American posturing has real limits.

Here’s what this all adds up to.

The United States didn’t stumble into this war because Israel asked nicely. It acted on a threat that five decades of American presidents acknowledged and mostly kicked down the road.

Iran was weeks away, not years, from having the material needed for nuclear weapons. It had long-range ballistic missiles capable of reaching U.S. bases and allies throughout the region. It had a weapons development program it had been lying about for years.

Calling this Israel’s war ignores fifty years of American policy, multiple rounds of failed diplomacy, and a nuclear program that was running out of road.

The world needed someone to act. The better question isn’t why it happened. It’s why it took this long.

Jews vs Muslims.

Jews believe in one God.
Muslims believe in one God.

Judaism is about 3500 years old.
Islam is about 1400 years old.
 
Jews pray 3 times per day.
Muslims pray 5 times per day
.
Jews have dietary laws and don’t eat pork.
Muslims have dietary laws and don’t eat pork.
 
Jews don’t try to proselytize anyone.
Muslims try to proselytize everyone.
 
Jews are happy having one country.
Muslims want every country.
 
Jews assimilate well with other cultures.
Muslims don’t assimilate well with anyone.
 
Jews have never taken over a country.
Muslims have taken over many countries.
 
Jews can co-exist with other races and religions and live harmoniously together.
Muslims fight and try to conquer whoever they live with.
 
Jews don’t stop traffic to pray.
Muslims stop traffic to pray.
 
Jews defend.
Muslims attack.
 
Jews accept the rules and the laws of the countries they live in.
Muslims don’t believe they have to follow the rules and the laws of the countries they live in.
 
Jews contribute to the building of Western civilization.
Muslims want to conquer Western civilization.
 
Jews cherish their life.
Muslims cherish their after-life.

If there’s going to be a war of the religions, which side are you choosing?

Hamas's Sophisticated Media Empire

 A recent report by the Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center (ITIC), based on Hamas documents seized by the IDF in Gaza, argues that Hamas maintains centralized managerial, financial, and strategic control over a broad media ecosystem, including outlets presented publicly as “independent” with a $2.24 mill budget

The report, published on February 22, 2026, draws from documents captured during military operations in Gaza and provides an unprecedented window into how the Palestinian terrorist organization coordinates its information warfare against Israel and the broader international community.

The Hybrid Media Model

At the heart of Hamas’s strategy lies what Israeli analysts term a “hybrid” media ecosystem—a deliberately constructed system designed to create the appearance of press diversity while maintaining absolute editorial control. According to the report, Hamas operates both official outlets like the Al-Resala media institution, the Al-Aqsa television network, and the Palestine newspaper, alongside news agencies Shehab and SAFA that publicly present themselves as independent journalistic organizations.

“This hybrid media system is not accidental,” the report states. “It is designed to allow Hamas to appear to advocate for media pluralism, while in fact it fully controls the media discourse.” This arrangement also provides the organization with diplomatic and operational flexibility, including the ability to circumvent sanctions and deny association with extreme content by attributing it to “independent” outlets.

The report adds that unofficial reports in late 2025 claimed Ali al-Amoudi was appointed acting head of Hamas’s political bureau in Gaza and was being discussed as a potential successor to Yahya Sinwar.

It traces his proximity to Sinwar back to their time in Israeli prison: al-Amoudi was arrested in 2004, released in the 2011 Gilad Shalit exchange, and, according to the report, developed a close relationship with Sinwar while incarcerated. The report says al-Amoudi later served as Sinwar’s office manager during Sinwar’s first term leading Hamas’s political bureau in Gaza (2017–2021).

Detailed Strategic Blueprint: 25 Projects and $2.24 Million

Perhaps most revealing are captured documents outlining Hamas’s operational plan for 2022-2025, which breaks down the organization’s media strategy into 25 major projects with measurable goals, specific content quotas, assigned budgets, and detailed timelines. The plan’s total budget is listed as $2,240,660, funded through an approved budget of $1,131,160 and an additional overage/exceptional budget of $1,109,000.

The projects span two primary categories:

1.     Strengthening the Palestinian narrative and crafting media discourse directed at foreign/international audiences

2.     Strengthening psychological and media warfare against rivals and enemies, and conducting propaganda against the occupation, with support and protection 

The distribution reveals significant resource allocation toward public-facing propaganda, with 35 projects accounting for 266 activities budgeted at $1.04 million, compared to 12 internal projects budgeted at $1.2 million.

LASER BEAM now operational

 

ISRAEL'S IRON BEAM REPORTEDLY INTERCEPTS ROCKETS AND UAVs: Multiple credible Israeli and international defense outlets report that Israel’s Iron Beam laser air defense system successfully intercepted rockets overnight and UAVs this morning Feb 26th along the northern border, amid renewed Hezbollah attacks from Lebanon. Footage circulating on social media shows a drone interception that is consistent with the system’s reported capabilities.

 

Iron Beam was declared operational in September 2025 and delivered to the IDF in December 2025 as a complementary layer to Iron Dome, designed to counter short-range threats such as rockets, mortars, and drones at very low cost per interception, primarily electricity. While some tactical details remain pending formal IDF confirmation, there are no conflicting reports regarding the interceptions, and the reporting describes this as the first combat employment of a high-energy laser air defense system in an active conflict.