A recent study published
by the firm ClearSky has revealed that the Iranian regime’s cyber capabilities
have suffered a major strategic defeat. Despite a significant 15 fold increase
in activity from groups such as Handala, the research concludes that the vast
majority of these operations resulted in nothing more than reused propaganda. While the regime and its proxy groups have
flooded the internet with grand declarations about the collapse of Israeli
critical infrastructure, the actual impact on the ground has been negligible.
The investigation
indicates that the Iranian cyber strategy has prioritized psychological war
over tangible technical results. By claiming responsibility for events that
never occurred or inflating minor technical glitches into strategic
breakthroughs. Many of the purported data breaches, which Handala touted as
massive thefts of sensitive information, were exposed as recycled data from
years past or entirely fabricated claims. This approach has allowed the regime
to maintain a facade of operational potency while lacking the actual capacity
to disable the Israeli economy or degrade civilian life.
Tehran has
increasingly utilized its cyber arm as a supplementary tool to generate a
digital image of victory whenever the war results in military losses. However,
the study identifies three critical factors behind this ongoing failure: the
robust defensive posture of Israel’s security establishment, the lack of genuine technological innovation
among Iranian hackers, and the persistence of outdated attack methods. Despite
having ample time to modernize, Iranian operators continue to rely on basic
techniques such as phishing and the utilization of known vulnerabilities.
The Israeli defensive
teams and large scale organizations have successfully blocked thousands of
daily penetration attempts, proving that the regime’s digital bark remains far
worse than its bite.
By Shmuli Volkin, Jewish Breaking News
On the eve of its
78th Independence Day, Israel is not just surviving, it’s surging. The
Central Bureau of Statistics put the country’s population at 10.244 million, up
roughly 146,000 people, or 1.4 percent, over the past year.
Born out of war, tested by war, and
still absorbing the shock of October 7 and the campaigns that followed, the
Jewish state enters Yom Ha’atzmaut more populous, more prosperous and, by its
own citizens’ accounting, happier than most of the Western world.
The demographic snapshot tells a story
no adversary wants to hear. Jews and those classified as “others” make up 7.79
million residents, about 76 percent of the population. Arab citizens number
2.157 million, and roughly 296,000 are foreign nationals.
Some 177,000 babies were born in the
past year, a figure that dwarfs the birth rates of virtually every comparable
developed economy, alongside around 21,000 new olim and 48,000 deaths.
Four in five citizens are Israeli-born
sabras. More than a quarter of the country is 14 or younger; only 13 percent
are over 65. In an aging West, Israel is conspicuously young.
Today close to 45 percent of the
world’s Jews live inside its borders, a reversal of nearly two millennia of
exile that no planner in Ben-Gurion’s era would have dared predict.
Life expectancy has climbed by nearly
two decades since independence, now sitting at 81.1 years for men and 85.5 for
women. Average wages have jumped from roughly 2,300 shekels a month in the
1990s to just under 14,000 today. Car ownership, that crude but telling marker
of middle-class arrival, has climbed from 3 percent of households in 1959 to
about 72 percent now.
Despite the hostage crisis, the rocket
fire, the war with Iran, and the drumbeat of international hostility, Israelis
overwhelmingly say they’re doing fine. Ninety-one percent report being
satisfied or very satisfied with their lives. The United Nations’ World
Happiness Report ranks Israel eighth for 2026, well above the USA at 23 and the
UK at 29
by Majid Rafizadeh • April 18, 2026
For
full article go to https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22447/selective-outrage-hezbollah
With thanks to Vered Weiss, World Israel News
Iran is set to take its place as a
member of a 54-nation committee to safeguard human rights, despite the Islamic
Republic’s mass execution of protesters.
Iran will join the UN’s Committee for
Programme and Coordination after being selected by the body’s Economic and
Social Council, which comprises 54 nations.
Many countries, including the UK,
Australia, France and Canada, nominated Iran to join the committee. The only
country to vote against the nomination was the US.
The committee’s upcoming agenda
includes issues such as terrorism, women’s rights and gender equality, and
disarmament.
Iran’s selection comes as its
authorities continue a wide-ranging crackdown on dissent.
On January 8 and 9, security forces
opened fire on nationwide demonstrations, killing tens of thousands of
protesters. Estimates place the death toll between about 12,000 and more than
30,000 people over those two days.
The government has continued its
campaign in the months since, carrying out arrests and executions and enforcing
restrictions on women’s rights. Authorities have maintained policies that limit
basic freedoms and suppress opposition activity.
Tehran has also been cited for its
role in funding major terror organizations such as Hamas and Hezbollah, even as
it prepares to participate in discussions that include counterterrorism.
The Economic and Social Council’s
decision places Iran on a committee tasked with coordinating UN programs,
including those tied to human rights-related issues.
The UN’s Committee for Programme and
Coordination is a subsidiary body of the Economic and Social Council that
reviews and coordinates the United Nations’ work programs.
A growing number of leading progressives in the American political spectrum have come out against continued American funding for the system, some saying it has “emboldened Israel" to attack other countries.
For years, support for Israel’s Iron
Dome missile defense system was immune to politics.
Republicans backed it. Democrats backed
it. Funding passed because it was obvious. Intercepting rockets aimed at
civilians is not a complicated moral equation.
That clarity is now fading.
As recently as September, a bill to
approve supplemental funding for Iron Dome passed the House with only 9
dissenting votes.
However, today, a growing number of leading
progressives have come out against continued American funding for the system.
J Street president Jeremy Ben-Ami,
Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), Ro
Khanna, and Jewish Democratic congressional challenger Brad Lander all now
oppose future budget earmarks for Israeli defense systems.
The bottom line is that it is becoming
politically incorrect to win a war and human rights are being turned on its head.
Full article at https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-891150
The full strategic consequences of the conflict with
Iran remain to be seen. What has already emerged, however, is a clearer picture
of the US-Israel alliance: not a one-sided act of American
benevolence or an emergency rescue mission, but a deepening strategic
partnership shaped by shared interests, joint capabilities, and mutual benefit.
That is exactly why the habitual phrase “aid to Israel” is so misleading.te
Israel is America’s cost-effective strategic ally
One conclusion was unmistakable: calling the US-Israel security framework “aid” is inaccurate, and it hands skeptics an easy talking point, as though this relationship cannot be equated with America First.
In reality, the arrangement functions as a strategic
exchange that advances American interests, strengthens American industry, and
reduces the need for costlier US R&D and military exposure.
Every few months, Washington relitigates “US aid to
Israel,” as though it were a discretionary act of charity, a foreign transfer
sustained primarily by sentiment. That framing is politically unhelpful and
descriptively wrong. The word “aid” implies a one-way relationship, dependency,
and benevolence unconnected to the donor’s concrete interests. It invites the
predictable question: Why are we paying for someone else’s security when
Americans have needs at home? It is the wrong framework for a security architecture
designed to protect American interests, strengthen American production, and
reduce the likelihood of direct American military exposure.
If the United States wants a clearer debate, it should
change the terminology. Call it what it functionally is: a US-Israel security
exchange, a strategic defense partnership, or an allied capability investment.
The label matters because the arrangement itself is
not structured as a cash gift, and the returns are not abstract.
Begin with the legal and financial structure. The 2016 memorandum of understanding established a 10-year framework totaling $38 billion, comprising $3.3b. annually in Foreign Military financing and $500 million annually for missile defense cooperation.
This
is a financing mechanism tied to procurement of US services, and production
connected to American defense systems and American firms, it is NOT general
budget support. A significant portion of what is commonly called “aid”
functions as sustained demand for US manufacturing and supply chains,
supporting the American defense industrial base.
That is the industrial dimension. There is also the strategic dimension, which is more consequential. In a region that repeatedly generates global shocks, the United States has two basic options: deploy major US assets forward, or rely on capable allies who carry the operational burden locally while remaining interoperable with US systems. The first option is slow to surge, expensive to sustain, and puts Americans in harm’s way.
Effectively, Israel’s continuous
present, fully engaged allied force in the region substitutes for that kind of
US forward deployment. A “USS Israel” American aircraft carrier, so to speak.
And unlike an actual carrier strike group, whose annual operating costs run
into the billions of dollars, Israel delivers that strategic presence at a
fraction of the cost while placing no American sailors or pilots in the line of
fire.
This is a strategic, practical, cost-saving measure
that is anything but charity, which is wholly not captured by the term “aid.”
It obscures reciprocity and, in doing so, undermines the durability of public
support. Labels become shorthand, shorthand becomes perception, and perception
becomes policy. When the label is wrong, the coalition built on it becomes
fragile.
All of this was true even before the war with Iran. But the recent US-Israel coordination in
confronting Iran has made the point even harder to ignore. When set against the
cold shoulder and strategic impotence shown by older allies, whose defense
Washington underwrites at far greater cost each year within the NATO framework,
the value proposition of the US-Israel partnership comes into even sharper
focus.
Far from being a burden on America,
Israel is one of the most cost-effective strategic investments the United
States makes anywhere in the world.
Full article at https://www.ynetnews.com/travel/article/bydhuviqzg#autoplay
On Saturday
morning, February 28, Operation
Roaring Lion
began, and Israel’s skies shut down once again, as they had during the earlier Operation
Rising Lion. With
the outbreak of that war, about 80 aircraft parked at Ben Gurion Airport had to
be evacuated immediately.
This time,
however, lessons from the previous round meant contingency plans were already
in place, including a structured framework to keep the airport operating under
attack, subject to Home Front Command guidelines, the Civil Aviation Authority
and security officials.
To see how that
plan works in practice, we joined a special tour of the airport on Sunday, as
it continued operating under missile fire and repeated alerts.
The tour began
with a descent into a protected shelter. This was not a drill. Phones around us
blared with the harsh alert tone as a real siren sounded. A glance at the Flightradar app showed an
Air Haifa flight from Larnaca circling in the air, delayed before landing, a
routine procedure since the start of the rescue effort.
In the operations
control room overseeing the “Open Skies” mission, another situation assessment
was underway despite ongoing missile launches, with all relevant agencies
present. Listening to the briefings, we learned that a missile fired from Iran
toward central Israel had been successfully intercepted.
At the same time,
standard protocol kicked in. Specialized runway vehicles, known as “carpets,”
scanned takeoff and landing strips for debris and metal fragments from the
interception. They collected the shrapnel and cleared the runways thoroughly.
Moments later, we
were informed of another missile launched toward Eilat. The intensity
underscored the challenge facing crews working around the clock in what may be
one of the most complex operations ever managed in civil aviation. Only after
the runways were fully cleared did operations resume, with landings and
takeoffs restarting under strict limitations. View gallery
A passenger’s path: From
Hall G to Gate C
What does flying
from Ben Gurion look like in wartime? Departing passengers check in and undergo
security screening in Hall G, not the usual departures hall. The reason is
proximity to shelters, allowing up to 1,500 people to be evacuated quickly if
needed.
After check-in
and security, passengers proceed through border control and head to Concourse
C, where they wait at the gate. Only one café is open, along with a small
duty-free shop across from it.
On the tarmac,
just one commercial concourse is active. At the time of our visit, two aircraft
were preparing for departure, one from Israir already pushed back toward the runway, and another
from Arkia still boarding.
Otherwise, the
airport was nearly empty of commercial planes. Aircraft do not remain parked
here; they land, take off and clear the area quickly. Much of the airfield is
now dedicated to U.S. aerial refueling planes operating around the clock,
giving the airport the feel of an American military base.
The next stop on
the tour was the duty-free zone. “It’s not pleasant to see everything closed,”
Kedmi said. “But Ben Gurion airport, operating under war conditions and missile
fire from Iran and Hezbollah, is functioning in an unprecedented way. No airport
in the world has maintained inbound and outbound flights under such intense
fighting.”
"The airport
is operating under a strict capacity cap of 2,300 people at any given time to
ensure rapid evacuation if needed. It’s not worth risking even one passenger’s
life for a flight,” Kedmi said.
At that moment
another alert sounded for missiles fired toward central Israel. Staff
immediately sprang into action, calmly and efficiently directing passengers in
the hall toward the protected shelters.
“This is why the
framework allows a maximum of 100 passengers on narrow-body aircraft and no
more than two flights per hour, both departures and arrivals,” Bar-Oz
explained. “What allows us to reopen the skies for such a complex operation
starts with protecting human life, without taking unnecessary risks.”
"Everything
is tightly scheduled. Boarding takes about 20 minutes, and each flight cycle is
calculated at roughly half an hour. At peak, the airport is handling about
1,000 passengers per hour.
The tour
concluded at the control tower, in the radar room beneath the glass cab above.
There, Deputy Director of Operations Assi Ben-Michael gave a detailed briefing
on the radar units, approach control and area control.
“Air traffic
management has several moving parts, and this is one of them,” he said, without
going into detail. “In practice, aircraft control is handled from here. We are
fully coordinated with the Air Force under very strict procedures. The
complexity is high, because alongside passenger and cargo flights, a fleet of
U.S. refueling aircraft is also operating, and the goal is to keep planes on
the ground for as little time as possible.”
He noted that
managing air traffic during wartime is fundamentally different. "In normal
times, efficiency comes right after safety. Now, after safety the priority is
operational coordination, especially those of the Air Force, so we can operate
without interfering with them. It’s a major challenge, particularly since we
sometimes have to move into protected shelters, while continuing to manage
traffic and communicate with aircraft."
"The most
challenging moments come when many aircraft are in the air and on the ground
simultaneously, especially with heavy activity from U.S. refueling planes.
During an alert, we still have to manage the airspace, and it can reach very
intense peaks. We maintain continuous communication with aircraft, factoring in
each plane’s fuel levels while keeping safety above all else.
To enable the
effort, the head of the Home Front Command approved an exception to standard
protection policies at Terminal 3, allowing up to 2,300 people to be present at
the same time, including about 800 airport staff.
By Ezra Lev Cohen
Despite the disruptions to daily life, Israelis are proud of their country’s accomplishments so far and are making the most of their time.
It’s
Wednesday afternoon, and the war with Iran is continuing. But in Jerusalem’s
iconic outdoor Mahane Yehuda market,
signs of conflict are absent. Fewer shoppers crowd the main area of the shuk,
and fewer car horns can be heard, but overall, life is strangely normal.
Erez
Yitzhakov lounges outside a fruit stand, a dog on his lap, sunglasses on his
face; he’s the image of relaxation. “We’re not scared,” he tells The
Press Service of Israel.
“We
have shelters, we go to the shelters for ten minutes, go out, and life goes on
the same.”
“To be
honest, it’s normal for us,” echoes Efie Ohana, an Israeli who has seen
multiple wars wrack the country in his lifetime.
Not
everyone is so calm, however, and many find the changes to daily life
disruptive.
“I was
sleeping, and I woke up to a giant boom, and it really scared me,” says Chaya
Adelkopf, who recently arrived in Israel from the United States.
She
recounts being “very cautious” during the war’s first few days until the daily
missile attacks and trips to the shelter began to feel normal. “Even if it’s
dangerous and it’s crazy, these are our normal days now,” she says.
Still,
others note that Jerusalem has lost some of its bustle. “You can feel that
here, in Shuk Mahane Yehuda,” Ohana explains.
“Normally
we have more traffic, but now it’s like this,” he says, gesturing at the
smaller-than-normal crowds.
“At
night, walking down the streets, it’s emptier than usual,” adds Adelkopf.
Despite
these disruptions to daily life, Israelis are proud of their country’s
accomplishments so far and are making the most of their time.
Mendel,
who goes by the nickname ‘The Street Jew,’ shares a lesson he learned from a
man he met during the recent Purim holiday.
“[The
man] drank a very substantial amount of alcohol, and we hear the sirens, and he
says, ‘Who cares about the sirens, Messiah is coming!’ and he starts dancing in
the streets like a drunk guy,” Mendel says. “We all need a little bit of that
belief.”
“We are
still happy, Am Yisrael Chai [the nation of Israel lives],” Ohana says.
Petting
his dog with one hand and making a victorious fist with the other, Yitzhakov is
confident in the war effort: “Israelis are strong people,” he says.
For full article go to https://tinyurl.com/4h9xn8mw
There is still some frustration with
the way the US and Israel are prosecuting the war, but there is a desire among
Gulf countries — particularly the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain
and Qatar — to ensure that Iran comes out of this war with its military power
sufficiently degraded to cease posing a threat to them.
While Trump has repeatedly expressed surprise over Iran’s decision to retaliate against its neighbors, including by targeting civilian sites, one of the officials said that Gulf countries largely anticipated the response and that this was one of the reasons they opposed the US-Israeli launch of the war.
“There was also serious doubt that military
strikes would have the desired effect of ending Iran’s destabilizing activities
in the region,” the senior Gulf diplomat said, explaining that the consensus in
the region had been that continued pursuit of a diplomatic off-ramp was a surer
way to maintain security in the Gulf.
But the US and Israel spurned that
view, launching operations Epic Fury and Roaring Lion, respectively, on the
grounds that only preemptive military action could address Iran’s nuclear
aspirations and its rapidly expanding ballistic missile capabilities.
Iran responded by not only targeting
those attacking it, but also by launching repeated strikes against all six Gulf
Cooperation Council countries — Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and
the UAE. The attacks have killed several people and disrupted oil and gas
production as well as tourism, both of which are important economic lifelines
for the region.
Iran is thought to have calculated
that the strikes would lead to the Gulf pressuring Trump for a ceasefire.
Instead, the move seems to have had the opposite effect, with Gulf countries
experiencing firsthand the danger inherent in allowing Iran to remain an armed
regional menace.
“Ending the war with Iran still in
possession of the tools it is currently using to target the GCC would be a
strategic disaster,” a second Gulf official said.
All four officials agreed that the US
and Israeli strikes were unlikely to bring down Iran’s regime. However, they
differed on how much the Islamic Republic’s military needed to be degraded to
void Tehran’s ability to pose a threat.
“We want this war to end with Iran
stripped of the capabilities to harm its neighbors,” the third Gulf official
said.
The second Gulf official was more
specific, insisting that the war continue until Iran’s missile and drone
manufacturing sites are destroyed.
All four officials agreed that the
primary target of Gulf anger is Iran, for using the American and Israeli
strikes as an excuse to attack them, rather than the US and Israel for
launching the war.
While both the UAE and Bahrain have indicated that the war will help tighten
ties with Israel, the Gulf officials largely rejected speculation that it would
also lead to new Arab normalization deals under the Abraham Accords.
The IDF announced this morning that it has expanded its ground operations in southern Lebanon.
Three divisions are now operating in southern Lebanon, with more expected to join them.
The IDF says it has struck about 1,000 Hezbollah targets since the start of the war, and has eliminated around 400 Hezbollah operatives.
The IDF continues to carry out a large scale attacks against Iranian regime infrastructure targets in Tehran and other parts of the country. Yesterday, the IDF struck 200 targets across western and central Iran. The focus continues to be the further degrading of ballistic missiles array and other military targets.
IDF Spokesperson Brig. Gen. Defrin told the Israeli public, “Our achievements are greater than we expected. The opening strike was very successful and consequently, so are our other attacks that have hit the Iranian regime. And we are intensifying the blow. Every day, the achievement increases and intensifies. And as a result, this is destabilising this regime. That is the reality. We are ahead of schedule.”
Despite a relative decrease in Iranian attacks over the weekend, missile fire from Iran was resumed Sunday night. Air raid sirens were activated twice in Beer Sheva and its environs, in the Dead Sea area and in the Gaza periphery. No casualties were reported.
In parallel Hezbollah continues its more intensive but short range attacks against northern Israel.
As the war enters its third week, both US and Israeli officials sound upbeat at the military achievements to date.
The tight US – Israel military cooperation continues with a clear division of labour. Each military is carrying out their attacks in different strike zones, but with a shared intelligence target bank. Each sides has senior liaison officers in each other’s headquarters whilst a special intelligence team operates in Israel, feeds targets in real time to both militaries.
According to the IDF Military Intelligence Directorate, the Israel Air Force has so far destroyed 100 Iranian anti aircraft batteries and another 120 radars, providing it with absolute air superiority. Seventy percent of Iran’s missile launchers have been either destroyed, decommissioned or buried out of reach inside tunnels.
Military intelligence now assesses that Iran’s missile production has dropped to zero, but ongoing attacks are needed to prevent the Iranians from trying to resume production. Moreover, the volume of missile fire on Israel needs to be reduced further.
Rumours circulated over the weekend that the IDF is running out of interceptor missiles, based on areport on the US website Semafor, that claimed Israel informed the US that it suffers from a severe shortage in missiles used to intercept ballistic missiles. This led the IDF to issue a statement, “As of now, there is no interceptor shortage. The IDF prepared for prolonged combat. We are continuously monitoring the situation.” In addition it was cleared for publication that Israel’s cabinet approved allocating NIS 2.6 billion (£626m) for further purchases for the war.
There are initial signs of diplomatic efforts to bring the war to an end. Most significantly regarding Lebanon. Former Minister Dermer is once more serving as an envoy for the Prime Minister. Over the weekend he visited Saudi Arabia to discuss a peace initiative between Israel and Lebanon for after the fighting is over. One initiative aims to turn Hezbollah into a political movement without any military capabilities. The Lebanese government, the White House and the French are all party to the talks.
Two more IDF divisions are expected to join operations in southern Lebanon in the next few days.
European Union foreign ministers will discuss a potential widening of the EU Aspides naval mission to the Strait of Hormuz. The report in the Financial Times suggested that an EU-UN joint naval mission to ensure safe passage "seems more likely" than EU countries approaching Iran bilaterally.
Israel and the US have approved operational plans for the next three weeks. The plan is to destroy all of the Iranian regime’s components and capabilities. The IDF announced this morning that it has expanded its ground operations in southern Lebanon.
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.
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.
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.
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.
If there’s going to be a war of the religions, which side are you
choosing?
