Some More Iranian War News

• "US beefs up military might in Middle East after unleashing powerful B-1 bombers to attack Iran"--New York Post. The headline is misleading as the article indicates that only a single B-1 was deployed. It also reports that "[m]ore than 150 medics have also been sent to Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany — the military’s primary hospital for wounded troops from the Middle East," and that additional special forces are being sent to the region.
• "House adopts Iran war powers resolution as four Republicans join Dems to rebuke Trump "--New York Post.  Four Republicans joined all 210 Democrats to pass a resolution calling on Pres. Trump to “to remove the use of United States Armed Forces from hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran or any part of its government or military, including potential ground forces in a combat role or used for occupation.”
• "Brent crude oil surges to $100 a barrel for first time since May after reports of Red Sea attacks"--The New York Post.  "Reports of fresh strikes in the Red Sea raised new fears that a second critical shipping route through the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, which carries about 7% of global oil supplies, could also be compromised – multiplying what is already the world’s worst-ever supply disruption," the article states. 

Israel To Sit Out The Rest Of The War?

Zero Hedge reported on some comments from Israel's finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich--the second most powerful cabinet member according to the article--with the article relating (bold in original):

    “The State of Israel has no interest in joining the contained confrontation between Iran and the United States," far-right finance minister Bezalel Smotrich said in a session at the Katif Conference for National Responsibility, which endorses Jewish settlement in Palestinian territories. "The current situation is the best one for us.”

[snip]

    In his latest remarks, Smotrich candidly acknowledged that Israel and the United States have different goals vis a vis Iran, but said America's continued military engagement furthers the Israeli agenda. “[We] must remember that the ultimate goal of Israel, and not necessarily the United States, is to undermine and weaken the regime in Iran – to the point of overthrowing it,” Smotrich said. 

    Disregarding the widespread victimization of innocents that the strategy entails, Smotrich said destruction of Iran's economy will help precipitate the Iranian government's collapse. "Currently, inflation in Iran is at 85 percent, food inflation of over 134 percent in a total of four months, and the Iranian rial is trading at an exchange rate of 1.9 million to the dollar - and it's going up." He then reiterated that "the current situation is good for us, and there's no point in pushing ourselves inward."  

That might work if the economic collapse was not clearly the result of outside agents; but, as Germany and Japan illustrated during WWII, economic woes will not spark a rebellion when there is a clear enemy to blame. 

    The article also recounts comments from an Israeli journalist opining that Israel staying out of the fight makes it less of a target for Iranian attacks, allowing daily life to continue and saving the country billions of shekels for air operations or interceptions of incoming missiles. 

    Larry C. Johnson at Sonar21 suggests another reason for Israel pulling back is because both of its oil refineries were damaged earlier in the conflict and now Israel faces a shortage of diesel and jet fuel; and any further damage to the refineries would severely limit Israel's ability to continue military operations in Gaza or Lebanon. And yet another source, quoting the Wall Street Journal, indicates that the U.S., under pressure from Arab states, asked Israel to sit out the war in hopes that doing so will keep Iran from striking more of the Arab states' energy infrastructure, and make it politically easier for those states to join in attacks against Iran. 

    I think this is a good example of the maxim "countries do not have friends, only interests". Israel's interests were to (i) destroy Iran's nuclear capabilities, which the United States has pretty much already done for it; and (ii) eliminate the Palestinians, which is easier to do if (a) the United States is distracted with Iran and (b) Israel can concentrate its efforts on Gaza and Lebanon. Besides, it increasingly appears that we are moving toward having boots on the ground in Iran; and there was no way that Israel was ever going to be part of that effort if for no other reason then it would outrage Muslims around the world. The best we can hope for is a limited invasion to capture the territory adjacent to the Strait of Hormuz, followed by an extended occupation of that territory by a coalition of Arab states. 

    The question that needs to be asked is what are the United States' interests? I would say that our interests are limited to keeping open the Gulf of Arabia and the Strait of Hormuz to the free transit of oil, which was the situation before the war but is now impossible because of the war. And the reason we are in this situation is because our leaders lost sight of our interests and/or believed that Israel's interests were the same as ours. 

Houthis Declare Naval Blockade On Saudi Arabia

From the New York Post: "Yemen’s Houthis declare naval blockade on Saudi Arabia, widening threat to global oil supplies." The Houthis' statement "said the decision was in response to what they called 'an unjust and oppressive siege' imposed on Yemen by the Saudis," but the article notes that "Iran had pressed the Houthis to close the Bab el-Mandeb gateway to the Red Sea if the US continued to attack Iranian power infrastructure."

The full closure of the Bab el-Mandeb strait would reduce global oil supply by 7% as it would leave most of Saudi oil exports unable to leave the region. The disruption would add to the massive cut to global oil flows from the war in the Gulf, which has already reduced shipments by 10% of global supply.

Was Israel Plotting To Assassinate Pakistan Peace Delegation?

Anonymous Conservative's daily news brief included a post from X on this topic, but I found an article which has a bit more detail: "'Wipe You Off The Map': Pakistan Thwarted Israel's Plot To Kill Asim Munir In Switzerland, Analyst Claims"--NDTV. The claim came from Pepe Escobar in an interview with Mario Nawfal, a Lebanese-Australian podcaster. 

    Pepe, while taking about the friction between Israel and Pakistan and the former claiming to wipe Pakistan off the map, claimed it was the other way around.

    "No, it was the opposite Mario. Basically the short story is Pakistani military intel intercepted ultra-credible information that the Mossad was preparing, under orders by Netanyahu, an assasination [sic] attempt against Asim Munir and maybe the rest of the Pakistani delegation going to Switzerland. So the Pakistanis sent a direct message via their usual intermediaries—I would bet it would be Oman in this case—directly to Israelis saying that 'if you touch our delegation, we're going to wipe you off the map', period. I am quoting, this is what our source informed," Pepe said.   

And on a related note: "Israel furious with Trump for being left out of the US-Iran peace talks: ‘It’s a huge mess’"--New York Post. 

Trump Waives Iran Oil Sanctions For Two Months

The New York Post reports that the Treasury Department has issued a waiver on Iranian oil sanctions effective through August 21, "allowing for roughly $10 billion in revenue as nuclear talks continued with Iranian officials in Switzerland."

Countries Do Not Have Friends, Only Interests

From the Daily Mail: "Netanyahu secretly plotting to TORPEDO Trump's Iran peace deal in intelligence bombshell." From the lede:

    US spy agencies have warned Donald Trump that Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu is poised to torpedo his fragile peace deal with Iran to save his own political skin.

    Netanyahu, who faces a general election in the fall, is expected to escalate strikes on Iran's proxy terror group Hezbollah in Lebanon to shore up support at home, a fresh intelligence report warns.

    An official familiar with the report told the Washington Post that Israel's leadership is frustrated with Trump's 14-point plan and what it sees as a capitulation to Tehran. 

And then there is this bit from the article:

 'For every tear of an Israeli mother, a thousand Lebanese mothers must weep,' Itamar Ben-Gvir, Israel's minister of national security, shockingly posted on Friday. 'All of Lebanon must burn!'  

It would be an understandable sentiment if it were directed at Hezbollah, but all of Lebanon? What did the Lebanese Christians do to Israel? Israel drove the Palestinians into southern Lebanon after the 1948 war and now want to destroy Lebanon for it?

More:

• "Conflict erupts in Lebanon between Israel, Hezbollah — just hours after 2 sides reach critical truce"--New York Post. 
• "Fed-up Trump threatens to ‘blow the s–t’ out of Iran — prompting Tehran to storm out of US peace talks"--New York Post. 

Iran Deal Begs The Question Of What Was The Point Of The War

The New York Post reports on the "Details of US-Iran deal revealed in 12-point plan — timeline for US withdrawal, $300B fund, Hormuz passage." Neither the U.S. nor Iran have official released the text of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), but it apparently includes the following points (quoting from the article):

• Iran, the US and their allies would stop fighting across the region — including in Lebanon.
• Tehran would reaffirm its pledge never to build a nuclear weapon.
• The US and Iran would work out what happens to Tehran’s enriched uranium stockpile.
• Both sides would open talks on Iran’s future enrichment activities and nuclear needs.
• Iran would maintain the “status quo” of its nuclear program — which has been largely decimated — while negotiations continue.
• The US would lift its naval blockade, hold off on new sanctions and refrain from sending more troops to the region.
• Iran would guarantee safe, toll-free passage for commercial ships through the Strait of Hormuz for 60 days.
• Washington would release an unspecified amount of frozen Iranian assets once the MOU takes effect.
• A final deal reached after the 60 days would see the US withdraw its forces within 30 days and lift all sanctions on Iran.
• It would pave the way for a $300 billion reconstruction fund for Iran.
• The US would allow Iran to resume oil sales through temporary sanctions waivers.
• Iran, Oman and Gulf states would negotiate new shipping and maritime security arrangements for the Gulf.

The article adds that Oman and Iran are already negotiating transit fees. 

    So, in effect, the winners from this conflict were Israel, which got to kill a bunch of the top Iranian leadership, get more money from the U.S., and greater access to our military technology; Iran, which will get a larger role in the Middle-East and billions of dollars (although this will supposedly come from the Gulf States); and Oman which will apparently--with Iran--be charging tolls. The loser in all of this was the U.S. and, more particularly, U.S. taxpayers. If only Trump had kept his campaign promise of no new wars. I guess we should be glad that he is not doubling down on the conflict, but is just cutting our losses.  

The Never Ending Story: Israel Attempts To Derail Peace Deal With Iran

 A story in two headlines:

• "Iran agrees not to build a nuke, will reopen Strait of Hormuz — and US to release $25B in assets in Trump peace deal: Tehran"--Daily Mail. This was from Iran, not another White House press release.
• And then later today: "Frustrated Trump says attack on Beirut 'should not have happened' as he warns Israel and Hezbollah not to 'blow' it after Netanyahu launches strikes on eve of deal again"--Daily Mail.  

NY Post: Beware Turkey's Ambitions

Writing at the New York Post, Jonathan Schanzer warns: "Beware Turkey’s ambitions in the post-Iran power vacuum." He points out:

    Tehran has for years projected power by proxy across the Middle East, sponsoring terrorist groups like Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, Shiite militias in Iraq, and other malign actors across the region.

    Should the regime collapse, other aspiring regional powers will seek to fill the void.

    And while many countries may think regional leadership is theirs to inherit, there is one powerful player to watch: the Republic of Turkey.

    The country has the second-largest army in NATO.

    It has a growing drone industry and a government-tied military contractor, SADAT, that is training and arming militias across the Muslim world.

    Concurrently, Ankara has been cultivating terrorist proxies in the Middle East for years.

    The Turks are key patrons of Hamas, dating back nearly two decades, and are now trying to ensure their participation in the Gaza peace effort — despite opposition from the Israelis, who are wary of Ankara’s intentions.

    But the Turks are deployed elsewhere, too.

    Ankara is now supporting Hezbollah in Lebanon.

    It’s the primary patron of the new Syrian regime, led by former al-Qaeda leader Ahmad al-Sharaa, making Syria a forward base with key military and intelligence platforms.

    That’s to say nothing of Turkey’s longstanding military deployments in Northern Iraq, Somalia, Qatar and more.

    In short, Ankara has blanketed the region, leaving it well positioned to fill the void left by the Islamic Republic.

And from an eschatological perspective, I would also note that Turkey is one of the leading candidates for the land of Gog and Magog. 

Pentagon Angry Over Israel's Spying On U.S.

From Zero Hedge: "Angry Pentagon Sources Leak Report Of Israel's 'Unhinged' Spying On US Officials." From the lede:

    It's no secret that Israeli spying and surveillance is pervasive, and it is often even directed at its most powerful ally and backer, the United States. But the phenomenon has escalated of late, outraging Washington intelligence officials.

    Behind the scenes of this alliance which mainstream media and pundits typically project as essentially untouchable, deep-seated friction is boiling over. In an unprecedented move, the Pentagon has officially elevated Israel's counterintelligence threat level to its highest possible category, driven by surging internal alarm that this primary Mideast regional ally is aggressively ramping up espionage operations targeting senior US officials - even Trump's own top Iran negotiator.

As Wikipedia summarizes: 

Despite a close bilateral alliance, multiple incidents since Israel's foundation that Israeli intelligence agencies (such as Mossad, Shin Bet, Aman, and the now-defunct LAKAM) have actively collected American political, military, scientific, and economic secrets.     

The article hits the highlights of some of the worst spying scandals involving Israel (that we know of) including the Pollard Affair, noting that it appears that some of the military and intelligence information that Pollard provided to Israel may have been passed on to the Soviet Union. 

    However, this most recent concern is that Israel has stepped up its attempts to spy on the Trump administration in relation to negotiations with Iran. NBC reports:

    The Pentagon’s Defense Intelligence Agency in recent weeks issued the new counterintelligence threat assessment amid rising tensions between Israel and the U.S. over the way forward in the war with Iran, the officials said. They said the DIA posted an internal message, viewed by one of the current officials, that raised the level for Israel to “critical.”

    The designation stems from concerns within the Pentagon that Israel is making a particular effort to surveil top U.S. officials to get information on the Trump administration’s internal deliberations and decision-making on the conflicts in the Middle East, the officials said.

    The DIA assessment includes a seven-page document and features a chart, according to one of the current U.S. officials. The document says the assessment of Israel is that its ability to conduct human espionage and technical collection is at a “critical level,” according to the official.

    It also identifies a series of specific incidents that heightened U.S. concerns, the official said. 

Israel laughably denies that it spies on the U.S. but the NBC article goes on to note:

    According to current and former diplomats and former national security officials, Israel for years has had a reputation for aggressive espionage even against the U.S., its closest ally. It’s a practice that has long raised concerns among national security and diplomatic officials, and U.S. intelligence officials closely monitor the issue, according to experts and the current and former U.S. officials.

    Top U.S. officials often take extra care when traveling to Israel, sometimes using burner phones and computers and taking extreme caution when speaking in hotel rooms during official trips, the current and former U.S. officials and experts said.

    Israel has “a hyper-aggressive intelligence service,” said Emily Harding, vice president of the Defense and Security Department and director of the intelligence, national security and technology program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank in Washington. “They are exceedingly interested in what we are up to,” Harding said of the Israelis.   

Related: 

• "Israel Crosses Iran’s Redline in a Mission to Prevent Trump From Signing a Peace Deal with Iran" by Larry C Johnson. 
• "Three Lebanese Army members, including general, killed in IDF strike that could jeopardize US-brokered truce"--New York Post.  
• "Trump insists Israel’s Netanyahu ‘won’t have any choice’ in accepting Iran peace deal after fresh strikes: ‘I call the shots’"--New York Post.  
• "Trump scolds Netanyahu in testy phone call: ‘You could be left alone against Iran very soon’"--New York Post.  
• "Iran says it’s halting Israel attacks after Trump tells both sides ‘stop shooting’"--New York Post. 

Does Iran Have A Nuke?

Yesterday, Vox Day linked to this article, "Confirmed — Donald Trump Believes Iran Has The Bomb," by Larry Johnson at Son of the New American Revolution. Supposedly, in a phone call between Iranian President Pezeshkian and Pakistani Prime Minister Shariff was over a non-secure line, Pezeshkian outlined an ultimatum should U.S. airstrikes continue which includes this:

3. The Detonation of a Nuclear Device on Iranian soil—executed not as a weapon of war, but as an undeniable demonstration of sovereign capability and ultimate control over the escalation ladder.   

Assuming this is true, I'm not sure why the Iranian president would say this because it now gives plausible deniability if Israel were to nuke some remote facility in Iran. If nothing else, it will justify to the rest of the world the attacks on Iran. 

Israel Has Benefitted The Most From The Iran War

From the Daily Mail: "Why Israel is quietly emerging as the biggest winner from the Iran war." The key point from the article is that Israel's war aims are different from ours:

    Unlike the US, which sought the nebulous goal of regime change, or Iran, whose sole aim was simply to survive, Israel's calculated involvement has delivered tangible and perhaps lasting geopolitical gains.

    'Israel's goal was always to inflict maximum destruction on Iran, its proxy groups and its ability to rebuild after the war,' Pleasance explained.

    'Their strategy was therefore to fight as intensely as possible, for as long as possible.'

    This war aim, Pleasance said, put Israel at odds with its closest ally. While Trump had promised the American people a swift end to the conflict, Netanyahu needed the fighting to keep going.

    Yet despite the war entering its fourth month, Israel has managed to maintain its crucial alliance with Washington.

    In that time, according to US military figures, Iran has been crippled, with the majority of its air defences, navy and missile factories reportedly destroyed alongside every one of its drone production facilities.

    While the US has borne the brunt of the diplomatic pressure and footed much of the bill, Israel has been quietly eliminating many of its most dangerous enemies.

And this explains why Israel keeps sabotaging attempts to resolve the conflict. 

Israel, Once Again, Sabotages Peace Talks With Iran

I've mentioned before that Israel is best described as a frenemy, not an ally, who grossly abuses its relationship with the United States including, but not limited to, spying and espionage, providing a haven for Jewish criminals fleeing the United States, and undermining the U.S. in the Middle East. And we have seen it over and over again with how they have undermined the U.S. vis-a-vis Iran. The latest: "Trump's ceasefire collapses as Iran ENDS peace talks over Benjamin Netanyahu's fresh bombing campaign." The article relates:

    Iran's top negotiators on Monday stopped exchanging messages with the US through Pakistani intermediaries as Tehran vowed to fully shut down the Strait of Hormuz, according to the Iranian state-affiliated news outlet Tasnim.

    The report claims Iran cut off communication because it believes one of the preconditions for the ceasefire was a halt to the IDF's continued attacks on its Hezbollah allies in Lebanon.

    The regime says 'No dialogue will take place' until Israel fully withdraws from Lebanon and also stops attacks in Gaza, according to Tasnim.

    'Also, the resistance front and Iran have resolved to completely block the Strait of Hormuz and activate other fronts including the Bab al-Mandeb Strait, in order to punish the Zionists and their supporters,' a regime official told state media. 

    The Trump administration has spent recent weeks trying to quell the fighting by brokering a temporary ceasefire between Benjamin Netanyahu's government and Lebanon, but those efforts have not succeeded.

    Oil markets went into a frenzy following news of the ceasefire's collapse, with crude prices climbing more than six percent.

Trump was reportedly not happy with Israeli prime minister  Benjamin Netanyahu:

    Donald Trump reportedly called Benjamin Netanyahu 'f***ing crazy' on a phone call just before the President announced a halt to fighting between Israel and Hezbollah. 

[snip]

    However, Trump issued a note of hopeful skepticism: 'Let's see how long that lasts — Hopefully it will be for ETERNITY!'

    Before the statement, the pair reportedly had a tense exchange during a phone call regarding escalating conflict in Lebanon between Tel Aviv and Hezbollah. 

    A source told Axios that at one point, Trump bluntly asked Netanyahu: 'What the f*** are you doing?' 

    Trump eventually went off on the prime minister, directly stating that Netanyahu would be jailed without him. 

    'You're f***ing crazy. You'd be in prison if it weren't for me. I'm saving your ass. Everybody hates you now. Everybody hates Israel because of this,' he reportedly said. 

    Two sources told the outlet that Trump accused Netanyahu of being ungrateful to him and that making good on threats to bomb Beirut would make things worse for Israel. 

    The sources hinted that Trump's rage was driven by a belief that Israel's actions were making it harder to forge a peace deal with Iran. 

    Netanyahu later appeared to cast doubt on Trump's claim of a ceasefire, saying that his country would strike Beirut if Hezbollah doesn't stop attacking Israel. 

As I expressed yesterday, I doubt that Iran is sincere about trying to reach a peace deal, but neither can we trust Israel's leaders. 

The Muslim Way Of War

Iran is pretending to pursue peace negotiations simply as a reprieve to regain their military strength: "Iran digs out underground missile sites during cease-fire with US: report." From the lede:

    Iran has dug out a majority of the entrances to its underground missile bases that were buried by joint US-Israeli strikes during the height of the war, satellite images show.

    A recent probe of 18 missile facilities hit during the war shows that at least 50 out of 69 tunnel entrances have been reopened since the cease-fire went into effect in April, CNN reported.

    The fast work indicates that Iran would be poised to fire a lot more long-range missiles across the Middle East if the war restarts amid tense peace negotiations.  

This strategy is termed hudna. The Middle East Forum gives this explanation of it (footnotes omitted):

    The concept of hudna deserves a close look: It is not a Qur’anic term, nor is it the only Arabic word for a cease-fire or truce; others include: muhadana, muwada’a, muhla, musalaha, musalama, mutaraka, and sulh. But hudna is the most prominent. It is the first word used in Muslim history to mean cease-fire, specifically in the context of the seventh century Truce or Treaty of al-Hudaybiyya, often termed the Sulh al-Hudaybiyya (peace of al-Hudaybiyya).

    Named after a village outside Mecca, the truce came six years after Muhammad and his followers abandoned Mecca for Yathrib, today’s Medina. This move, known as the hijra (emigration) is of enormous significance for the classical understanding of jihad, inasmuch as it sets a pattern of retreat followed by regrouping and rearming, which permits an attack on the territory previously left behind. In March 628 C.E., Muhammad and his followers sought to return to Mecca to perform a pilgrimage. At Hudaybiyya, Muhammad “marched till he reached al-Hudaybiyya which lies at the limit of the Haram [sacred territory of Mecca] area at a distance of nine miles from Mecca.” Muhammad and the rulers of Mecca, most of whom had yet to convert to Islam, negotiated a truce, the essence of which was to permit the Muslims to return unarmed on pilgrimage each year for the next decade. It came to an end two years later, however, following an infraction by a tribe allied to the Meccans. In 630, Muhammad entered Mecca with a small, armed force and took the city peacefully. Hudna, in other words, amounted to a temporary truce.

There is no such thing as a lasting peace with Islam--it is always temporary until they believe they have sufficient strength to challenge you. Or, as the Times of Israel has succinctly explained:

    Simply put: within Islamic tradition, it is considered morally acceptable to make peace treaties (Hudna) when in a position of weakness, and to break them once the balance of power shifts in one’s favor—just as the Prophet did.

    Western observers often fail to grasp why Muslim negotiators push for temporary ceasefires (often ten years long, mirroring the Prophet’s example). They’re then surprised when such agreements collapse suddenly. This isn’t seen as dishonorable, rather, it follows a deeply rooted cultural and religious precedent. 

Israel Upset It Has Been Sidelined In Iran Negotiations

If you have been following the news, you will probably have heard that, per the White House, we are close to an agreement with Iran where Iran would turn over its processed Uranium. I'm not hopeful given that Islam has historically used a strategy of pretending to seek peace when it is facing defeat in order to give it time to build strength or otherwise obtain an advantage (aka, the Hudaybiyya strategy). So, over the short term, the Iranians may be negotiating in order to buy time, such as time to move the Uranium to a more secure location, or move weapons around, or some other object. Long term, they might agree to U.S. terms with no real intent on abandoning their nuclear program (or turn to alternative WMD research). 

    Nevertheless, Trump's attempts to negotiate a deal with Iran does not match with Israel's desire to utterly devastate Iran. Thus, I've seen reports of Israeli officials upset that they have largely been excluded from negotiations with Iran (see, e.g., "US has almost completely excluded Israel from Iran negotiations, Israeli defense officials tell NYT" from the Times of Israel). That article relates:

    The United States has almost completely excluded Israel from the negotiations with Iran, two Israeli defense officials tell The New York Times.
    
    Israel was not involved at all in the discussions ahead of the ceasefire and learned of developments in the talks between the US and Tehran from regional diplomatic contacts, as well as through the use of surveillance, the report says.

Someday soon we will need to do something about Israeli spies and hacking of U.S. government computer networks. The article adds:

    The report notes that in the run-up to the start of the war against Iran earlier this year, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was in close coordination with Trump and was leading a discussion in the Situation Room in Washington predicting the fall of the regime in Tehran.

    “The banishment from the cockpit to economy class has potentially significant consequences for Israel,” the newspaper says.

Consequently, Israel has unleashed its loyal Congress critters. The Daily Mail reports, "Trump lashes out at Republican rebels as Cruz and Graham warn his Iran deal could be a 'disastrous mistake'." It begins:

    President Donald Trump angrily lashed out at Republican critics on Sunday after allies including Ted Cruz and Lindsey Graham publicly warned his emerging Iran deal could become a 'disastrous mistake' that hands Tehran a massive strategic victory.

    The extraordinary public feud exposed deep cracks inside the GOP as some of the party's most hawkish national security voices openly questioned whether Trump was on the verge of repeating the very same Obama-era nuclear agreement he once denounced as catastrophic.   

Their complaint is that Trump is considering an agreement that would "reopen the Strait of Hormuz, establish a 60-day ceasefire and continue negotiations over Tehran's nuclear program while details are finalized."

    Senators including Ted Cruz and Lindsey Graham openly sounded the alarm over the pending agreement.

    Cruz delivered one of the sharpest attacks over the weekend, saying he was 'deeply concerned' by what he was hearing from inside the administration.

    'If the result of all that is to be an Iranian regime - still run by Islamists who chant 'death to America' - now receiving billions of dollars, being able to enrich uranium & develop nuclear weapons, and having effective control over the Strait of Hormuz, then that outcome would be a disastrous mistake,' Cruz wrote on X.

    'The details are still coming out - and I pray the early reports are wrong - but the fact that Biden's Rob Malley is praising the deal is not encouraging,' he added, referring to the former Biden Iran envoy who helped negotiate the 2015 Obama nuclear deal.

    Cruz's warning then triggered a flood of criticism from other Republican national security hawks. 

It is notable that Cruz has received more money from AIPAC than most any other politician, while Graham ranks very high as well. It is telling that Republican senators will publicly split from the President over this issue just because it does not match the outcome that Israel wanted, even though pursuing a path that would lower fuel prices would benefit Americans.

Israel: Jews Spitting On Christians An "Ancient Jewish Custom"

From France24: "‘Some hide their crosses’: Jerusalem nun attack highlights Israel’s growing anti-Christian problem." The article relates:

    Harani, who heads the Religious Freedom Data Center (RFDC) – an Israeli NGO that documents anti-Christian incidents and help victims report them to authorities – said there are so many cases now that she and her roughly 100 volunteers are kept busy “24/7”.

    “The most common is spitting,” she said. “But it can also be graffiti on [Christian] signs with crosses on them, vandalism or different forms of harassment.”

    The perpetrators, she said, belong to a very tiny part of Israel’s population of 10 million – “most Jews would never do this” – and mainly identify as ultra-Orthodox, Shas-style Sephardis or nationalist religious Jews.

    “They all wear kippah [traditional Jewish skullcaps]. I’ve not seen one secular Jew misbehave toward Christians.”

    In 2024, her organisation recorded 107 incidents. Last year, the number jumped to 181.

    “There isn’t a month that goes by without at least ten incidents reported,” she said, but noted that in reality, the numbers are likely much higher. This is in part because victims either do not know how to report, or do not want to “make a fuss” over less serious offences like spitting. 

The article tries to minimize the seriousness of the situation by essentially explaining that the Jews doing this are just too stupid and ignorant to know better, but also that it is a Jewish tradition.

Related:  

• "Israel: Spitting on Christians in Jerusalem ‘not criminal’, says Ben Gvir"--Middle East Eye. This October 2023 article notes that Ben Gvir--who was Israel's National Security Minister (and oversees the police) indicated that the Israeli government was not going to prosecute such assaults because it was not illegal. It adds:

    Ben Gvir had previously defended the act of spitting on Christians as “an ancient Jewish custom”. 

    The claim was echoed on Tuesday by Israeli settler Elisha Yered, who is suspected of involvement in the killing of a Palestinian teenager in August. 

    Yered said on X, formerly known as Twitter, that “spitting near priests or churches is an ancient Jewish custom”.      

Also:

    Harassment by Israelis against Christians, including spitting, is not new. However, it has spiked under the new government, which took office late last year and has been described as the most right-wing in the country's history.

    The attacks - committed mostly by ultranationalists or settlers, including soldiers - range from trespassing on churches and spitting on churchgoers to destruction of Christian symbols and vandalising graves, among other acts. 

    Police have reportedly not been taking the attacks seriously, refusing to treat the incidents as part of a trend and downplaying the culprits' motives by saying they are carried out due to "mental illness". 

Pakistan Deploys Figher Jets, Troops To Saudi Arabia

From Reuters (via Yahoo): "Exclusive-Pakistan deploys jet squadron, thousands of troops to Saudi Arabia during Iran war." From the article:

    Pakistan has deployed 8,000 troops, a squadron of fighter jets and an air defence system to Saudi Arabia under a mutual defence pact, ramping up military cooperation with Riyadh even ‌as Islamabad serves as the main mediator in the Iran war.

    The deployment, the full scale of which is reported here for ‌the first time, was confirmed by three security officials and two government sources, all of whom described it as a substantial, combat-capable force intended to support Saudi Arabia's military if ​the kingdom comes under further attack. 

Report On Hamas' Atrocities

The New York Post has reported on the atrocities that Hamas committed against prisoners both before, during, and after killing them. However, my original post on this was put behind a warning that it involves "sensitive content". Accordingly, I have taken it down. Nevertheless, I will again note that I have no problem believing the reports because it is been a part of how warfare has been carried out historically among primitive tribal peoples and even more advanced cultures that are not Christian. And I will also note that these are the types of people that liberals want to import--and have been importing--into the West. 

Israel: "Who? Me?"

Vox Day cites to an article from the Israel Hayom news site, entitled "Who really dragged whom into the war with Iran?" The author, Danny Zaken, claims that Israel and its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, are not to blame for the war with Iran. Rather, he blames U.S. Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth. Briefly, as Zaken summarizes in his conclusion, he contends:

The pointing of the finger at Israel as the party that pushed the US into the strike is therefore only partially correct. In practice, this was a purely American decision, based on an understanding that the regime poses a threat to America and the entire West, and certainly to US interests in the Middle East. Israel assisted with precise intelligence, on the nuclear and missile programs, on Iranian attacks against American targets, and on what happened during and after the protests. The clear convergence of interests with the US is what brought about the joint war, even if its end remains unclear.     

But Israel did more than provide intelligence--it led the charge of the actual attacks. 

    Day sees Zaken's article as a sign that the war is not going well, writing:

    I find this version of events less interesting for its attempt at revising history and more useful for indicating that at least some of the parties responsible for the war are attempting to avoid being held culpable for it, which is a very reliable indicator that the war failed to accomplish their goals and is expected to be considered something that is worthy of blame rather than praise.

    This, in turn, indicates that everyone involved in prosecuting it is going to be highly motivated to bring it to an end sooner rather than later. ...

    I have the impression, although it may be wrong, that Day believes that Zakem is predicting the fallout will be throughout the whole of the West--that is, all national leaders will be excoriated by their respective citizens. But Zakem's audience isn't the world, as a whole, but Israel. Thus, the fallout which Zakem foresees is not necessarily one applicable to all leaders in the West, but may be limited to Israel's military and political leadership. And it may be tied to the comments I noted earlier today from Netanyahu wanting to end Israel's reliance on U.S. financial aid. 

    That is, it suggests to me that however this war ends, it is going to cause a lot of backlash against Netanyahu inside Israel and he is trying to get out ahead of it. Here are two possibilities, although there may be more. First, he may be looking at a backlash because the war didn't accomplish Israel's war goals, and he intends to blame the U.S. for tying his hands, which was only possible because the U.S. holds the purse strings. Or, second, he may be facing backlash for declining support for Israel, for which he will blame the U.S. while at the same time weening Israel from its dependence on U.S. tax dollars for fear that the aid might be suddenly cut off by a future Congress or President that feels no obligation to subsidize Israel and its military. Or both. 

    In relation to this discussion, I would point out this piece by James Howard Kunstler, "The Earth Moves Just a Bit," which paints a far different picture of how the war is going:

Expect a consequential week. The Persian Gulf remains closed and colossal oil slicks leak out of Kharg Island while Iran blusters and stomps its feet. No one can even try to buy its oil anymore, not even China. The sanctions are too onerous. Iran’s wells must be shut in now. Imagine how the production chiefs out in the oil fields are howling at their insane IRGC overseers. Iran has no economy left operating. Iran’s domestic security force, the Basij (Sâzmân-e Basij-e Mostaz’afin, or “Mobilization of the Oppressed”) is strangling anyone who expresses discontent in the streets, not a good look for a regime that can’t survive without the pretense of popular support. 

F-18 Fires On, Disables Iranian Oil Tanker

The New York Post reports that "[t]he US military fired on and disabled an Iranian-flagged tanker that tried to break the naval blockade around the Strait of Hormuz on Wednesday[.]"

“After [the M/T] Hasna’s crew failed to comply with repeated warnings, US forces disabled the tanker’s rudder by firing several rounds from the 20mm cannon gun of a US Navy F/A-18 Super Hornet launched from USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72),” CENTCOM wrote on X. 

In other news, France has deployed its sole nuclear aircraft carrier, the Charles de Gaulle, and its battle group to assist with peacekeeping operations should the U.S. and Iran reach a peace deal. The carrier and its retinue of ships is en route to the Red Sea.