 |
| No longer on the same page (Daily Mail) |
That’s how morons like Tucker Carlson and Marjorie Taylor
Greene and their followers - whose
combined IQs barely match that of a tadpole - can oppose military action
against the most dangerous threat to world peace since Adolf Hitler. Their
hatred of the Jewish people is so deeply embedded that they fail to grasp how
much they endanger the very country they claim to love by insisting the U.S.
should stay out of Iran. That Israel’s war with Iran is ‘none of our concern’.
But this isn’t just about staying true to their isolationist
ideology. It’s clearly about their disdain for Jews, whom they perceive as
wielding too much influence over the government of a nation they believe should
long ago have defined itself explicitly as Christian.
Even if one embraces an isolationist worldview, when a
hostile nation threatens to point a nuclear gun at your head, you cannot afford
to ignore it. Yet these people are so blinded by their hatred of the Jewish
people that they cannot see what is happening right in front of them. Insisting
that their backward isolationism is the best way to serve American interests.
A constant refrain from these low-life isolationists is that
‘the U.S. is being dragged into war with Iran by Israel’. As if America has no independent interest in
preventing Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. As if Israel (read: ‘the Jews’) is
steering this country off course to serve its own ethnic interests.
They warn of dire consequences if the U.S. joins Israel’s
war against Iran, including attacks on our troops and increased terrorism
worldwide, especially in the U.S. They point to Iran’s threats of retaliation
if we get involved. But that argument is absurd. A nuclear-armed Iran would
make 9/11 look like child’s play, as would a nuclear strike on a U.S. military
base.
In their infinite stupidity, they argue that Iran is nowhere
near building a bomb and has no interest in doing so. Sure. Just like Hitler
claimed he had no intention of harming the Jews when he was first elected
chancellor. Or that he had no plans to go to war after annexing Czechoslovakia.
Recently, some critics have pointed out that the president’s
MAGA base includes a significant isolationist faction. Many of whom are his
friends, advisors, cabinet members, and members of Congress,. And they are not
exactly known for being pro-Israel. Critics cite multiple examples, including
the president’s recent Middle East visit, where he skipped Israel, brokered a
ceasefire with the Houthi rebels without including Israel, and negotiated with
Hamas for the release of an American hostage without Israel.
Despite all that, I never doubted his deep and enduring
support for Israel, nor did I believe he would be swayed by the isolationist
wing of his base. That faction saw his “America First” policy as a sign that he
shared their hardcore isolationist views and would keep the U.S. out of any
foreign war, regardless of the consequences to Israel - or to the rest of the
world.
What they failed to grasp is his lifelong personal support
for Israel and his ironclad commitment to preventing Iran from acquiring a
nuclear weapon. He has never wavered from that position.
Now that negotiations have failed, and our ally Israel has -
beyond anyone’s expectations - severely crippled Iran’s military infrastructure
in just a few short days, the window for diplomacy has all but closed. The
president is no longer talking about a nuclear deal. He’s talking about
surrender. Which only happens after a lost war.
Iran has threatened retaliation if the U.S. joins the fight.
The president’s response? In effect: “Go ahead. Make my day.” (Okay, he didn’t
use those exact words, but the message was clear.)
Asked about the isolationist wing of his MAGA base, he made
it clear he doesn’t care what they think. If they disagree with him on this, he
said, they’re not truly part of his movement.
The president has not yet made the final decision to act
militarily, but he has authorized attack plans. If and when he gives the green
light, it will likely happen within seconds of that decision.
I still believe he would prefer a peaceful resolution.
Perhaps he’s holding out hope that Iran will come to its senses and abandon its
nuclear ambitions at the last moment, rather than face overwhelming U.S.
military force.
But my guess is that the religious fanatics who rule Iran
will never give up their dream of global Islamic dominance—starting with ‘restoring’
Islamic rule over Palestine. They would rather die than surrender. That means
the president may soon have no choice but to act, and to finish the job Israel
has so successfully begun.
If Iran retaliates, it might even spark a long-overdue
regime change. Without needing the help of the 80% of Iranians who reportedly
desire it but are too afraid to act. If Israel alone can do what it has done in
a matter of days, imagine what the full might of the world’s most powerful
military can accomplish.
As always, I cannot predict the future. And yes, a U.S.
strike against Iran will come at a cost. But the alternative is far worse.
My hope and prayer is that the U.S. will strike, take out
Fordow, the ayatollah, and his inner circle with it. The Middle East has
already been transformed by what Hamas did on October 7th but not in the way they intended. If the
president follows through on his pledge to eliminate Iran’s nuclear threat for
good, the region will change in ways previously unimaginable—even just a week
ago.
