Trending Topics:

Neoconservatives may finally get their war with Iran, from Donald Trump

The very day Donald Trump was to deliver on Jerusalem, Benjamin Netanyahu gave a speech about — the Iranian threat to the “entire world.”

If Iran continues unabated, they will have a nuclear arsenal of 100 bombs and more. . . .  This has to be stopped. Not merely because Iran calls for the annihilation of Israel, but because Iran wants to conquer the entire Middle East and go even beyond that. It’s developing ICBMs to reach any point on earth.

Netanyahu seems to hope that after delivering on Jerusalem, Trump will also deliver on Iran — the attack that Netanyahu was unable to convince George Bush or Barack Obama to undertake.

And today Nikki Haley echoed Netanyahu: giving a fire-and-brimstone speech about Iran arming “terrorists” in the region as a pretext to end the Iran deal.

One sure sign of Netanyahu’s influence in Washington is the march of the neoconservatives. Of course, many neoconservatives have been Never Trumpers. But if Trump is a hawk for Israel — who knows how much they’d be willing to forgive! The Weekly Standard, the magazine led by the biggest Never Trumper of em all, Bill Kristol, celebrated the Trump speech on Jerusalem as a “noble statement.” Hmmm.

Neoconservatives are poised to gain more influence in the administration. Two weeks ago the major newspapers were filled with reports about the reported plan to remove Rex Tillerson as secretary of state as part of a shuffle that would promote two unrestrained militarists: CIA director Mike Pompeo in place of Tillerson, and Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton to succeed Pompeo at the CIA. If this shuffle comes to pass, the main purpose will be to grease the run-up to war with Iran, the generational dream of the neocons.

Pompeo’s elevation would make it “a virtual certainty that Trump will withdraw the U.S. from the Iran nuclear deal and put the U.S. at odds with its closest European allies,” Eli Clifton writes. Tom Cotton was mentored by Bill Kristol on foreign policy, and his rise to the Senate was underwritten by Kristol’s Emergency Committee for Israel (with a cool million) as well as by Trump’s pro-Israel coffer-bearers, Sheldon Adelson and Paul Singer. Cotton organized the famous 47 traitors’ letter to the ayatollahs trying to undermine the Iran deal back in 2015, and often touts “regime change” — he believes in the use of force in the Middle East as a solvent for all those countries’ issues.

Trump campaigned against a neoconservative foreign policy, as Eli Clifton notes. But he now seems to be moving increasingly into their camp.

“Every few years, the neocons push very hard for all-out war to overthrow the Iranian regime,” David Bromwich wrote to us. “It is never off their minds for long and they figure eventually they’ll catch a break. Now, with Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Libya, and Somalia under our belt, what’s one war more or less? Trump wants to jack up a crisis –confrontation for his own reasons, before the November 2018 midterm election. The time spent by Pompeo at the CIA will not have been wasted: remember, the agency under John Brennan was militarized in order to direct and conceal Obama’s drone wars; and Pompeo, knowing the machinery from inside, will be be ideally prepared to coordinate secret actions at the CIA with non-diplomacy at the state department.”

Robert Wright at Vox warns the left about the neocons gaining shelter:

[O]ne big reason we can’t afford to put our differences with Kristol on hold until Trump leaves office: That next war could be coming soon. Trump is already undermining Obama’s Iran nuclear deal (which Kristol energetically opposed) and in other ways exacerbating tensions with Iran. If reports of an upcoming administration reshuffling are true, we will soon have passionate and reckless anti-Iran hawks running both the State Department and the CIA. . . .

A cynic might go so far — and some cynics have — as to suggest that a belligerent, militaristic foreign policy is the lodestar for Kristol and some other neoconservatives, and that they’re willing to support whatever constellation of domestic policies it takes to sustain a coalition for this militarism.

In this view, the current moment is, for Kristol, an opportunity to win favor from fervent liberal anti-Trumpers, favor that can be used later to sell another war.

Wright cites Michael Tomasky as a liberal who is willing to put aside foreign policy differences with the neocons to oppose Trump. Tomasky said, “Well, Bill Kristol’s done a lot of things I don’t like. And I’ve probably done a lot of things he didn’t like. . . .  But I’m ready even to forget Iraq.”

Be careful what you wish for.

Ehud Barak, the Laborite who was once a defense minister under Netanyahu, said two weeks ago at Brookings that he personally lobbied Presidents Bush and Obama to launch a “unilateral” strike to destroy Iranian facilities. Barak told the presidents it would be “irresponsible” not to take bold action.

It’s not a big secret that we could not convince the presidents at the time. I talked personally one-on-one with two of them, could not convince them that’s a good idea and be enthusiastic about it. We didn’t ask for American enthusiasm.

“Why didn’t you attack Iran when you had the chance?” asked Jeffrey Goldberg of the Atlantic. Well, Obama always argued that attacking Iran would set off a major war, Barak responded. But this is a false idea, because in the last four years the Pentagon “has developed extremely fine scalpels, much finer than what we have or can dream of having.” Barak went on:

There is a way to do it in extremely surgical manner and a very successful — now. But you can do it now. You can do it in four years and you will be able to do it even in eight years from now.

Yes we’ve heard about those scalpels before.

During the Bush administration in 2007, neoconservative policy advisers wanted to station more air craft carriers in the Persian Gulf to provoke Iran. “Some Bush advisers secretly wanted an excuse to attack Iran [Hillary Mann Leverett, former White House security aide, told Newsweek]. ‘They intend to be as provocative as possible and make the Iranians do something [America] would be forced to retaliate for.'”

Then in 2010, Jeffrey Goldberg was Barak’s mouthpiece, pushing for an attack on Iran as the supposed last gasp to keep the Iranians from going nuclear — and the only way to keep the Israelis from launching an attack of their own.

Look for Iran to be the bridge by which the neocon “Never Trumpers” come to Trump’s side. Sadly, the word “neoconservative” never occurs in any of the New York Times stories on the possible executive shuffle, though reporters Mark Landler, Peter Baker, and Julie Hirschfeld Davis are all surely aware of the neoconservative march. And Eliot Cohen gets cited as an impartial authority — Eliot Cohen who pushed for the Iraq war, who defended Israel’s onslaughts on Gaza as the equivalent of Sherman’s march through the south, and who endlessly promoted an attack on Iran too.

At Jeffrey Goldberg’s magazine, Cohen recommends Pompeo for the State Department,  as someone who will restore a “sane” but “tough-minded” direction to foreign policy.

Here we go again. Netanyahu wants a war with Iran, for reasons not all that different from Trump’s. We can only hope that the resistance to such a disaster this time will include many Democrats and realist Republicans, too.

Update: Note that one of Nikki Haley’s biggest contributors is Sheldon Adelson, who once called on the president to nuke Iran.  Jim Lobe:

Between May and June, 2016, Sheldon Adelson contributed $250,000 to Haley’s 527 political organization, A Great Day, funds that she used [as governor of South Carolina] to target four Republican state senate [critics] in primaries. Adelson was the largest contributor to her group, which raised a total of $915,000.


James North and Philip Weiss

Other posts by .

Posted In:

51 Responses

  1. amigo on December 14, 2017, 1:25 pm

    And while all this warmongering against Iran,( who is in compliance with the deal) continues, the US is trying to get North Korea to halt it,s nuclear weapons program.Who in their right mind would make any kind of deal with the USA of today.

    The USA is run by morons who happen to be in the pockets of the Lobby –ie Adelson and co.

    I wonder when Doug Jones will be taking his trip to Israel , to prepare him for service to the US,s greatest ally.

    • Emory Riddle on December 14, 2017, 7:18 pm

      I would assume he has already been there. Although I can’t find confirmation of the fact. Candidates for the Senate or House are generally whisked over there before the election…oft times during the campaign. Visit or the money dries up and the media smears begin.

  2. Citizen on December 14, 2017, 4:26 pm

    I agree with both this article & amigo’s comment. Kristol is always a pundit on TV cable news shows (like John Bolten) and he’s a particularly preciously sleazy, always hidden big Zionist A bellwether nobody ever calls him on.

  3. US Citizen on December 14, 2017, 5:25 pm

    Maintaining a straight face, the United States with an AIPAC controlled government calls Iran “the primary state sponsor of terrorism”. This from a country bombing at least six nations.

    Iran has not invaded another nation in over 200 years. The U.S. has been at war for at least 220 of its 241 year history. Let us now ask: What country is the primary state sponsor of terrorism?

    Is it the one who is being threatened with ‘regime change’ by the country which is now bombing six other countries, and that has not invaded another country in over 200 years?

    Or is it the one doing the bombing? Since logic and common sense tell us that it must be the one doing the bombing (the U.S.), we need to ask another question:why does the U.S. want to convince the world that Iran is exporting terrorism, when it itself is doing so and then turning around and asking – gee, why do Muslims hate us so much? Whatever did we do?

    The answer has been stated before: the U.S. does not want any country in the Middle East to be powerful except apartheid Israel – all courtesy of israel and the israel lobby in Washington.

    Iran is a power broker in that part of the world, so the U.S. must reduce it to ruins, if it possibly can, as it did with Iraq. However, Iran is not Iraq: it is far bigger, more heavily populated, and more powerful than Iraq ever was.

    An invasion/bombing of Iran would be a disaster for the U.S., the Middle East and quite possibly, the entire world.

    • Cazador on December 15, 2017, 9:17 am

      US Citizen,

      «Or is it the one doing the bombing? Since logic and common sense tell us that it must be the one doing the bombing (the U.S.), we need to ask another question:why does the U.S. want to convince the world that Iran is exporting terrorism»

      I totally agree with you, and I would also add Israel for the bombing of neighbours, and also for the constant use of a wrong translation by the inexperienced Iranian translation services back in 1979, a translation blunder corrected by the Iranians the day after its publication, but the BBC published only the flawed document, and Israel has made miles and miles on that text.



    • Kay24 on December 15, 2017, 8:24 pm

      All true. The irony is, Nikki Hayley was so outraged about “finding” Iranian weapons in Yemen, she forgot to mention that weapons “Made in the USA” could also be found easily, at the hands of those bombing, and killing, innocent civilians in Yemen, the good ole Saudi’s. These Trumpsters sure have convenient lapses of memory. And how about the Saudi blockade that is killing hundreds of little children? Is that okay too Hayley?
      You can sense that the Axis of Evil is gearing up, and working hard, to give Iran the same treatment they gave Iraq too. Whatever they keep accusing Iran of, you can be sure they are guilty of the same. This time I don’t think the world will go along, but what will they do?

      • Talkback on December 16, 2017, 6:13 am

        Kay24: “The irony is, Nikki Hayley was so outraged about “finding” Iranian weapons in Yemen, she forgot to mention that weapons “Made in the USA” could also be found easily, at the hands of those bombing, and killing, innocent civilians in Yemen, the good ole Saudi’s.”

        Israel’s hipocrisy has infected the US. And ‘finding’ allegedly Iranian weapons right now to divert from the backlash of their Jerusalem policy is more than ludicrous.

  4. RoHa on December 14, 2017, 8:29 pm

    I’m not convinced that Russia will stand idly by if the US attacks Iran. China and Turkey will be a bit miffed, as well.

    But I am sure that the Australian Government will give wholehearted support, and probably send troops to help the US.

    • Cazador on December 15, 2017, 9:29 am


      The Russian decision to leave Syria to its own trouble with the illegal occupation of an important part of Syria’s territory by the US of A and its proxy terrorists is hard to figure out.

      If I were about to decide to really launch a war against Iran, I would try first to remember the Russian S-400 missiles ready to be launched from Iran against US bombers, ships, aircraft carriers. And I were Israel, maybe I would think twice before going ahead with those attacks against Iran. Israel has nukes, but the Iranian missiles could also destroy major parts of Israeli main cities, military installation, even Dimona and other nuclear installations…,7340,L-5010187,00.html

      • RoHa on December 15, 2017, 7:02 pm

        I don’t think Russia has “left Syria to its own trouble”. Russia now has an airbase as well as a naval base in Syria, and has earned a lot of respect in the Middle East. Putin isn’t going to just walk away from all that. Recovering the rest of Syria without starting a hot war with the US will be a tricky business, but I’m sure Assad and Putin are working on it.

      • ritzl on December 15, 2017, 9:26 pm

        Agree RoHa. Well said.

      • ritzl on December 15, 2017, 10:03 pm

        The founders of “The Atlantic” (abolitionists) must be spinning in their graves. Goldberg as Managing Editor? Argh. The Atlantic’s message has now been coopted/corrrupted by [a] war monger. Or beyond war-mongering, a bigoted, racial purity (i.e. Israel), anything goes mentality.

        I’ve read recently that this is what goes on. ‘Whatever*-washing by nasty types moneying themselves into positions of respectability. Golldberg as Managing Editor of “The Atlantic” looks like that.

        Goldberg is, prima facie, NOT an anti-repressionist. How did he get to be a Managing Editor at
        The Atlantic?

  5. Elizabeth Block on December 15, 2017, 9:14 am

    This is from a country that has Special Ops in 149 countries, including Canada. (Why Canada? I don’t know! but I shall ask our prime minister.)

    And from a country, Israel, that has nuclear weapons numbered in three figures.

    • Cazador on December 15, 2017, 11:51 am


      «Why Canada?»

      Because we, Canadians, are NATO members, neighbours of that EXCEPTIONAL EMPIRE, probably if not certainly trying to have the NAFTA DEAL put back into force so both USA and Canada companies can make more profits.

      Now, why does Canada back the USA in Ukraine’s US geopolitical anti-Russia 5 billion$ investment and «F…k the EU» PROJECT. The parents of Canada’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Chrystia Freeland, are Ukrainians, and have a NAZI past not so well hidden in the closet:

      Since it’s been proven that Nazi Ukrainians were backing the US in the removal of the democratically-elected Ukrainian president, friend with Russia, Canada’s role of assistance to the USA in Ukraine is a total mistake, as it puts Canada’s geopolitical and possibly military operations in Ukraine right at the border of Russia. Canadian governments should remember that Russian super fast missiles would take little time to cross the Arctic ocean and fall on Canada’s major cities as well on their way to the USA.

      Putin declared that the 27 000 000 civilians and soldiers killed by the NAZI armies during WWII had been too much of a loss, and it would never happen again. Nuclear weapons would be used right away against the next country bombing Russia.

  6. Misterioso on December 15, 2017, 10:57 am

    I remain convinced that despite pressure from Israel to do so, the US will not attack Iran, (fingers crossed.)

    Apart from the important fact that Russia, the EU, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and China, co-signers of the agreement with Iran, would adamantly oppose an attack, the narrow and vital Strait of Hormuz would be front and centre in hostilities. At least 17 million barrels of oil pass through it every day. Along with those sunk by the Americans, scores of ships would be scuttled by Iran, making the Strait impassable and the result would be a huge and long term increase in the price of oil.

    • annie on December 15, 2017, 11:05 am

      i absolutely agree misterioso. despite the neocons best efforts i don’t think the US will attack iran.

      • Lillian Rosengarten on December 15, 2017, 3:08 pm

        I also agree. Except we have people in power who are not in their right minds. Absolutely crazy and dangerous. Never thought I would support Tillerson and hope he stays. He now seems least crazy and without him, we have a band of lunatics on the loose .

      • Kay24 on December 16, 2017, 6:00 am

        Who thought Trump would throw the Palestinians under the bus, and announce the opening of the US embassy in Jerusalem, giving Israel the green light to call it their capital? With Netanyahu playing puppet master, and Jared exerting pressure on the dotard, they just might coax the idiot that decimating Iran is the best thing for Israel’s “security”, and he loves to please the evangelicals too. Right now the people in power are not sane and experienced people. It is frightening.

      • mcohen.. on December 16, 2017, 7:52 am

        Annie.unfortunately you are wrong. oil blackmail is coming to an end.

      • echinococcus on December 16, 2017, 8:58 am


        For the umpteenth time, to “announce the opening of the US embassy in Jerusalem, giving Israel the green light to call it their capital” was done in 1995 by the “Jerusalem Capital Act”. It was entered in the official program of the Democratic Party in 2012. It was confirmed by unanimous Senate vote in 2017.

        So you either answer that in a way that makes sense or you admit that you are a propaganda agent.

        What does not make sense is the usual totally delirious journalist BS that 1995 was “a compromise” that has been ended by the current Prez reminding people of it. It was not a “compromise” but an official recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of the Zionist entity, a country it doesn’t even belong to, entered in US law and unanimously reiterated by the assembled Senate criminals including mountebank Sanders. This non-compromise has not been canceled by the current criminal’s reminder. as he continues to issue “security waivers”.

      • Keith on December 16, 2017, 12:25 pm

        ECHINOCOCCUS- “It was entered in the official program of the Democratic Party in 2012. It was confirmed by unanimous Senate vote in 2017.”

        Yes, it is very frustrating to deal with liberal hypocrisy in seeking to ignore Democratic Party complicity in the Jerusalem recognition. I provide a quote to reinforce what you have said, along with a link to an interesting perspective on this. Trump may inadvertently be weakening the imperial foreign policy agenda, not a bad thing.

        “Just six months ago, the Senate—including Chuck Schumer, Dianne Feinstein, Kamala Harris, and Bernie Sanders—voted 90-0 to demand that Trump “abide by its provisions.” (Jim Kavanagh)

      • echinococcus on December 16, 2017, 2:35 pm


        I don’t mind the Democrat and “liberal” hypocrisy or their pitiful attempts to ignore the past (including the Dim propagandists in our midst.) That is their nature, as lowly peons in the organization managing US imperial aggression worldwide.

        What gets my goat, though, is the absolute lack of even trying to concoct some kind of story to sell us why this Trump reminder/rehasher is anything new, when they have themselves made it f&^%g Law of the Land. They aren’t even trying to argue any longer. They just say it and expect to smuggle it through, unchecked.

        Goebbels has been dead all of 72 years –but his ghost still riding fom success to success.

    • Kaisa of Finland on December 15, 2017, 11:50 am


      “I remain convinced that despite pressure from Israel to do so, the US will not attack Iran, (fingers crossed.)”

      I hope you are right. I think that the war in Irak was a warning signal to Europe and no-one here wants that kind of things happening again in the Middle East.

      • Kaisa of Finland on December 15, 2017, 12:29 pm

        A news that surely did not reach you in U.S.:

        “Finnish Joulupukki (Santa Claus) and Russian Дед Мороз (“Uncle Frosty”) had today their annual meeting by the Finnish/Russian boarder in Tohmajärvi, North Karelia..”

        (The clip starts at 16.36)

      • echinococcus on December 15, 2017, 2:01 pm

        Very nice, Kaisa, and no, the news hadn’t reached us in this other world.
        I mean the big news that the Lapinkulta (among others) alcohol content has been approved to go up! And that you have an MP called Sinuhe –that’s also news.

      • Kaisa of Finland on December 15, 2017, 4:02 pm

        “alcohol content has been approved to go up..”

        Heh heh EKI, to be exact, that news was about stronger beer “to come to be sold” in the supermarkets. Do you remember that stronger drinks have traditionally been only sold in restaurants and ALKO-shops here?? So soon the stronger beer will be available in every supermarket and they are trying to do the same with wines too. (If you ask my opinion, I was against, cause some of the Finns have always known how to drink too much and I am tired of it. I guess there should be some kind of a “drinking license” here: First you learn to drink in moderation and then you’ll be allowed to buy alcohol.. :) )

        Anyway, well done and ten points for understanding!

      • RoHa on December 15, 2017, 7:10 pm

        “First you learn to drink in moderation ”

        Now that’s just anti-Finnish!

      • Kaisa of Finland on December 15, 2017, 8:02 pm


        Well it has always been kind of devided, some people drink most of the alcohol drunk in this country and the rest do not drink or drink rarely. When I was a teenager, I had my wild party years too, but it irritates me that some people over 25 years old, still can’t behave when they drink and you can ask Estonians, what happens when these people travel to Estonia, where alcohol is cheaper.. I think whole Finland owes an eternal apologize for the Estonians, because of those “ördäävät* suomalaiset”..

        *(ördätä, does not translate to English, so you can just quess what it means and yes it means like it sounds :) )

      • Mooser on December 15, 2017, 8:04 pm

        “First you learn to drink in moderation ”

        Or go crazy, I would think. I don’t blame them a bit.

      • echinococcus on December 16, 2017, 9:09 am

        “Moderation” just like the “moderate terrorists” of Syria? You just drink beer in a volume 5 times that of your serious alcohol drink, pee away the surplus, et voilà! Sinuhe (not the current one, the original) used to drink beer with around 3% and still got a buzz.

      • Kaisa of Finland on December 20, 2017, 11:53 am
      • Mooser on December 20, 2017, 1:11 pm

        “First you learn to drink in moderation.. ”

        And if you can hold your liquor in moderation, they promote you to Mondo Editor.

    • ritzl on December 15, 2017, 3:36 pm

      Totally agree as well Misterioso. No less than the end of economic life as we (the “West”) know it is at stake. And Iran would only have to sink or maybe even just missile-snipe at ONE tanker as a demonstration of capability for insurance rates to become unaffordable (and substantially limit oil traffic in the Persian Gulf). The cure for that exposure can only be much higher oil ($300/bbl production and shipping cost ++ speculator effect) to cover [only] the increased insurance costs for $300M replacement value tankers.*

      Are these loonies willing to risk that? Did I just answer my own question??

      Someone (specifically neocons) will be blamed for that (hopefully avoidable) war-at-any-cost-to-others scenario. Very “un-civilly. Maybe that’s enough acknowledged self-interest for this war talk to go away or stop just short of actual war.

      Speculatively, I also think these competing pipeline proposals through Syria are part of this Iran-war calculus. If the Saudis had had their way, this transport problem/risk goes away and Iran war gets green lighted. But they lost in Syria. Bit of a snag, that.


      Thanks for pointing this out.

      * math being $300M+/- ÷ 2M bbl/load = $150/bbl risk cost per trip – full exposure

    • Emory Riddle on December 16, 2017, 8:20 am

      You may be making the mistake that the people calling the shots are rational. The Israel Firsters (or whatever you want to call them) who effectively own are politicians are fanatics. The corrupt pols they control have shown themselves willing to do anything no matter how harmful to America if they think it will advance or protect their careers. All wars are insane yet America is always involved in at least one.

  7. James Canning on December 15, 2017, 1:12 pm

    Is Trump aware of the relentless cr*p emanating from Bibi Netanyahu regarding Iran? Or does Trump swallow it whole?

    • John O on December 15, 2017, 2:42 pm

      Judging by Trump’s performance on the White House lawn today, he isn’t aware of anything very much.

    • Citizen on December 15, 2017, 3:45 pm

      He swallows it whole as it comes from the mouth of his very Zionist son-in-law & daughter: Javanka

      • catalan on December 15, 2017, 6:54 pm

        “He swallows it whole as it comes from the mouth of his very Zionist son-in-law & daughter: Javanka”
        Trump is nobody’s ideal of a human being. Nonetheless, next week he will sign a major tax cut benefiting quite a few people, myself included. I am thankful for that. Ultimately, what he does in his spare time or how he treats others, etc is a matter of general interest, of moralistic discourse and so on. Whereas money is a somewhat more palpable thing, it’s useful if you need a heart surgery for instance (ultimately, it all falls apart either way). The president can be a super nice guy too but how is that important? In this life, you can be either be successful or liked, pretty much never both (unless you count sycophants). So you have to make your choice.

      • Kaisa of Finland on December 15, 2017, 7:43 pm

        “In this life, you can be either be successful or liked, pretty much never both..”

        OMG, you must be provoking. If not, just talk about yourself then, most of the people I know, do not count their success in life in any currency and they have all succeded the way they wanted and they are all deeply loved as being what they are.

      • Kaisa of Finland on December 15, 2017, 7:53 pm

        p.s. You can count our current president on that list.

      • Keith on December 16, 2017, 1:06 am

        CATALAN- “Nonetheless, next week he will sign a major tax cut benefiting quite a few people, myself included.”

        In the short run perhaps. However, the ultimate destruction of both the political economy and the environment benefits no one. At one time I thought you smarter than this. Apparently I was mistaken.

    • Maghlawatan on December 15, 2017, 11:20 pm

      Trump.and Netanyahu are twins.

  8. JLewisDickerson on December 15, 2017, 8:02 pm

    RE: “Here we go again. Netanyahu wants a war with Iran, for reasons not all that different from Trump’s.” ~ North & Weiss

    MY COMMENT: I read in Haaretz recently that Netanyahu has made some changes (to the Security Cabinet, I guess) so that the military and/or intelligence services cannot keep him from launching an attack on Iran like they did last time.

    P.S. Be afraid. Be very afraid! There’s a perfect storm a-brewin’!

    • Maghlawatan on December 15, 2017, 11:36 pm

      Where did the model for Israeli belligerence come from?

      The New York Times and the New Yorker previously reported that Weinstein cultivated a far-reaching network of entertainment professionals, spies, and media allies to help him deflect potential exposure or retaliate against the source of those threats.

      Weinstein is alleged to have told multiple women he could enhance their careers or ruin them depending on how they responded to his sexual advances.

    • JLewisDickerson on December 16, 2017, 5:47 am

      BY LAHAV HARKOV DECEMBER 10, 2017 19:27

      A bill that would allow a prime minister to declare a military operation with only the approval of the security cabinet instead of the full cabinet was approved by the Ministerial Committee for Legislation on Sunday.

      Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked put forward the bill, which was designed to help prevent leaks. The bill would allow the prime minister to give the security cabinet the authority to approve a military operation that could “with an almost certain probability” lead to war. . .

      . . . Meretz chairwoman Zehava Gal-On came out against the bill, saying, “Allowing a small group of ministers to declare war without the [full] cabinet’s approval contradicts the basic principles of democracy.” . . .

  9. JosephA on December 15, 2017, 8:42 pm

    I’ve been to Iran, and I have to say it was a spectacular and awe-inspiring trip. I can only imagine how beautiful Iraq and Syria were before the United States ruined those countries. There’s a thriving Jewish community in Iran who would also be harmed by such a war. Something tells me the racist Benjamin Milikewski (Nutty Yahoo) doesn’t give a damn about “dark Jews”.

  10. Maghlawatan on December 15, 2017, 11:27 pm

    Israel is not rational. Violence is not a sustainable long term strategy. It messes up the society and exposes the country to the risk of total destruction. Israelis think the IDF is forever . Austrians thought the Hapsburgs were forever


    “But in the long run, a hostile region like that cannot be policed, even by a nuclear-armed Israel. It will simply do to Israel what some of the wars have done to us on a smaller scale. Attrite it, tire it, fatigue it, demoralize it, cause emigration of the best and the first, and then some sort of cataclysm at the end which cannot be predicted at this stage because we don’t know who will have what by when. And after all, Iran is next door. It might have some nuclear capability. Suppose the Israelis knock it off. What about Pakistan and others? The notion that one can control a region from a very strong and motivated country, but of only six million people, is simply a wild dream”

    Boy, boy, boy

  11. HarryLaw on December 16, 2017, 7:20 am

    In my opinion the US will neither attack North Korea [NK] or Iran. In the case of NK a conventional attack would put the lives of 12 million people in Seoul in grave danger from the NK massed artillery all along armistice line. Steve Bannon got it right when he said Top White House official Steve Bannon said Wednesday that there is “no military solution” to North Korea.

    “Forget it,” he told American Prospect magazine in an August 16 interview. “Until somebody solves the part of the equation that shows me that ten million people in Seoul don’t die in the first 30 minutes from conventional weapons, I don’t know what you’re talking about, there’s no military solution here, they got us.”
    The same thing applies to Iran, the US has its fleet in Bahrain and many ships and bases in the area, you will know war is imminent when those vulnerable ships all move out of the area, out of range of the formidable missile systems Iran has. If Iran is attacked Israel would also come under threat, Hezbollah alone has 100,000 missiles ready to rain down on all vital infrastructure in the Tel Aviv area. In theory approx 1000 missiles per square mile. Iron dome cannot stop them Professor Postol of MIT calculated that iron dome intercepted just 5% of Hamas rockets
    So using the above figures Israel could intercept approx 5,000 of the 100,000 missiles at a cost of 10 billion dollars [each iron dome interceptor missile costs 100,000 dollars] Remember this is just Hezbollah, Iran and Syria have far deadlier arsenals. Israel knows it would be in ruins if the ‘arc of resistance’ is attacked, and the arc is growing stronger by the day.

  12. mcohen.. on December 16, 2017, 8:15 pm

    Harry ……iron dome is not a stand alone weapon but part of an offensive system.notice how israels missile capabilities are never presented.instead a war of attrition would seem the better option.

    • Mooser on December 17, 2017, 1:03 pm

      “.instead a war of attrition would seem the better option.”

      You bet! Can’t wait for the next Pew Poll.

  13. Atlantaiconoclast on December 16, 2017, 9:51 pm

    I think people need to connect the vicious warmongering toward Iran with the vicious scapegoating of Russia for HRC’s humiliating defeat. Right now, especially among Jewish elites, there is too much common ground to keep them from pursuing a beligerent foreign policy that has nothing to do with America’s needs. Trump may in fact be trying to appease these elites by showing interest in war with Iran. After all, if he is at war with Iran, an ally of Russia, how can he really be accused of colluding with Russia? Remember how he was praised by the press when he bombed Assad’s forces?

Leave a Reply