I'm Fed Up! Why Aren't You? Part I

Every once in a while I feel like I'm fed up.  And I need to let it out.  Fed up with who?  Lots of people.  I'll start with my fellow Jews.  An AP-NORC poll conducted last month found that 45% of secular Jews feel no connection to Israel.  What's the matter with you people?  Did you not learn any of the history of our people?  Do I need to start with the Babylonians?  The Romans?  The murders, the persecutions, the exiles?  Do you not know any of it?  How about the expulsion of the Jews from England in 1290?  Or from Spain in 1492?  Not even the Russian pogroms in the late nineteenth century into the early twentieth century?  At least the Holocaust?  And you think nothing bad can happen to you because you live in (fill in the blank)?  Or because you are a secular Jew?  It's time to wake up!  Start defending Israel and your fellow Jews now!

Then we have the leftwing Jews.  You know, they hate AIPAC (the American Israel Public Affairs Committee), because AIPAC actually supports candidates for Congress who will (hopefully) support Israel.  They hate AIPAC because their cherished leftwing candidates hate Israel.  And they are Leftists before they are Jewish.  Well, wake up!  Did you not see that Hamas slaughtered 1200 Jews and kidnapped another 250, on October 7, 2023, in the worst attack on the Jewish people since the Holocaust?  And did you fail to see that all the leftwing groups and causes that you supported didn't give a damn about the slaughter of your fellow Jews.  In fact, they turned on the Jewish people.  What is your problem?  You have a death wish?  You hate Trump so much that's all you can talk about?  You refuse to acknowledge all the good he's done for Israel and the Jewish people?  Fine.  But why does your hatred of Trump blind you to the ever increasing Jew hatred going on all around you?  Wake up!

While I'm getting my fellow Jews mad at me, I don't want to forget the ones who say they are too old, or retired, or too busy playing golf and spending time with their families.  Or, it's too stressful to deal with it.  No, you're not too busy.  And too bad if it's stressful.  Living through another Holocaust would be more stressful.  And you're not too old.  When the Rebbe (Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, arguably the most influential Rabbi of the twentieth century) was told by some advisers that he should retire upon reaching 70 years old, he refused.  He said not only would he not retire, he would dedicate himself to opening 70 new Chabad centers in honor of his 70th birthday.  Regardless of how busy you are with (fill in the blank), don't tell me that you don't have the time to stand up for Israel and the Jewish people.  If not for yourself, then for your children and grandchildren.  Wake up!  

Who else can I pick on?  Notice how the Left wing Jew haters and the Right wing Jew haters have that in common?  We know the Leftists in Congress who hate Israel.  Now, Right wing candidates are joining them.  Not to mention much of the mainstream media and Left wing pundits and Right wing pundits.  Isn't that nice how they can all coalesce around one issue - "We hate the Jews."  Of course, most of them deny being antisemitic.  We're not antisemitic, we just have a problem with Israel.  Or Gaza.  Or with Zionism.  And, of course, what about the genocide, apartheid and colonialism?  Who actually falls for any of that nonsense?  If you agree with any of that, you are antisemitic at best, and a Jew hater at worst.

Apartheid?  Then how is it that Arabs are in every sector of Israeli society?  Not just lawyers and doctors and in the universities.  But on the Courts and in the legislature (the Knesset).  Genocide?  Those claiming genocide mostly mean that not enough Jews died compared to Palestinians.  They mean that (some anyway) Israel has the right to defend itself, but not actually fight back.  I already explained in a prior post that the Palestinian population has grown, not decreased.  But what about starving the Gaza population?  You mean ignore the hundreds of tons of food and medical supplies that Israel has allowed into Gaza?  Who else does that?  Who else takes such good care of an enemy they are fighting while in the middle of a war with them?  

And, you can always ignore the fact that Hamas takes the food and supplies for their fighters.  Because if you were honest about it, you would acknowledge that Hamas does not give a damn about the people of Gaza.  If you were honest about it, you would admit that Hamas has used all the billions of dollars in aid to buy weapons and to build tunnels into Israel.  All for the sole purpose of killing Jews.  They even admit it.  They don't try to build a productive society for the people they rule over.  They start war after war, knowing full well that thousands of Gazans will die.  But some of you want to blame Israel for having the nerve to fight back.  Wake up!

But doesn't Israel starve the people?  No, they don't.  Here's a statement from the UN:  "Humanitarian workers were forced to halt food distribution after armed personnel affiliated with the de facto authorities (that would be Hamas) forcibly entered the Abu Rashid food distribution point in Jabalia, North Gaza."  And:  "These incidents are not isolated.  They are completely unacceptable and reflect an increasingly dangerous pattern of intimidation, violence and obstruction."  What about colonialism?  Jews are the colonizers of the land they have been kicked out of time after time?  Really?   

How does anyone in their right mind support a terrorist organization that brutally rapes, tortures and murders civilians?  And then blame the victims.  What is the matter with you people who do that?  I've got others to complain about.  See Part II.    

How Do We Know When It's Time?

(I hope that all my readers, whether Jewish or non-Jewish, read this post.  Because it is not just about Jews in America.  It is about America.)

I know that I am not alone among my fellow Jews in asking this question:  why didn't more German Jews and other European Jews, leave in the 1930's?  Did they not see the handwriting on the wall?  Were there not enough signs?  Of course, this is not meant in any way to blame the Jews of Europe for all the atrocities committed by the Nazis during the Holocaust.  But, could more have left and survived?  

Now, I'm seeing the same question being raised about the Jews in America.  Of course, today's European Jews have been asking that question for some time.  And an ever increasing number have been leaving their homes in Europe and moving to Israel.  But what about America?  No, contrary to the assertions by many on the Left, we do not have a Nazi in the White House.  But are there any events that should give us pause, and cause us to ask:  "Is it time?"  Is it time to leave this country that has given so much to the Jewish people?

We know about all the Leftists and Islamists who are already serving in Congress.  Israel haters and Jew haters and America haters.  We know about the Leftists and Islamists and apparent Jew haters who have been winning primaries across the country.  Most of us likely recall the firebombing of the Pennsylvania Governor's mansion on April 13, 2025, while Governor Josh Shapiro (Dem. and strong supporter of Israel)  and his family were inside the residence.

But is everyone aware of all the other violent, and potentially violent, threats against those who support Israel.  I shouldn't have to say this, but it's where we are as country now.  People are entitled to their own opinions.  They are allowed to disagree with you.  In America, differences are supposed to be resolved by debate and by votes.  Let's take a look at some other threats to the American way of life.

In May of this year, Representative Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) said threatening messages had been left on his voice mail, threatening himself and his family.  In June, Representative Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) said he was advised by the FBI that it broke up "a potentially large scale attack on pro-Israel members of Congress."  (As reported in the Algemeiner, an online Jewish magazine.)  Both Moskowitz and Gottheimer are strong supporters of Israel.  Potentially large scale attack?  How large?

Most recently, Representative Thomas Massie (R-KY), who is no fan of Israel, proposed a resolution that would end all aid to Israel.  All the House Republicans, except Massie, opposed the resolution.  But nearly one-half of the Democratic members of the House (103 out of 212) voted in favor of the resolution.  10 members voted "present."  This vote comes on the heels of the Senate resolution seeking to cut various types of aid to Israel, with 40 of the 45 Senate Democrats voting in the affirmative.  2 Independents who caucus with the Democrats, also voted in the affirmative.  With the Republicans opposed, the Senate measure failed.  As to the House resolution, because the Republicans all voted against the resolution (except for Massie), it failed to pass, 104 to 314.

Representative Adam Smith (D-WA) is not Jewish.  He had announced that he was not inclined to vote in favor of Massie's resolution cutting all aid to Israel.  But Smith reported that he and his family "were subjected to an unrelenting campaign of intimidation by anti-Israel activists," including "vandalism, arson, and an assault on a staffer."  (As reported by the Algemeiner.)  Congressman Smith ended up voting for the Massie resolution.  Did the threat have anything to do with him changing his mind?  It was more than threats.  His home was vandalized, a fire was set in his driveway, some of his town hall meetings were shut down.  And, again, a staff member was physically assaulted.  Is this how anyone wants to see America being run?  By threats and intimidation and violence?  

Of course, threatening a member of Congress in order to change their vote is a violation of Federal law.  (18 USC 115.)  But the threats and intimidation and violence are not limited to Congress, which is bad enough.  The United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan, has indicted 8 people on charges of conspiracy to threaten University of Michigan leaders, law enforcement officers, businesses, and the Jewish Federation of Detroit.  4 of those indicted have Muslim sounding names.  It was unclear if they, or the 4 others, were Muslims.  

However, their motivation was apparent.  They were demanding a "full and complete divestment" from Israel and any business that supports Israel.  The indictment alleges that the co-conspirators discussed how to "torment," "terrorize," and even "kill" their intended targets.  (A reminder.  An indictment is a charge.  It is neither an admission of guilt nor a finding of guilt.)  The indictment further alleges that the co-conspirators "damaged and defaced homes and businesses with spray painted messages, threats, and symbols" targeting people for death.  The graffiti included "Divest Now," "Fuck You," and "Fuck the IDF" (the Israeli Defense Forces).  

(Is it time for all Jews to update their passports - just in case.  It appears to be past time for all Jews to arm themselves.  In my next post, I want to discuss further the seeming alliance of the far Left and the far Right in their Jew hatred, as more and more run for office, and are often winning.  And, I want to discuss the seeming alliance of our Vice President with the right-wing Israel hater Tucker Carlson.  And we need to consider when anti-Jewish talk leads to assaults on Jews and even the killing of Jews.  Because we have already seen the too frequent killing of Jews in America and around the world.  Lastly, I want to discuss the analysis given by our Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, who is well aware of the dangers of this Jew hatred.)

      

These Latest Democratic Primaries Should Have Removed All Doubt - You Can Even Beat Other Progressives As Long As You Hate Jews

A brief recap is in order.  Graham Platner won the Maine Democratic Senatorial primary.  By a large margin.  He is an admitted communist, hates law enforcement and celebrated the killing of IDF forces by Hamas.  (See more on Platner in Part II of my May 4, 2026 post.)  Abdul El-Sayed will likely be the victor in the August 4, 2026 Democratic primary in Michigan for a seat in the U.S. Senate.  He has the usual leftwing talking points.  And is highly critical of Israel and AIPAC (the American Israel Political Affairs Committee).  (See Part I of my 6/4/26 post for more about El-Sayed.)  And let us not forget that Adam Hamawy won his Democratic primary for the House in NJ.  Again, with the leftwing views accompanied by intense criticism of Israel.  (See Part I of my 6/4/26 post.)

In New York City there was a trifecta of socialist, Jew haters winning their Democratic primaries for seats in the House.  All supported by the socialist, Jew hater Mamdani.  Darializa Avila Chevalier defeated Adrian Espaillat, the Chair of the House Hispanic Caucus.  Chevalier wants to abolish the police and abolish prisons and get rid of our borders.  She has talked about seizing private property and nationalizing industries.  She has called the U.S. a "fucking disgrace," and once posted that "I forgot to get napkins so I just wiped my hand on the American flag behind me (followed by a happy face)."  On the day after the Hamas terrorist attack on Israel, she attended a pro-Palestinian (pro-Hamas in my opinion) rally.  I guess the rape, torture and murder of Jewish women did not offend her.  Chevalier also wants to end funding for the Israeli military (which provides significant benefits to the U.S.). 

Claire Valdez was another NYC Democratic primary winner for a U.S. House seat.  She wants to abolish ICE, supports a federal job guarantee and a four-day work week.  And in one quote she managed to get in all the leftwing lies about Israel:  "I will continue to call for Palestinian liberation.  We will stand up to genocide and refuse to abide by apartheid..."  How about calling for Palestinian liberation from Hamas?  That might actually accomplish something.  

The third NYC Democratic primary winner for a seat in the House was Brad Lander.  Yes, he has the usual leftwing talking points, such as defund the police.  Lander is Jewish.  Yet he supported Mamdani for Mayor of NYC.  And he doesn't support Israel much.  He has called for the end of giving a "blank check" to Israel (never was) as the Israeli government is "increasingly authoritarian."  And, he said that Democrats should stop obeying AIPAC (whatever that means).   

Let's not forget that Chris Rabb won his Democratic primary for the House in Pennsylvania's 3rd district.  This guy has called for a Palestinian right of return to the land of Israel.  People who call for that mean that millions of descendants of Palestinians who fled during Israel's war of independence (1948-1949) should be able to return to what is the land of Israel. In other words, Rabb wants to see the end of Israel as the world's only Jewish state.  And James Talarico won the Democratic primary for a House seat in Texas.  He tries to balance his support for Israel getting aid for defensive weapons such as the Iron Dome, versus denying aid for offensive weapons.  Of course, that makes no sense.  It is akin to saying "you can defend yourselves and hope for the best, but don't you dare fight back."  Sorry, but that is, quite simply, stupid.

Let's take a little trip further west to Colorado.  In another win for a Democratic Socialist of America candidate, 29 year old Melat Kiros defeated 30 year incumbent Diana DeGette.  Yes, Kiros has the leftwing talking points, such as abolish ICE.  But she also wants to end all aid to Israel.  If we go a little further west to Los Angeles, guess what we find.  Incumbent Karen Bass was unable to win the primary in June with a majority of the vote.  Therefore, she will be in a runoff election in November against Nithya Raman.  While initially expressing sympathy for Israel after the Hamas terroist attack of October 7, 2023, Raman has learned what it takes to win as a Democrat.  While the Mayor's seat is considered nonpartisan, it is no secret that Bass and Raman are Democrats.  Now, Raman spouts the leftwing talking points about Israel committing genocide and being an apartheid state. 

So, what is going on with all this Jew hatred?  As one writer opined:  it appears that the ticket to winning office in the U.S. is to not only be anti-Israel, but vehemently anti-Israel.  Scott Weiner is a Democratic member of the California State Senate.  And he is gay.  He was attending a trans led pride Shabbat in San Francisco.  Something he has done for 22 years.  He has been critical of the Israeli government.  But not enough.  This time, he was harassed and screamed at with things like "we fucking hate you."  And "you do not belong here."  And, the best one:  "you stopped being queer the moment you started supporting Israel, you piece of shit."

I recall how after the October 7, 2023, Hamas terrorist attack on Israel, the Los Angeles Times ran a front page story with interviews of one Jewish person (mostly young) after the next, finding out that all the leftwing groups they supported did not support them in their time of need.  Leftists did not support Jews they knew, even after the worst attack on the Jewish people since the Holocaust.  I have recently heard a number of leading Democrats, when asked about this Israel-hating and Jew-hating trend in their party, claim that the party is a "big tent" party.  Really?  A big tent should include Jew haters?  Unless whatever more mainstream Democrats that may be left start speaking out against these Jew haters, this trend will continue.  And, unless rank and file Democrats - especially Jewish Democrats - stop supporting this party, the Jew hatred will not end.  Or, will you be like Jewish Chuck Schumer, who hopes that the Nazi tattoo sporting Graham Platner wins a Senate seat in Maine, because even a Nazi is better than Trump? 

Trump's MOU With Iran - Part IV (This Is Still Not Acceptable)

(Note.  A word first.   I received some criticism from other conservatives regarding Parts I and II of this continuing post about the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Iran.  Basically, the complaints were that I should not be criticizing Trump.  I disagree.  It is no secret that I voted for him three times.  And I have not piled on with criticisms over every little thing as the Democrats and mainstream media have done.  But we are talking about a matter of national security.  As I stated previously, I have been following this issue of Iranian nukes since about 2003.  And I've seen the tactics used by Iran - stalling and deception and continuing to call for "Death to America."  So I will not stay silent with regards to such an important issue - even with Trump in the White House.) 

In Paragraph 6 of the MOU, the U.S. "undertakes with regional partners to develop a definitive, mutually agreed plan with at least USD $300 billion for the reconstruction and economic development of the Islamic Republic of Iran."  Details to be finalized within 60 days.  What's the problem, Mike?  Didn't we have the Marshall Plan after World War II to help rebuild Europe?  Yes we did.  But the Nazis were gone.  Germany was split in two.  And West Germany became a Western oriented democracy, even joining NATO.  And Japan?  Their leadership was gone, with new leaders operating under a US imposed constitution.  Notice that this MOU provides for the reconstruction of the "Islamic" Republic of Iran.  

That is completely unacceptable.  There is no requirement, at least in this preliminary agreement, that the government return to what it was before the Islamic revolution of 1979 - a pro-Western country.  There is no requirement that the IRGC be disbanded.  Perhaps worst of all, there is no requirement that Iran cease its support for terrorism.  There is nothing to stop Iran from using these funds for the purpose of continuing to support Hezbollah, Hamas and the Houthis, and other terrorist groups.  But Trump said the money will be disbursed in a way that requires Iran to buy food from American farmers.

Aside from Iran saying they did not agree to that, money is fungible.  If, for example, Iran would have needed to set aside $300 billion for food and reconstruction, but now that money is being given to them, that frees up $300 billion to develop their own ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons, and provide missiles to their terrorist proxies.  Money is money.  

Paragraph 10 may be even worse.  It provides for the "immediate" termination of sanctions, with the US Department of Treasury to "issue waivers for the export of Iranian crude oil, petroleum products, and derivatives, and all associated services, including banking transactions, insurances, transportation, etc."  Well isn't that special?  Iran gets to start making billions of dollars immediately.  Just who won this war?  It appears to this writer that the West has given up on actually winning wars ever since FDR and Eisenhower were determined to win WWII.  

I have another problem with all of this.  Three problems actually - Steve Witkoff, Jared Kushner and JD Vance.  We have a knowledgeable and experienced Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, who happens to be the chief diplomatic officer of the United States.  Yet he seems to not be involved.  Why?  I do not like that Kushner runs a multi-billion dollar venture capital fund, Affinity Partners, which has received substantial backing from Middle Eastern Arab countries, including Qatar.  Qatar has been known to back Hamas, a terrorist organization.  At a minimum, this has the appearance of impropriety, the appearance of a conflict of interest.  Meanwhile, the Trump sons, Don Jr. and Eric, have invested in this company called Powerus, involved in the development and manufacturing of drones.  As we know, drones are increasingly being used in warfare, including in the Middle East, and they compete for government contracts.  Another appearance of impropriety, if not an actual conflict of interest.  

Based on recent comments by Trump and Vance, it appears that I will need a Part V, in order to make it clear that Israel is not the problem.  I guarantee that the US military and the CIA do not want to see an end to our country's close relationship with the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) and the Mossad (Israel's CIA), both of which have proven to be invaluable to the United States.     

Trump's MOU With Iran - Part III (I Can't Believe It)

Paragraph 2 provides that the US and Iran "undertake" to respect each other's sovereignty and territorial integrity.  That's certainly consistent with Paragraph 1, which provides for the "immediate and permanent termination of military options on all fronts."  If regime change was ever on the table, it's not now.  And forget about telling the Iranian people that "help is on the way."  Remember that?

Paragraph 4 of the MOU provides that immediately upon signing, the US will begin to remove its blockade.  So, there is nothing that Iran must do first to get that benefit.  Paragraph 8 says that Iran "reaffirms" it will not procure or develop nuclear weapons.  In other words, Iran is reaffirming what they already promised, yet violated, as they were well on their way to making nuclear weapons.  Basically, Iran is saying we promise again, but we lied the first time and mostly got away with it, so we're lying again.  And it looks like they can get away with it again.  

Paragraph 9 says the two sides will maintain the status quo.  The US will not impose any new sanctions nor will the US deploy additional troops in the area.  And Iran will maintain the current status quo of its nuclear program.  What?  Assuming all of Iran's enriched uranium is not buried deep beneath a mountain, and at least some of the material is accessible, that means Iran would likely be able to make weapons grade uranium within a few days.  Unless, of course, all their centrifuges were in fact destroyed.  Hard to know, as Iran still manages to launch missiles at other countries.  

If stopping Iran from obtaining nukes was the highest priority, why isn't removing all of Iran's enriched uranium the top priority?  Which should be removed immediately.  No?  Anybody?  Trump now seems to have backed off from that, saying all the uranium is buried under so much rubble that Iran won't be able to access it.  Can we really be sure of that?  Why doesn't the deal provide for immediate access by the US to take the enriched uranium out?  Whatever happened to Iran not being allowed to keep any enriched uranium?     

Everybody remember when Trump said, back on March 2, "Our objectives are clear.  First, we are destroying Iran's missile capabilities...and their capacity to produce brand new ones."  Defense Secretary Hegseth repeated that.  As did Press Secretary Leavitt.  Fast forward to now.  Trump:  "If other countries have them (ballistic missiles), it's a little bit unfair for them not to have some."  WHAT?  Other countries are not launching ballistic missiles into neighboring countries.  That is like saying that when the police and SWAT arrive at a shootout with their automatic rifles, it's just unfair that the criminals do not have them also.  Has Trump completely lost it?  It appears so.

Then we have this doozy by Trump:  "Missiles aren't the problem.  They hurt a little location, but they don't blow up the planet."  Perhaps that explains why there is nothing in the MOU about ballistic missiles.  But do I really need to explain to Trump that Israelis have to constantly run to shelters when missiles are incoming?  Do I have to explain that people are killed and injured by missiles?  And do I really need to explain that this is not a situation that calls for some misguided sense of equality.  Not when Iran is the leading state sponsor of terrorism.   

Meanwhile, Iran issued this statement today:  "It is hereby announced that the Strait of Hormuz will be closed to vessel traffic; it is noted that this first step is a response to the enemy's breach of promise, and if the aggression continues, further steps will be planned and taken to force the enemy to comply with its obligaions."  What is the alleged breach?  Hezbollah launched numerous missiles into Israel, and Israel had the temerity to fight back.  But recall what Part II of this blog post said - Paragraph 1 of the MOU "ensured" the "territorial integrity of Lebanon."  It did not ensure the territorial integrity of Israel.

As I said in Part II, Iran will object to Israel having troops in southern Lebanon, and will certainly object to Israel defending itself against Hezbollah, which operates out of Lebanon.  And just who is Iran referring to as the "enemy"?  Can't be Israel, as they are not a signatory to the MOU.  It appears that Iran is blaming the US for not preventing Israel from defending itself.  Just how can Trump tolerate Iran continuing to refer to the United States as the "enemy"?  That attitude does not suggest that Iran is sincere about abiding by any agreement.  Which, to anybody with knowledge of Iran's actions over the last 47 years, would be - should be - obvious.  Iran cannot be trusted to abide by any deal!  

Why did Trump do this deal?  Some thoughts in Part IV.  (Maybe Part V.)     

Trump's MOU With Iran - Part II (It's Even Worse Than I Thought)

The very first paragraph of this 14 point (14 paragraphs) plan says there will be an immediate and permanent end of military operations on all fronts.  Furthermore, it ensures "the territorial integrity of Lebanon."  Paragraph 14 provides that the final deal will be "endorsed by a binding UNSC resolution.  

Everyone needs to understand the significance of that.  Israel currently has forces in southern Lebanon because of the nonstop rocket and missile attacks being fired by Hezbollah in Lebanon.  So, first of all, the above provision does nothing other than protect Hezbollah - a terrorist organization .  Second, as the territorial integrity of Lebanon (Hezbollah) is "ensured," that means either signatory, the US or Iran, would have the right (arguably the obligation) to forcefully remove those Israeli troops.

Paragraph 14 then says that the terms of the final deal (which will include Lebanon absent a change) may also be enforced by the UN Security Council.  The Security Council would have the options of imposing sanctions on Israel, and even sending in a UN "peacekeeping" force to remove the Israeli forces.

Iran wanted to make sure that their terrorist proxy in Lebanon (Hezbollah) was protected.  And Trump agreed.  Trump agreed to protect a Foreign Terrorist Organization, so designated by our State Department.

Anybody also notice one glaring omission?  Trump did not insist on protecting the territorial integrity of Israel.  Israel has been hit by hundreds, if not thousands, of rockets and missiles in the last several months.  By Hezbollah in Lebanon.  By Hamas in Gaza.  By the Houthis in Yemen.  And by Iran.

Yet, Trump chose to protect a designated terrorist organization over our best ally in the Middle East, and arguably our best ally in the world.  Cool.

Trump's MOU with Iran - Part I

Some details have been leaked about the MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) between Trump and Iran.  Neither side has yet confirmed the accuracy of those leaks, however.  From what I've seen, it does not appear to be any better than Obama's JCPOA.  I have been following the issue of Iranian nukes since shortly after the turn of this century.  Negotiations began with the Europeans, as the US had no direct contact with Iran at the time.  The US was involved behind the scenes; and later on was openly involved.  The entire time - over 20 years - Iran has lied, failed to comply with any agreement, stalled, asked for more time, raised new issues requiring even more time.  To put it simply, Iran feigns interest in a deal, all the while building up their nuclear facilities, and playing the West for fools.

It looked like Trump would be different.  Sure, the US and Israeli militaries destroyed much of Iran's military.  But clearly not all of it, as they have continued to launch missiles at Israel and the Gulf states.  And top Iranian leaders have been killed.  But this "deal" sure looks like Iran won this war.  Let's take a look at the terms.  First off, all fighting stops - including Israel with Lebanon.  We Jews know what that means - Israel may not fight back when Hezbollah continues to launch rockets and missiles into Israel.  There are tens of thousands of Israelis afraid to return to their homes in northern Israel because of the nonstop rockets and missiles coming in from Lebanon.  

Isn't that the goal of Israel's enemies - slowly but surely make increasing parts of Israel uninhabitable by the Jewish people.  Hezbollah can reach the major population centers of central Israel as well.  Should Israel just sit back and take it?  Israel has had to send troops into southern Lebanon to deal with Hezbollah.  Iran says those troops need to leave Lebanon.  In case anyone had any doubt about who really controls Lebanon, there it is - Hezbollah does, and Iran controls Hezbollah.  Otherwise, what business is it of Iran's about what happens in distant Lebanon, nearly 1000 miles away.

Here are Trump's latest comments on Lebanon.  "Israel is fighting Hezbollah too long and too many people are being killed...They should have been able to do the job faster.  It just goes on forever.  And when that happens, it throws a negative light on the big deal, and that's the deal with Iran."  Well, President Trump, why have you capitulated to Iran by letting them dictate what happens between Lebanon and Israel?  Trump:  "Without me, there'd be no Israel, because no other president was willing to do what what I did."  He went on that Iran was "two weeks away from having a nuclear weapon" and would have used it against Israel.  Maybe.  And I have expressed my gratitude for President Trump doing what he has done.  But, telling our closest friend and ally in the Middle East to stand down while the rockets and missiles keep flying is taking the side of Iran - which has been the sworn enemy of the United States for 47 years.  

Instead of allowing Israel to deal with the problem of Hezbollah, Trump suggests that Syria handle it.  I would ask Trump if he would defer to another country when it comes to the protection of the USA.  Obviously, he would not.  Then don't ask Israel to do so.  

This deal provides for a 60 day period of further talks.  Yes, Iran says they agree to never build a nuclear bomb.  Does anyone in their right mind believe that that this Islamist regime, sworn to the destruction of the West, gives a damn about the words on a piece of paper?  This promise has been made by Iran before.  Recall their secret facilities with ongoing nuclear development?  Recall that Iran said all they wanted was nuclear power for civilian purposes?  Then why were they enriching uranium to 60%, just days shy from being able to obtain weapons grade uranium.  Civilian use would never be more than 20% enrichment.  I have zero doubt that Iran will use this 60 day talking period to continue their enrichment of their nuclear material to weapons grade.  

Trump:  "They're (Iran) not going to acquire a nuclear weapon.  If they do, all hell will rain down on them."  First of all, attacking a nuclear power becomes much more problematic.  Because if they feel threatened existentially, that might tempt them to use whatever nukes they developed.  Second, earlier this year Trump assured the Iranian people that help was on the way.  He seemed to want to free the Iranian people from the oppressive Islamist regime.  But I guess that promise has been forgotten.  The people did protest - but tens of thousands were killed.  The Iranian people are obviously reluctant to engage in further protests, absent the United States or another power supplying the people with the neceassary armaments to actually fight the regime.  I am unaware of Trump providing that war materiel.   

And just what will Trump do if Israel continues to defend itself from the Hezbollah rocket and missile attacks?  It's certainly an interesting question.  The bigger questions are these:  why does it appear that Trump is now willing to let the Islamist regime remain in power?  Iran continues to refer to the US as the "enemy."  How is that the basis of any deal?  Iran may be getting even more money than the JCPOA under Obama provided.  I will discuss that and other issues in the next posts.  But, as of now, it is no surprise that Iran believes they won this war.  Because maybe they did.