fox files

Biden’s White House Attempts to Micromanage Israeli Operations in Gaza and right now b/c of constant waring and waring factions, I am not pro or anti anyone other than Pro America FIRST!

Israel knocked out internet and cell service in Gaza on Friday as its troops prepared to enter the terrorist stronghold but were forced by the Biden White House to restore communications within 48 hours.

Israel’s action took place as Israel Defense Forces spokesman Rear Admiral Daniel Hagari hinted that the upward tempo of air strikes was a prelude to ground action.

Israeli military spokesman Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari said ground forces were “expanding their activity” Friday evening in Gaza and “acting with great force … to achieve the objectives of the war.” Israel says its strikes target Hamas fighters and infrastructure and that the militants operate from among civilians, putting them in danger.

The Hamas media center reported heavy nighttime clashes with Israeli forces at several places, including what it said was an Israeli incursion east of the refugee camp of Bureij in the central Gaza Strip. Asked about the report, the Israeli military reiterated early Saturday that it had been carrying out targeted raids and expanding strikes with the aim of “preparing the ground for future stages of the operation.”

By Saturday, internet and cell service were being restored. 

Two days after cellular and internet service abruptly vanished for most of Gaza amid a heavy Israeli bombardment, the crowded enclave came back online Sunday as communications systems were gradually restored.

That’s a welcome development for Gaza following a communications blackout that began late Friday as Israel expanded ground operations and launched intense airstrikes that illuminated the night sky with furious orange flashes. A rare few Palestinians with international SIM cards or satellite phones took it upon themselves to get the news out.

By Sunday morning, phone and internet communications had been restored to many people in Gaza, according to telecommunications providers in the area, Internet-access advocacy group NetBlocks.org and confirmation on the ground.

⚠️ Confirmed: Metrics show a brief disruption to internet service in parts of the #Gaza Strip with indications of recovery; comms have been heavily affected by air strikes and damaged infrastructure as well as a near-total outage on Friday attributed to measures imposed by Israel pic.twitter.com/3xcQc6Vv6F— NetBlocks (@netblocks) October 29, 2023

What caused the about-face by Israel’s military command? Pressure from the White House.

A senior U.S. official said Sunday that Israel had shut off communications in the enclave of 2.3 million and the United States had pressured the government to switch them back on. The Israelis did not tell their U.S. counterparts why they had switched off communications, the official said.

“We made it clear they had to be turned back on,” said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive negotiations. “The communications are back on. They need to stay back on.”

Jake Sullivan gave more details Sunday on Jake Tapper’s “State of the Union.”

Speaking to MSNBC on Sunday, Sullivan underscored the importance of communications networks in Gaza, saying, “We do feel strongly that the restoration of that communications was a critical thing.”

“Because aid workers need to be able to communicate, civilians need to be able to communicate, and of course, journalists need to be able to document what is happening in Gaza to report it to the wider world,” he said.

Sure, internet connectivity aided aid workers. But it also aided Hamas. Most of the press in Gaza seem to have a personal interest in seeing Hamas emerge victorious and armed Hamas terrorists (as an aside, why is it that no one mewling about the Geneva Conventions ever wants to mention that Hamas terrorists are illegal combatants and not covered by the Law of Land Warfare?) use internet and cell connections to plan terrorist attacks, monitor the progress of the IDF, and coordinate combat operations.

What we are beginning to see is the White House imposing the same nonsense restrictions on Israel that it has on Ukraine. It is almost as if the policy of the United States is to drag out every conflict as long as possible and maximize suffering because of escalation or something.

The US has gradually increased the quantity and quality of weapons flowing to Ukraine and, at the same time, put targets of operational and strategic importance off-limits to attack. It took 20 months of warfare to agree to provide Ukraine with ATACMS and begin training F-16 pilots, unnecessarily extending that war. This was all done because of Jake Sullivan’s unreasoning fear that caused intestinal palpitations every time Putin or one of his lackeys mentioned a “red line,” see Putin’s War, Week 86. The Very Resistible Force Meets the Immovable Object in Donbas for more on the subject. Now, you can see the same impulse at work as Iran blisters.

“We have had numerous conversations – from the prime minister and the president on down, and certainly among military leaders and their counterparts – about Israeli military objectives and about the steps that they have taken and intend to take to achieve those objectives,” he said.

“We’ve asked them hard questions, the same hard questions that we would ask ourselves if we were seeking to conduct an operation to take out a terrorist threat,” he went on. “We’ve pressed them on questions like objectives and matching means to objectives, about both tactical and strategic issues associated with this operation.”

Sullivan said Hamas was “making life extremely difficult for Israel” by using civilians as human shields and placing its rocket infrastructure among civilian populations.

“That creates an added burden for Israel. But it does not lessen Israel’s responsibility under international humanitarian law to distinguish between terrorists and civilians, and to protect the lives of innocent people,” he said.

An astoundingly simple three-move checkmate of Western civilization:
1. UN & Israel must ensure safety of Gaza civilians.
2. Civilians shield Hamas, hiding in its secure tunnels.
3. Hamas attacks Israel, as Israel must not target Hamas because of civilianshttps://t.co/st5SyUOznA— Ukraine Reporter (@StateOfUkraine) October 30, 2023

The meddling in Israel’s entirely just chastisement of Hamas will result in more Israelis and Gazans dead because imposing limits on violence in warfare does not add to the humanity of essentially inhumane activity. It merely drags it out to ensure more and more people are killed; factually, Sullivan is wrong when he says, “It does not lessen Israel’s responsibility under international humanitarian law to distinguish between terrorists and civilians, and to protect the lives of innocent people.” Additional Protocol I of the Geneva Conventions says:

The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favour or impede military operations. 

The International Criminal Court statute covers the same ground. 

Utilizing the presence of a civilian or other protected person to render certain points, areas or military forces immune from military operations” constitutes a war crime in international armed conflicts.

It is Hamas’ obligation to ensure civilians are removed from possible targets and not used to shield terrorists or their fortifications (Hamas Leader Says They ‘Need the Blood of Women, Children, and the Elderly’ to Inspire Terrorist Attacks).

The reason for White House meddling is apparent. The Biden administration is heavily infiltrated by Iranian agents who are developing US policy for the Middle East (Shocking: Shadowy Iranian ‘Youth Network’ Secretly Influences America’s Foreign Policy, What Was the Role of the Iranian Spy Ring in the US Government in the ‘Intelligence Blunder’ With Hamas? and Why Is Alleged Iranian Operative Ariane Tabatabai Still Working in the Pentagon?) and Biden desperately wants to complete the Obama project of creating a regional superpower out of Iran. But like everything else this bunch touches, you can rely on it turning to crap.

Guess what the geniuses are admitting

Three and a half years too late, New York magazine just published an article called “COVID Lockdowns Were a Giant Experiment. It Was a Failure.” It’s the most popular article on their site right now.

I think we’re long past the point at which we say: good for them for figuring it out, even if belatedly. The time for that has officially gone by.

We don’t award partial credit for admitting the problems with lockdown three and a half years after the policy was implemented.

These belated statements of regret do no good. First and most obviously, it’s far too late to undo the damage from the policy. But second, these tend to be the same kind of people who always, after the implementation of some disastrous policy, can be heard saying, “This was a mistake in hindsight, but nobody could have known at the time.”

Yeah, sure.

Instead, we should draw lessons from episodes like this so we don’t get snookered the next time something stupid and evil comes along.

How’s this for one such lesson: the American establishment is not to be trusted, does not deserve the benefit of the doubt, and does not have your best interests at heart.

Whatever the establishment’s current obsession is, it’s almost certainly a boondoggle based on lies, and it never makes your life better. It only impoverishes you.

Oh, and if you have a dissenting opinion you’ll be called evil, a fool, a conspiracy theorist, a dupe of a foreign power, whatever.

Just a super bunch these people are.

John McCain ultimately admitted that the 2003 Iraq war “can’t be judged as anything other than a mistake, a very serious one, and I have to accept my share of the blame for it.”

Well, that’s super. But as a result of this mistake, how did McCain look at the world differently? What new caution would he now exercise? How would his approach to future conflicts change?

We never got any answers, because nobody bothered to ask him these obviously central questions.

So again, what good does it do to admit, years later, that Boondoggle X was a mistake, if you’re assuredly going to go along with Boondoggle Y, as if Boondoggle X never occurred?

Don’t be the dolt who years later has to say, “We now know X was a mistake.” Be the person with a functioning brain who says at the time, “No way am I supporting X.”

The Threat to Freedom of Expression at American Universities with Stephen Haber | Policy Stories

Self-Defense: No Charges For Man Who Drew And Fired Gun After ‘Pro-Palestinian’ Protesters Swarmed And Beat Him In Skokie

Unfortunately for the mainstream media, this video is everywhere now.  There were all sorts of news stories about someone shooting at “mostly peaceful” “pro-Palestinian” protesters Sunday evening in Skokie, IL.  As if he just couldn’t contain his hatred for Muslims in general and Palestinians in particular.  Of course, now that the video is released, it shows the violent mob swarming the man and beating the hell out of him before he pulled his gun and fired a warning shot instead of shooting one of the thugs beating him with sticks.

You want to know what else is remarkable?  How the Skokie cops didn’t converge on the attack until after the shot was fired.  Were they told to stay “hands off” even with the pro-Palestinian “protesters” attacking people and beating them severely?  Seconds after the shot was fired, the Skokie officers were right there taking the man into custody.

What else is troublesome?  I guarantee you those “mostly peaceful” protesters are busy trying to find out the man’s identity and will undoubtedly vandalize his residence, share plenty of death threats and try to get this guy fired from his job and similarly harass his family.

Here’s a snippet from the Chicago Sun-Times.  I’ve left out all of the paragraph after paragraph of the Palestinians casting themselves as the victims when they were the bullies and instigators of violence, NOT the guy defending himself in a not-so-friendly to self-defense Cook County.

Charges will not be filed against a man who fired a gun near pro-Palestinian protesters in the north suburbs Sunday night, according to the Cook County state’s attorney’s office.

The 39-year-old man, who prosecutors declined to name, was released from police custody. In a statement issued Monday, prosecutors said the man, a Firearm Owner Identification Card and Concealed Carry License holder, had “no criminal history.”

“After reviewing the evidence, which includes surveillance video and witness statements, we have determined the individual … acted in self-defense upon being surrounded by a crowd and attacked by some of those individuals,” according to the statement.

People scream and the crowd scatters, and the man can be seen holding the gun as someone screams, “Get him! Get him!”

Yes, even after he fired his gun, the crowd was still going to get him.  If the cops hadn’t arrived when they did, he probably would have shot a few of his attackers before being overtaken and likely beaten to death.

This all coming from the left who label themselves as the peaceful, for the common middle people party.

Think about that long and hard.

It’s Not Your Imagination. Social Media Is Censoring You.

For the better part of the last decade, many Americans have wondered just how much is being censored from social media. While horrific content of people killing, raping, and robbing other people is consistently lauded across the platform as “music,” the conservative voice is being gagged. Choked out by the powers that be, their ivory tower mindset has kept them from being reachable for decades.

Now thanks to the Supreme Court upholding a lower court ruling, they can bring back their censorship. Announced on October 23rd, Justice Samuel Alito penned his dissent from a split ruling.

“This case concerns what two lower courts found to be a coordinated campaign by high-level federal officials to suppress the expression of disfavored views on important public issues.” By allowing the ruling to stand, the left could now resume “either coercing social media companies to engage in such censorship or actively controlling those companies’ decisions about the content posted on their platforms.”

Alito’s dissention was also joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch.

Such a crucial ruling hands the federal government the right to fully censor what we see. Thanks to the liberal left and their “free spaces” and prevention of “disinformation” we can no longer guarantee the free speech of what we read online. While there has always been a grain of salt taken with much of the information available online, by censoring it, they are preventing people from doing their own research to learn the unadulterated truth about controversial topics.

This doesn’t just change what we’ll see in terms of COVID. Now they’ll resume shaping the narrative around Israel and Hamas, Ukraine and Russia, and especially Republicans versus Democrats. Poisoning the idea of free thought and the free exchange of ideas like this is more than a slippery slope. It’s outright setting us on course for 1984 to move from movie to reality.

Police State by D’Souza and Bongino

EXCLUSIVE CIVIL LIBERTIES DOC

Dinesh D’Souza Documentary “Police State” To Stream Exclusively on Rumble

Rumble, the rapidly expanding video-sharing platform and provider of cloud services, has revealed the launch of exclusive film content, featuring an explosive piece of cinema from political filmmaker and author, Dinesh D’Souza. His latest film, titled “Police State,” has created waves by aligning itself with free speech and anti-censorship ideals, displaying a commitment to the unfiltered dissemination of content. The film, co-created alongside political commentator Dan Bongino, will be accessible on Rumble and Locals from October 28th. In the face of rampant online censorship, D’Souza’s “Police State” intends to shed light on the impending risks to American civil liberties. Recognizable for his uniquely unfiltered voice, D’Souza aims to expose the encroaching threat of a police state in a country that has traditionally valued individual freedoms above all else.

The film also underlines the urgency of recognizing an increasingly invasive state machinery. For D’Souza, this project represents not just a movie but an urgent call to action. In this vein, he voiced his pleasure to be streaming his utmost critical work on uncensored platforms such as Rumble and Locals. “This movie will expose the threat to the basic rights of Americans and the alarming movement toward the country becoming a police state,” said D’Souza. “It’s my most urgent and powerful film, and I’m delighted to be streaming it on Rumble and Locals.” Rumble, known for its mission to challenge cancel culture and encourage the unimpeded flow of ideas, has welcomed the addition of D’Souza’s latest pivotal work. Chris Pavlovski, Rumble Chairman and CEO, expressed his enthusiasm about the progress they have been making with their pay-per-view functionality. “We’ve made a lot of progress with our pay-per-view functionality, and we are excited to bring this movie to the platform,” said Pavlovski. “With a significant following and an impressive portfolio of movies, D’Souza is a powerful voice, and we expect a great turnout,” he added. Dinesh’s Locals community includes access to stream “Police State.” Members will also gain access to exclusive live streams and other films like “2000 Mules.”

HYPOCRITICAL

The Australian Government Says It Will Be Exempt From Its Own Online “Misinformation” Laws

The Albanese administration’s pursuit of overreaching legislation intended to tackle “false” content on social media platforms is drawing sharp criticism and questions about its implications for free speech. A notable exclusion from this potential crackdown is the very government pushing for it. This exemption, which would allow government messages to bypass these stringent regulations, was questioned by Independent Senator David Pocock. He rightly posited why governmental communications should remain unexamined when content from other entities would be under scrutiny. To many, the exemption smells suspiciously like a double standard, allowing the government to avoid the very accountability they seek to impose on others. “It would not ‘pass the pub test’ for the exemption to stand when the laws were eventually introduced,” Senator Pocock remarked. Assistant Minister for Infrastructure Carol Brown rushed to defend the exemption, stating that it is intended to prevent critical emergency communications from the government being accidentally removed by social media platforms. Special Minister of State Don Farrell, who oversees electoral matters, conveyed the complexity of the issue. “It’s a difficult topic,” he admitted. The balance between preserving free speech and battling misinformation is indeed a delicate one. Senator Farrell remarked, “You don’t want to stop free speech in this country, and we do want people to be able to express their views, even if you consider them crazy and so forth.”

PUSHING BACK AGAINST LAWMAKERS

X Won’t Demonetize Russell Brand, The Company Tells Pro-Censorship British MPs

Demonstrating its commitment to upholding principles of free expression, Twitter recently affirmed that it would continue to financially support comedian Russell Brand, refusing to be swayed by mere accusations leveled against him. Elon Musk has promoted the position of not penalizing account holders unless they deviate from the platform’s guidelines or violate local laws. Detailing its stance in a letter addressed to Dame Caroline Dinenage, who chairs the Commons Culture, Media, and Sport committee, and who was widely criticized for asking platforms whether they would allow Brand to earn a living from online platforms, the company explained that its resolution to allow Brand’s financial pursuits on the platform aligns with its intent to protect free expression. The company said: “X is not able to provide confidential commercial information relating to individual accounts, including for privacy reasons.” It added: “We do not take action on accounts where they have not violated our own rules or local laws. This is essential to protect free expression on the service. In order to ensure that all people can participate in the public conversation freely and safely, all content on X, including monetised content, is subject to our User Agreement and the X Rules.”

X’s chosen course of action resonates with perspectives against encroachments on free speech and accentuates the necessity for platforms to observe impartiality, without resorting to knee-jerk reactions based on unproven insinuations. This development comes after YouTube barred Brand from generating revenue from his account in the wake of allegations implicating him in incidents of sexual assault, which purportedly transpired between 2006 and 2013. This was based on allegations alone, despite Brand not being convicted, or even charged with such offenses. Consequently, Dinenage had sought an audience with Linda Yaccarino, X’s CEO, expressing apprehensions regarding the comedian’s ability to monetize his content on the platform amid the accusations. She also queried whether Musk had influenced the decision-making process pertaining to Brand’s case, given the billionaire owner’s public defense of the comedian.

INVASIVE

Visitors to the EU Will Soon Face Fingerprinting and Facial Scans

A significant shift is looming in the way American citizens will be allowed to enter a large majority of European nations. The European Travel Information and Authorization System (ETIAS), an arm of the European Union, has unveiled its plans to implement a system in Spring 2025, requiring Americans to secure prior approval for travels up to 90 days in any of the 30 EU countries. This is a departure from the current practice where US travelers enjoy effortless entry into these countries without a visa requirement. However, the new regulation will insist on individuals proceeding with their travels only after registering their intent via the official ETIAS website or mobile application, both of which currently do not process such requests.

In a radical departure from the norm, from 2025 onwards, American passport holders will no longer receive passport stamps. Alarmingly, the planned regulatory changes involve intense intrusions into personal privacy. The new rules state that visitors will be subjected to both face and fingerprint scans aside from surrendering other biometric data. It’s disconcerting that this data will be reserved within the European Commission’s Common Identity Repository (CIR), a database accessed by numerous agencies, including law enforcement. The implications of this regulation change could be even more disconcerting from a privacy perspective. Critics and advocates of digital privacy have sounded the alarm on not just the possible misuse of this extensive data pool by governments, but also the potential exposure to hacking threats, be they criminal outfits or invasive foreign governments. There’s also the risk of rogue insiders dealing with this sensitive information. These regulations reflect a worrying escalation towards a surveillance state that doesn’t differentiate between law-abiding citizens and potential threats but treats them both as data sets to be tagged, traced, and retained. It’s worth noting that the US began collecting fingerprints of international tourists as part of the US-VISIT (United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology) program, which was initiated in 2004.

The controversial digital ID project tracking vaccinations

Beware of These Links

As people start to get wise to the vast amount of online tracking, using ad blockers and tracker blockers to protect themselves, marketers are getting smart and are looking for new ways to track people. That’s why, these days, you have to be extremely careful of the links you click. This is explored here below.

CENTRALIZED SURVEILLANCE

How Mastercard’s Digital ID Project Is Being Used by Governments To Track Health and Vaccination

In Mastercard’s ongoing technological pursuits, there seems to be an agenda of consolidating digital dominance. The so-called “Community Pass” project, helmed by Tara Nathan, Mastercard’s executive vice president, claims to integrate marginalized communities into the digital world. However, with only 3.5 million users so far, skeptics of digital ID plans may wonder about its real reach and intentions. Nathan’s recent appearance on the company-sponsored podcast “What’s Next In,” touted the supposed merits of the Community Pass. Launched in 2019, this platform ostensibly provides individuals in Sub-Saharan Africa and Asia-Pacific with a digital ID and wallet, allowing them access to services such as government benefits and humanitarian assistance. Nathan waxed eloquent about the supposed benefits of digitization for developing economies. But her emphasis on using offline digital channels to supposedly empower marginalized individuals raises eyebrows. Is this another case of a multinational company trying to sell its tech solutions to unsuspecting communities under the guise of altruism?

While they sing praises about aiding farmers with their digital identity system, one can’t help but question the underlying motives. Is this just a method to tap into the vast, underexplored markets of rural areas? Community Pass seems to be less of an inspiration from their previous mobile money humanitarian ventures and more of an extension of their global financial grip. Nathan was eager to elaborate on the various components of Community Pass – Farm Pass, Wellness Pass, and Commerce Pass. Each appears tailor-made to address specific challenges. For instance, Farm Pass supposedly helps farmers gain visibility and a credit record. However, this digital interference might just be a ruse to infiltrate local markets and dictate terms. The Wellness Pass initiative seems particularly odd. While it’s positioned as a system to monitor vaccine roll-outs, isn’t there a clear risk of tracking individuals’ personal health data? Even if institutions like the Ministries of Health in Ethiopia and Mauritania endorse it, the broader implications can’t be ignored. Their goal to expand the reach of Community Pass to over 30 million people by 2027 sounds more like a corporate conquest than a genuine effort to assist. The project’s privacy concerns are evident. Digital identities, under the pretense of progress, could well turn into tools for invasive surveillance, jeopardizing the very rights of the people they claim to uplift. Their recent ID2020 certification might vouch for their intention to offer financial inclusion and digital identity services, but with technology’s relentless pace, there’s a dire need for strict regulations. Policymakers must be wary and ensure that such initiatives don’t compromise individuals’ freedoms under the guise of inclusion and so-called progress.

Klaus the wannabe Bond Villain comes clean on who will rule the world in his WEF wet dream

This is shocking. Klaus Schwab, in his best German pre-war stylistic accent voice says the world will no longer be run by countries, or superpowers like America but instead by the World Economic Forum stakeholders such as Blackrock and Bill Gates. This is the man who wants us to have no property, eat bugs and plants, live in dense cities so the countryside can re-wild, and only allow the elites to travel.

Reminder: Globalists Vs. The People:

Klaus Schwab says the world will no longer be run by superpowers like
America… Instead, it will be run by globalist like World Economic Forum stakeholders, such as BlackRock, Bill Gates, and others.

Reject them and call them out for their… pic.twitter.com/EXfQyyXwWy

— Blake (@_BlakeHabyan) October 16, 2023

Hamas And Hezbollah Are The Symptoms; Iran Is The Disease

The U.S. Navy should play to its strength, enforcing sanctions against Iran by controlling the maritime routes Iran depends on to generate cash for its empire of terror.

The U.S. response to Hamas’ Nazi-like massacre of Israelis, Americans, and anyone else in its murderous path has been, almost without exception, robust. But U.S. officials are largely missing the larger picture and risking being drawn into an escalation — on the enemy’s terms.

Hamas and Hezbollah are the symptoms; Iran is the disease.

But President Biden’s Oval Office address to the nation on Oct. 19 danced around the core issue of Iran’s financing, training, and encouragement of violent, brutal forces across the region and beyond, as well as its nuclear missile program.

Thus, the gathering might of the U.S. Navy off the coast of Israel in the form of two aircraft carrier strike groups and a Marine Expeditionary Unit betrays unimaginative, linear thinking.

If used, American firepower would augment Israel’s own considerable military force. In theory, this threat helps to deter Hezbollah from unleashing its arsenal of 100,000 missiles on Israel, many of them sophisticated.

But, like Hamas, Hezbollah is expert at digging. They hide their missile launchers in an extensive network of tunnels and bunkers — all guarded by an air defense network that is likely to get lucky enough times to raise the specter of captured American pilots.

The last time U.S. naval aviation operated over Lebanon was in 1983, in response to the Beirut barracks bombing in October — an attack that Iranian authorities arrogantly claimed credit for in the past month. Until 9/11, it was the deadliest terror attack on Americans. Two months later, the Syrian military fired on U.S. Navy aircraft, shooting down two A-6 attack jets and capturing an officer.

Optimal Use of U.S. Air Force and Navy

If the incremental addition of American airpower is helpful to the pending effort to destroy Hamas while deterring a wider conflict, that role can more than adequately be filled by the U.S. Air Force.

The U.S. Navy should instead be concentrating 2,000 miles to the east in the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea. There, the U.S. Navy would be playing to its unambiguous strength, enforcing sanctions against Iran by controlling the sea lines of communication that Iran depends on to generate the cash for its empire of terror.

Unfortunately, this would require a Biden administration that was both imaginative and strategic — and not in the thrall of a recently revealed Iranian influence operation that managed to place several advisors friendly to the Iranian mullahs in key national security positions since the Obama administration. Chief among these, Robert Malley, a longtime friend of Secretary of State Antony Blinken and an architect of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran, a deal that focused exclusively on Iran’s nuclear program, rewarding the mullahs with cash and sanctions relief while greenlighting their missile program and global support for terror.

Iran’s Nuclear Program

Instead, Biden’s systematic appeasement of Iran, a continuation of the Obama-era policy that weirdly sought to use Iran as a counter to perceived Israeli intransigence on the Palestinian problem, has resumed. Up until the gruesome events of Oct. 7, Biden’s national security team was willfully blind to Iran’s bloody history of sponsoring terror and its determined drive to produce nuclear weapons and missiles to deliver them.

As a result, U.N. sanctions against Iran’s nuclear, missile, and drone program — never well enforced by Biden — expired on Oct. 18 with the U.S. announcing its own unilateral set of sanctions. The U.S. continues to pretend these efforts are somehow slowing Iran’s drive to push its nuclear program to completion, while Russian use of Iranian combat drones in Ukraine reveals the prior sanctions regime as inadequate to the task.

Reagan-Era Lessons

The U.S. never fully grappled with the Iranian theocracy after the shah was toppled in 1979. During the Cold War, it was assumed that the Soviet Union would come to Iran’s aid and that the military cost of defeating the regime would be too high.

Instead, the U.S. was content to see Iran tied down in a bloody stalemate against Iraq after the latter invaded in 1980.

As the war started to threaten oil exports out of the Gulf, America responded by providing a U.S. Navy escort to six Kuwaiti-owned super tankers in July 1987.  

After an escorting U.S. Navy ship struck a mine on April 14, 1988, the Reagan administration responded only four days later with Operation Praying Mantis. It was the Navy’s largest combat action since World War II, sinking an Iranian guided missile frigate, crippling a second, sinking four other boats, and destroying two militarized oil platforms at the cost of one helicopter with two crew lost.

The operation was thoroughly wargamed a year before, when it was determined that an unambiguously aggressive response to Iran would likely prevent the conflict from escalating. In other words, a disproportionate response would rob Iran of the ability to control the timing and mode of escalation, reducing U.S. casualties and preserving the peace.

Applying Force

This lesson from the Reagan era opens up a final consideration. Rather than following through on the foolish precedent of incentivizing hostage-taking via negotiation and cash payments, America should ditch the carrots and pick up the stick.

Imagine the transformative discussion over the current hostage crisis — and the forestalling of future hostage-taking by Iran and its proxies — if the U.S. were to announce that every hostage taken is worth $1 billion (or $1.171 billion if we wish to account for Bidenflation). That amount would be deducted from seized Iranian assets or taken from oil tankers filled with Iranian oil. The proceeds would compensate hostages and their families, with the remainder used to replenish the Pentagon’s waning stocks of armaments.

This is exactly the kind of naval power application the U.S. Navy was built for.

Unfortunately, the radical cadres infesting the Biden administration’s national security staff would never allow such an idea to reach the desk of our cognitively impaired commander-in-chief.