USA military begins attacks on Kharg island, and deceased ayatollah's son is unable to operate

The USA military's begun some attacks on Iran's Kharg island, targeting mainly Iran's own military setups:

The US launched about 50 strikes on Kharg Island today (Tuesday), the Wall Street Journal reported.

The strikes on the island, which controls about 90% of Iran's oil exports, come as US President Donald Trump warned that “a whole civilization will die tonight" if Iran fails to abide by his 8 pm EST deadline to reach an agreement to end the conflict.

NBC News reported that the strikes targeted Kharg Island's military facilities, including military bunkers, storage facilities, and air defense systems.

It remains to be seen if the Iranian Islamofascist overlords will surrender, but chances are entirely possible they won't. And if not, they'll deserve to have their resources on the island destroyed after all the misogyny, antisemitism and racism they emphasized.

Next, according to recent reports, the now dead-as-a-doornail Ali Khameini's son, whom the mullahs in Iran tried to make the next ayatollah, is unable to function:

Mojtaba Khamenei, Iran's new supreme leader, who was wounded in US-Israeli strikes that killed his father, Ali Khamenei, is reportedly incapacitated and receiving medical treatment in the holy city of Qom. Citing a diplomatic memo, The Times reported that the 56-year-old cleric was unconscious and being treated for a "severe" medical condition.

It's the first time the location of Iran's supreme leader is revealed. The central city of Qom is located 87 miles (around 140 kilometres) south of Tehran. The city is considered sacred in Shia Islam and is known as the religious capital of the Islamic republic.

"Mojtaba Khamenei is being treated in Qom in a severe condition, unable to be involved in any decision-making by the regime," the document, which is believed to be based on American and Israeli intelligence that was shared with Gulf allies, read.

Information on the Supreme leader's location was reportedly known to US and Israeli spy agencies for some time but has not previously been made public.

But what if the Islamofascists move him in an attempt to escape justice from the USA and Israeli militaries? Let's hope the USA and Israeli armies can track the monster down and punish him too.

Ukraine's president makes a horrific PR mistake by visiting Syria's autocrat

While Russia's war against Ukraine is abominable, so too is Syria's conduct under Ahmed al-Sharaa, and Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky made a serious mistake by paying the Islamofascist a visit:

President Volodymyr Zelensky visited Damascus, Syria, on Sunday, receiving a warm welcome from President Ahmed al-Sharaa and reportedly discussing cooperation on food and security exchanges.

Zelensky and Sharaa met once before, in New York, while both were attending the United Nations General Assembly in September. Both their countries have experienced significant aggression by both Iran and Russia – Ukraine is facing an ongoing Iran-backed Russian invasion, while Syria endured over a decade of civil war in which both Iran and Russia supported deposed dictator Bashar Assad. On the groundwork of these shared experiences, Sharaa and Zelensky appear to be pursuing closer collaboration.

This is an utter embarrassment, and truly disgusting. As though it weren't bad enough the Trump administration had to be lenient on al-Sharaa, now Zelensky's getting chummy with the monster, and at the UN, no less. This does not help Ukraine's situation at all.

Federalist contributors continue their ambiguous view of how to conduct a war against evil entities

So now the Federalist writer/editor Hayden Daniel's the next contributor to the site to make an unclear argument on how the USA should conduct a war in areas like Iran and other parts of the middle east. He's no better than the aforementioned editor, mainly because he slurs Mark Levin as a "neocon", more on which anon. There may be, oddly enough, some valid points made about Ronald Reagan here, but the op-ed still falters badly:

But, for now, the economically vital Strait of Hormuz remains shut, and over the past few weeks, the U.S. has transferred thousands of ground troops to the region. Given the administration’s shifting goalposts and unclear messaging over the last few weeks, escalation is still not outside the realm of possibility. And any further escalation of the conflict would probably mean boots on the ground.

And that's unacceptable to Mr. Daniel, right? Seriously, why should we buy the notion he even wants to defend his own country's borders then? After all, rounding up violent illegal immigrants is tough too, and there are serious dangers involved. If we don't have the courage to defeat tyrants and demand they stop using Islam as an educational tool, then how will we be able to do anything about it back on home turf? Already, there's disturbing signs of some individual states selling out to the Religion of Peace, the aforementioned Utah included, and Daniel's not making any improvement when it comes to the troubles with dhimmitude.

But after decades of costly, ultimately futile wars in the same part of the globe, the prospect of another ground conflict in the region is deeply unpopular with most Americans. Such a move, if taken, would almost certainly tank President Donald Trump’s already wavering approval rating, sink Republican prospects for the midterms and even 2028, and mar his legacy with a long Middle East war he promised to avoid.

And that's solely Trump's fault, not that of the jihadists, huh? Mr. Daniel's just as appalling as his fellow editor John Daniel Davidson, and whatever merit the Federalist had when they first began about a dozen years ago has evaporated since. As for the issue of Levin, while there's obviously cause for disagreement, what Daniel says next is bizarre:

In light of that, our other options are to continue the air and naval war alone without a ground element, or, as some have suggested, to begin arming the Iranian people (or other groups like the Kurds and Azerbaijanis) so they can overthrow the regime themselves. Even if the U.S. stops its direct military actions against Iran in the coming weeks as Trump suggested, the administration could still arm and train Iranians to destabilize the regime from the inside.

Reagan admin veteran (as if he’d ever let you forget it) and neocon political commentator Mark Levin emphatically endorsed the latter option Tuesday.

Wow, this is the 2nd time somebody at the Federalist makes the claim Levin's a "neocon", even though his record shows he's anything but that, no matter his flaws. I just don't know what they expect to accomplish from such an all-too-easy putdown. That said, here's what they seemingly dissent with him about:

“ARM THE IRANIAN PEOPLE IMMEDIATELY!” he posted on X. “I’ve been calling for this for weeks on radio. One thing we can do, which Reagan did in Afghanistan, Angola, and Nicaragua, is ARM THE PEOPLE in Iran so they are no longer butchered by these monsters without the ability to fight back! They will rise up as a real fighting force, but they need weapons! And it must be done IMMEDIATELY, especially if we are talking about ending our military operation in a few weeks!”

In 2015, the Pentagon set out to train up to 15,000 rebels to help take on ISIS and topple Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad. Five hundred million dollars later, we had only managed to train a few dozen men, and those who actually made it to the battlefield were quickly killed, captured, or fled. Some of them even surrendered their equipment over to terrorists in return for safe passage out of the country. A separate CIA effort to train rebels also met a dismal end and was thankfully cancelled by Trump in his first term.

Meanwhile, the Iraqis and Afghans we spent untold resources and man-hours on training to defend their own homelands cut and ran at the first sight of major combat against ISIS and the Taliban, respectively. Their cowardice left mountains of U.S.-provided equipment in the hands of terrorists, who subsequently distributed them to other militant groups.

In all this argument, it's missing a vital point: nobody tried to persuade the Afghans or Syrians to stop practicing Islam. If they don't have the courage to make the point, then why do they think these missions were a failure overall? Have they also forgotten their 2021 reports on how Dubya's administration did nothing at the time to stop sexual violence against children in Afghanistan? Let's be clear: if there's no courage in the press to confront bad ideologies in any shape or form, then no wonder even a government/military won't do anything about it in turn.

“But that was during the incompetent Bush 43 and Obama years. Reagan knew how to do it right!” Levin might respond. But, as it turns out, the exact three examples Levin cited also turned into fiascos for the United States.

The Reagan administration provided support to the anti-communist militant group UNITA against the communist MPLA during the Angolan Civil War. From the mid-80s to early-90s, the U.S. provided tens of millions of dollars in aid to UNITA, including state-of-the-art Stinger missiles, in an attempt to curtail Soviet and Cuban influence in Angola. This aid turned out to be for naught, as the MPLA eventually won the civil war. The MPLA, though it has shed some of its communist tenets, still rules Angola to this day. In recent years, Angola has cozied up to China, negotiating lucrative deals for its substantial oil and mineral reserves.

Levin, in an extremely puzzling move, cited Nicaragua as a positive example of the United States supporting rebels against a hostile regime. The Reagan administration helped fund the Contras, anti-communist guerrillas who opposed the Marxist Sandinista movement, which had just taken control of the government of Nicaragua. The catch came with how the U.S. was funding the Contras. In 1984, Congress had passed legislation cutting off aid to the Contras, but the Reagan administration was still determined to prop up the rebels.

So, the Reagan administration raised funds to funnel to the Contras by selling weapons to … Iran. The U.S. government sold tens of millions of dollars worth of weapons to the same Iranian regime we’re currently at war with and then used proceeds from those sales to fund rebel bands in Nicaragua.

The resulting Iran-Contra affair was a massive scandal during the Reagan era. And, much like in Angola, it didn’t change much. The Sandinistas negotiated peace with the Contras in 1990, and free elections saw the ousting of the Sandinistas from power. However, the party returned to power in 2006 and has ruled the country ever since.

While this is disturbing, and makes for a valid argument about why Levin's approaching this from a naive viewpoint that overlooks infuriarating details, including how the USA government naively made use of Islamofascists to fight against the USSR, Daniel still doesn't sound altruistic, and that's the problem, which continues here:

As we’ve seen, the strategy of arming the locals can be simply ineffective or can spiral into era-defining disaster. Providing guns and training to the Iranian people so that they can take on the regime themselves *might* work, but the best you’re going to get out of that is a long civil war and an uncertain future. But the potential second-and third-order consequences, especially involving a state with over 90 million people and access to the building blocks of a nuclear weapon, are too great to risk it.

If this is implying the USA military shouldn't track down and secure any nuclear materials still around, then what's the point of this article? Wars aren't won by leaving dangerous tools lying around that barbarians could one day make use of again if given even remotely the chance. Yet Daniel seems disinterested in demanding something be done to ensure they won't be given one. And if Daniel's not interested in finishing the job to prevent the enemies from having access to any kind of nuclear research, then his blabber is pointless. There are valid reasons to disagree with Levin about Nicuragua, but if Daniel doesn't think even the USA military should do the job itself, then he's perpetuated the same defeatist stealth tactics his fellow writers at the Federalist seem to be advocating now. Granted, they do make a point Reagan wasn't the genius some claim he was, but since they don't raise any alternatives that could be better, their argument still falls flat.

The Federalist staff aren't the only ones who're trying to damage morale. There's also podcaster Joe Rogan, and comedian Theo Von:

Podcasters Joe Rogan and Theo Von, who both hosted President Trump during the 2024 election, have strongly criticized military action in Iran.

[...] Both Rogan and Von seemed to reject the tactics made to “stop the terrorists.”

“Supposedly, they’re trying to stop the terrorists,” Rogan said.

“That’s crazy though if you’re the fucking terrorist,” Von laughed. “You know what I’m saying? Like, if you want to stop them, fucking stand in front of the fucking mirror. Just start there.”

The interview with Theo Von comes days after Rogan said “nobody thinks it’s a good idea” for the U.S. to engage in a military conflict in Iran.

Nobody needs somebody like Rogan to comment on the news, that's for sure. He wore out his welcome pretty fast, as did the Federalist as a news site. Von sounds just as bad. And these sites are all examples of how uncreative minds are ruining the right, assuming they really do represent it. If anything, they're just embarrassments to the cause, and it'd be best to avoid them. If commentators like these had been running the store during WW2, it never would've been won.

Update: now, Brianna Lyman offers an improved view of the rescue of 2 USAF officials from behind enemy lines, suggesting the site's editors realized they were making themselves look bad with their own shoddy stealth anti-war propaganda:

Americans can and will continue to debate the war in Iran. But what is not debatable is the competence on display of our military and its leaders during Saturday’s rescue mission. This rescue mission stands as a stark indictment of the generation of top brass who preceded it — the same admirals and generals who spent decades losing wars and abandoning Americans in times of need — all the while retaining their Washington, D.C. accolades.

[...] The successful rescue mission of America’s finest did not occur simply because the military rediscovered competence. It occurred because of decisive action by Hegseth and other leaders, proving failure has been a choice for decades.

Well isn't that how to win a war against tyranny? If Reagan had shown even a fraction of that competence, Iran wouldn't have reached the dangerous levels it did in over 40 years. Maybe now, somebody will start calling for more improved leadership, something Europe's going to need very badly now.

Convicted Haredi sex offender was allowed access to Western Wall

At this point during the war against Iran, there've been restrictions on how many people can attend the Western Wall plaza in the Old City of Jerusalem. But of all people who did have access, it appears a convicted sex offender of Haredi background was actually allowed to pray there:

While hundreds of worshippers were turned away due to strict restrictions, it has emerged that among those granted entry to the Western Wall was Eliezer Berland, leader of the “Shuvu Banim" community.

Berland’s entry sparked outrage, particularly in light of his past convictions: In 2016, he was convicted of sexual offenses, and in 2021 he was also convicted of financial crimes, including fraud, exploitation, and money laundering, for which he served a prison sentence.

The incident raised questions among many worshippers who had sought to reach the site but were denied entry due to strict quotas imposed since the start of Operation Roaring Lion on February 28.

Neither the Western Wall foundation nor the police were willing to admit it's morally offensive somebody who's not really faithful to Judaism was allowed to pray there. And that's deeply repellent. They both owe a serious apology for what they did, and Berland should not be allowed anywhere near a site he doesn't really love ever again.

Two USAF officials successfully rescued after planes were shot down by Iran's jihadists

Two airmen had the misfortune of having their planes shot down over Iran, but thankfully, both were saved:

U.S. special operations forces rescued the second crew member from a downed F-15E fighter jet in Iran after a “heavy firefight,” successfully extracting both airmen and all rescue personnel from the country, according to multiple reports.

U.S. officials told Axios and Fox News the high-risk combat search-and-rescue mission recovered the weapons systems officer more than a day after the aircraft was shot down, concluding a complex operation that unfolded behind enemy lines.

Officials described the shootdown as a “worst-case scenario,” with U.S. forces racing to recover the crew before Iranian units could capture them.

The second crew member was located on Saturday, triggering a rescue effort as Iranian forces, including elements of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), also raced to the area to locate the downed airman.

U.S. air assets conducted strikes to prevent Iranian forces from closing in, while special operations units on the ground executed a layered extraction under fire.

The weapons systems officer had evaded capture after ejecting alongside the pilot, using Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape (SERE) training to move away from the wreckage and take cover on elevated terrain while activating an emergency beacon, according to reporting cited by Fox News.

It's very fortunate they were rescued. What's also impressive is that Israeli forces took part in the rescue operation:

The IDF commando units Shaldag and Sayeret Matkal participated in the American operation to rescue the navigator whose plane was downed in Iran on Friday, according to a report today (Sunday) by the opposition channel “Iran International."

Earlier, Fox News reported that Israel was involved in the rescue operation by sharing intelligence with the United States and by halting Iranian strikes in the area during the hours when the navigator was missing.

This was an operation by US forces that operated on the ground inside Iran to rescue the navigator. It is the first time during the war that the United States has deployed ground forces.

According to the report, the navigator used his “Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape" (SERE) training to avoid capture. He hid on an elevated ridge after moving on foot away from the crash site and activated a distress transmitter. He survived with only a handgun and managed to evade potential captors.

While it's still sadly possible there could be casualties for as long as the war goes on, this is a miraculous rescue mission for now, and if the Federalist/Daily Caller/Tucker Carlson crowd are smart, they won't be attacking the Trump administration or any army personnel over what the jihadist enemy in Iran is guilty of.

Delaware declares January "Muslim heritage month"

Another sad example of local governments in the USA succumbing to dhimmitude. Delaware's decided that January will be "Muslim heritage month":

The resolution came from Rep. Madinah Wilson-Anton. We covered her in our first edition of Election Jihad for making a scene by screeching about ‘genocide’ at Kamala Harris.

Wilson-Anton, the first Muslim elected in Delaware, has all sorts of thoughts about Islamic terrorism. Rep. Wilson-Anton responded to Oct 7 by posting that, “so long as a government refuses to respect the existence of a people it should expect resistance”. She had been previously involved with Students for Justice in Palestine, some of whose chapters had called for the destruction of Western Civilization.

No doubt, there's quite possibly plenty of Muslims now living in Delaware and we didn't know until now, but obviously also plenty of complacent leftist citizens who didn't give a damn how bad this makes the whole situation by extension, who voted her into office. And this is going to really bring down the quality of life in Delaware all the more.

National Review editorial more favorable to Trump on Iran war issue

Unlike the aforementioned editor of the Federalist, National Review's editors appear more supportive of Trump on the Iran issue:

The reporting ahead of President Donald Trump’s Wednesday night address to the nation forecast Trump’s intention to declare victory and withdraw from the war against the Islamic Republic of Iran. According to media speculation, he would insist that our objectives had been achieved. He would wash his hands of the crisis in the Strait of Hormuz, and he would lambaste America’s NATO allies for failing to take ownership of it—perhaps even going so far as to withdraw from the Atlantic Alliance. He did nothing of the sort. While Trump did declare that most of America’s wartime objectives had been achieved, he said there was more fighting to come, and he pledged to “help” alleviate the crisis in the strait. The U.S. has so far suffered the loss of 13 service members, but the operation has been remarkably successful in destroying Iranian military power. Had the Iranian threat been allowed to mature, as the president said, the future would have been bleak.

I should note though, that the headline is the only problem here, since they imply there's no end in sight. Anybody who's going to worry about whether a war will end must consider that it's the savages running the asylum in Iran who're to blame for the length, and if a convincing effort is made to remove them from power, that will make it easier to end the war plausibly.

Interestingly, as Noah Rothman notes, there's been almost no anti-war demonstrations against the war in Iran:

And yet, while the run-up to the Iran war unfolded on an accelerating timeline, Americans probably encountered at least some of the many indications that military action against Iran was once again imminent. They did not respond to those signals with a mass outpouring of hostility toward the project. Today, more than a month into the campaign, that sort of mass action has yet to materialize.

While it could still occur, this is a relieving revelation for now, suggesting even Iran can't bankroll these abominable protests. And any RINOs who may oppose the war must've realized they'd be doing no good in the long run if they tried opposing a war against tyrants.

Defeating Hezbollah is a main objective in Lebanon

Israel's defense minister made the point now, though there's a certain point of contention to be found here:

Defense Minister Israel Katz says Israel remains committed to disarming Hezbollah “through military and political means.”

“Israel’s policy in Lebanon has been and remains clear: the top objective is the disarmament of Hezbollah through military and political means, regardless of the Iran issue,” Katz says following an assessment with military officials.

Katz says the IDF is completing its ground offensive in southern Lebanon up to the line from which Hezbollah can launch anti-tank missiles at Israeli communities.

Well I do hope they realize that allowing the Hezbollah to remain even in northern Lebanon is unacceptable, since it would give them a chance to rebuild one day, with or without Iran's backing. Something that might be called "hudna" in Islamic doctrine. And it's high time that something were done to ensure Lebanon can one day return to having a non-Muslim majority and/or government run the country again, which would make the region safer.

John Daniel Davidson continues his RINO-based anti-war agenda

Federalist editor John Daniel Davidson is continuing his efforts to undermine the war against Iranian tyranny, and while his approach may be subtle, the opposition to punishing totalitarian barbarians in his "op-ed" is there:

The American-Israeli war against Iran is now in its fifth week and shows no signs of ending anytime soon. Despite the heavy aerial and naval bombardment of Iran, the regime in Tehran is still intact, Iran retains control over the Strait of Hormuz, and the Iranian military is still capable of launching attacks against U.S. positions in the region.

I think it can be said Iran's control over the straits of Hormuz is a bit exaggerated, since much of their naval fleet's been demolished, but Davidson apparently doesn't want anybody to know that. Obviously, there's still military monsters in Iran who're willing to cause chaos, but what's being told about Hormuz still seems pretty forced.

This list is different from the three-part mission Secretary of War Pete Hegseth laid out in the opening days of the war. On March 2, Hegseth said Operation Epic Fury’s three objectives were to destroy Iran’s offensive missile capabilities, cripple its navy, and prevent Tehran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

Moreover, Rubio’s list makes no mention of other war aims that have been floated by President Trump, such as taking control of Iran’s nuclear materials (which was arguably the casus belli), regime change, or opening the Strait of Hormuz. Regarding the strait, the Wall Street Journal reported Monday night that Trump has told aides that he’s willing to end the war even if the Strait of Hormuz remains largely closed, “likely extending Tehran’s firm grip on the waterway and leaving a complex operation to reopen it for a later date.” The reason for Trump’s sudden willingness to compromise, we’re told, is that a mission to reopen the strait would extend the conflict beyond Trump’s four- to six-week timeline.

Somehow, it sounds like Davidson's unconcerned about even mere chemicals remaining in Iran's clutches, nor does he consider any possible pause could be to prepare additional military officials for battling Iran's jihadists. And then, Davidson continues to push propaganda in disfavor of war to defeat an evil entity:

Trump does seem aware that time is not on his side. Domestically, the war is unpopular. A consistent and sizable majority now disapproves of military strikes on Iran, and amid rising gas prices and general anxiety about the economy, Trump’s favorability rating has reached a record low for his second term. The unpopularity of the war will likely increase as time goes by, as will Trump’s disapproval rating.

Escalation in the form of the deployment of U.S. ground forces would deepen the war’s unpopularity. One recent Ipsos poll found 55 percent of Americans would not support the deployment of any ground troops to Iran, and only 7 percent would support a large-scale invasion of the country. Yet such an escalation seems to be in the works. The Pentagon is in the process of sending thousands of American soldiers and Marines to the Middle East in preparation for potentially weeks of ground operations in Iran, according to recent reporting from the Washington Post.

As expected, Mr. Davidson's obscuring previous research on Breitbart, in example, telling that a sizable majority of the USA public supports the war. Also, if this article tells something, Davidson's choice of polling material is as much from leftist Reuters as it is from Ipsos, so it's not hard to guess Davidson's relying too much upon leftist polling in the long run. What good does that do? This bias check page also indicates Ipsos is left-leaning. If Davidson's not willing to offer an analysis of what sites like Breitbart provide, then he's definitely not in favor of defeating Iran's jihadist tyrants at all. Besides, to win a war, you can't always rely on time limits in which to get the job done. I also notice Davidson fails to say whether he believes realists who care should call for stopping Islamic indoctrination. One more clue to why his whole "op-ed" is a joke.

The White House therefore appears, at times anyway, to be operating under the assumption that the only way to deescalate the conflict at this point is to escalate, hoping to find a point at which the pain inflicted on the Iranians is sufficient to compel them to accept a negotiated settlement and acquiesce to U.S. demands.

That might work, but even if it does it will take time, and Trump and the GOP will pay a heavy political price domestically for it, both in the midterms and in 2028. It also might plunge the U.S. into a Vietnam-like quagmire, unable to win decisively or to extricate itself from the war. [...]

The stark truth is that the president has no good options, and the best course of action at this point might be to leverage the apparent malleability of declared U.S. war aims to assert that they have in fact been achieved, while reserving the right to attack again if Tehran pursues a nuclear weapon or continues to target U.S. bases or allies in the region.

Sorry, but we shouldn't have to wait until Iran's tyrannical overlords once again try to pursue nuclear materials in order to attack them. And we also can't ignore the Religion of Peace's influence in this whole horror story. What needs to be done is preemptively strike against evil weapons being stored in secrecy, which is exactly how Iran's Islamic overlords will resume manufacturization if they're given the chance. And if Trump feels a ground operation is required to confiscate and destroy any chemical weapons in Iran that could still one day be used for causing mass deaths, then that's why the USA military must perform a ground operation if that's what it takes to take control of whatever obscene weapons Iran's dictators still possess.

Garbage like this is exactly why I've become hugely disillusioned and disappointed with the Federalist, as I've realized they're not really the "patriots" they must claim to be. Unless perhaps they replace him as editor, and find some writers who make a sad but necessary point that freedom isn't free, and that there's times where it's inevitable that sacrifices must be made, with the most important part being whether a call for improvement in education, religious or otherwise, can be made if you want to reduce the risks that're bound to occur in the future if the Religion of Peace is allowed to continue dominating anywhere. And Davidson's not doing anything like that. A real shame and disgrace he is.

Israel's Knesset approves use of death penalty for jihadists

After many years of failure to take more serious measures for punishing murderous crimes, the Israeli Knesset has finally approved a law enabling the death penalty for jihadists:

The Knesset plenum finally approved this evening (Monday), in second and third reading, the bill allowing for the death penalty for terrorists.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu voted in favor of the law, along with MKs from the Yisrael Beyteinu faction. On the other hand, MK Benny Gantz, along with members of the Degel Hatorah faction, chose to vote against it. Noam Chairman MK Avi Maoz was not present.

During the preliminary discussion, the chairman of the National Security Committee, MK Zvika Fogel, presented the law as an essential tool in the current war. "The State of Israel is facing unparalleled evil and hatred," said Fogel.

"Our enemies do not seek a border, a compromise or a shared future, but to destroy, harm, sow fear here and undermine our very existence here," continued Fogel. "Faced with such a reality, our responsibility is clear - to protect the citizens of Israel. Not with words or hopes, but with deeds. This law is not a law of revenge or rage, but of the responsibility of a state towards its citizens, of leadership towards human life."

I do find it disturbing though perhaps unshocking that some members of a Haredi party like Degel HaTorah wouldn't vote for this bill. And if Maoz didn't either, is that also concerning?

Some European governments unshockingly condemned this bill passage, but the USA's thankfully refrained:

The United States refrained from condemning the Death Penalty for Terrorists Bill, which was approved in the Knesset on Monday.

“The United States respects Israel’s sovereign right to determine its own laws and penalties for individuals convicted of terrorism," said a State Department spokesperson in a statement.

“We trust that any such measures will be carried out with a fair trial and respect for all applicable fair trial guarantees and protections," the spokesperson added. [...]

Last week, the European Union (EU) criticized the Israeli government for advancing the bill, saying it “is deeply concerning" and adding that the EU “opposes capital punishment in all cases and under all circumstances."

In response, Israel’s Foreign Ministry noted that the EU is intervening in a sovereign country’s legislative process.

“Israel, as a sovereign state, legislates its own laws. Unbelievably, the European Union is intervening in the midst of a sovereign state’s legislative process," the ministry said.

“Israel is facing murderous and brutal terrorism on a scale unmatched anywhere in the world. Palestinian terrorism is fueled by payments from the Palestinian Authority, as well as by abductions that lead to shortened prison terms for terrorists," it continued.

The statement noted that “Israeli law already permits capital punishment, and under the proposed new law, discretion over its application will remain with the courts."

“EU double standards: as always, the EU obsessively singles out Israel - we haven’t seen a tweet like this when it comes to capital punishment in the United States, Japan, India, Egypt, or other countries," the Foreign Ministry concluded.

But sooner or later, the EU will turn against, say, Armenia if they take similar measures for combatting terrorism. That aside, what the EU is doing is exactly what's led to the horror stories in Europe when it comes to Islamic jihadism. Sooner or later, any European country or movement that understands reality will have to consider parting ways with the EU if that's what it takes to making it possible to improve the situation.

Chemical weapons center in Iran destroyed

The IDF destroyed one of the most dangerous form of weapons factories Iran was running:

In recent days, one of the IRGC’s central military infrastructure sites was recently struck, located within the compound of Imam Hossein University - the IRGC’s primary military academic institution, which also serves as an emergency asset for the regime’s military bodies.

Under civilian cover, research and development for advanced weaponry were conducted within the university.

Due to its direct affiliation with the IRGC and its involvement in advancing terrorist activity, several countries have imposed sanctions on the university and its senior officials. The university is commanded by Mohammad Reza Hassani Shahnegari, a senior IRGC officer holding a rank equivalent to Brigadier General. [...]

The IDF also destroyed the chemistry center of Imam Hossein University, used by the regime for research and development of chemical weapons; as well as the technology and engineering center of the mechanics and development group. The technology center was a key complex used by the regime for the development of ballistic missiles and additional weapons

This was a most vital step to take, and rid the world of some of the most dangerous manufacturing Iran's mullahs were working on.

Update: in a similar story, the USA military destroyed some camoflaged Iranian ships that were concealing missiles:

Iranian plans to hide cruise and ballistic missiles, and marine raiding parties aboard warships disguised as oil tankers or container ships to raid commerce well away from its own waters has been disrupted by U.S. strikes, a report states.

Gulf allies have been briefed by American and Israeli officers on the operation to wipe out Iran’s force of “adapted and disguised” container and oil tanker ships as part of Operation Epic fury, hearing how U.S. strikes “destroyed five Iranian warships that were disguised as container vessels”, a report in The Times of London states.

While the destruction of most of the ships named in this alleged briefing was already in the public domain — the United States Central Command (CENTCOM) has been active in briefing on its campaign of destruction against now hundreds of Iranian warships of all sizes — this may be the first time a specific mission to take out Iran’s grey fleet of converted civilian ships as a priority has been publicly spoken of.

It is stated the allies played to their own strengths in the “secret operation”, with CENTCOM taking the lead on destroying the ships while Israel concentrated on assassinating Iran’s maritime leadership and naval officers.

Good work.