Israel’s Greatest Weapon Was Fear – And It Is Now Failing

Israel’s war on Iran reveals a deeper crisis: the collapse of a psychological doctrine built on fear and invincibility.

Origins of Israel’s Psychological Warfare

Wars are rarely fought only on battlefields. They are also fought in the minds of societies, in the perception of power and vulnerability, and in the political imagination of entire regions. Israel understood this principle early in its history, and psychological dominance became a central component of its military doctrine.

From the earliest years of the Zionist project, the idea that power must appear overwhelming was openly articulated. In 1923, the Revisionist Zionist leader Ze’ev Jabotinsky wrote in his famous essay The Iron Wall that Zionism would only succeed once the indigenous population became convinced that resistance was hopeless. Only when Palestinians realized they could not defeat the Zionist project, he argued, would they accept its permanence.

The events surrounding the Nakba of 1947–48 reflected this logic. Between 800,000 and 900,000 Palestinians were expelled or forced to flee their homes, as hundreds of villages were destroyed or depopulated. The expulsions occurred through a combination of direct military assault, forced displacement, and the collapse of Palestinian society under war.

Massacres played a crucial role in spreading fear. The killings at Deir Yassin in April 1948, in which more than one hundred civilians were killed by Zionist militias, quickly reverberated across Palestine. But Deir Yassin was only one among many massacres that occurred during that period. Killings in places such as Lydda, Tantura, Safsaf, and numerous other villages contributed to a climate of terror that accelerated the depopulation of Palestinian communities.

The psychological impact of these events was enormous. News of massacres spread from village to village, convincing many Palestinians that remaining in their homes meant risking annihilation. The lesson was clear: war could function not only as a tool of conquest but as an instrument of psychological domination.

Keep reading

Trump’s lies reveal the real story about the Iran war

A recent poll in the U.S. concluded that Donald Trump tells the truth only about 3 percent of the time during his public announcements at press conferences. Perhaps it was his stint at being a celebrity on TV that taught him how gullible people in America are when fed the most fanciful, moronic lies a leading figure can tell, through the American media. Of course, it’s also about the journalists as well, and if there’s one thing that the Trump administrations have taught us, it is how poor the general level of journalism is in America these days. American journalists are not afraid to ask difficult questions or disbelieve what they are told. They simply don’t know how to do this in the first place.

Covering the Iran war, it is breathtaking, some of the brazen lies he tells while being questioned by journalists who are complicit in his dirty work. The mere idea that Iran, for example, acquired a Tomahawk missile and used it to kill its own schoolgirls is beyond absurd. How could journalists not question such a reply when it is so clear that Trump is lying through his teeth?

Because of this lying, we can see how Trump works, though. Unlike other U.S. presidents who have some shame and discomfort in lying to the press, Trump suffers no such handicap and so can take on bolder, more daring ventures on the global stage. In this environment, there is no respect for international law or even due process within the political framework of how Congress works. Trump hasn’t worked out how to defeat Iran, but he has all the contingent narratives to lay out afterwards to explain why everything that goes wrong is not his fault. We see that he is already preparing himself for the day of judgement by the press pack in the coming days and weeks by telling them that it was Jared Kushner, Marco Rubio and Steve Witkoff who told him to hit Iran.

The direction towards these three is revealing. Of course, we have learned the simple rule of Trump when it comes to decisions. When things go well, everything was his decision; when things go badly, blame others.

Keep reading

Will Washington Betray the Kurds Yet Again?

The Trump administration has enlisted the support of Kurdish activists in Syria, Iraq, and Iran to join the U.S.-led war to unseat Iran’s clerical regime.  CNN reports that the Central Intelligence Agency is already arming Iranian Kurds. CNN and other outlets also report that President Trump spoke with Kurdish leaders in Iraq on March 8, 2026, about having their forces join the fight.

Washington’s motives for this move are easy to discern. The Kurdish minority concentrated along Iran’s western border has long sought to break away from Tehran’s control.  U.S. and Israeli leaders understand that such disruptive secessionist efforts could further damage the incumbent government’s already weakened position.

There is a major problem with that strategy, however.  Secessionist-minded Iranian Kurds do not merely want to undermine their oppressors in Tehran; many of them want to join their equally restless ethnic brethren in Iraq, Syria, and Turkey to establish a new, independent Kurdish homeland.  The incumbent governments in those volatile countries feud about a wide array of issues.  One objective all these governments have in common, though, is a determination to prevent the emergence of an independent Kurdish nation state, since that development would threaten the internal unity – and perhaps the continued viability–of multiple neighbors.

Previous U.S. administrations have encouraged and even actively supported Kurdish clients when it advanced Washington’s short-term goals.  Such initiatives invariably have been followed by cynical betrayals of those clients when the U.S. government concluded that support for parochial Kurdish objectives endangered higher priority U.S. regional objectives.

This cycle of support and betrayal has occurred repeatedly.  Most recently, the Obama, Trump, and Biden administrations used Syrian Kurds as armed proxies in a long campaign to seize oil-rich territory in northern Syria and help unseat Syria’s dictator, Bashar al-Assad.  A small contingent of U.S. ground troops deployed in northern Syria aided that effort. The Kurdish fighters were remarkably successful despite strong opposition from both Assad and Turkey.

But when anti-Assad insurgent forces dominated by Arab Sunni Islamists finally overthrew his secular government in December 2024, the usefulness to Washington of Kurdish fighters and Kurdish control over northern Syria evaporated quickly.  In late 2025, the Trump administration terminated its support for the Kurdish faction and warned Syrian Kurdish leaders to end their opposition to the new Islamist regime in Baghdad.

That latest move was at least the fourth example of a U.S. policy reversal and outright betrayal of the Kurds in less than three generations.  In 1973, President Richard Nixon made a secret agreement with the Shah of Iran to provide the covert financial and military support to the Kurdish minority in Iraq who had launched an insurgency against Iraq’s young dictator, Saddam Hussein. Those Kurdish insurgents were seeking to establish an independent Kurdistan in northern Iraq.  (Saddam had irritated U.S. leaders earlier that year by signing a Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation with Moscow.) Kurdish officials conducted planning sessions in Washington with the CIA, and CIA agents assisted Kurdish Peshmerga militia units to harass Saddam’s forces.

Keep reading

Iranian TV Says Khamenei’s Son Mojtaba, Elected New Supreme Leader, Has Been Wounded by US-Israel Strikes

Like father, like son?

The late ayatollah Khamenei was killed during the airstrikes by the US-Israeli coalition, and now it arises that his son, Mojtaba, has been chosen to be the new ‘Supreme Leader’.

However, that is not the only report going around, as it’s been widely published that Mojtaba has been gravely wounded, also by coalition airstrikes.

The news was first reported by Iranian TV, but has been subsequently picked up by the UK’s Mirror and LBCTimes of Israel, The Western Journal, among others.

See how War Secretary Pete Hergseth declines to deny that he is injured.

The Daily Wire’s Mary Margaret Olohan: “There’s been reports that the new leader of Iran has been wounded. Do you know if this is true and what his condition is? And then another one, President Trump said he had a really good call with President Putin yesterday. Will Russia be… pic.twitter.com/bRkzOY9OC3

— RedWave Press (@RedWavePress) March 10, 2026

“The President, as I’ve said before, maintains strong relationships with world leaders, which creates opportunities and options for us in very dynamic ways… The new leader of Iran. He would be wise to heed the words of our President, which is to not pursue nuclear weapons, and come out and state as such. As far as his status, that’s not something I can comment on right now.”

Keep reading

Could There Be a Military Draft? Trump Administration Says It’s ‘On Table’

As the United States continues to strike Iran roughly 10 days since ordered by President Donald Trump, questions about how long the war may last have been coupled with the prospect of a military draft that administration officials admit remains “on the table.”

Six U.S. soldiers have been killed in the war that Trump has continually defended on the backdrop of what he and other senior officials have attributed to “an imminent threat” posed by Iran towards the U.S., Israel and other Middle East nations. The potential length of this conflict has drawn many assumptions, as Trump has floated a “4-5 weeks” duration while Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has been more clandestine in presenting any particular timeframe due to not giving away U.S. military strategies.

That, in turn, has led to questions of whether U.S. troops could ultimately be on the ground in Iran due to airstrikes historically not providing enough military might over time for sustainability. 

On Sunday, Fox Business’ Sunday Morning Futures host Maria Bartiromo asked White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt about the prospect of Americans not enlisted in the U.S. military being forced to fight overseas.

“Mothers out there are worried that we’re going to have a draft, that they’re going to see their sons and daughters get involved in this,” Bartiromo said. “What do you want to say about the president’s plans for troops on the ground? As we know, it’s been largely an air campaign up until now.”

“It has been, and it will continue to be,” Leavitt said. “President Trump wisely does not remove options off of the table. I know a lot of politicians like to do that quickly, but the president as commander in chief wants to continue to assess the success of this military operation.”

Keep reading

Saudi oil giant warns of ‘catastrophic consequences’ from Iran war as three commercial ships are ‘attacked’ in Strait of Hormuz and Tehran tries to strangle world’s energy supplies

Saudi Arabia‘s state oil company has warned of ‘catastrophic consequences’ for the world’s oil markets if the Middle East war continues to choke exports, as three commercial ships were attacked in the Strait of Hormuz. 

The waterway is a chokepoint in the global oil trade, where roughly 20 per cent of the world’s oil would ordinarily pass through daily. 

But as a result of the roiling war, oil shipments have been largely blocked from using the shipping artery. And Iran said on Tuesday it would not allow ‘one litre of oil’ to be shipped from the Middle East if US and Israeli attacks continue.

Amin Nasser, the CEO of Aramco, said: ‘While we have faced disruptions in the past, this one by far is the biggest crisis the region’s oil and gas industry has faced.’

He admitted that while his firm, the world’s single biggest exporter of oil, was meeting most of its customers’ needs for now, this was only possible by tapping into storage facilities outside the Gulf. 

Nasser said that these stores cannot be used for ‘an extended period of time, but for the time being, we are capitalising on it.’ 

The CEO said: ‘There would be catastrophic consequences for the world’s oil markets, and the longer the disruption goes on … the more drastic the consequences for the global economy.’ 

The stark warning comes after three commercial ships were attacked in the Strait of Hormuz.

An attack on the Thailand-flagged bulk carrier Mayuree Naree from an ‘unknown projectile’, which was reported at 4.35am GMT, happened 11 nautical miles north of Oman and resulted in a fire onboard the ship. 

Iran today confirmed it had attacked the Mayuree Naree, adding: ‘The American aggressors and their partners have no right to pass.’

Authorities are searching for three missing crew members from the Mayuree Naree after 20 were rescued by the Omani navy. 

Keep reading

Staggering number of US troops wounded in Trump’s Iran war

As many as 150 US troops have been wounded in the Iran war, Reuters has reported. 

The figure, disclosed on Tuesday, is far higher than the Pentagon‘s previously acknowledged tally of eight seriously wounded. 

Seven US service members have been killed after Donald Trump launched strikes against Iran on February 28.

The Pentagon did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 

The human toll comes amid mounting concerns over the financial cost, the Pentagon having burned through $5.6 billion worth of munitions in the first two days of the war alone. 

Gas prices have rocketed to an average of $3.5 per gallon from $2.9 before the war began, oil prices now at levels unseen since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022. 

Keep reading

Crushing the Right to Conscientiously Object

As the U.S. and Israel’s deeply unpopular war with Iran enters its second week, social media platform X is censoring the accounts of people providing information to military servicemembers on how they can refuse to serve. This is particularly relevant as fears have grown that U.S. ground troops may enter the conflict.

The Center on Conscience & War, an 80-year-old nonprofit that, according to its website, “advocates for the rights of conscience, opposes military conscription, and serves all conscientious objectors to war,” was banned on X for 12 hours. The center’s executive director, Mike Prysner, shared a notice that the center received from X which labeled their posts as having “violated X rules” against “illegal and regulated behaviors.”

Prysner wrote: “This is the post @CCW4COs was suspended for, informing service members of their legal right under DoDI 1332.14 to report “failure to adapt” within first 365 days of service and receive an entry-level discharge.”

It remains legal to conscientiously object to military service. The only conceivable way that the post could be framed as encouraging illegal or irregular behavior would be to recast such objections as mutiny, which is exactly what pro-Israeli voices on social media have been frantically doing in the last few days.

In response to conservative commentator Candace Owens also encouraging those in the U.S. military to conscientiously object to serving in Iran, pro-Israel journalist Emily Schrader wrote on X:

“This is illegal. She is literally advocating mutiny. Under 18 U.S.C. § 2387 (Advocating overthrow or disloyalty in the armed forces). It is a crime for any person, including civilians, to willfully advocate or attempt to cause:
• insubordination in the armed forces
• disloyalty among service members
• mutiny or refusal of duty
It also criminalizes distributing materials intended to encourage those outcomes.
The penalty can be up to 10 years in prison and fines.”

Other pro-Israel voices like Bill Ackman, the billionaire hedge-fund manager, reposted Shrader’s sentiments.

The social media ban on the Center for Conscience and War came less than 24 hours after its executive director, Prysner, also wrote via social media regarding anecdotal evidence of troops being readied for combat:

“I just spoke with the mother of a service member in this unit. They were given one last call home before having to turn in their phones. He told his mom they were going ‘boots on the ground’ tonight.”

Keep reading

Iran War Supporters Invent a New and Absurd Justification: It Is All About China

Before Operation Epic Fury began, the Trump administration spent very little energy trying to justify the looming war with Iran. The few defenses they did offer were banal platitudes, just echoes of the case for the Iraq War from more than twenty years ago: that Iran was weeks away from obtaining a nuclear device, that their ballistic missile program posed a significant threat to American assets and allies in the region, and that the Iranian people deserved liberation via regime change.

But not long after the bombing began, a new (admittedly more creative) justification emerged online and in the pro-Israel media that war supporters assume will be more persuasive to those doubting the wisdom of yet another Middle East conflict. The war with Iran, we are now told by many, is not really about Iran at all. It is, instead, all about China.

“Some argue Israel dragged the U.S. into war,” a post from The Free Press reads, “But this conflict is bigger than Israel and Iran — it’s about China.” Another article from The Spectator, a British conservative outlet, sang the same tune: “Trump’s ultimate target in this war is China.” Glenn Beck, on March 2, unveiled C.R.I.N.K., or “the new Axis Powers of China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea,” as a way to “understand why Trump attacked Iran.” Fox News’ Jesse Watters told his audience last week that “we are killing two birds with one stone: we stop the number-one sponsor of terror, and we checkmate the Chinese.”

At the very least, if China were really the motive, one would have expected the Trump administration to offer this theory — “this is the chance to counter America’s greatest geopolitical rival” — as a major justification to the American people. One would think they would be particularly motivated to do so, given the consensus of polling data showing that public support for this war is far weaker than for any American war in decades.

But Trump officials never mentioned China as a core motive. In fact, even now, the administration and its backers have hardly mentioned China. This is a theory invented out of whole cloth by Iran-war supporters and/or Trump supporters, grasping for some cogent reason why this new war is in Americans’ interests.

Late last week, Senator Lindsey Graham claimed that this conflict is “a religious war” waged by “radical Islamic terrorists.” On March 2, House Speaker Mike Johnson explained to a group of reporters that the United States “determined, because of the exquisite intelligence that [it] had, that if Israel fired on Iran,” then “[Iran] would have immediately retaliated against U.S. personnel and assets.” Therefore, the House Speaker insisted, because the U.S. would be attacked either way, it had to hit Iran with Israel. President Trump announced on Friday that the U.S. intends to select “GREAT & ACCEPTABLE Leader(s)” for the Iranian people, in order to make their country “economically bigger, better, and stronger than ever before.”

Keep reading

Turkey Blocks 41 Social Media Accounts Over Iran War Posts

Turkey’s government blocked 41 social media accounts on X, Facebook, and Instagram last Friday, deleted content from 75 more, and launched criminal proceedings against account holders, all on the grounds that they spread what officials called “disinformation and provocative content.”

The crackdown followed the start of attacks on Iran. Presidential Communications Director Burhanettin Duran framed the deletions as a national security response, saying the targeted accounts had been “systematically sharing unverified content aimed at creating fear, panic and uncertainty in society.”

Who decided the content was disinformation? The government. Who gets to define “provocative content”? The government. Who determines what threatens “public order, social peace, and our national security”? Also, the government; the same government that ordered the blocks.

The operation involved the Turkish Presidency’s Communications Directorate, the cybercrime department of the Security Directorate General, the Information and Communication Technologies Authority, and the chief public prosecutors’ offices. A coordinated state apparatus, mobilized to silence social media accounts during a regional conflict.

Keep reading