Israel Gets What It Wants

All They Are Saying Is Give War A Chance

BILL ASTORE

JUN 13, 2025

I awoke to the news that Israel has bombed Iran, focusing on nuclear enrichment facilities and military targets. For the U.S. and Israel, war always finds a way.

The U.S. is claiming that Israel alone is bombing Iran, but of course Israel is using U.S. weaponry, intelligence and logistical support, and political cover at the United Nations. The planes may be Israeli, but the U.S. government is complicit in the attacks, just as the U.S. government is complicit in genocide in Gaza.

At Eunomia, Daniel Larison has an informative article on the “insanity” of the Israeli/U.S. attack on Iran. A few points come to mind here:

+ Israel is allowed to have 90-200 nuclear bombs, but no other country in the region is allowed to have any. I guess that’s because Israel is so clearly peace-loving?

+ Iran is the latest target of Israel’s quest for regional dominance. As far back as 2003, if not earlier, Israel (and U.S. neocon “warriors”) always wanted to go to Tehran. Baghdad was supposed to be both a cakewalk and a stepping-stone. Two decades and several disasters later, these “real men” finally achieved their dream of war with Iran.

+ The success of Israel in getting the U.S. government and military to do its bidding is nothing short of phenomenal. Iraq? Greatly weakened. Syria? Greatly weakened. The same with Libya. And now it’s Iran’s turn to be “greatly weakened,” i.e. bludgeoned with bombs made in the USA.

+ Iran will likely strike back. U.S. media will frame these attacks as “unprovoked” and “anti-semitic.” See this grimly amusing article by Caitlin Johnstone about future headlines at the New York Times.

+ One thing is certain: Israel, like the U.S., has an irrational belief in the efficacy of bombing, an efficacy largely disproven by military history.

+ One might recall how the U.S. conspired with Britain in 1953 to overthrow Iran’s democratically-elected leader, replacing him with the Shah, leading to 25 years of a repressive police state until the Shah was finally overthrown. I wonder how Americans would feel if Iran conspired in 1953 to overthrow Dwight D. Eisenhower as U.S. president, replacing him with a petty dictator who ruled through secret police?

Chickenhawk Graham says “Game on.”

Here are a few responses by prominent U.S. politicians to Israel’s attacks on Iran. I just love the “game on” reference by Senator Lindsey Graham. Has there ever been a more abject and delusional chickenhawk than him?

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee said, minutes after reports of the operation began, “Proud to stand with Israel.” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) soon followed, saying, “Game on. Pray for Israel.”

Cotton later added that “We back Israel to the hilt, all the way,” adding that if “the ayatollahs harm a single American, that will be the end of the ayatollahs.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA), said “Israel IS right—and has a right—to defend itself!”

Sen. Jim Risch (R-ID), the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said, “We stand with Israel tonight and pray for the safety of its people and the success of this unilateral, defensive action.”

“I am also praying for the brave U.S. service members in the Middle East who keep America safe — Iran would be foolish to attack the United States,” Risch continued.

U.S. members of Congress seem to think they swore an oath to Israel, not the U.S. Constitution. And, given all the money they receive from AIPAC and similar pro-Israel lobbying groups, maybe they have sold their souls to Israel.

Once again, all they are saying is give war a chance.

Golden Dome Idiocy

A “shield” against nuclear attack makes nuclear war more likely

BILL ASTORE

JUN 09, 2025

Donald Trump has a dream: a “golden dome” over America to defend the country against nuclear missiles. It’s a repeat of Ronald Reagan’s dream, the Strategic Defense Initiative, nicknamed “Star Wars” after the movie. The problem is that the dream represents a nightmare.

How so? Golden Dome would be dangerously escalatory, wildly expensive, and unlikely to work as a “shield” to America. It is worse than a mistake: it is a crime. It represents a massive theft from those who hunger and suffer in America. As Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower said in 1953, wasting enormous resources on weapons systems is no way of life at all. It is humanity crucifying itself on a cross of iron. Crucifixion is not made more pleasant when the cross is golden.

A new golden idol occupies his mind

Put differently, the Golden Dome is a golden idol, a false god, one that by making a massive nuclear strike more likely endangers all of us and God’s creation.

Golden Dome is a grotesque example of makework militarism and warfare as welfare for weapons makers. Though it’s unlikely to work, if it did (partially) it would make a massive nuclear strike more likely, not less, endangering the world with the ecocidal terror of nuclear winter.

Golden Dome and the so-called investment in America’s nuclear triad are both examples of socio-technological madness–America’s leaders are like the mutants in “Beneath the Planet of the Apes,” worshipping the bombs that twisted them and which can only destroy what’s left of civilization.

Some Christians today await the apocalypse when Christ is supposed to return–but the most likely apocalypse features not the second coming of a God-man but a third world war featuring bomb-gods of thermonuclear destruction.

As Daniel Ellsberg once noted, U.S. nuclear attack plans in the early 1960s envisioned 600 million killed, or 100 Holocausts (before we knew such an attack would lead to nuclear winter). We’re lucky this insanity never came to pass. The only sane policy is to cancel Golden Dome and end “investment” in a new nuclear triad. Disarmament, not rearmament, is what’s needed.

*****

The Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space has released a statement against Golden Dome that you can read here. You can add your name to the statement, as I have. Here are some bullet points released along with the statement:

  • Golden Dome is financially reckless and unsustainable. Early cost estimates range from $550 billion to several trillion dollars over two decades. This dwarfs even the Pentagon’s annual budget and adds to the US’s $37 trillion national debt—a price tag that makes the project fiscally indefensible.
  • Experts overwhelmingly agree that 100% effective missile interception is a fantasy, especially against complex attacks involving decoys, hypersonic missiles, and maneuverable warheads. Even Israel’s Iron Dome has been bypassed by more rudimentary drone and missile attacks.
  • Golden Dome includes space-based interceptors—effectively weaponizing the Earth’s orbit and triggering an arms race. This violates the spirit of the Outer Space Treaty and pushes nations like China and Russia to accelerate space weapons development.
  • By giving the illusion of first-strike survivability, it runs counter to the Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) doctrine that has prevented so far a nuclear holocaust and incentivizes other powers to retain or expand their nuclear arsenals, blocking disarmament efforts permanently.
  • Thousands of rocket launches for satellite interceptors would further damage the ozone layer, could generate dangerous orbital debris (Kessler Syndrome), and will harm our already fragile space environment.
  • The only guaranteed winners of Golden Dome are weapons giants like Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Palantir, which stand to profit enormously regardless of the system’s effectiveness or risks.
  • The trillions funneled into Golden Dome could be used for urgent domestic priorities—such as healthcare, infrastructure, climate action, and education, directly benefiting millions of Americans.

In short, Golden Dome is a massive, dangerous, and futile vanity project, cloaked in patriotism but driven by profit, politics, and illusion.

America’s Unrepresentative Government

How can ordinary Americans regain political agency?

BILL ASTORE

JUN 06, 2025

When you have an unrepresentative government, or, put differently, a government that represents oligarchic interests and corporations, as well as being heavily influenced by lobbyists, domestic and foreign (AIPAC), you get Trump and Congress conspiring to decrease Medicaid, to cut food support for the poor, while funneling more money upward to the very richest Americans.

American workers essentially have no agency, no ability to act in meaningful ways in the political realm. Along with no agency, Americans also have fewer liberties, especially if you should choose to criticize U.S./Israeli policies and otherwise challenge the imperatives of the powerful.

Be careful shouting “Give me liberty or give me death!” in these times. Death may be far easier to achieve.

Hannah Arendt

What is the answer to regaining our agency? In “Between Past and Future,” the political philosopher Hannah Arendt wrote how French resisters to the Nazis during World War II discovered themselves—their true nature—in and through action. In resisting the Nazis, they seized control over their own agency by exercising it in the face of danger. They chose risk, they fought to effect change, they took stands that often meant life or death.

Through action, these resisters lifted themselves out of “normal” time, Arendt argued, entering instead a realm between past and future, a realm of true existence, a present of dynamism, of possibilities, of clarity of commitment.

Political agency is not going to be given back to the people. If we regain it, it will only be by seizing it ourselves, through action, through commitment, through risk-taking, and perhaps most of all through large-scale organized resistance.

Hopefully, that resistance can remain non-violent. I prefer reformation or restoration to revolution, recalling the words of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn that revolutions unleash the most elemental barbarism.

Genocidal Parallels and Final Solutions

A Grim Reckoning

BILL ASTORE

JUN 01, 2025

At her Substack, Lisa Savage asks whether the “Gaza Hunger Games” we’re witnessing—the concentration of Palestinians there accompanied by slaughter and mass starvation—was the plan all along for Israel and the United States. It got me to thinking, so I wrote a rather longwinded response to Lisa, which I’d like to share with all of you.

Whether it was the plan all along or whether it’s the result of ad hoc decisions over time, one thing is certain: the holocaust in Gaza must be stopped.

*****

Lisa, I’ve taught the Holocaust, and your question reminds me of a debate among historians: Did Hitler and the Nazis always plan to kill all the Jews, or was it the result of ad hoc decisions over time? Scholars still debate this.*

Perhaps the debate is somewhat artificial in the sense that Hitler and the Nazis vilified the Jews, demeaning them, attacking them, dehumanizing them, establishing the conditions for genocide, which were linked to the need to win a war (Jews as an existential enemy that had to be destroyed, even Jewish children, i.e. they were all “guilty”).

The “logic” of genocide sees even children as enemies who must be eliminated (Image of the “Warsaw Ghetto Boy” during World War II)

Something similar is happening with Palestinians in Gaza. I don’t think Israel and the U.S. had a plan all along to concentrate them in Gaza and kill them. But all that’s gone before this has created the preconditions for a final solution to the Gaza question.

When you vilify Palestinians, demean them, attack them, incarcerate them, dehumanize them, you establish the conditions for a genocide. Then you use the excuse of a “war” to drive the most radical solution–elimination–just as the Nazis used the excuse of World War II to eliminate the Jews (who, of course, posed no existential threat to Germany).

Within the Nazi government (and now within the Israeli government), extremists always come to the forefront. Many officials in Nazi Germany wanted to relocate the Jews, not kill them all, or they wanted to exploit them as slave labor before killing them. But the extremists–the ones who just wanted to kill them all–tended to win the argument. They were the most committed, most sure of themselves, the most radical. 

So, what’s happening in Gaza has been the result of long-term dehumanization and propaganda coupled with ad hoc decisions that have run to extremes, because those who are most radical tend to win these “arguments.”

What is truly unconscionable is the eagerness of the U.S. government to provide Israel with all the weapons and diplomatic cover it needs to implement its final solution in Gaza. Whether the president is Biden or Trump, whether Congress is controlled by the Democratic or Republican parties, the policy and result is the same: a blank check to Israel to kill as many Palestinians as they want, justified falsely in “defending” Israel from Hamas.

The Nazis thought or said the Jews were out to destroy them (obviously the Jews were totally incapable of threatening the German war machine) so they tried to destroy the Jews.

The Israeli government says Hamas is out to destroy them (obviously Hamas is totally incapable of threatening the IDF war machine) so they’re trying to destroy the Palestinians.

Genocide is sold as “defensive” and “necessary.”

The parallels are there, yet few people want to see them.

*****

*Addendum: Among Holocaust historians it’s known as the “intentionalist” versus “functionalist” debate, i.e. was it always the Nazis’ intent to kill the Jews, or did it emerge slowly as a function of specific events and decisions?

Some might say, who cares? Dead is dead. Stop the killing!

Foreign Area Expertise Devalued by U.S. Government

Experts? We Don’t Need No Experts

BILL ASTORE

JUN 03, 2025

Over at Foreign Exchanges, there’s an informative article by Alex Thurston on the devaluation of foreign area expertise by the U.S. government.

I witnessed this myself after the 9/11 attacks in 2001. The Army has FAOs, or foreign area officers, who specialize in specific regions and countries, learning the language and culture while being stationed overseas in Spain, Germany, South Korea, or wherever. What I discovered in talking to FAOs, however, is that they weren’t on the fast-track to promotion in the Army. So-called Big Army didn’t look with favor on FAOs. You were more competitive for promotion if you served and specialized in a specific combat branch, like infantry or armor, and if you also had some special forces training (a Ranger Tab or the like).

Hooah!

After 9/11, the U.S. government in general, and the U.S. military specifically, lacked foreign area expertise with respect to the Middle East. FAOs who could speak Arabic and had some knowledge of Iraq, Iran, and so on were especially in short supply. Thus what the Army did was to deploy FAOs to the Middle East whose specialty was Latin America or Asia or whatever. Makes sense, right? Who cares if they spoke Spanish or Mandarin and knew nothing about Arab culture: they were FAOs, dammit! They could learn!

The U.S. military has occasionally pushed for its senior officers to become less parochial, perhaps by learning a foreign language, but to my knowledge proposals to that effect have never gained much traction. The U.S. military says it values education, but education often becomes a box-checking exercise. To be promoted to field grade (major or above; the Navy equivalent is lieutenant commander or above), you generally need a master’s degree in, well, something. Anything. In my day (roughly 25-30 years ago), many officers got an MBA or similar degree, often from an online university that catered to military and government personnel. (An MBA was desirable for future possibilities after one separated or retired from the military.)

Another box military officers had to check was PME, or professional military education. This could be done by correspondence (online), by seminar, or “in residence” at specific military schools. (For me as a major in the Air Force, this was ACSC, or Air Command and Staff College). Doing your PME “in residence” was seen as more desirable than doing it other ways, but ultimately what mattered was that you did it. It was a sign of your commitment—and your conformity. I did ACSC by correspondence, a necessary box to check on my way to being promoted to lieutenant colonel.

All this is to say that FAOs, who worked hard to develop specific expertise in areas of alleged vital interest to America, were in a way often punished by the system, or at the very least misused by it. I don’t know what it’s like in the U.S. military today, in 2025, but something tells me FAOs are still not valued for the knowledge they’ve gained. What matters is being a “warrior” and focusing on “kinetic action” and getting a CIB (combat infantryman badge). I assume officers on the career track are still getting master’s degrees in, well, something and also completing PME while learning very little. (PME tends to promote the party line. You won’t hear meaningful and sustained critiques of the military-industrial complex here: surprise!)

But perhaps it really doesn’t matter, as the article by Alex Thurston cited above suggests. America’s senior leaders seem most concerned about exercising power for power’s sake; the subtleties and nuances that FAOs and other foreign area experts bring to the table are typically ignored or disregarded. Who needs language skills and deep knowledge of local culture and customs when you can just shock and awe them? As President Trump recently said at West Point, America spreads democracy at the point of a gun. Again, who needs language skills or deep knowledge for that?

America, this is how you spread democracy! (USMC photo at Wikipedia)

Trump Puts the Naked Back in Naked Capitalism

The Emperor Hath No Clothes–And Is Proud of It

BILL ASTORE

MAY 30, 2025

It remains amazing to me that a man known for overselling himself, of stiffing others, a man who became notorious for saying, “You’re fired!” to a lot of ordinary people and a few celebrities as well, is somehow seen as a champion of little guys and gals. Of course, it’s not like the Democrats offered much of an alternative (Hillary Clinton or Kamala Harris as working-class champions? I don’t think so). Nevertheless, Donald Trump is about the furthest thing from a public servant to America that I can imagine. When he’s not playing golf or stirring the pot or posing and preening, he’s finding new ways to cash in as president.

Well, as Richard Nixon famously argued, if the president does it, that means it isn’t illegal. Right?

Trump is a creature of Pottersville, the nightmarish alternative to Bedford Falls if George Bailey (played by Jimmy Stewart) had decided to jump off the bridge rather than serving the humble people of his community. Lurid Pottersville, shiny and decadent and shallow, where everyone’s on the make or on the take: that’s Trump’s kind of place. It’s a wonderful life—for Trump!

Which brings me to a fine article by Juan Cole at TomDispatch, Trump of Arabia, in which Cole recounts Trump’s grasping and greedy trip to the Middle East. You gotta hand it to Trump: he knows how to party down with the sheikhs, with all the hair-flipping and exotic dancing.

One thing is certain: Trump isn’t lecturing them about democracy and human rights. It’s just gimme-gimme-gimme. Trump puts the naked back in naked capitalism. The emperor who hath no clothes.

Well, at least America got a big beautiful jet out of the deal: a “free” luxury 747 from Qatar, the new Air Force One if Trump has his way. How sad is it that the new Air Force One that America was supposed to have is years behind schedule and billions over budget? Thanks a lot, Boeing!

Maybe on his next trip to the Middle East, Trump can convince the sheikhs to help fund Medicaid and SNAP for the poor. For struggling Americans, it sure would beat luxury jets and hair-flipping.

Trump’s Military Parade

The Triumph of Trump’s Will

BILL ASTORE

MAY 28, 2025

When I think of celebratory military parades with lots of heavy weaponry and the like, images of Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union come to mind. Authoritarian regimes, strongly militaristic, led by dictators.

When I think of U.S. military parades, featuring large numbers of troops, I think of victory parades after World War II that celebrated the defeat of Nazi Germany. Back then, the idea was to celebrate the triumph of the free world over darkness, not the triumph of Trump’s will over wokeness.

The naked celebration of military strength in Trump’s proposed parade is yet another example of American militarism on steroids. It marks the further erosion of democracy in America and a coarsening of the human spirit in America.

Trump’s parade, scheduled to coincide with his birthday on June 14th (Flag Day as well), may cost as much as $100 million. But that price tag is minuscule compared to the damage it does to America’s image.

For Trump, openly embracing the idea (and ideal) of America as a dominant empire built around a trillion-dollar-a-year military just seems commonsensical. An acknowledgement of the obvious and the irreversible.

It’s high time America acted to prove him wrong.

What Should A U.S. President Do–And Be?

The Seven Habits of Highly Effective Presidents

BILL ASTORE

MAY 27, 2025

What are the seven habits of highly effective presidents?

My simple answer is the president needs to uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution. That’s first and foremost.

Second, he or she needs to be a public servant. Not a servant of special interests, and not a servant of himself or herself.

Third, he or she needs to be a leader. A president should be able to inspire, to bring people together, to get things done for the betterment of all (as much as that’s possible).

Fourth, the president should be a defender of the little guy or gal. Wall Street doesn’t need a defender. Corporations don’t need a defender. But ordinary people do. People without big money and connections need a champion, and the president should be that champion.

Fifth, the president must represent America on the world stage in a positive light. Like it or not, the president, whoever he or she is, inevitably becomes a lead symbol of America. That person should represent us at our best, not our worst.

Sixth, the president, as commander-in-chief, needs to recognize the limits of military power, and needs to exercise control over the national security state, recognizing that incessant war is an enemy of democracy, and that spending on weapons and war is a waste of resources.

Seventh (and perhaps most importantly), the president must be a steward of the nation’s resources, especially its environment (healthy air, clean water, unpolluted land, and so on). The president must always have an eye on the future — on the need to preserve our country for our children and their children.

This is a quick list, and it could easily be lengthened, but these to me are the seven most important habits for the U.S. president.

One presidential role model: An MLB Umpire

With respect to the fourth “habit,” I used “should,” not “must.” In my mind, I see the president as a sort of umpire or referee, making sure the game is played fair and square. In the “game” of life, powerful interests (the ultra-rich, powerful corporations, and so on) already have a big advantage, so I see the president as a public servant (umpire) who acts to ensure the interests of the people are not subsumed or denied or violated.

Of course, there are many interests of the people, and some are contradictory, but again I see the president as acting to ensure, as much as he or she can, the integrity of the process.

This is one reason we need campaign finance reform. Those with money speak with a much louder and more powerful voice, essentially drowning out our voices. A president who’s a captive of the special interests is a president only in name, i.e. just a money-grubber, just a bag-man (or -woman). We’ve allowed politics to be co-opted by special interests with deep pockets; campaign finance reform and public funding of elections will help to reverse this.

Palestine, the Moral Issue of Our Time

Do you have a heart that’s open and functioning?

BILL ASTORE

MAY 25, 2025

So much of what we’ve been told about Israel and Zionism has been a lie, as this video reveals.

My mother-in-law had a saying: “Have a heart if you’ve got a heart.” So many “leaders” in the U.S. and Israel, including Joe Biden and Donald Trump and of course Bibi Netanyahu, haven’t got hearts, at least when it comes to Palestinians and Gaza.

Meanwhile, from Caitlin Johnstone:

Israel bombed the home of two married doctors in Gaza on Friday, killing nine of their children and critically injuring their sole surviving son. The father of the children was also severely injured in the attack, while their mother, while still working at the nearby hospital, received the charred bodies of her children. They were too badly burned to be recognized.

This one incident, just by itself, is vastly more newsworthy and deserving of attention than two Israeli embassy staff members being killed in Washington. But news coverage hasn’t reflected this, because Palestinians aren’t regarded as human beings in the mainstream western press.

And another worthy snippet from Caitlin Johnstone:

The Guardian has published an opinion piece by Rhiannon Lucy Cosslett titled “As Gaza’s children are bombed and starved, we watch — powerless. What is it doing to us as a society?”, which is noteworthy because it somehow never mentions the word “Israel” or “Israeli” one single time throughout the entire article. It doesn’t even mention Netanyahu.

This is a particularly glaring example of the way the western press have been discussing the Gaza holocaust as some kind of unfortunate tragedy that is just passively happening to the Palestinian people, as though it’s a natural disaster or something. It’s like bombs and siege warfare are just the weather over there. Like “Oh it’s a bit bomby and faminy in Gaza today, and it makes me feel sad!”

This genocide is exposing the mass media like nothing else in my lifetime.

Finally, consider this article by Lisa Savage as she ponders the misuse of Memorial Day as a celebration of militarism in the United States.

Here’s an excerpt:

The U.S. as a whole seems to be suffering from moral injury as we destroy country after country in our lust for imperial spoils. Watching the U.S.-Israel genocide in Gaza starving thousands to death while bombing them drives me to despair. There are now plans for U.S. soldiers to distribute food aid because Israel won’t allow UNRWA to do it as they have for decades. Food has been weaponized and politicized, and the largest shipments being allowed in at the moment don’t even contain calories or medical supplies. They contain shrouds.

Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill” Robs the Poor and Rewards the Rich

More Walls, A “Golden” Dome, More Weapons, Higher Deficits, Make this a Petty Ugly Bill

BILL ASTORE

MAY 23, 2025

The “Big Beautiful Bill” passed recently by the House is petty and ugly. A sham. A reverse Robin Hood. It cuts SNAP benefits (food stamps) to the poor. It cuts Medicaid. Because who needs food and medical care, amirite? Meanwhile, it cuts taxes for the richest Americans and funds various weapons follies (a foolish and wasteful missile shield known as “Golden Dome,” more nuclear weapons, yet more billions for the wall on America’s border with Mexico). And it adds significantly to the national debt.

Remember when Republicans were once known as fiscal conservatives? Remember calls for a balanced budget? Those days are long gone. The “Big Beautiful Bill” is a fever dream, or a night terror if you prefer, of wanton and wasteful spending that rewards the already well-heeled and hurts the most vulnerable of Americans.

Trump, who is truly an expert at the craft of the con, concocts the most outrageous names to sell his BS. Thus a missile shield that may end up wasting $500 billion is a “golden dome.” Heck, the whole bill, which is contempuous toward the poor and punishing to workers organizing for higher wages, is sold as “big” and “beautiful.”

When Trump describes things as “golden” and “big” and “beautiful,” you should know to hold tightly to your wallets and purses, America, because you’re about to get scammed.

At his site, Stephen Semler has a superb chart that breaks down the petty ugly bill the House just passed. Here’s an excerpt. Read it and weep, America.

The bottom line: More money for the already affluent and for the Pentagon; less money and benefits for the poor. The rich get richer, the poor poorer, as America reinforces its turn to weapons, walls, police, domes, and warriors.