Brad Johnson offers analysis on the current state of the electoral race between Trump and Biden or whoever may replace Biden suggesting that Trump’s lead in the polls make it impossible for the Democrats to cheat it enough to take this election.
Category: Analysis
-
Brad Johnson: The Disaster Debate and the curious turning of the media narrative
In this Brad Jonson analysis, the debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden is examined in the context of a behind the scenes look at motives for this event.
Clearly there has been a Sea Change in media narratives. In this video Brad examines a few possible reasons for this major shift in media opinion.
-
Brad Johnson: The Heritage Foundation, and the fake conservatives within the Republican party
In this video, Brad Johnson takes on the RINO establishment as well as various organizations that claim to be conservative but no longer even seem to hold conservative values.
Specifically The Heritage Foundation in this case.
-
Two interviews with Hungarian Prime Miniter, Viktor Orbán on the escalation of war between NATO proxies and Russia
Following are two consecutive interviews from Hungarian TV with popular president, Viktor Orbán in which he discusses what he sees as a large move towards escalation in the current war between Russia and Ukraine.
PM Orban is concerned that NATO is causing an escalation by doing targeting and telemetry for strikes within Russia using weapons they supplied to Ukraine. This would mean that NATO has progressed from merely supplying defensive weapons to Ukraine, to being active participants to strikes on Russia, according to PM Orban.
Much more detail is explained by the Hungarian leader in terms of Hungary’s unique position as a NATO member, but who is a non-participant in this conflict. The prospects for peace, Orban feels, are dismally low. The likelihood for a much wider conflict is almost certain.
Orban explains that his own study of past World Wars shows that a certain amount of setting the mood for war takes place in nations that would otherwise not have an interest in a given regional conflict, which can result in catastrophe.
Viktor Orbán May 2024 World being prepared for major war:
Viktor Orbán II NATO is already attacking Russia:
-
LIFE’S ROAD TRIPS
LIFE’S ROAD TRIPS
“I would rather own a little and see the world, than own the world and see a little.”
Alexander Sattler
“Because the greatest part of a road trip isn’t arriving at your destination. It’s all the wild stuff that happens along the way.”
Emma Chase
“Look at life through the windshield, not the rearview mirror.”
Byrd Baggett
“Never underestimate the therapeutic power of driving and listening to very loud music.”
Unknown
It occurred to me this week that the long winding road of my life, and the windows of time wherein it unfolds, are best measured in road trips.
That’s right, road trips!
Early this week, for example, Ima and I took off on one such road trip. My sister Vicki Sue and Ed, her husband, have been talking for weeks about a special hamburger joint located about an hour from our house in Springboro, Ohio. Any of you that know about my love for burgers and know talk like this is like waving a red cape in front of a bull.
We drove north, above the terminal moraine—that point where the last glacier stopped—and where the land becomes as flat as a tabletop, with the scenery dominated by huge farms as far as the eye can see, on both sides of the road. Our goal was the city of Greenville, Ohio, home of Annie Oakley (a museum in her honor is on main street), and the place where the famous Treaty of Greenville was signed.
In the old part of Greenville, across the street from a tattoo parlor, stands a small, squat, brick, bar-looking edifice called the Maid-Rite Sandwich Shoppe. Since the mid-1930s, this establishment has been famous for two things: a unique hamburger recipe, and its famous “gum wall”—outside brick walls covered with layers of chewing gum pressed on the walls by successive generations of customers.
The burger was as good as advertised. (I didn’t try one of the wads of gum ☺). The beef has the shredded consistency of a Sloppy Joe sandwich (before the sauce is mixed in), seasoned with salt, sugar, onion, mustard, Worchester sauce and other spices. Workers constantly stir the hamburger in two large, metal pits, to meet the demands of a constant flow of drive-in orders that can have cars lined up for blocks outside.
What an experience! Ima and I loved it.
This brings up Akers’ Road Trip Law #3: road trips are always made better, and certainly more memorable, when there is a food stop involved.
A good burger is one thing: a place where there is a ton of history is another. (Akers’ Road Trip Law #4). As soon as I returned home, I started researching the significance of what happened in Greenville, within walking distance of the Maid-Rite hamburger emporium. I read that in early August 1795, an event occurred close to those hallowed eating grounds that ended the Northwest Indian War (1785-1795) and laid the groundwork for Ohio to become a state eight years later: the Treaty of Greenville.
Of course, I’m sure we discussed all this in Mr. Stubb’s Ohio History class in our eighth grade at good ol’ Clearcreek Local High School. But I don’t remember it …
The Indian tribal confederacy that fought the new American government constituted, in the words of historian William Hogeland, the “high-water mark in resistance to white expansion.” It was sandwiched between the two better known pan-Indian movements led by Pontiac, the gifted Odawa tribal leader (1763-1766) and Shawnee Tecumseh’s Rebellion—along with his brother Tenskwatawa, “The Prophet”—(1810-1813, which merged with the War of 1812). At any rate, the defeats suffered by the U.S. Army during the early battles against the Indian confederation were among their worst in history, largely because of poor training, equipment, and morale.
Nothing remains of the old Fort Greenville—built two years before the treaty was signed—built as part of a string of forts on the Northwestern border of the newly independent United States. The architect of this string of forts was General “Mad” Anthony Wayne, who had battled the British in the War for Independence and was appointed as commander-in-chief of the Army by President George Washington. The fort, at the time, was the largest wooden fort in America, covering over 50 acres, with eight blockhouses located about 250 yards away from the main fort.
1 William Hogeland, Autumn of the Black Snake, (NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2017), p. 374.
2 Tenskwatawa emerged as a tribal leader in the early 1800’s as the most prominent Shawnee witch hunter. The death of important native leader of Lenape Chief Buckongahelas in mid-1805, probably from smallpox or influenza, triggered rumors that witchcraft was responsible for the great leader’s death and triggering a witch-hunt that resulted in the death of several suspected tribal witches. The result was a nativist religious revival led by Tecumseh’s brother that rejected European-American customs and ways (liquor, clothing, and use of firearms), calling on Indian tribes to stop ceding land, and accusing Indians that cooperated with the United States of witchcraft.
3 Fort Greenville, Ohio, The Archeological Conservancy (website), 2024.
4 See, among others, Allan W. Eckert, A Sorrow In Our Heart: The Life of Tecumseh, Bantam Books (paperback version), 1993, p. 495.The Delawares, the Potawatomies, the Wyandots, the Shawnees, the Miamis (including the Eel River Miamis, Weas, and Piankeshaws,), the Chippewas, the Ottwas, the Kickapoos, and the Kaskasias. (The Sacs and Foxes were invited but refused to attend).s wh
5 Ibid.
The fort was named after Revolutionary War hero Nathaniel Greene. Most important, the fortification served as a vital training center for some 3,000 members of General Wayne’s Legion of the United States before they marched north in August 1794, to defeat the Indian confederation at the Battle of Fallen Timbers (near present-day Toledo, Ohio).
With the Indian threat greatly reduced, Fort Greenville was abandoned in 1796, and most of the ruins were destroyed as the town of Greenville was built. Much of the fort’s materials were used to build buildings in nearby Dayton, Ohio. The remains of Blockhouse 8, across Mud Creek from the fort, close to where the courthouse and fountain are today, was dug up in 2002 by an amateur archeologist.
Adjacent to the parking lot behind the Maid-Rite bar-turned-restaurant, is the Tecumseh walking path. It was hard for me to imagine the huge gathering outside the great council of Indian chiefs and tribes—held on Tuesday, September 22, 1795—where some 1,100 chiefs and delegates representing 12 Indian tribes of the Northwest Territory, met to discuss the recently signed treaty.
One who didn’t sign the treaty was the great Shawnee warrior and chief Tecumseh (lit. “Panther-Passing-Across,” 1768-1813). Close to where the restaurant stands today, Tecumseh’s eloquently answered Chief Blue Jacket and the 91 other signatories of the treaty: “I stated only that I could not make peace with the whites and could not live with those who did. What I feared would happen has happened: we have entirely lost, by the terms of the treaty, practically all in Ohio that was our own. Even the land of this little village where we now sit has been signed away and we no longer have any right to be here … This is—was—our land and it is here that the bones of our fathers and our fathers’ fathers are buried, and if we cannot protect what is ours, what is left to us?”
Why am I so interested in the Native Americans? Many of you have heard or read a story I have told many times over the years. On my dad’s side of the family, going back three generations, one of the men married a full-blooded Cherokee princess. In fact, my grandfather (Wiley Akers), one of eight brothers and sisters—all orphaned at an early age—had enough Indian blood that he and his siblings qualified for one of the periodic Oklahoma land rushes that began in the 1880s. The brothers and sisters pooled their money and sent the youngest brother to participate. Did I tell you all the Akers love to play cards? It runs in our blood. Bottom line: the youngest brother got flimflammed in a card game on the train heading west and lost the family’s money.
“Sigh.”
One of my most powerful memories involves a visit many years ago to the National Museum of the American Indian in the Smithsonian Museum complex at one end of the mall in Washington D.C. On the second floor, if memory serves me correctly, is a large room dominated by a large, wall-sized map showing the names of all the Indian tribes that once occupied the continental United States. Hundreds of Indian tribes are displayed. However, the names of Native American tribes that no longer exist are highlighted in red. All of a sudden, the carnage becomes very real to the observer. A very small percentage of indigenous tribes survived waves of disease, westward expansion, and inter-tribal wars.
It is a sobering experience.
If I tried to describe all the road trips that have influenced my life, it would make this missive at least thirty pages long. I have described one or two in previous missives. My most sacred memories were the completely unscripted road trips with my dad, with the first ten directional decisions of our trip decided by the random toss of a coin.
Recently, Ima and I made the long drive down I-75 from Ohio to Fort Lauderdale. This was our second trip in that direction within a month. On the drive we go through Chattanooga, Tennessee, and passing south of the city, go by an exit designating the National Battlefield sites at Lookout Mountain—also known as the Battle Above the Clouds—where a battle was fought on November 24, 1863, during the Civil War. Although not a huge battle by Civil War standards (in terms of casualties at least), the result of the battle opened the gateway into the Deep South for Union forces.
Nevertheless, I have a special fondness for the place.
It raises memories, of course, of a road trip. At the time, I was a student at Cumberland College (now Cumberland University). I don’t think I’ve written about this experience before. There was an extended weekend and break during one of the semesters. Sitting (and bored) in the dorm, four of us decide to launch out on a road trip to Florida: suddenly, spontaneously, and with very little thought. All the ingredients for a perfect road trip! One of the guys said he had relatives in Florida who would provide us a place to stay and, hopefully, money for the return trip.
What could go wrong with a road trip plan like that, right?
We hopped in the car and made it as far as Chattanooga, before it became apparent that we didn’t have enough money to make it all the way to Florida. So, instead we made the thoroughly mature decision to go to a movie theater downtown and watch an afternoon matinee featuring Jane Fonda in Barbarella, a risqué movie by 1968 standards (but ho-hum by today’s rapidly eviscerating standards).
Afterwards, we briefly toured the battlefield site at Lookout Mountain.
By then it was getting dark and so we looked for a place to stay. We found a fleabag, dilapidated hotel clinging to the side of the mountain. If I recall correctly, it cost us ten dollars for a room with double beds. No questions asked. Can you imagine a group of four male teenagers doing that today, with the media- and Hollywood-induced homophobia? Back then we thought nothing of it.
In the middle of the night, about 2:00 in the morning, we heard a loud, terrible, and chilling noise. Almost like the sound of a train crashing through the trees. When we went outside to investigate the strange sound, we saw fresh tread marks on the road in a curve—just down the steep mountain road from the hotel—and could see that a car had gone airborne over the guardrail and crashed through a cluster of trees.
We scrambled down the road and looked breathlessly down the mountain.
It was a chilly, but bright, moonlit night.
Three of us attempted to climb down the steep decline toward the wreck, one of our group stayed up top to flag down approaching traffic.
It was a difficult, bordering on treacherous, descent.
By then, a car had come by on the road above and said they would call for help.
As we half slid, half stumbled downward, we could see that the car had snapped off several trees before coming to rest on its roof, the crumpled vehicle frame wedging itself on a shelf of large rocks and trees.
Broken glass, car parts and things from the inside were strewn about everywhere.
Smoke was spewing out of the car.
A female passenger had been hurtled out of car and lay bleeding and unconscious several feet from the car. (It was a time just before seatbelts were mandatory).
The driver, a young teenager like us, was trapped under the car and screaming in pain.
What would you have done?
There was no such thing as cellphones in those days.
I took off my coat and placed it over the girl to keep her warm.
I thought she muttered something but wasn’t sure.
I felt so helpless. All I could do was pray. I remember more about shivering from the cold than the words I prayed during those early morning hours for the complete stranger at my feet.
After that, I went over to help my friend as we tried to console the teenager trapped under the car as best we could. It was obvious to us that he had a serious back injury, and although we didn’t know much about first-aid treatment, we were reluctant to move him.
A weak “hang on,” was all I could muster, and muttered yet another prayer under my breath.
By then an emergency vehicle arrived at the scene on the road above.
We were so relieved to have help.
We heard them crashing down the hill hauling a litter with them.
Our joy at seeing them arrive soon turned to dismay when we noticed that each of them were drunk.
I mean really drunk. As they say in the mountains, “drunk as skunks.”
Two of them immediately started to tug on the trapped young driver prompting a new round of painful squeals. “Don’t do that,” my friend said with a determined voice, “he may have a back injury.”
“Shut up kid,” one of the would-be rescuers slurred.
Imagine the scene if you can. Four teenagers in a strange hotel rousted from their sleep by a horrible accident. Unexpectedly thrust into a situation beyond their control. Then they encounter drunken would-be rescuers. All resulting in an uncomfortable, unexpected stand-off at the wreckage site halfway down the side of Lookout Mountain. Four college boys standing our ground until a more experienced and capable, rescue team arrived.
Only then, after helping all we could and feeling the accident victims were in good hands, did we feel free to leave.
The old, grizzled veteran rescue worker in charge of the team grabbed me by the arm. “You kids did well,” he said with his deep southern drawl. That made me feel good.
We were still talking about the incident later the next morning when we stopped by a diner in downtown Chattanooga. The waitress teased us about our northern accents. We barely made it back to campus, gas indicator pinging on empty, without a dollar between us.
But what a road trip!
I have thought about that early morning encounter on Lookout Mountain many times over the years. I was so young and naïve then. Just another innocent road trip. I have no idea whether the young girl or the teenage boy survived. I assume they did.
Why else was I there except to pray …
I wonder what they’re doing now?
A century earlier that same mountain—only the rock formations are unchanging—witnessed multiple, unspeakable tragedies of a different kind. Almost all of them were far too young, with hopes, dreams and girlfriends left behind. The human condition. The terrible physical and mental carnage of war. In those days, they wore thick wool uniforms of gray and blue as they scrambled down the mountain rather than blue jeans and T-shirts.
Looking backward in time, I wonder what took place on that very same spot a century before our early morning experience?
Is it disrespectful to compare the two?
In 1863, it was a nation bitterly divided.
Like today.
Over the years, I have never attempted to visit that place on the road. I’m sure the hotel is long since gone, the road itself improved.
Guardrails can be repaired, car wreckage removed, broken bones healed … only memories remain as they were.
On that very spot, separated in time by a hundred years, I wonder how many memories remained on both ends of the time spectrum: how many prayers were offered over the broken bodies of wounded comrades.
Faith endures even longer than memories.
Even for those on the mountain snared in their own cross-hairs of times and circumstances beyond their control.
-
The “New Equation” in the Middle East
“We have decided to create a new equation … From now on, if the Zionist regime attacks our interests, assets, figures and citizens anywhere, we will reciprocally attack it from the origin of Iran.”
Major General Hossein Salami
Head, Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps
“Israel will do whatever it needs to defend itself … They [the Western allies] have all sorts of suggestions and advice. I appreciate that. But I want to be clear: Our decisions we will make ourselves.”
Benjamin Netanyahu
Israel’s Prime Minister
“The narrow Israeli attack [on Isfahan] and Iran’s rhetoric in response appeared to be an attempt by both sides to calm tensions after more than a week of concerns that Israel’s war with Hamas in Gaza would metastasize into a bigger regional conflict, though fears remain of a miscalculation. Israel was under pressure from the U.S. and Europe to moderate its response and faced the challenge of delivering a blow that would punish Iran for the attack without provoking a response.”
The Wall Street Journal
It is now going on a week since Iran’s massive attack on Israel. That left the situation in the Middle East more fluid and dangerous than ever. As I was putting the finishing touches on this piece, word came in that Israeli warplanes and drones had conducted a calibrated and limited attack on an airbase near an Iranian nuclear site at Isfahan in central Iran. Israel sent five important messages with its limited retaliatory strike: it retains autonomy of action, wants to limit an escalatory cycle of violence (if possible), can operate with relative impunity over the skies of Iran, has the ability to hit Iran’s most secretive nuclear facilities, and will not play by the rules of Iran’s “New Equation.”
But make no mistake about it, “New Equation” or not, events over the last few days indicate a huge genie has escaped the Middle East bottle, and it will be difficult, if not impossible, to stuff it back in.
What does Tehran’s “New Equation” look like? Perhaps it slipped by you, like an elusive thief in the night, but Iran’s unprecedented aerial attack on Israel on the evening of April 13 and into the morning of April 14—employing some 170 kamakazi drones stuffed with explosives, 120 ballistic missiles, and at least 30 cruise missiles—has changed the face of war, and diplomacy, in the Middle East.
Perhaps forever.
Simply put: the old rules may no longer apply.
With the massive barrage, Tehran’s mullahs dramatically ended the 45-year-old “shadow war” in the Middle East that had been characterized by proxy attacks, covert missions, clandestine operations, assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists, disabling cyberattacks, and a tit-for-tat cycle of violence. The whole purpose of this war in the shadows—as I used to tell my students—was to allow a state actor to hide behind the veil of “plausible deniability.”
Iran ripped off that veil last weekend.
So what?
The sole redeeming virtue of the four decade-old “shadow war” was that all major regional participants knew the rhythm and flow of the “dance.” All the dancers had an intuitive understanding of the rules of conduct, the music being played, and where the red lines within red lines existed. As a corollary observation, outside parties like the U.S., European countries, Russia, China and India, never quite understood the nature of the dance. They still don’t. The nuances of the depth and passion that divides Jew and Arab, and Sunni and Shi’ite, escape regional outsiders. Tehran’s declaration last weekend that there was now a “New Equation” in the Middle East—by which Iran intends to establish new dance rules and shape the regional expectations of the various dancing partners—was an effort to change everything.
There are some who will argue that, in truth, the rules of the “shadow war” dance began breaking down about six months ago when Hamas brutally attacked undefended villages in Israel, massacring over a thousand Israeli citizens and taking over 200 hostages. The act crossed a previously sacred red line established by the dance. Israel’s reaction was likewise an untypical dance response: they sought the total destruction of Gaza as a haven for Hamas militants. Today, only the Hamas bastion of Rafah remains in southern Gaza and one observer of the situation—Amir Tsarfati—told his listeners recently that the Israeli military is moving major armor units toward the city.
Israeli pressure on Hamas in Gaza was followed, in turn, by Iranian-sponsored proxy militia activity throughout the Middle East: cross-border violence between Israel and Iran-supported Hezbollah, Houthi attacks on maritime shipping, unrest in the West Bank, and Shi’ite attacks on remaining American bases in Iraq and Syria.
Although the traditional “shadow war” dance was being stretched, the tit-for-tatt response pattern was still holding.
Meanwhile, Israeli intelligence and airborne assets began targeting the planners and enablers of the Hamas operation. In that vein, in December Israeli aircraft took out a senior Iranian commander in an airstrike near Damascus and on April 1, 2024, a precision strike on an annex building on Iran’s embassy compound in Damascus, killed a senior IRGC Quds force commander along with several other high-ranking officers. Facing this steady attrition of senior military officials, Iran decided to try to change the rules of the game. No longer content with losing the ”shadow war” dance, Iran decided to unilaterally change the rules and ordered an unprecedented large-scale assault on Israel.
Like most game-changing world events, Iran’s massive attack on Israel last weekend came with its share of head-scratchers. Two of these, in my mind, stand out. First, why did Iran signal its planned strike, code-named True Promise, in advance? Two days prior to the strike, Iran forewarned diplomats of Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) of an imminent attack that would cross their airspace. This intelligence—confirmed by regional Sunni intelligence organizations in the Gulf region and Turkey—provided a valuable heads-up in terms of the timing and scope of the operation. Israel and its allies used the warning to deploy additional air defenses, shift aircraft, cancel leaves for military personnel, prepare to close the skies over the Middle East, and deny GPS access for outside targeting purposes.
We can safely assume that Iran’s military planners will not repeat the mistake the next time around.
Tehran’s advance notice was so bizzare, in fact, that it has birthed a conspiracy theory playing out in U.S. far-right, non-mainstream media circles. It goes this way: an anonymous Turkish diplomat told Reuters this week that his country played the role of a back-channel intermediary between the United States and Iran in the days leading up to Iran’s strike on Israel. According to this source, Tehran informed Turkey of its intended strike in an effort to limit further escalation. In response, the U.S. allegedly conveyed to Tehran via Ankara, that any action would have to be “within certain limits.” In other words, while President Biden was saying “Don’t” in front of American television screens, behind the scenes he “greenlighted” the strike on our only true ally in the region as long as it took place within certain limits. As a result, one prominent right-wing journalist has called for Biden to be compelled to resign if the accusation is proven to be true.
Stay tuned to see if this story gains any traction. Or, for that matter, is valid.
My second head-scratcher concerns the Iranian supported Shi’ite militia group Hezbollah on Israel’s northern border. Why did Hezbollah—which has waged continuous low-scale, cross-border attacks, and missile firings since the Israeli punitive incursion into Gaza—largely sit this one out? To date, Hezbollah’s leaders have barely dipped into their reported arsenal of between 100,000 and 150,000 missiles in recent cross-border attacks on Israel, firing only an estimated 3,000 missiles. Indeed, since December 2023, following two months of low-intensity border fighting, Israeli forces began to dislodge Hezbollah’s forces from southern Lebanon. According to one source, more than 90% of Hezbollah’s special Radwan forces have fled the area and abandoned border lookout posts. (According to another source, Hezbollah already has suffered more casualties since the IDF incursion in Gaza than it did during the entire 2006 war). In the same time period, targeted Israeli airstrikes have taken a heavy toll on Iranian and Hezbollah commanders in Syria and elsewhere.
There are, in my view, four possible explanations for Hezbollah’s reticence. First, Hezbollah may be going overboard to prove they are autonomous and not under Iran’s thumb. (In the old days, when I was watching Hezbollah and other Shi’ite militant groups, we used to debate the degree to which Hezbollah was an autonomous actor). Iran is 600 miles from Israel whereas Hezbollah is just across the border. Second, Hezbollah may be acting (or non-acting) primarily out of a motive of self-preservation and realizes that Israeli aircraft can reduce to rubble its strongholds in Beirut and southern Lebanon. If another war between Hezbollah and Israel breaks out—the last one was in 2006—the group’s privileged position as an actor in Lebanese politics would be threatened. They don’t want Lebanon to turn into another Gaza. Thirdly, Hezbollah could be husbanding its resources for a future joint push with Iran against Israel. Finally, in line with the forementioned conspiracy theory, Hezbollah was “ordered” to stay on the sidelines to keep the strike within certain, controllable boundaries.
At any rate, from all initial appearances, it seemed like Israel’s technical superiority won the day (night) last weekend and the Iranians were dealt a decisive, humiliating. blow. The mainstream press in our country—certainly no friends of Israel or Netanyahu—have emphasized the role played by American forces in the region to explain the outcome: over 90% of all inbound weapons systems were destroyed. Much has been made of the switch in theater operational command to CENTCOM, the defensive and secretive air alliance of Sunni regional partners such as Jordan, UAE, and the Saudis (a strategy tracing back to the Trump administration—but no one in Washington D.C. these days will admit that). Indeed, there was unprecedented cooperation in shutting down the airspace over the Middle East to allow IDF and allied aircraft to operate with impunity. But make no mistake about it, the elimination of the unprecedented invasion fleet of ballistic missiles was primarily an Israeli operation. American, British, French, and Jordanian aircraft took out many of the drones (during their nine-hour flight from Iran) and the slower moving cruise missiles.
Eliminating the most lethal component of Iran’s airborne armada—the ballistic missiles—was almost exclusively an Israeli operation. Israel’s Arrow missile-defense system performed better than anyone expected and brought down in the empty desert almost all the long-range missiles Iran hoped would land on Israeli cities such as Tel Aviv, the Nevatim airbase in the Negev Desert and the Dimona nuclear reactor. (Iranian missiles were used in a mock attack on an Israeli airbase two months earlier). Only seven percent of Iranian missiles made it through Israel’s defenses, doing minor damage to the airbase and shrapnel injuring a 7-year-old girl.
Iran’s officials have tried to put the best face on the humiliating setback by bellicose posturing and suggesting they only used a small portion of their inventory in the attack. Tehran’s apologists have even proposed that it was a trial run to gauge the effectiveness of Israeli defenses. Some analysts, however, are pouring cold water on Tehran’s claims after examining evidence of the weaponry destroyed. “Iran basically threw everything it had that could reach Israel’s territory,” according to John Krzyaniah, and U.S. military analysts told The Intercept shortly after the attack that American intelligence estimated that 50% of Iranian weapons “failed upon launch or in flight due to technical issues.”
From Israel’s perspective there is only one huge flipside to its operation: the costs incurred. Many years ago, in Washington D.C., I was invited to participate in a wargame exercise set many years in the future in Asia. One of the problems we identified during the exercise was the rate at which the U.S. armed forces burned through its inventory of advanced weapons, which were costly to replace and—given the state of our defense industries—very difficult to replenish. The same logic holds in the wake of this operation. Israel’s Arrow 3 interceptors, for example, are priced a $3.5 million per shot and David’s Slings are $1 million each. Iran’s costs to produce its homemade ballistic missiles used in the attack are probably a tenth of that cost (although they have an estimated 3,000 missiles that can reach Israel and at least 100 launching systems. Furthermore, Iran’s long-range Shahed-136 kamikaze drones, a mainstay of Russia’s drone force in Ukraine, are estimated to cost between $20,000 and $40,000 apiece, a fraction of the cost of any missile-based anti-aircraft weapon. A retired Israeli general estimated that the cost of expended munitions—excluding fuel and operational costs for IDF’s manned aircraft—was over $1.5 billion (another Israeli estimate was $550 billion. Exactly what fraction of Iran’s MRBM arsenal (and what percentage of Israel’s defensive missiles were used) remain important “X” factors when judging which side could outlast the in a future sustained war of attrition.
So, why did Israel choose Isfahan as a target? The city houses an air base and a nearby nuclear site ringed by S-300 antiaircraft batteries (a sophisticated Russian-made air defense system). As such, it was an important symbolic target that checked all the boxes: a symmetrical response to Iran’s attack last weekend which focused on Nevatim Air Base. Moreover, it was the first time Israeli air assets attacked a military target protected by the S-300 system (and took advantage of a window in time before more lethal S-400 systems are delivered to Iran).
Today, the political and economic fallout from Iran’s “New Equation” pronouncement continues. The Netanyahu administration’s decision to hit Isfahan with a limited strike ended the widespread speculation as to how, or if, his government would respond to Iran’s aerial attack (especially in light of Biden’s recommendation that Israel “take the win”—as if the U.S. would sit on its thumbs if such a barrage came from Russia, China, or Cuba). One Israeli observer even called the latest act a “de-escalatory strike,” and in one of the few public comments by Israeli cabinet officials on the strike, a right-wing coalition member posted a one-word response on X: “Weak.” Nevertheless, global oil and gold prices immediately spiked upon news of Israel’s response. Israel’s decision to strike was a difficult one: following repeated meetings of the Israeli War Cabinet at Kirya Base outside Tel Aviv, and, reportedly, at least two aborted missions.
In Iran, there was a muted response to the strike on Isfahan. Iranian military officials told the state-run media that explosions heard at Isfahan were the result of a mysterious object brought down with no damage. Russian foreign policy officials in touch with Iran, and Russian intermediaries communicating with Israeli officials have said that Iran does not want the recent escalation of skirmishes to continue.
Israeli military sources have said nothing about the attack leaving the Jerusalem Post to wonder why the Pentagon felt it necessary to leak news about the attack.
Perhaps Iran’s vaunted “New Equation” will amount to a one-off event. It certainly seems Israel is content to return to the more familiar “shadow war” dance between the two.
Finally, (and I have received this question several times), what are the prophetic implications of Iran’s latest attack and Israel’s surgical response? I had intended to discuss this issue in depth. I’ve ran out of space.
Perhaps another time …
This missive is dedicated to my close friend Ray Hartman who went to be the Lord on April 11, 2024 (aged 75). I will miss Harty-Ho’s smile, humble spirit, and genuine Christian faithfulness. Ray was a devoted father, a Vietnam-era veteran, played on Springboro’s first varsity football team and was an avid reader of my missives. He was a good person in our high school baseball dugout but couldn’t play a lick. That didn’t stop him from enjoying the experience. Ray was also a Methodist pastor for 15 years. I’m so grateful I got the chance in the hospital room on his final night to say goodbye—I know he heard me.
FOOTNOTES:
Jared Malsin and Benoit Faucon, “Emboldened Iran Makes Dangerous Gamble on Open Confrontation,” The Wall Street Journal, Apr. 17, 2024.
Statement on Wednesday (Apr. 17, 2024), quoted by Lawrence Richard, “Netanyahu says 9 chilling words as Iran’s president vows to completely destroy Israel,” Fox News, Apr. 17, 2024.
Dov Lieber, et al, “Israel Strikes Iran in Narrow Attack Amid Escalation Fears,” WSJ, Apr. 19, 2024.
See Yonah Jeremy Bob, “Iran’s Attack Ended the Shadow War,” The Wall Street Journal, Apr. 17, 2024. Bob is is senior military analyst for the Jerusalem Post and co-author of the book “Target Tehran: How Israel is Using Sabotage, Cyberwarfare, Assassination—and Secret Diplomacy—to Stop a Nuclear Iran and Create a New Middle East.”
Amir Tsarfati, “Breaking News,” (Telegram video), Apr. 19, 2024. My personal thanks to old friend Marcia Ellendar for feeding me Amir’s broadcasts. Amir is an Israeli citizen and a Christtian who has valuable inswights on Middle East events.
Bob Unruh, “’Stunning betrayal,’ Biden must resign if he greenlit Iran’s strike on Israel,” WND, Apr. 17, 2024.
Bob, “Iran’s Attack Ebded.”
Sarah Dadouch and Shira Rubin, “After Iran’s Attack on Israel, now fears over escalation at Lebanese border,” The Washington Post, Apr. 18, 2024.
Yonah Jeremy Bob, “Iran’s Attack Ended the Shadow War,” The Wall Street Journal, Apr. 17, 2024.
Susannah George, et. al., “What Iran’s Attack on Israel revealed about its weapons arsenal,” The Washington Post, Apr. 17, 2024.
Ken Klippenstein and Daniel Boguslaw, “U.S., Not Israel, Shot Down Most Iran Drones and Missiles,” The Intercept, Apr. 15, 2024.
See the interesting discussion at Roblin, “A Barrage of Missiles,” on this issue.
Lieber, “Israel Strikes.”
Mariko Oi,” Markets rocked as US says Israel has struck Iran,” BBC News, Apr. 18, 2024.
Zvika Klein, “Israeli sources to Post:’An eye for an eye’; not clear why Pentagon leaked info on attack,” The Jerusalem Post, Apr. 19, 2024.
-
Trump, not Biden, benefits from RFK announcing
The decision of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to run as an independent candidate in the upcoming presidential election poses a substantial challenge for Joe Biden’s campaign. While some may argue that Kennedy’s independent bid could divide the progressive-leaning voters, ultimately benefiting President Trump, a closer examination reveals that Biden will be the one affected the most. Firstly, Kennedy’s political legacy and historic association with the Democratic Party could attract a significant number of voters who are dissatisfied with Biden’s moderate stance. Secondly, his strong liberal platform and commitment to progressive ideas might lure away the younger and more left-leaning voters who perceive Biden as too centrist. Lastly, Kennedy’s presence on the ballot may intensify the deep divisions within the Democratic Party, weakening Biden’s overall support base and making it harder for him to compete with Trump effectively.
One of the crucial factors working against Biden due to Kennedy’s independent run is the Kennedy family name itself. RFK’s family has been synonymous with Democratic politics for decades, and his iconic status may catch the attention of voters who desire a fresh and visionary Democratic leader. Feeling uninspired by Biden’s pragmatic approach, they may opt for Kennedy, who embodies the ideals and charisma reminiscent of his late father and uncle. This shift in support can significantly impact Biden’s chances as votes that would have otherwise gone to the Democratic nominee are now directed towards a third-party candidate.
Additionally, Kennedy’s unabashedly progressive platform could siphon support away from Biden, primarily among younger voters who have been advocating for bold policy changes. Many young progressives already view Biden as too moderate, and Kennedy’s strong stance on issues like climate change, racial justice, and income inequality may resonate with them. As a result, Biden risks losing a considerable portion of the youth vote, a key demographic that played a significant role in previous Democratic victories. Consequently, Kennedy’s independent run could weaken Biden’s overall appeal and hinder his efforts to build a broad coalition behind his campaign.
Furthermore, Kennedy’s entry into the race has the potential to further divide an already polarized Democratic Party. The party has been grappling with internal divisions between moderate and progressive factions, and the presence of an independent candidate with strong liberal ideals serves as a catalyst for this divide. Kennedy’s campaign will amplify existing tensions, making it increasingly challenging for Biden to unite the party and consolidate support. With the Democrats already facing the uphill battle of unifying their base and appealing to a broad spectrum of voters, Kennedy’s bid may exacerbate these challenges and make it harder for Biden to forge a strong and cohesive campaign strategy against Trump.
In conclusion, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s decision to run as an independent in the upcoming presidential election poses a significant threat to Joe Biden’s chances. RFK’s family legacy, progressive platform, and potential to deepen divisions within the Democratic Party are all factors that hurt Biden more than they do Trump. If Biden wants to overcome this challenge, he will need to find ways to appeal to the independent-minded progressives and unite the Democratic Party behind his candidacy.
https://intelreform.org
