New in PJ Media:
Matt Gaetz, the former congressman and Donald Trump’s first choice for attorney general, claims that Israel is trying to coax the U.S. into entering a regime-change war in the Middle East. Many who rally under the America-First banner, including Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) agree with him, although President Trump has stated in no uncertain terms that “AMERICA FIRST means many GREAT things, including the fact that, IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!”
On his OAN show, Gaetz played a 2002 clip of Benjamin Netanyahu warning that Saddam Hussein was developing nuclear weapons and guaranteeing that the Middle East would be safer for everyone if Saddam were removed from power. Obviously Netanyahu was dangerously wrong about that, and no one has ever claimed that the Israeli prime minister was infallible, but Gaetz argued that Netanyahu led us down the primrose path into war with Iraq then, and now was doing the same thing with Iran.
Greene then added that Israel attacked Iran first; she appears unaware of or indifferent to the fact that Hamas, which began the conflict by brutally murdering 1,200 Israelis on Oct. 7, 2023, is a proxy of Iran, as are Hezbollah and the Houthis, the other principal groups waging jihad against Israel today.
One notable omission in Gaetz’s presentation was that far from departing from his America-First principles, Trump has been consistent for ten years about his determination to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons. In his very first speech as a politician, announcing his candidacy for president on June 16, 2015, Trump said: “I will stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons.”
Gaetz likewise ignored the fact that it isn’t just Netanyahu who claims that Iran is trying to get nuclear weapons. In a May 31, 2025 report, the UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), stated that “the significantly increased production and accumulation of highly enriched uranium by Iran, the only non-nuclear-weapon State to produce such nuclear material, is of serious concern.”
DW reported Sunday that according to the IAEA, Iran “has accumulated than 400 kilograms (881 pounds) of uranium enriched to 60%. That level of enrichment far exceeds what is needed for civilian energy production — and is close to weapons-grade material.”
The IAEA report also lamented the fact that Iran had stopped the IAEA from all of its monitoring activities inside the country. Why would a country that had nothing to hide and wasn’t developing nuclear weapons behave in such a manner, when it doesn’t take much thought to realize that this caginess only arouses suspicion that could get it embroiled in a global conflict?
The UN is no friend of Israel; item 7 of the UN Human Rights Council’s every meeting agenda focuses on the Jewish state’s alleged abuse of Palestinian Arabs. Why would an organization that is so hostile to Israel have its nuclear watchdog repeat propaganda favorable to Israel? It’s much more likely that the Iranian regime really is working toward getting nuclear weapons. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot said that Iran’s nuclear program was an “existential threat” not just to Israel, but to Europe as well.
Hugh Fitzgerald says
Matt Gaetz? The one who invited a Holocaust denier, Charles Johnson, to be his guest at the 2018 State of the Union address? Johnson claims that “at most” 250,000 Jews may have been killed by the Nazis. That Matt Gaetz? T The man whom a House report found made payments totalling tens of thousands of dollars to women for sex and drugs on at least 20 occasions? One of those “women was a 17-year-old. That Matt Gaetz, who was forced to resign from the House? Yes, it is one and the same. He’s still swimming in his moral squalor. No, not swimming but drowning.
PacosMojo says
Oh, looky here! Hugh the resident Globalist and Zelensky BFF repeating the lies of a Donk controlled House looking to destroy any one even adjacent to MAGA! But, it benefits Hugh’s BS so why bother fact checking?
Taffy says
Hey Paco,
Get your facts straight! So far, Hugh has gotten material facts straight in all of his articles. If he gives an opinion, it is obvious from the context that it is an opinion.
Matt Gaetz was a strong MAGA supporter, but unfortunately his “ugly” contaminated his good. MAGA leadership cannot have people with moral turpitude even if all else that they stand for aligns with the MAGA message.
If it were only a single “House Report,” I’d reserve judgment, but there is a lot more to make the accusations credible, at least by a preponderance but not to the level of “beyond reasonable doubt.”
࿗Infidel࿘ says
I admire Matt Gaetz politically, although some of his personal choices, be it his trysts w/ various women or his activism against Jamie Spears is not something I supported. However, there is no single “MAGA” policy on Israel. There are antisemites like Tucker and Posobiec there, but there are also pro-Israel people, like Charlie Kirk and Steve Bannon. Israel is a country that MAGA is split on
However, nobody on the pro-Israel side in MAGA has demanded that the US join the war in support of Israel, who’re causing mayhem among the jihadists on their own. The only thing that they are conflicted on is whether the US itself should take out Fordow w/ its bunker busters, or give Israel the tools and have them take it out. At this point, the Islamic Republican resistance has collapsed: even if the US were to send in the USAF to blow up Fordow, there’s nothing that Iran could do in retaliation
That only leaves the question of the aftermath of the war. Since the Israelis are the ones w/ personnel on the ground, maybe they can work w/ organized Iranian opposition, such as Reza Pahlavi, to manage a peaceful transfer of power in Tehran so that there isn’t chaos throughout that country. US doesn’t have to do a thing. Once a new government comes to power, both US & Israel can negotiate w/ them about their nuclear projects, their ballistic missiles & so on. At that point though, given that neither Iran nor its government will no longer be hostile to the US nor Israel, that would be more conducive to a deal being worked out
James Lincoln says
࿗Infidel࿘ says,
“The only thing that they are conflicted on is whether the US itself should take out Fordow w/ its bunker busters, or give Israel the tools and have them take it out.”
Israel would need:
1. The GBU-57A/B MOP
2. The B-2 Spirit – the only currently operational aircraft capable of carrying it.
3. USAF pilots fully trained in the B-2
So, it would involve the direct involvement of the United States – which may be necessary if there is no other alternative.
gravenimage says
All PacosMojo does here is spout Muslim apologia.
mgoldberg says
Netanyahu might have been in error about some things but Saddam Hussein was a murderous tyrant whose nuclear warhead goals indeed needed to be stopped and it was Israel that destroyed the Osirik reactors and later did the world a favor by destroying that nuclear facility in Syria. The fact that the west hs not learned that you cannot simply defeat a muslim state and then go on to nation building means only a restitution of a muslim nation that cannot but duplicate the historic evidence of muslim rule and rulers. They are not democracies. So, in Germany and Japan during wwII we spent seven years there in each nation erasing the hateful anti western teachings: we didn’t do any of that and the next day, the hatred for America, the hatred for the West, and esp. the hatred for Jews was all begun once again. That wasn’t Netanyahu’s fault- that was ours. And the ‘vision’ of the American leaders evidences that all too clearly.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Removing Saddam was a mistake, and had we known what we found out after the war about there being no WMDs, there was no good reason to overthrow Saddam. He had rivalries w/ both Iran and Syria, even if he was anti-Israel as well. Also, today Kuwait is pretty much pro-jihad and close to Iran: liberating it did nothing for our interests in the region. If anything, it gave Bush a pretext to pressurize Israel to invite back the PLO from Tunis and settle them in Judea, Samaria and Gaza
Trying to repeat the Germany & Japan experiments in Iraq & Afghanistan w/o even recognizing the islamic aspects of those 2 countries was never gonna work. In the case of Japan, emperor worship in Shintoism was ended, and in Germany, Nazism was stamped out. The equivalent of that in these 2 countries would have been the qur’an and all islamic texts being banned, and islam being completely curbed, like it was in Kemal’s Turkey. Since nobody has the stomach to do those things, the Afghanistan war should have ended in 2002 once the Taliban fell, and the Iraq war should never even have happened
One last thing: Netanyahu wasn’t the driving influence behind the Iraq war in 2003. In fact, he wasn’t even Israel’s prime minister then: I remember him being a regular on US TV appearances making a case for defanging Iran as well as Hamas and Hizbullah
James Lincoln says
࿗Infidel࿘ says,
“Removing Saddam was a mistake, and had we known what we found out after the war about there being no WMDs, there was no good reason to overthrow Saddam.”
Yes.
By personal thoughts…
Saddam Hussein was very “opaque” with inspectors regarding possible WMDs as to not appear weak to his own people – as well as to neighboring countries.
Had he been totally “transparent”, the war may have been avoided – but his “weakness” would not have gone over well with his supporters…
David M says
somehistory that’s debatable, & whatever the US has done in the Middle East has been an absolute disaster. Trillions of $ spent, many lives cost & zero gain. Just stay out of the Middle East.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Actually, the theory was that he wanted Iran to believe that he had WMDs, particularly nukes, which is why he was that opaque, and put all sorts of restrictions on IAEA inspectors. Problem for him was that it wasn’t Iran that was freaked out by that, but rather, the Bush administration. Maybe he should have through secret channels convinced the US of the truth but persuaded Bush to play along
James Lincoln says
Thanks for your informative reply, Infidel.
David M says
Exactly, the US should stay out of middle eastern wars. The weapons of mass destruction claim was a lie. Regime change? How did that turn out in Syria, Afghanistan & Iraq? Iran will be the same.
somehistory says
Bio-weapons (germ warfare) and chemical weapons are both WMD’s.
saddam had both of those.
Billy Bones says
We are not being dragged into a regime change war or a war by any other definition, we are already in it. We are at war with the greater Islamic world. The greater Islamic world knows they are at war with us, but we haven’t figured that out yet. One indication of how confused we are about the whole thing is Trump’s recent statement that Iran should “unconditionally surrender.” Islam never surrenders in the war against the infidel, they just change tactics.
dumbledoresarmy says
Yes. And in fact: the Ummah, or Mohammedan Mob, has been waging war, by various means, according to whatever opportunity presented, for **1400 years**: in Asia, in Africa, in Europe and now on the other inhabitated continents as well.
Open full-scale military assault; use of non-state entities for plausible deniability; infiltraton and subversion to take over economies and governments (including by bribery and corruption, and foolish infidel males in high places converting to Islam in order to be able to marry a tempting hijabette), and ‘freelance’ jihad by individuals running amok. Over and over and over; and an estimation of the death toll inflicted on non-Muslims, so far, runs to some 250 million (bearing in mind, too, that for most of the period when Muslims were murdering millions – e.g. in India, 7th Century to 17th century, or in Africa, for the same period – the total human population of the world was much, much smaller than it now is… so the percentage of the human population murdered by Muslims in any of those previous centuries, just pick any one and do some sums – is.. horrific.
gravenimage says
+1
somehistory says
That is true, Billy Bones. Every devout mozscum is a soldier of satan the devil, intent on submission of everyone, or death for everyone.
Keys says
Yes indeed, Billy.
A “no nuke” Iran will require regime change. Khomeini’s recent statements are clear. “The Iranian nation will not surrender.” He said he would “resolutely” oppose peace with Israel or any of Israel’s allies, if peace was imposed from abroad:
“The Iranian nation will firmly stand against an imposed war, just as it will resolutely resist an imposed peace. This is a nation that will never surrender to any form of imposition.”
His idea of peace is a muslim “hudna”; during the “peace” he will continue to strive for nukes and ICBMs.
It would be best if the so-called 80% of Iranians who oppose or hate this regime bring about regime change. But, I find it hard to believe the 80% figure, and those who oppose it are basically unarmed against armed and organized Khomeini supporters/benefactors. Many Muslim believers may find it difficult to go against Allah’s Imams and Ayatollahs.
Khomeini is a true Muslim, and that is the evil heart of the problem. Bottom line to quote Billy Bones above:
“Islam never surrenders in the war against the infidel, they just change tactics.” And their new tactics are not scimitars and siege towers.
dumbledoresarmy says
Re Trump, and not permitting Iran to go nuclear…
Waay back when Trump was running for president the first time, I came across a historic article from the *1980s* (I think it was the 1980s): someone had interviewed him when he was still engaged in making his pile. And instead of talking about business deals and real estate, what did he insist on talking about? – Pakistan, which was then in process of going nuclear. And Trump was worrying about that, and wondering how one would stop them… and he didn’t rule out military force as a last resort. But of course, at the time, he was just a private businessman, without anyone’s ear in politics, and the idiots in charge didn’t do a damn thing; and so the Sunnis (i.e. Pakistan) got the Bomb.
it occurs to me to wonder whether all along one of the drivers for this man.. driving him to become rich enough, connected enough, to conduct not one but two presidential campaigns… has been a rational fear not unlike that which Giulio Meotti recently expressed in a brief, hard-hitting article that appeared in Israel National News – “Woe betide anyone who does not take an Islamic fanatic seriously. Double woe betide anyone who does not take an Islamic fanatic with nuclear weapons seriously”. (only correction required: not ‘Islamic fanatic’ but.. ‘devout Muslim’…).
Someone send him (and every member of his circle) – reduced to one page, with nice clear bullet points, the wisdom of a/ John Quincy Adams and b/ Winston Churchill, on Islam. (Churchill’s discussion of the awfulness of Islam – Islam, as such – can be found in The Story of the Malakand Field Force, where he sums it up as ‘the religion of blood and war’ and at somewhat more length in the original unabridged edition of “The River Wars” (which describes what happened when the British had to deal with the Mahdi in Sudan).
Adams matters the most; because Adams GOT Islamic deception; he understood the fact that Muslims resort to deception, if they are not strong enough (temporarily) to destroy their target upfront by military means. They will engage in ‘false and delusive promises of peace’. Adams observed how Muslims behaved toward America, during the campaign against the Barbary pirates; but he ALSO did his homework and observed their conduct elsewhere as, for example, in the Russo-Turkish wars. He knew that infidels cannot trust Mohammedans to honor a ‘deal’ made with said infidels. I suspect he knew all about the Treaty of Hudaybiyya, from his research, and had drawn the correct conclusions.. DON’T trust. Muslims. PERIOD!
Worth quoting: first, re Mohammed – “He declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind….The precept of the Koran is perpetual war against all who deny that Mahomet is the prophet of God. The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute; **the victorious may be appeased by a false and delusive promise of peace; and the faithful follower of the prophet, may submit to the imperious necessities of defeat; but the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective. The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force…”.
Further: “.. AS THE ESSENTIAL PRINCIPLE (JQA’s own capitals) of his [Mohammed’s] faith is the subjugation of others by the sword, it is only by force, that his false doctrines can be dispelled, and his power annihilated”.
Adams would not have reached that conclusion rapidly, or lightly.
Israel needs the USA to help them absolutely OBLITERATE every last trace of Iran’s nuke project; to turn every site into nothing but a big smoking hole in the ground.
It would send a strong message to the rest of the Ummah: the Infidels, or some of them, have wised up.. and they are prepared to hit damn hard.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
That is strange, given his recent praise for Pakistan after he forced a ceasefire b/w India & Pakistan. Indian posters on @X dug up his tweets from 2012 dinging Pakistan for hosting Osama. I really wish we had that Trump back, who would treat Pakistan like the rogue state that it is
somehistory says
Thank you, DDA , for the info on Mr. Trump’s early interview. Just one thing, Mr. Trump had to finance *three* campaigns. 3
Keys says
Yes, thank you DDA.
We are at a “Battle of Vienna” point with historical figures:
Sobieski, Mustfa Pasha, Trump, Khomeini, Netanyahu.
Stop the invasion or not.
Pray for Trump/Netanyahu – they must be exhausted trying to best fix these life altering messes. No doubt, never again is now.
Taffy says
“Obviously Netanyahu was dangerously wrong about that [ Saddam Hussein was developing nuclear weapons and guaranteeing that the Middle East would be safer for everyone if Saddam were removed from power].”
All I can say is that Netanyahu was not wrong. Even after Israel destroyed Saddam’s reactor, Saddam continued his quest for a nuclear weapon. He also was far advanced in biological weapons and chemical weapons. Remember Dr. Germ, Mrs. Anthrax—Chemical Sally, and Chemical Ali? Saddam used Iranian and Kurdish prisoners of war to test the efficacy of his anthrax and camel pox bio weapons. He set up gas chambers where the POWs were all “gassed” with these bioagents. All died in extreme agony from internal hemorrhaging and this testing was deemed a success. Saddam’s human guinea pig experiments went in for at least 10-years.
Saddam had weaponized anthrax, Aflatoxin, and botulism by incorporating 5-10000 liters of each into various munitions. Unfortunately, Iraq fooled the CDC, France’s equivalent and some German firms to give them biological samples, claiming it was for medical research. It was only after the defection of a high ranking Iraqi general to Jordan in the mid 1990’s did Iraq admit that it had this biological warfare program.
Somehow all of the above was downplayed by the MSM with the simple statement inserted that Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction and the war was for naught and all Bush’s fault.
The U.S. did not fail by attacking Iraq and ousting Saddam. It failed by packing up its bags and going home before the job was finished. The U.S. left Iraq with a big power vacuum and failed to install a government favorable to U.S. policy. And wouldn’t you know it, every radical Islamic faction took over.
somehistory says
Every human is wrong at some time. It’s foolish to think that because a man is *seemingly* wrong in one instance, he can’t be right in another.
There was much said about iraq and whether the wmd were there, or not. There was evidence that saddam had things removed to syria when he received word of what was on the way.
Whether or not Mr. Netanyahu was right or wrong about saddam, there is way too much evidence….much from the mouths of the mullahs…that iran plans to develop the bomb and use it asap against its *enemies.*
War is a terrible thing. But sometimes, it is a necessary terrible thing.
Pray Hard says
Silly person question. Islam is dragging the entire world into war.
Westman says
800 lbs of 60% enriched U235/238 would make a number of dirty bombs which could make significant cities of Israel uninhabitable.
That 800lb stockpile is reason enough to remove it from Iran by any means necessary. Which is worse, 100,000 dead from a nuclear bomb or centuries of abandoned cities which could kill 100,000 with radiation over time should the citizens remain?
James Lincoln says
Great point, Westman.
gravenimage says
+1
MJ Raichyk says
Whatever.!!.. the question was whether this was appropriately a threat to America in order to justify the involvement of U.S. in kinetic war…. Just like Trump did with the Houthis…. Threaten American shipping and Trump orders BRIMSTONE…. stop? and Trump calls his fire off…
What needs doing is to do the NUKE ARITHMETIC and ditch the pointless, acrimony over what are OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES and PEOPLE
When facing the wild west negotiating of ”peace” paths involving NUKES and WAR MACHINES,
don’t run off to hysterical political clowns of all BIASED stripes, instead of CONSULTING A.I. to get RELEVANT INFO…
So where does A.I. get us?
Well, A.I. will tell you that U.S. Intel on Iranian nuke status is not what they said BEFORE to Tulsi, and instead quotes the INDEPENDENT NUKE INSPECTORS [IAEA], that Iran has over 600lbs of nuke stuff purified to 60% and enough for a half dozen nuke warheads…
Say to A.I. what does that mean and A.I. will explain…
[here colloquially translated]…
yep, we-the-Great-Satans would not last long if the jihadis already here were supplied with SUITCASE size NUKES that would be delivered to the KEY 9-10 big TRANSFORMERS on our UNHARDENED electric GRID….
Provided courtesy of the Ayatolla’s 600 lbs of 60% already purified uranium etc [requiring another 2weeks of centrifuge time per A.I] which could supply a couple 50lb missile warheads for launching on Little-Satan and reserve a bunch of the rest for the many 6lb suitcase nukes…
So
digest that part…
Next ask A.I. about what military resources could rapidly end the Iranian NUKE CENTRIFUGES threatening GREAT SATAN
and NOT USE SATAN’s NUKE WEAPONS which would trigger escalation…
A.I. says the U.S. has the GBU-57 non-nuke bunker buster with the depth power needed…
THEN
all we need is the confidence that Trump would say NO to anything boots-on-the-ground once the America-First objective of NO-NUKES-for-IRAN is accomplished… JUST LIKE HE CAMPAIGNED TO ACCOMPLISH…
TTYL
All the yapping neo-cons or those whose ideas don’t do nuke arithmetic are IRRELEVANT.. don’t you agree? ttyl
Winston 101 says
I want the U S to assist, if needed, in the destruction of the sites in Iran that need to be destroyed by equipment and bombs that only the U S possesses. This does not conflict with America First because America would be acting in the interest of “America Now” and for “American Future”. America would not be doing it simply for Israel. Each country would be doing their part for their interests.
When Iran chants “Death to America” I bereave them. I think the U.S. should take advantage of all the fine work Israel has done to weaken Iran to the point it has.
Israel is not asking the U.S. for boots on the ground and regime change.
Israel is asking for an assist from the United States that would benefit the United States.
If nuclear Iran wasn’t a threat to America via nuclear missiles, suitcase terror bombs, dirty bombs etc this discussion would not be happening.