By Sherman Frederick/Properly Subversive
It’s hard for journalists to cover war, be it something on the scale of World War II or the conflict we now see in Iran.
Sherman Frederick
All you have is your own common sense plus whatever the combatants tell you. In the Iran conflict, for example, we listen to the assessments from the U.S. and Israel and watch the videos they provide. The TV guys love the video — and I get that — but watching something blow up means nothing unless it tells a bigger story.
Common sense tells me that the U.S. and Israel have won the conflict, if what is meant by that is that Iran, as a military force and exporter of terrorism, has been rendered helpless.
Iran’s Navy is verifiably gone. The country’s air defense, too. The missiles and drone attacks once furiously lobbed out from Iran have been reduced to a trickle. It’s clear Iran no longer poses a threat to its neighbors or the world.
That’s a win.
But this isn’t a World War II kind of war. We’re not going to get reports from a modern-day Ernie Pyle embedded with troops. There’s not going to be a picture of soldiers raising the flag on Mount Suribachi after the taking of Guadalcanal.
More than likely, there’s not going to be troops in Tehran.
The crazy Islamic clerics who brought Iran to this point still hold sway over the people of Iran. When they will be overthrown and replaced is a whole different proposition, largely up to the people of Iran.
This war was fought and won with sophisticated weapons fired by soldiers in a mobile command shelter, high-altitude bombers, or fighter jets able to pinpoint a destructive missile with pinpoint accuracy.
The battle now is for the children of Iran. Will leaders there join the league of civilized nations or return to us-against-the-world Islamic rule?
If there were a button outsiders could push to fire off a sophisticated weapon capable of achieving that, we’d push it.
But there isn’t. So we wait, and hope.
KNIVES OUT FOR ISRAEL
The New York Times tells us that there’s a big shift in the Democratic Party away from supporting Israel. The Grey Lady’s headline reads: “Newsom Compares Israel to ‘Apartheid State,’ Questions Military Support — The California governor, seen as a likely presidential candidate, made comments that reflect a shift in the Democratic Party.”
The newspaper backs up that headline by assuring us that “(California Gov. Gavin) Newsom’s comments reflect a stark shift in the Democratic Party, which in recent years has grown critical of Israel.”
The New York Times would be a good source for what’s going on in the Democratic Party, as its writers are so far up the DNC’s arse they see every polyp. Gallup’s polling shows that over 60% of registered Democrats have an unfavorable view of Israel.
And, need we mention the clear anti-semitic tone struck by Democratic leaders during the Gaza war?
Newsom, of course, is running for president and will likely face a challenge from Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, who is Jewish. (Just pointing it out, not suggesting any other motive.)
The governor told a podcaster in L.A., “Do you think, looking down the road, that the United States should consider maybe, you know, rethinking our military support for Israel?”
Currently, there are nine Jewish U.S. Senators, including Nevada’s Jacky Rosen. I wonder what she thinks about her party’s ongoing shift against Israel?
(Sherman R. Frederick is a longtime Nevada journalist and a member of the Nevada Press Association Hall of Fame. You can read more from him at shermanfrederick.substack.com.
