“Ending the Islamic regime in Tehran would help reset the West’s moral compass.”
Det skriver Melanie Phillips her “The stunning indifference of so much of the West to the Iranians’ heroism and the vicious savagery of the regime reflects the persistent inability of Western nations to understand the stakes.”
Taget herfra
The stupendous courage of the Iranian people has inspired awe at this massive display of unquenchable human spirit. Hundreds of thousands of Iranian demonstrators literally walked into the guns in their struggle for freedom from the monstrous Islamic regime.
At the time of writing, it’s unclear whether U.S. President Donald Trump will come to their aid as he promised. An apparently planned U.S. attack on Wednesday night was reportedly called off at the last minute.
The enormous risks of such an operation may mean that it will take place when all ducks are finally in a row. It’s hard to believe that Trump would be happy to be seen to have been played by the regime and thus leave it in place.
He must be aware that this wouldn’t merely be a stunning betrayal of the Iranian people. It wouldn’t merely torch his own reputation. The resulting weakening of America and strengthening of the axis of evil in the world would be a dire outcome.
For decades, the West has refused to face up to and deal with the threat posed by Iran.
Just as in the 1930s a refusal to grasp the true extent of the danger posed by Nazism led to the Holocaust and a terrible world war, so the eventual reckoning with the mullahs is turning out to be far more difficult and deadly than if the Iranian jihadi bullet had been bitten years ago.
Whatever may happen over the next few days or weeks, the terrible result of this vacillation is that many thousands of Iranians have now been murdered while the world did no more than wring its hands. And some haven’t even done that.
The stunning indifference of so much of the West to the Iranians’ heroism and the vicious savagery of the regime reflects the persistent inability of Western nations to understand the stakes. And that’s rooted in turn in a moral perversity to which much of the West has succumbed.
This was on unsavory display by Ken Martin, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee. Considering the massacres by Iran’s regime and the disputed killing of anti-ICE protester Renee Good by a U.S. law-enforcement officer last week, Martin equated the two.
“If comparing the U.S. to Iran makes you angry, ask why,” he wrote. “Killing protesters. Crushing dissent. Kidnapping and disappearing legal citizens. Ignoring courts. Threatening critics. Terrorizing communities. That’s authoritarian behavior—anywhere.”
Martin thus defamed his own country and diminished the evil of the Iranian regime. His obtuse comparison reflected the general loss of moral compass in the West—the collapse of the distinction between right and wrong, and the insistence on moral equivalence.
This empowers bad people and punishes their victims. With the “post-colonial” narrative that the Muslim world is the victim of the West and therefore can never do wrong, while Israel and America are oppressors and therefore can never do right, it’s produced Western complicity with Islamism.
It’s made it blind to the ways in which jihadi Islam is steadily dominating society, as well as distorting its response to antisemitism and even to the Islamist murder of Jews.
This has been spectacularly demonstrated by the new legislation introduced by Australia’s government under Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to combat antisemitism, hate and extremism in the wake of the Dec. 14 attack by Islamist terrorists against Jews celebrating Chanukah on Bondi Beach in which 15 people were murdered.
With startling perversity, this new law could criminalize Jews for identifying Muslims as being responsible for the atrocity against them. The mass murder of Christians would not constitute an offense, but “Islamophobia” may be punishable by up to five years in prison. And an exemption for religious texts could empower radical preachers to use the Quran and the hadiths to promote murderous hatred of Jews, as some do now.
In the storm of criticism that followed, Albanese defended this exemption by appearing to falsely suggest that the “Old Testament” promoted hatred or called for the murder of others. So he managed to turn an ostensible protection against antisemitism into an ignorant and prejudiced attack on the Hebrew Bible.
In Britain, which has long plunged down this rabbit hole, the police are now doing the Islamists’ bidding. In Birmingham last November, the West Midlands force decided at the behest of local Islamists to ban away-fans of Maccabi Tel Aviv from attending their team’s match with Aston Villa. It’s now been revealed that they then fabricated intelligence to obscure their own conclusion that the Israelis would be at risk of violence from “armed” local Muslims, and instead stated falsely that the Muslims were at risk from the Maccabi fans.
As Nick Timothy, a Conservative Member of Parliament, has written: “Britain is in danger of veering into something that should alarm us all: the surrender of the criminal justice system to the politics of communalism. Islamist thugs and the mob know what they want and are determined to get it.”
Britain is an extreme outlier in this baleful process. But the refusal to confront the danger of Islamism led to the election of Zohran Mamdani as New York’s mayor, whose first act was to dismiss the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism and repeal an executive order put into place by his predecessor, Eric Adams, prohibiting boycotts of Israel.
Mamdani insists that he will protect the city’s Jews. But while he has been speaking out against the recent torching of a synagogue in Mississippi and incidents of antisemitic graffiti in New York—and accepted the resignation of a high-level appointee who had peddled a trope about “money-hungry Jews”—he has made it plain that he will not do the same for Jews who are seen to support Israel.
“We must distinguish between antisemitism and criticism of the Israeli government,” he said. But it’s not mere criticism of Israel but anti-Zionism to which he himself subscribes by his refusal to recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state.
The distinction between antisemitism and anti-Zionism is specious. It’s only the Jewish people who are singled out as having no right to their own ancestral homeland. The very attempt to divide the Jewish homeland from the Jews—the people whose faith is centered in that land—is an attack on Judaism.
In Britain, a Jewish Member of Parliament was barred from visiting a school in his Bristol constituency by Israel-haters among the teachers and their union on the grounds that he is the vice chair of Labour Friends of Israel.
This has caused widespread shock as an assault against the principles of education and parliamentary democracy, as well as against a Jewish politician.
But no one should be at all surprised. In the United Kingdom, as in America, the education system (with some honorable exceptions) has been in the grip of teachers who are teaching schoolchildren through a Marxist lens that represents all human behavior as a struggle between the powerful and the powerless.
They subscribe to the belief that the capitalist West is fundamentally oppressive and colonialist, that the Jews are behind capitalism, and that the State of Israel is therefore colonialist and oppressive.
Generations of this brainwashing have resulted in American sympathy for Israelis hitting an all-time low, falling last year to 46%—the lowest level in almost 25 years of Gallup’s annual tracking of this measure.
And in Britain, polling by StandWithUs UK found that 29% of British students see Hamas’s Oct. 7 pogrom as an “understandable act of resistance,” with 40% believing that those publicly supporting Israel should “expect” abuse on campus.
It’s clear that the Palestine cause is a portal to obliterate Israel by suborning Western elites to the cause; the desire to obliterate Israel is a portal to the desire to obliterate Jews; and the desire to obliterate both Israel and the Jews is a portal to the destruction of the West through a broader and deeper loss of moral compass and civilizational spine. Ending the Islamic regime in Iran would be a way of resetting the West’s moral compass. Enabling it to survive would leave that compass broken and the West in continuing freefall.
Taget herfra
Taget herfra
- Despite encouraging Iran’s protesters to carry on and assuring them that American “help is on its way,” Trump has done nothing to compel the regime to permanently stop the killing or its other atrocities.
- The question becomes: Is Trump actually going to leave these psychopaths in power and effectively thwart the brave, unarmed Iranians from ridding themselves of an armed government that has been suppressing, torturing and slaughtering them in the streets over the past 47 years?
- For reasons that are entirely unclear, Trump already has a history, unfortunately, of rescuing the Iranian regime — called by the US State Department 39 years in a row, since 1984 the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism.
- Trump first said he did not want regime change in Iran; then posted that he might want regime change if it could “Make Iran Great Again: MIGA!!!”, before turning around, yet again, and reimposing the ceasefire. Trump also seems constantly to be “forgetting” that Iran has been attacking the US since 1979…
- Every US adversary — from Russian President Vladimir Putin to Chinese President Xi Jinping — can now assume that the Trump administration, while giving diplomacy so much of a chance that it is effectively no help at all, is primarily just huffing and puffing, while every US ally can now assume that the US no longer can be trusted.
- The Trump administration’s dawdling appears virtually the same as that of President Joe Biden…. Such acoustics with no follow-up destroy US deterrence and paint the Trump administration as weak and dithering at a time when the future of American preeminence is at stake. That is a terrible look.
It has been nearly two weeks since US President Donald J. Trump threatened the Iranian regime with military intervention for killing its demonstrating citizens.
“If Iran shoots and violently kills peaceful protesters, which is their custom, the United States of America will come to their rescue,” the president wrote in a post on Truth Social on January 2, about five days into the Iranian protests. “We are locked and loaded and ready to go.”
Since then, according to Iran International, the regime has killed “at least 12,000,” and according to CBS News, “possibly as many as 20,000 people.” According to the Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA), as of January 14, “[at] 617 protest gatherings in 187 cities across the country, the arrest of at least 18,470 people [was reported].”
On January 13, Trump wrote:
“Iranian Patriots, KEEP PROTESTING – TAKE OVER YOUR INSTITUTIONS!!! Save the names of the killers and abusers. They will pay a big price. I have cancelled all meetings with Iranian Officials until the senseless killing of protesters STOPS. HELP IS ON ITS WAY. MIGA!!! PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP,”
Despite encouraging Iran’s protesters to carry on and assuring them that American “help is on its way,” Trump has done nothing to compel the regime to permanently stop the killing or its other atrocities.
On January 15, according to some news reports, Trump informed Tehran that the US would not attack the regime. The report came after Trump said the day before that he had been informed that Iran’s crackdown on nationwide protests was subsiding:
“The killing has stopped. The executions have stopped. There’s no plan for executions or an execution. I’ve been told that on good authority. We’ll find out about it. I’m sure if it happens, I’ll be very upset.”
Iran executes its people year-round, even when there are no protests. In 2025, the regime executed at least 1,922 people, more than double the number recorded the previous year and the highest figure documented in over a decade, according to a report by HRANA.
One cannot take any information that comes from the mullah regime as being “on good authority,” especially since the Iranian regime will say anything to stay in power and avoid a US attack.
According to a January 15 report in the New York Post:
“The ruthless slaughter of anti-government protesters in Iran appears to have stopped — but only because residents are being held hostage in their homes by machine gun-wielding security forces that have flooded the streets, sources told The Post Thursday.”
Iran is also trying to deny that it had scheduled any executions, although White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt stated that Iran had scheduled 800. At least one, according to reports, has been “postponed.” Oh? Until when?
The question becomes: Is Trump actually going to leave these psychopaths in power and effectively thwart the brave, unarmed Iranians from ridding themselves of an armed government that has been suppressing, torturing and slaughtering them in the streets over the past 47 years?
For reasons that are entirely unclear, Trump already has a history, unfortunately, of rescuing the Iranian regime — called by the US State Department 39 years in a row, since 1984 the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism.
When Israel and the US critically set back the Iranian regime during the 12-day war, Trump stepped in and imposed a ceasefire, thereby preventing Israel from continuing to neutralize threats from Iran’s drones, ballistic missiles and other weaponry. Trump even stopped Israel from responding to an Iranian violation of the ceasefire after it went into effect. In doing so, he not only disadvantaged Israel but also subverted the Iranian people, who, after an Israeli airstrike destroyed the gates of the notorious Evin Prison, which represents every evil that the Iranian regime stands for, were hoping for an end to the regime.
Trump first said he did not want regime change in Iran; then posted that he might want regime change if it could “Make Iran Great Again: MIGA!!!”, before turning around, yet again, and reimposing the ceasefire.
Trump also seems constantly to be “forgetting” that Iran has been attacking the US since 1979, starting with taking 66 members of the US Embassy staff hostage in 1979, then, in 1983, bombing the US Marines barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, killing 241 Americans. In just the last four years, Iran has launched 350 attacks on American troops and assets in the Middle East, without America lifting a finger in protest.
If Trump does not care about the lives of Iranian protesters, or that he might inadvertently be condemning them to live under savage rulers they do not want, he does claim to care about US national security — as he repeatedly mentions when it comes to “running” Venezuela and acquiring Greenland. Threatening military intervention against Iran for two weeks, however, and then doing nothing is probably an extremely counterproductive, horrible precedent to set for US national security deterrence.
Every US adversary — from Russian President Vladimir Putin to Chinese President Xi Jinping — can now assume that the Trump administration, while giving diplomacy so much of a chance that it is effectively no help at all, is primarily just huffing and puffing, while every US ally can now assume that the US no longer can be trusted.
The Trump administration’s dawdling appears virtually the same as that of President Joe Biden: through passivity, he succeeded only in encouraging America’s adversaries to drag out their aggression — because nobody stopped them. Such acoustics with no follow-up destroy US deterrence and paint the Trump administration as weak and dithering at a time when the future of American preeminence is at stake. That is a terrible look.
Robert Williams is based in the United States.
Taget herfra
Trump havde chancen for at flade Mordor, men gjorde det ikke. Det vil blive husket!