The U.S. Air Force and Intelligence Community Could Learn from Israel - But as Long as Isolationism Is Used to Mask Jew-Hatred, It Won’t Happen

Let’s begin with the following fact: Israel is the only ally in American history that has succeeded in pushing out two strategic rivals, Russia and China, from an entire region of the globe: the Middle East. And it did so in under a year and a half. No other U.S. ally, not in Asia, not in Europe, not in Africa or South America - has ever in history achieved a feat even remotely close.

And all of this was achieved without a single American bullet being fired.

Now let’s continue.

In recent years, especially amid rising tensions in the Middle East, a disturbing idea has gained ground in Western discourse: that Israel and Iran are equally extreme, religiously driven, and destabilizing. Two sides of the same coin.

Beneath this false equivalence lies a deeper bias: If there must be a nuclear threat, better it come from a regime untainted by “Jewish influence.” Better to tolerate Iran’s ambitions than support Israel, not out of trust in Iran, but out of distrust in Israel as the nation-state of the Jews.

This raises a critical question: Why is U.S. military support for a democratic ally more controversial than ignoring Iran, a dictatorship that openly chants “Death to America”? The answer, too often, is this: to some, the Jews, not Iran, are the real threat.

This is not analysis or political realism - it is theology disguised as strategy.

Where a spiritual or cultural discomfort with Judaism outweighs a clear, armed threat. When ideological allies are rejected in favor of declared enemies, for identity-based resentment, that is troll level insanity.

So how do they get away with it? By hiding behind the innocent-sounding veil of “American isolationism.”

But let’s be clear: isolationism made sense in a world without nuclear weapons, without ICBMs, without genocidal regimes armed with modern technology. That world is gone.

Today, “isolationism” is often just a fig leaf, a rhetorical shield. They invoke it not out of strategic caution, but to justify proven allies they despise. They use isolationism to like antisemites use anti-Zionism a mask towards their hate of Jews.

This isn’t foreign policy. Hence why to sustain it, critics must recast Jews as a metaphysical danger: a “corrupting force,” a “cultural menace,” the power behind the curtain.

Even Jews who built America’s strength, scientists of the Manhattan Project, thinkers, public servants, are folded into conspiracy. The point is to prove that "Jewish influence", in any form, is more dangerous to America than a nuclear Iran.

Thus, Israel becomes the ultimate scapegoat for blind neo-reactionaries with a historical grudge masked in the language of restraint.

They won’t say “the Jews are America's enemy” - but they will promote the idea in every indirect way. The result isn’t foreign policy. It’s a revival of the old dogma: Jews may exist as a people, but never as a nation.

Stalinist to the core.

And that’s the difference between principled realism and ideological rot: One stands with democratic allies. The other cannot bear the existence of a Jewish state that is sovereign, strong, and unapologetically modern.

The babble about an “American isolationist strategy” in the face of the Shiite fundamentalist threat, while America’s streets are burning, overrun by infiltrators from every direction, sounds eerily like the babble of a cancer patient who outright rejects life-saving chemotherapy in favor of holistic oils and prayer.

And yesterday, as I sat in a restaurant in Boston, across from what may have been the fattest man in Massachusetts, ranting against Israel like some woke-right version of Michael Moore, I had to tell him: As an American, I believe our Air Force and our intelligence community have a lot to learn from Israel.

But what good is that? Has anyone who truly hates the Jews ever been willing to admit they have something to learn from them?