WATCH:
11
LISTEN:
https://matzav.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/Bitachon4Life-Shiur-1726-Semichah-Part-26-Dependent.mp3For more info, email bitachon4life@gmail.com.
Podcaster Joe Rogan said many supporters of President Trump feel let down by the ongoing war with Iran, describing the conflict as “insane” and questioning how it fits with the president’s earlier campaign promises.
Speaking on the latest episode of his podcast, Rogan suggested that the military action has left some of Trump’s backers uneasy because they believed he would avoid new foreign conflicts.
“Well, it just seems so insane, based on what he ran on. I mean, this is why a lot of people feel betrayed, right?” Rogan said during the latest episode of his podcast. “He ran on, ‘No more wars,’ ‘End these stupid, senseless wars,’ and then we have one that we can’t even really clearly define why we did it.”
Concerns about the war potentially expanding into a lengthy military commitment have also surfaced among several Republican lawmakers. Some members of the GOP have warned that the United States could risk becoming tied down in another prolonged overseas conflict after spending two decades fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Last week, Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.) cautioned that the current operation against Iran could evolve into what he described as another endless war, urging Trump supporters to remain attentive.
“I would say stay concerned,” Burchett told a reporter after being asked if he had a message for Trump supporters. “I mean, be concerned. Be vigilant. Hold our feet to the fire. Keep us honest on that issue.”
Public opinion surveys indicate that many Americans expect the confrontation with Iran to continue for some time. A recent Quinnipiac poll found that nearly three-quarters of respondents believe the fighting will last months or longer.
According to the survey, 71 percent of voters said they expect the war to continue for “months,” “about a year” or “longer than that.”
President Trump, however, offered a much more optimistic timeline earlier this week, suggesting that the conflict is nearing its conclusion.
“This was just an excursion into something that had to be done. We’re getting very close to finishing that too,” Trump said during a press conference Monday.
Trump’s remarks came only days after he made clear that the United States would settle for nothing less than “unconditional surrender” from Iran’s leadership.
{Matzav.com}
A small island in the Persian Gulf that is only about one-third the size of Manhattan has become a focal point in discussions about how the conflict with Iran could unfold, as analysts say its control could dramatically affect Tehran’s finances and influence President Trump’s strategy toward the regime, the NY Post reports.
Kharg Island sits roughly 16 miles from Iran’s coastline in the Persian Gulf. Because of its exposed position, experts say it could be difficult for Iran to defend while also being relatively easy for adversaries to isolate — factors that have reportedly attracted attention from planners within the administration.
“Kharg Island handles roughly 90% of Iran’s crude oil exports. Take it out, and this means cutting off the military budget in addition to pulling the plug on the basic services that keep Iranian society functioning,” said Mohammed Soliman, a senior fellow at the DC-based Middle East Institute.
Soliman explained that even a temporary disruption of activity on the island could send shockwaves through Iran’s economy and internal stability.
“Losing Kharg for even a few weeks will create a security and societal crisis in Iran at the same time. Tehran doesn’t get to choose which one to deal with first,” said Soliman, author of “West Asia: A New American Grand Strategy in the Middle East.”
“The revenue shortfall would run into the billions monthly. You’d see the currency collapse further, inflation spike, subsidies buckle, and this will add more pressure on the country with no quick way to stop the bleeding.”
According to a source familiar with administration thinking, the question surrounding a move to seize the island is less about whether it will happen and more about the timing, given its strategic importance in the wider conflict.
The source said the Israel Defense Forces would prefer to capture the island sooner, while American commanders are believed to favor continuing strikes against Iran’s offensive capabilities before turning attention to Kharg.
Under that approach, taking control of the island would occur only after Iran’s military power had already been severely weakened, allowing the move to deliver maximum strategic pressure on the regime.
Although Iranian oil exports face heavy American sanctions, most crude shipped from Kharg ultimately ends up in China.
Since the war began on Feb. 28, oil shipments moving through the Persian Gulf have slowed dramatically. The disruption has rattled global markets, prompting sharp fluctuations in trading as Trump attempts to encourage commercial vessels to pass through the Strait of Hormuz by offering a new reinsurance plan along with U.S. naval escorts.
JP Morgan warned in a statement Monday that “a direct strike [on Kharg Island] would immediately halt the bulk of Iran’s crude exports, likely triggering severe retaliation in the Strait of Hormuz or against regional energy infrastructure.”
Axios was the first to report that Washington was considering a mission aimed at capturing Kharg Island.
Former administration official John Ullyot, who previously served in defense roles including at the National Security Council during Trump’s first term, said the island’s central role in Iran’s economy could provide the United States with major leverage.
Ullyot described the prospect of a military operation to take the island as a risky move that could nonetheless deliver major strategic benefits.
A US raid to capture Kharg would be “high-risk, high-reward,” Ullyot said.
“To take such a high percentage of the Iranian oil supply off the table would cripple the regime and would also give the US, as it has in Venezuela, a big say on where Iran’s oil supply would go,” he said.
“This is the whole source of their economy.”
Since launching the war with Iran, Trump has frequently pointed to events in Venezuela, telling audiences how he removed dictator Nicolas Maduro and replaced him with vice president Delcy Rodriquez, who later agreed to direct oil exports toward the United States and allow American companies into the country’s energy sector.
Ullyot said Trump appears aware of the dangers that come with occupying territory inside Iran itself, suggesting that large numbers of American troops may not be necessary because of Kharg Island’s geographic position.
“One option would be to do a naval blockade of the island,” he said.
“President Trump can essentially seize the island by having an aggressive blockade of the island, [which] he could use down the line to essentially make the Iranian oil supply subject to his call… It would also give him leverage to influence who would be, ultimately, the next leader or interim leader of Iran.”
Speaking Monday afternoon, Trump said he expects the conflict to conclude soon.
“I think you’ll see it’s going to be a short-term excursion,” the president said.
“So the rest is going to be a determination as to my attitude, along with the people in the Trump administration, what we want to do.”
{Matzav.com}
A public dispute between Sen. Ted Cruz and commentator Tucker Carlson intensified again this week as the two prominent conservative figures exchanged sharp criticism over Israel, antisemitism, and the war with Iran.
Speaking Tuesday at an antisemitism symposium in Washington organized by the Republican Jewish Coalition and National Review, the Texas Republican delivered a blistering attack on Carlson and vowed to confront the podcast host directly.
“I believe Tucker Carlson is the single most dangerous demagogue in this country,” Cruz said. He added that antisemitism has become increasingly visible on the political right in recent months. “I have seen more antisemitism in the last 18 months on the right than at any point in my lifetime,” Cruz continued. “It is being spread by loud voices, the most consequential of whom is Tucker Carlson.”
Cruz’s comments came days after Carlson mocked Cruz and others who rely on Israeli intelligence assessments during a recent episode of his podcast.
During the March 2 broadcast, Carlson ridiculed what he described as blind trust in Israeli intelligence. “No offense to Ted Cruz or all the other dumbos who are always saying, ‘we get all this actionable intelligence, it’s so important, we need [Israel] so desperately,’” Carlson said. “Really? Let’s evaluate the quality of that intelligence.”
The conflict between the two men reflects a broader divide among conservatives over U.S. policy toward Israel and Iran. Both figures host widely followed podcasts and are frequently mentioned as possible contenders in the 2028 presidential race, making their rivalry a potential preview of future political battles within the Republican Party.
Carlson, who remains one of the most influential voices in conservative media and maintains ties to the White House, is often discussed as a possible presidential candidate despite criticism from many Republicans. Cruz, who finished second to President Trump in the 2016 Republican presidential primary, is also viewed as a potential 2028 contender.
Asked Tuesday to respond to Cruz’s latest remarks, Carlson brushed off the criticism in a brief text message. “Pretty funny,” he said. “He’s running for president against me, which I find amusing since I’m not in the race.”
Cruz has repeatedly attacked Carlson in recent months, including over Carlson’s decision to host white nationalist Nick Fuentes on his podcast without challenging Fuentes’ claim that the “big challenge” to unifying the country is “organized Jewry.”
The Texas senator has suggested that opposing antisemitism and strengthening support for Israel could be key elements of a possible presidential campaign. Speaking at the symposium Tuesday, he warned that the political landscape could shift in troubling ways if voices like Carlson’s gain greater influence.
“I don’t want to wake up in five years and find myself in a country where both major political parties are unambiguously antisemitic,” Cruz said. “I think that is a real possibility, if Tucker and his minions prevail.”
The two men have clashed repeatedly over Middle East policy and have been sparring publicly for months.
In June 2025, Carlson invited Cruz onto an episode of “The Tucker Carlson Show,” one of the most widely streamed podcasts on Spotify. During the interview, the two argued intensely about Iran, with Carlson accusing Cruz of lacking knowledge about the country.
Carlson said Cruz didn’t “know anything” about “the country you seek to topple.”
Cruz fired back during the exchange, suggesting Carlson’s criticism of Israel echoed antisemitic arguments.
“You’re not talking about the Chinese, you’re not talking about the Japanese, you’re not talking about the British, you’re not talking about the French,” Cruz told Carlson. “You’re asking, ‘why are the Jews controlling our foreign policy?’ That’s what you just asked.”
After the interview aired, Cruz used his own podcast, “Verdict with Ted Cruz,” to defend his performance and criticize Carlson’s conduct, saying the commentator had gone “off the rails.”
Later in November, while addressing the Republican Jewish Coalition’s leadership summit in Las Vegas, Cruz escalated the rhetoric further by calling Carlson a “coward.” Speaking days afterward at a Federalist Society event in Washington, he said some Republicans hesitate to challenge Carlson publicly because “he has one hell of a big megaphone.”
At Tuesday’s symposium, Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas appeared to dismiss the influence of what he described as internet personalities promoting antisemitic views. Although he did not mention Carlson by name, Cotton referred to “so-called influencers” spreading such ideas and minimized their impact.
“They are not influential,” Cotton said. “They are at least not influential with Donald Trump, who continues to reject their kooky advice.”
Despite criticism from many Republican leaders, Carlson’s views about Israel have gained traction among segments of younger conservatives. Recent polling highlights shifting attitudes, with a Yale Youth Poll showing Americans under 35 significantly more likely than older generations to believe that U.S. Jews “have too much power.” A Pew survey last year also found that the share of Republicans under 50 holding unfavorable views of Israel increased from 35 percent to 50 percent over the previous three years.
When asked whether he might seek the presidency in 2028, Carlson responded with a quip aimed directly at Cruz.
“Only if it’s against Cruz.”
{Matzav.com}A group of Orthodox Jewish teachers in New York City has lost a legal challenge against the Department of Education after being denied time off to prepare for Pesach, marking the first time in decades that such requests were rejected.
The dispute began last year when the Department of Education declined to grant religious exemptions that would have allowed observant teachers to miss work in order to prepare their homes for the holiday. It was the first time since 1999 that the agency refused to approve those requests.
As a result, teachers who wished to spend the day performing the traditional Pesach preparations were required to use personal leave or vacation days.
In May 2025, twenty observant Jewish educators filed a formal grievance challenging the policy. They were informed in mid-February that their complaint had been denied.
The United Federation of Teachers is now considering whether to pursue the matter further by requesting an arbitration hearing.
In response to questions about the issue, the Department of Education defended its position.
“We respect the religious observances of all employees and provide reasonable accommodations consistent with applicable regulations, collective bargaining agreements, and operational needs,” the DOE told The Post.
Moshe Spern, president of United Jewish Teachers, pointed out that an arbitrator had ruled in 1999 that the Department of Education should permit religious observance days, and said requests for the Pesach preparation day had consistently been granted since that decision.
“The DOE and new Chancellor Samuels reaffirming an awful decision from last year is not only wrong but definitely borders on religious discrimination,” Spern alleged.
{Matzav.com}Commentator Tucker Carlson has drawn renewed attention after delivering sharp criticism of radio host Mark Levin and Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee, accusing Levin of attempting to manufacture political consensus through repetition and suggesting that Huckabee may be acting under what he described as a kind of “spell” in his support for Israel.
Carlson’s remarks about Levin were made during an appearance on The Megyn Kelly Show on February 26. His comments about Huckabee came earlier, during a separate interview on the Judging Freedom podcast with Judge Andrew Napolitano on December 17, 2025.
Clips from both interviews have recently resurfaced and are circulating widely on X, where users are sharing the segments amid a growing debate among conservative commentators over U.S. policy toward Israel, Iran, and the broader Middle East.
During his conversation with Megyn Kelly, Carlson spoke about the increasingly heated divide among conservatives on foreign policy issues, arguing that some figures attempt to shape political reality simply by repeating claims until they are accepted as truth.
Carlson said that “what people like Levin—whom I’m not attacking; I feel sorry for him because he’s clearly living in hell—are trying to do is a species of witchcraft,” explaining that in his view the tactic is straightforward: “you repeat something until it becomes true.”
He illustrated his point by describing the types of messages he believes are being repeated in the public discourse. According to Carlson, the argument is framed in slogans such as: “Khamenei must die. We’re going into war. We’re gonna knock off the government. This is good for us. Anyone who’s against it is an antisemite, a Nazi, should be expelled, Benedict Arnold, not allowed in the White House.” Carlson added that the strategy, as he sees it, is that “you keep repeating things that are untrue until they become true.”
Expanding on the idea, Carlson said he believes language itself can shape public perception. “You speak, and you create truth by speaking,” he said, adding, “In the beginning was the Word. There’s a holy power, a supernatural power, in words. Describing things is different from simply doing them.”
He continued by arguing that rhetoric can function almost like an incantation that creates a new political reality. “If you can talk reality into being, this is what an incantation is. This is what a spell is,” Carlson said. “It’s not spooky or crazy stuff—it’s the lived reality of every person. Say it, and it becomes true.” He concluded by questioning the strategic rationale behind the policy debate, saying that “nobody is making the case for how does this help The United States? How does this make us richer, safer, happier? Zero.”
Carlson also criticized former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, suggesting that some figures in Washington act more like paid advocates than independent voices. Referring to Pompeo, Carlson said that “shills like Pompeo—who are getting paid from who knows how many different groups to lie to you—come across as some moral voice.”
In his separate appearance on the Judging Freedom podcast, Carlson offered a broader explanation for what he sees as unusual political behavior in Washington, suggesting that it sometimes goes beyond ordinary political motivations.
Carlson said that “there’s something deeper. There’s almost a spell,” pointing specifically to Ambassador Mike Huckabee as an example. “Huckabee, for example—do you really think Huckabee is being threatened? I know Huckabee well. I’m sure you do, too. Nice man.”
Carlson said that when he observes Huckabee’s public comments, he finds them difficult to explain through conventional political reasoning. “What is this? I look at him and I see a man under a spell,” Carlson said, acknowledging that he expected criticism for the claim but insisting that he meant it seriously.
“There’s no practical, conventional explanation for some of this behavior,” Carlson said, adding that while he believes he understands the motivations of other political figures such as Ted Cruz and Lindsey Graham, Huckabee’s position appears different to him.
“But Mike Huckabee? I think he is under a spell. He is not thinking clearly at all,” Carlson said.
Carlson pointed to Huckabee’s public statements about the importance of supporting Israel as an example. He cited a comment in which Huckabee warned that “God will destroy our country if we don’t support Bibi,” saying he found the remark difficult to understand.
Carlson said that when he hears such statements he wonders how someone would reach that conclusion, adding that in his view the explanation may be “more metaphysical than political.”
{Matzav.com}
