His announcement came a day after Israel’s defense minister said ethnic cleansing was the only ‘real solution’ for Gaza
Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir on Thursday unveiled a plan for the ethnic cleansing of Gaza’s Palestinian population, which he and other Israeli ministers refer to as “voluntary migration,” a day after Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said the removal of Palestinians was the only “real solution” for Gaza.
Ben Gvir dubbed his plan “Disengagement 710” and said that it would involve removing 250,000 Palestinians from Gaza in the first year, 1.11 million within three years, and finally, 1.86 million over seven years. He said that his Jewish Power party would demand the establishment of an “emigration ministry” in the next Israeli government following the upcoming October elections.
In remarks on the plan, Ben Gvir said that he had been considered “delusional” for seeking the ethnic cleansing of Gaza until President Trump called for Palestinians to leave the territory early last year.
“At first, I was treated as a delusional extremist,” Ben Gvir said, according to The Times of Israel. “Then, one day, everything changed: President Trump publicly declared that encouraging emigration was a solution to the Gaza issue. Suddenly, Ben Gvir’s plan became legitimate. Suddenly, everyone became Ben Gvir.”
The attacks came after a report said Trump was considering a Hegseth-backed bombing campaign described as ‘mowing the lawn’
The US began a series of airstrikes against Iran’s coast on Tuesday, attacks that came after Axios reported that President Trump was considering a Hormuz Strait bombing campaign aimed at disrupting Iran’s ability to target commercial shipping that one US official described as “mowing the lawn.”
Iranian media has reported explosions in Iranian cities and towns on the Strait of Hormuz, including Bandar Abbas and Qeshm Island, and also as far southeast as the city of Konarak on the Gulf of Oman. Iranian officials reported that US strikes killed five people attending a wedding ceremony near the city of Sirik.
US Central Command said that at 12 pm Eastern Time, its forces “began striking Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) targets in Iran” and that the “strikes follow recent attempted attacks by the IRGC against commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and against American service members deployed to the region.” About six hours later, CENTCOM said the strikes had concluded and claimed it hit “air defense sites, radar systems, maritime assets and facilities, mine laying capabilities, and communications sites.”
Vice President JD Vance said on Thursday that he was “extremely skeptical” of Iranian media reports that the US bombed a wedding in Iran on Tuesday, despite overwhelming evidence from other sources that the US was responsible.
“I’ve been briefed to the extent that I know that we’re investigating. I’ve seen the same public media reports everywhere else,” Vance said at a press briefing when asked about reports of the strike.
“I will say that the Iranian state media has not been a very good scribe about what’s happened in the conflict thus far. So I’m extremely skeptical of this,” he added.
The New York Times has verified the footage and photos of the aftermath of the strike, which hit a home in the southern Iranian city of Kuhestak, and concluded that the bomb had been fired by US forces.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky vowed on Tuesday that Ukraine would escalate its drone attacks inside Russia and warned that “safe days” are over for civilian aircraft in Russian airspace.
“Today, we want to warn every airline that uses Russian airspace, every insurer, and everyone who still uses Russia’s key airports: Russian airspace is becoming completely unsafe,” Zelensky said in a post on X that cited his nightly address.
While the statement reads as an implicit threat against civilian aircraft, Zelensky insisted that wasn’t what he was doing. “Ukraine does not threaten civilian aviation as such – not a single civilian aircraft. There will simply be drones in Russia’s skies on a scale that has to be taken into account,” he said.
“We in Ukraine do not want innocent lives to be lost. That is why we are warning our partners: the safe days in Russia’s skies are over. It is important that this is heard by the ambassadors of countries represented here in Ukraine, as well as by ambassadors working in Moscow,” Zelensky added.
The Secretary of Defense mistakes rhetoric for strategy.
Reality doesn’t always line up with our wishes. For Pete Hegseth, this lesson has been learned the hard way. Six months into his war with Iran, top military officials are warning the Secretary of Defense that prolonged fighting would be “unsustainable,” according to new reporting from The Washington Post.
These officials are echoing sentiments that have been repeated for months within the administration. Gen. Dan Caine, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, had advised the White House before the conflict that a large-scale military confrontation with Iran posed serious risks, particularly because of the U.S.’ depleted munitions stockpiles and a lack of support from regional partners.
Rather than heed these warnings, Washington foreign policy elites chose to proceed with a reckless disregard for the facts, guided by an ideological drive to reshape the world in our image – or, perhaps more accurately, Israel’s. Pete Hegseth is one such ideologue, as demonstrated by his rhetorical record throughout the conflict.
The administration’s entire approach to this war has been stylistically Hegsethian. The tirades against the press, the administration’s unceasing – and undue – confidence, and the rigorous enforcement of a strict narrative are all hallmarks of Pete Hegseth’s brutish approach, rather than the calculated strategy one may expect to see from Marco Rubio or JD Vance.
Some people say that being anti-war is to be against “the troops” – the Americans who in the past were drafted to fight and today volunteer to serve. But that is a superficial criticism that distracts from what the criticism of U.S. wars really should be.
Many of us believe in a strong national defense. That requires a fully equipped and properly disposed military of men and women in uniform to defend the country from attack. The “anti” in “anti-war” is a healthy skepticism of the state abusing its power to wage wars of choice, typically in service of ideological and corporatist agendas that have nothing to do with safeguarding Americans. In fact, in many cases, Washington’s overseas interventions over the last century have reflected an imperialist urge that would have been abhorred by the American founders. These wars have blown back domestically to make our communities less safe and less free. Citizen soldiers in the form of our state National Guards were exploited to extend the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and are still being taken away from responsibilities at home to be sent to – and killed – in far flung active duty operations that most Americans know little about.
Today we hear about the deplorable conditions on U.S. Navy vessels in the Middle East. President Donald Trump’s decision to take the nation to war with Iran, without Constitutional approval, and to deploy ships to maintain an illegal blockade far beyond appropriate and safe measure for the men and women on them, is another indication of how Washington and its masters come before those who serve. Top Pentagon officials and the president himself have chosen to downplay the USS Abraham Lincoln scandal and engage in what seems to be coordinated attacks on the press sharing the sailors’ stories. This should raise alarms for everyone, not just the service members and their families. More than ever, we are convinced that Washington and its wars have nothing to do with us. Just see how dirty the powerful fight to protect their own interests.