Counter puncher Trump scolds counter puncher Israel

Ever since Donald J. Trump descended that iconic escalator, on June 16, 2015, in order to announce his run for the U.S. presidency, his detractors wasted no time contending that his brash and combatant personality was antithetical to the soft, diplomatic style of a polished politician whose decorum is an asset in furthering good will and positive results.  

It was to that particular claim that Trump hit back, back then, reassuring everyone that he was merely a counter-puncher.  In other words, he would not initiate a fight but, rather, only strike an opponent after first being attacked.  

Throughout his years, as president, both in his first term and now, that assertion has proven to be true, for the most part. Trump will post an insult on X, usually after someone else has landed the first insult. Likewise, he will, oftentimes, defend his name or actions following a harsh criticism, seeking to set the record straight as to why what he did was justified.

Perhaps, it is because of this particular character trait that now some of us find it extremely puzzling that Trump would scold Israel for doing the exact same thing. After an intense 12-day fight with the Iranian regime, a nation which had frightened most of the world into non-action, by making everyone believe they were a fearsome foe, not to be messed with, Israel quickly gained the upper hand within the first few days.

Taking out their top brass, destroying more than half of their launchers, bombing their weapons’ factories and taking full control of their air space, Israel had the Islamic Republic on the run. All Iran had left was the dwindling supply of missiles, which they would launch several times a day, trying to wreak as much damage as possible to Israel’s housing structures in the hope of achieving massive casualties.

Since a great number of those rockets were intercepted by Israel’s amazing technological systems of the Iron Dome, David’s Sling and the American THAAD defense projectile, the number of human casualties was considered minimal in contrast to what it would have been without those life-saving measures. 

Trump, realizing the grave threat posed by the Iranian regime’s nuclear ambitions, never attempted to deter Israel from waging what was seen to be a justified war against the Jewish state as well as the entire world. To the contrary, he rooted for it, often acknowledging the great success it was having as it masterfully and surgically went after the military threat, unlike Iran’s taking aim at ordinary citizens. 

By day eleven, Trump, in his desire to put an end to the fighting, which had largely accomplished its mission, made it clear that he wanted an immediate ceasefire of the two parties, given what appeared to be a great achievement after American bunker busters obliterated the Natanz, Fordow and Isfahan nuclear enrichment plants – thereby halting imminent threats.

Although Israel would have likely continued to inflict more damage, while it had the upper hand, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu adamantly stood on the statement, “In light of the achievement of the operation’s goals, and in full coordination with President Trump, Israel agreed to the President’s proposal for a mutual ceasefire.” That ceasefire was to go into effect on Tuesday morning at 7 a.m.

Willing to honor that agreement, it wasn’t until Iran repeatedly struck Israel in the early morning hours of Tuesday, making it impossible to leave our bomb shelters, because the moment we did, another siren would begin to blare, cautioning us to immediately return to those safe rooms.

In fact, it was during that attack that four Israelis were killed when an un-intercepted rocket struck a six-story apartment building in the southern town of Beer Sheva, reducing the structure into rubble. The fallout was so great, that not to react would have been tantamount to rewarding the unmitigated gall of a blood-thirsty regime whose only weapon was to target citizens, reducing them to dust.

That’s when the counter-punch came. Warning Iran that if they dared to break the ceasefire, they would be met with a harsh response, Israel made good on its threat.  At that point, Israel Defense Minister Israel Katz ordered the IDF to “respond forcefully to Iran’s violation of the ceasefire with intense strikes against regime targets in the heart of Tehran.”  

Despite this counter punch – a response only initiated following a brutal civilian attack, Trump went out fuming, accusing both sides of having violated his demand for an immediate ceasefire.  

One can only wonder if such a despicable action had taken place on American soil, would he have ignored it, choosing not to respond? And if not, which is the predictable guess, why would he then scold Israel for doing the same thing he, himself would have done?

It is not, nor has it ever been in the nature of Israel, to pick a fight. As a peace-loving country which strives for good relations between its neighbors, Israel has sought to help other nations whenever it was in their power to do so. We have come to the rescue of others who found themselves in great despair following natural disasters, and we have provided jobs and fed the same people who, in the end, turned on us by aiding terrorists who planned a bloody massacre in our southern communities.

Who can make a case for Israel being the aggressor at any time during its modern-day history? Willing to give up large blocs of land, all for the sake of peace, many generous offers were made to disingenuous so-called Palestinian negotiators who, rather than make deals for the sake of peace, rejected each proposal, resulting in an ongoing conflict which has never been resolved. Of course, it wasn’t for lack of trying.

That is why it comes as a stinging indictment to hear the man, who should know better, when it comes to Israel’s expressed desire for peace, contend that we were guilty of violating the agreement which would have put an end to the current war with Iran.  Trump has to know that this is not a fair representation of what took place and nothing which would have been acceptable to him had he been in our position.

Israel remains grateful for American help at a time when the entire world stood to gain from it, but a counter punch must be recognized and respected for the reason it is made – and who better to do that than a counter puncher?