"I'll Teach Them Democracy If I have To Kill Everyone of Them." From Stalag to Googlag! Even Honeymoons End.

Now that we are dismembering our heritage, our historical structures and our history what are we going to do about Tommy Jefferson?  After all he owned slaves, a beautiful black woman was one of his mistresses.

Why not burn down his house and rid the University he founded of all the books he gave to their library and/or read.

Once you begin an anarchial act in the name of goodness and Political Correctness you need to follow through in order to be consistent and not bend to calls of hypocrisy. If it is good for the goose then the gander is entitled to equal treatment. You cannot do to Lee and ignore Jefferson - capiche?

There is so much we can and must do to eliminate our history and we can begin by attacking those who hate. Yes, hate the haters and do them them what they want to do to others. I believe Jesus said that or maybe it was Moses. I was never a student of The Bible!

In fact we can take a page from students who attack those whose ideas offend them.  This is what you get for $70,000 annual tuition today.  Liberal professors encourage dissent and stress action over reasoning.

What all of this reminds me of is the Col. in: "The Teahouse of The August Moon," who said of the Okinawans: "I'll teach them democracy if I have to kill everyone of them."

Yes, our society is going from Stalag to Goolag.(See 1 below.)
+++++++++++++++
ISIS out, Iran in. Thanks Obama. (See 2 below.)

Even honeymoons come to an end.  Particularly those marriages which never had a chance.(See 2a below.)

Pipes' on an author whose Middle East Analysis has proven wrong. (See 2b below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Will Trump get credit for getting N Korea to back down and will it set a dangerous precedent which, eventually, amounts to nothing and we are snookered once again?  Stay tuned. (See 3 and 3a below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dick
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1) Google Wars: You're Next

By Karin McQuillan

To nice, nerdy James Damore’s surprise, Google does not want to engage in a discussion of how their hiring discrimination against white and Asian males can be justified.  Google’s corporate culture has been exposed as an Orwellian pig farm, where social justice warriors (SJWs) send daily missives on the correct way to think.  Those who express contrary opinions are bullied, sent to HR for reprogramming, fired and – not punished enough - put on Silicon Valley blacklists to ruin their careers.

Several managers have openly admitted to keeping blacklists of the employees in question, and preventing them from seeking work at other companies. There have been numerous cases in which social justice activists coordinated attempts to sabotage other employees’ performance reviews for expressing a different opinion. These have been raised to the Senior VP level, with no action taken whatsoever.

This would just one more sorry tale of progressive bullying, but for one thing.  This is the company that runs the largest search engine in the world.  Political bullying is supported and instigated by top management.  Groupthink is official HR policy.  These SJW Marxists are not content with a reign of terror within the company.  They are after your free speech on the Internet.

Our Brave New World is in Silicon Valley, and is coming to you right now, with growing Internet censorship of conservative viewpoints. 

Allum Bokhari has a series of must-read Breitbart Rebels of Google interviews with whistleblowers who have had enough:

AB:  Many people now fear that Google, Facebook, and other companies are moving to control and censor their content. Are these fears justified?
Hal: That is absolutely what Google is trying to do. The pro-censorship voices are very loud, and they have the management’s ear. The anti-censorship people are afraid of retaliation, and people are afraid to openly support them because everyone in their management chain is constantly signaling their allegiance to far-left ideology.

Google employees in the advertising department are trying to stop ads that support conservative websites.  They are fiddling with search engines “to demote results” to web content that is anti-communist, anti-Islamist, or non-PC.

Think about Google blocking Internet content that is anti-communist. The progressive left is a euphemism for old left Marxists.  They are the ideological and often literal grandchildren of Stalinists. (As are Obama, Valerie Jarrett, David Axelrod and Obama’s head of Homeland Security, Jeh Johnson, all red diaper babies).  No wonder tyrannical behavior comes to naturally to them.

Damore is not alone.  He is only the first casualty of Google’s war on free thought to make headlines.  The company immersion in leftist politics and punishment of rebels reached critical proportions in Obama’s second term.  Google is facing trial in November for an earlier complaint to the National Labor Relations Board.

(F)or interfering with employees’ legal right to discuss “workplace diversity and social justice initiatives.” The complaint alleges that Senior Vice President Urs Holzle and numerous managers in his organization actively stoked up witch hunts in 2015 and 2016 intended to muzzle low-level employees who raised concerns about the company’s practices.

Senior Vice President Urs Holzele is a prominent computer scientist and Google’s eighth hire, a power within the company.

Management is 100% behind hard-left employees mixing politics and politically correct crusades into the daily workflow and weekly digital “meetings.” Any dissent can lead to “humiliating forms of ‘training’ that resemble Maoist struggle sessions.”

The campus fascists are now in charge of the largest Internet search engine on earth.  Google even has the same denial of due process for allegations of sexual harassment that grew out of the Obama’s DOJ weaponizing rape accusations on campus.

There have been a number of massive witch hunts where hundreds of SJWs mobilize across the corporate intranet to punish somebody who defied the Narrative. The first one I remember is when Kelly Ellis made unfounded allegations of sexual harassment against her former manager, and Google terminated the manager in response to the internal SJW outrage. This was similar in intensity to the current witch hunt. Anyone who sympathized with the manager’s plight or asked for any sort of due process was “counseled” by HR and told that they were creating a hostile workplace for women and minorities by sticking up for a harasser.

The influence of Marxist group Black Lives Matter now reigns at Google. 

According to Gordon, things took a turn for the worse when the Black Lives Matter ideology started to spread through the corporate culture.
“One thing that’s unusual about Google is that it is fine to harshly and even unprofessionally criticize managers and other teams. Before we became politicized, this seemed liberating. Then, when Black Lives Matter hysteria hit its peak, sometime in 2015, it became taboo to criticize identity politics, and later on, it became very dangerous to criticize any member of a minority group at all (even if the criticism had nothing to do with their identity).”

Wonder why the decent people at Google don’t speak up?  A group of them tried.  Thjey started a mailing list called freespeech – were accused by a female SJW of hate speech, and lost their jobs.

“Google is run like a religious cult. Conform and carry out the rituals, and you’ll be rewarded and praised; ask any uncomfortable questions or offend the wrong people, and the threats and public shaming will be swift and ruthless. The religion in this case is a kind of intersectional feminism, its central tenets are Diversity and Inclusion, its demonic enemy is Bias, and its purifying rituals include humiliating forms of “training” that resemble Maoist struggle sessions.”

Google is the red line where our natural and Constitutional rights to freedom of thought and speech are defended.  Americans are sick of discrimination in the name of equality.  We want straightforward equality before the law – the same laws, the same rules, the same opportunities for everyone. 

Some of this can be done by directives from DOJ that our anti-discrimination laws apply equally to everyone.  Congress needs to protect us with new laws that ban race and gender based quotas, period. 

Employees need protection from being fired for political reasons.

As for Google, abusing their power to censor conservatives on the Internet cannot be allowed.  Their monopoly is dangerous to our civil rights.  We need a Trump intervention.

Kurt Schlicter has a few useful things to say on this topic.  

It's not hard to imagine that they'll soon try and silence the rest of us. One way is by weaponizing the information they maintain on all of us from search histories, purchases, and even email, information that gives leftist hacks incredible leverage to intimidate and extort opponents. “Gee, Mr. Conservative, it’d sure be a pity if the world found out about your browser history ….”

Another Schlicter proposal is an “Algorithm Transparency Act” to ban Internet companies from:

...willful manipulation of the algorithms that determine what can and cannot be said and read… And “transparency” means allowing an army of Davids to dig through Facebook and Google’s code, finding out why things the tech leftists don't want you to know are getting buried, and then feeding that info to trial lawyers.

Google’s Maoist company culture threatens us all.  We need new laws for this new age to protect freedom of speech and assembly in the digital realm.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2) Mossad Chief: ISIS Out – Iran In
By  Rojkes Dombe 

Speaking before cabinet meeting, Mossad Director Yossi Cohen warned that Iran is moving to fill the void left by ISIS and has not given up its aspirations to become a nuclear threshold state Ami 

During a security briefing to cabinet ministers, the head of Israel's spy agency, the Mossad warns that as the Islamic State terrorist group is beaten back, Iran and its proxies are rushing in to take over its territory, primarily in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Yemen. 

"Iran is acting to encroach on any territory relinquished by ISIS," Mossad Chief Yossi Cohen told the ministers. He added that Iran has also not given up its aspirations to become a nuclear threshold state and that the nuclear agreement between the two powers and Iran only reinforces this trend and is strengthening Iranian aggression in the region. 

Cohen also said that since the signing of the nuclear agreement (the JCPOA), Iran has seen a spark in economic growth and new international agreements only further strengthen its economy. 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that this constitutes clear proof that the basic assumptions in the agreement with Iran were wrong in the first place. Netanyahu further stated that Israel was not a party to the agreement, nor is it bound by its terms. 

"Israel will continue to act determinedly and in a variety of ways to defend itself from these threats," said the Prime Minister, and offered praise to Cohen and the activities of the Mossad.

2a) Palestinians: The Honeymoon with the US is Over

By Bassam Tawil

• The Palestinians have a condition for the US to be accepted by them as a mediator in the conflict with Israel: bias in favor of the Palestinians. This is the Palestinian state of mind: If you are not with us, you are against us.
• The Palestinian leadership does not wish to talk about improving the Palestinian economy because Palestinians do not perceive themselves as engaged in an economic conflict with Israel: they perceive themselves as engaged in an existential, struggle-to-the-death conflict with Israel. In their view, for Palestinians to thrive, the State of Israel must go.
• Notably, the Palestinians reject the idea of Israel making peace with its Arab neighbors. They fear that such peace would come at the expense of them achieving political supremacy over Israel.
  US President Donald Trump's envoys, Jason Greenblatt and Jared Kushner, are planning to return to the Middle East soon to discuss ways of reviving the stalled “peace process” between Israel and the Palestinians. Greenblatt tweeted last week that he was looking forward to returning to the Middle East “as we pursue peace.” He added that Trump was “optimistic,” but did not elaborate.

  Pursuing peace sounds wonderful. Less wonderful, however, are the facts on the ground of “pursuing peace” with the Palestinians.

  Not surprisingly, the Palestinians have returned to their old habit of accusing the US of being “biased” in favor of Israel.

  As the US envoys prepare to head to the Middle East, Palestinians are saying that they have lost confidence in the Trump administration, as they have done with all previous administrations.

  For the Palestinians, a US administration that openly supports the State of Israel cannot play the role of an honest broker in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. For the Palestinians, US commitment to Israel's security and well-being disqualifies Washington as a mediator because it means that the Americans are “biased” in favor of Israel.

  The Palestinians have a condition for the US to be accepted by them as a mediator in the conflict with Israel: bias in favor of the Palestinians. This is the Palestinian state of mind: If you are not with us, you are against us.

  In the Palestinian logic, the US administration must endorse the Palestinian narrative and comply with all their demands if it wishes to broker “peace” with Israel. The Palestinians do indeed want the US to be involved – as an axeman for their execution of Israel.

  The Palestinians are prepared to cooperate with any US administration, on one condition only: that it forces Israel to withdraw fully to the 1949 armistice lines and allow the incompetent and discredited Mahmoud Abbas to establish a corrupt, undemocratic and failed state, one that would set its predatory sights on the now-much-harder-to-defend State of Israel.

  Until recently, Abbas and his Palestinian Authority (PA) in the West Bank believed that the new president would swallow their fabrications and perhaps collude with them to bring Israel down. At one stage, Abbas even instructed his aides and spokesmen to avoid making any criticism against Trump or his administration, toward just this goal.

  However, the Palestinian tone has changed in recent weeks. Palestinian officials and factions and political commentators are no longer concealing their distrust of — and disdain for — the Trump administration. The “honeymoon” between the Palestinians and the Trump administration is over.

  In his recent meeting with US presidential envoys Jason Greenblatt (left) and Jared Kushner (center) in Ramallah, an enraged Mahmoud Abbas (right) rejected their demand that he halt payments to terrorists and their families.  (Photo by Thaer Ghanaim/PPO via Getty Images)

  Palestinians are waking up to the fact that the Trump administration is not planning to act as a puppet in their expansionist play. They are starting to see that the US has no intention of strong-arming Israel into making territorial concessions that would compromise its security. For the Palestinians, this is sufficient evidence that the Trump administration is not to be trusted.

  The Palestinians are not interested in the US acting as a mediator in the conflict with Israel; rather, they are interested in the Americans, and the rest of the world, imposing a solution upon Israel that threatens its security and strategic and national interests.

  In a reprise of a very old story, the Palestinians are prepared to return to table with Israel only if the US guarantees that the “negotiations” will involve compelling Israel to comply with all their demands.

  In light of the Palestinian disappointment with the Trump administration, what kind of reception are the Palestinians planning for Trump's envoys?

  Here is one sign of what awaits Greenblatt and Kushner when they arrive in Ramallah for talks with Abbas and his lieutenants: mass demonstrations.

  After an emergency meeting in Ramallah on August 13, Palestinian factions called for organizing mass protests against the visit of Trump's envoys and US “bias” in favor of Israel. The call could not have been issued without the approval of Abbas and the Palestinian leadership in Ramallah.

  A statement issued by the “National and Islamic Factions,” a coalition of various Palestinian groups, including Abbas's own ruling Fatah faction, accused the Trump administration of working toward pressuring the Palestinians to resume peace negotiations with Israel unconditionally.

  The statement also accused the Trump administration of “incitement” against the Palestinians and allowing Israel to “steal” Palestinian land.

  The statement went on to accuse the Trump administration of promoting the idea of “economic peace” by focusing solely on the need to improve the living conditions of the Palestinians. It also dismissed as a “mirage” the Trump administration's talk about a “regional peace” that would see Israel and some Arab countries sign peace treaties “behind the Palestinians' back.

  Such sentiments are echoed by Palestinian political analysts who are affiliated with Abbas and the Palestinian leadership in Ramallah.

  The Palestinian leadership does not wish to talk about improving the Palestinian economy because Palestinians do not perceive themselves as engaged in an economic conflict with Israel: they perceive themselves as engaged in an existential, struggle-to-the-death conflict with Israel. In their view, for Palestinians to thrive, the State of Israel must go.

  Notably, the Palestinians reject the idea of Israel making peace with its Arab neighbors. They fear that such peace would come at the expense of them achieving political supremacy over Israel.

  “It has become clear that the US viewpoint is biased in favor of Israel,” remarked Palestinian political analyst Anwar Rajab in an article published in the Palestinian daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadeeda, which serves as a mouthpiece for the Palestinian Authority. “It has become clear that Trump's envoys only carry suggestions for improving the living conditions and economy of the Palestinians.” Rajab also scoffed at the idea of a “regional peace” and dubbed it a lie, illusion and a miserable piece of merchandise.

  Once again, the Palestinians are broadcasting clearly that the Trump administration's renewed effort to revive the peace process with Israel is unacceptable and doomed to failure because the US is not prepared to force Israel first into retreat and then into defeat.

  Blinded by their hatred for Israel, the Palestinians have long sidelined both their economy and their future to achieve their real goal: to see Israel forced to its knees, and then removed from the face of the earth.

  Bassem Tawil is a Muslim based in the Middle East

  2b)
  

  The Most Embarrassingly Wrong Book Ever on the Middle East?

  by Daniel Pipes
  The Washington Times

  
  ^{Originally published under the title "One for the Graveyard of Middle East Predictions"}
  
  "The Middle East is the graveyard of predictions" notes the left-wing writer and editor Adam Shatz. That's partly because it's so volatile (no one in 2014 imagined the revival of an executive caliphate after eleven centuries) and it's perverse (Turkey's President Erdoğan started a near-civil war against the Kurds to win constitutional changes he does not need).
  In part, too, predictions fail because of the general incompetence of the specialists in the field. Often, they lack the common sense to see what should be self-evident. Case in point: the collective swoon upon the accession of Bashar al-Assad to the presidency of Syria in 2000.
  Some analysts of Syrian politics expressed skepticism about a 34-year-old ophthalmologist's ability to manage the "desolate, repressive stability" that he inherited from his dictatorial father who had ruled for thirty years. They suggested that the "deep tensions in Syrian society ... could explode after the long-time dictator's demise."
  

  Middle East specialists often lack the common sense to accept what should be self-evident.

  But most observers divined in the young Assad a decent fellow if not a closet humanitarian. David W. Lesch, an academic who rejoices in the title of Ewing Halsell Distinguished Professor of Middle East History at Trinity University in San Antonio, Texas, led this particular pack. Lesch befriended the young strongman, enjoying what his publisher calls "unique and extraordinary access to Syria's president, his circle, and his family."
  Those long hours of conversation led to a 2005 book, The New Lion of Damascus: Bashar al-Asad and Modern Syria (Yale University Press) and a cascade of praise from fellow academics: Moshe Ma'oz of the Hebrew University found it "very informative and perceptive." Curtis Ryan of Appalachian State University called it "revealing." James L. Gelvin of UCLA praised it as "an extraordinarily readable and timely account." A prestigious Washington think tank hosted a discussion of the book's findings.
  
  

  David W. Lesch wrote his 2005 book The New Lion of Damascusafter long hours of conversation with Syrian President Bashar Assad.

  
  But the passage of a dozen years, half of them consumed by Assad's monstrous brutality in the region's most lethal civil war of modern times, provides a very different perspective from which to gauge Lesch's scholarship.
  Assad responded to peaceful demonstrations against his regime that began in March 2011 not with reforms but with vicious force. The total number of dead totals about 450,000 out of a pre-war population of 21 million. Assad's personal barbarism has throughout been the key to this conflict; exploiting his control of the skies, his troops have perpetrated an estimated 90 percent of the war's fatalities.
  According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, over 5 million Syrians have been internally displaced and another 6.3 million have fled the country, causing crises in such disparate countries as Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey, Greece, Hungary, Germany, and Sweden.
  
  Privately too, Assad is an exemplar: "He changes diapers, gets up in the middle of the night to calm a crying child. ... During the entire first year of [his son's] life, Bashar did not once miss giving him his daily bath."In light of this appalling record, Lesch's account contains many passages of extreme gullibility and poor judgment. He assessed Mr. Assad roughly as he might a university colleague, deploying such adjectives as "compassionate." "principled," "unassuming," "innocent," and "morally sound." He described Assad as "a man of great personal integrity" with "appealing sincerity" with "a vision for the future of his country." Those who meet Assad, he tells us, are struck by "his politeness, his humility, and his simplicity." Turned around, "The thuggish behavior ... associated with his father is not in Bashar's character."
  
  

  Destruction in Homs. Bashar al-Assad's "vision for the future of his country"?

  
  For Westerners, he's cool culturally: "As well as liking music by Phil Collins, he enjoys Kenny G., Vangelis, Yanni, some classical pieces, and 1970s Arab music. He loves classic rock, including the Beatles, Supertramp, and the Eagles, and he has every album by the Electric Light Orchestra."
  As for his wife Asma, she "certainly seems to share her husband's calling to do everything in his power to make Syria a better place for their children and grandchildren."
  To his credit, Lesch recognizes the possibility of an implosion, "with regime instability leading to a potential civil war." But he rejects this scenario because "The opposition to the regime within Syria ... is divided and relatively weak."
  New Lion, a monument of scholarly humiliation, not surprisingly is out of print and has vanishedfrom Yale University Press's website. More surprisingly, Yale in 2012 returned to Lesch for another masterpiece, this one with the unfortunate title, Syria: The Fall of the House of Assad.
  

  Daniel Pipes (DanielPipes.org, @DanielPipes) is president of the Middle East Forum

   +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
• 3)Trump’s Full-Court Press Is Squeezing the Nukes Out of North Korea
  

  The hermit kingdom is starting to blink now that China isn’t its shield

  By Austin Bay 
• 
  
• The Trump administration’s “pressure strategy” is disrupting the North Korean regime.
• In March of this year, the Trump foreign policy team of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, and the Tweeter-in-Chief himself began a coordinated attack on Kim Jong-un’s regime, with the interim goals of disrupting its political and military plans, psychologically rattling its leaders, and exposing the regime’s grave weaknesses. The ultimate goal was to set conditions for achieving the long-range goal: denuclearizing the Korean peninsula.
• The great Chinese strategist Sun Tzu said that the best strategy is to attack the enemy’s plans. With a soldier-scholar like Jim Mattis in the Trump administration, a stroke or two of Sun Tzu should surprise no one.
  We aren’t engaged in a game. This is the latest phase of the Korean War. Though war is not a sport, some sports analogies are instructive. Basketball’s full-court press is a defensive attack on the offense’s “plan” to score—which would be a sportscaster’s description of the Trump administration’s North Korea policy. In basketball, teams employ a relentless full-court press to degrade an opponent’s ability to move the ball, deny easy shot attempts, and disrupt shots the opponent takes. “Pressing” teams try to force their opponents to make mistakes that lead to turnovers. A sustained press that forces mistakes dispirits an opponent.
  As a result, the Trump team is taking diplomatic, economic and military actions—not drawing feckless rhetorical red lines. Its actions are seizing the initiative, limiting the enemy’s options, and exploiting the enemy’s weakness. These actions are designed to force the thugs in Pyongyang to ditch their nuclear weapons and quietly rot within the starving confines of their Communist gulag.

3a)

Top Israeli, American experts concerned about North Korean nuclear precedent for Iran

By Ariel Ben Solomon

Several top Israeli and American experts on nuclear proliferation and Iran say the failure to successfully deal with North Korea sets a precedent for a similar result with the Islamic Republic.

“The aspect of the North Korean case that needs to be taken into account with regard to Iran is the fact that despite all the differences between the two states, they share a determination to acquire nuclear weapons in violation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) commitment they took upon themselves to remain non-nuclear,” said Emily Landau, director of the Arms Control and Regional Security Program at Tel Aviv University’s Institute for National Security Studies.

Although North Korea exited the NPT in 2003, the international community did not view that move as giving the rogue state carte blanche to become nuclear, she noted.

“The international community faces a similar challenge in getting [Iran and North Korea] to back down and return to the fold of the NPT,” Landau told JNS.org, “and in both cases the strategy chosen for this was negotiations and diplomacy.”

The North Korean case entails 25 years of failed negotiations. The country has been a nuclear state for at least a decade and now has demonstrated the ability to reach the U.S. with an intercontinental ballistic missile. 

“This raises a question regarding the outcome of negotiations with Iran as well,” said Landau. “In 1994, there were celebrations of the deal with North Korea that were viewed as ending the nuclear crisis, but it continued to move forward.”

The Obama administration had celebrated the 2015 nuclear deal between Iran and world powers with even greater fanfare, but Landau believes “there is no indication of an Iranian strategic U-turn in the nuclear realm, and the deal itself is severely flawed.”

“If a short-term delay causes the international community to be lulled into a false sense that the deal ‘is working,’ as we are hearing lately from deal supporters, it is likely to wake up with a nuclear Iran that will be as firmly entrenched as North Korea,” she said, noting Iran “has been emboldened” in the Middle East since the nuclear deal was reached.

Landau also expressed concern about military collaboration between North Korea and Iran in both the missile and nuclear spheres. This activity needs to be closely monitored by intelligence agencies, she said, explaining that North Korea “will sell anything to anyone for hard cash, and Iran can pay.”

Michael Rubin—a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a former Pentagon official, whose major research areas include the Middle East, Iran and diplomacy—said the current dilemmas with Iran and North Korea relate to how both nuclear deals were negotiated. 

“American diplomats in both cases were so afraid talks would fail that they would agree to a bad deal, and ignore backsliding and cheating just to keep hope alive,” Rubin told JNS.org.

“There was also hope in both cases that the regime was at the turning point,” he added. “Those negotiating with North Korea were convinced that the regime wouldn’t live out the deal anyway, and those negotiating with Iran fooled themselves into thinking reformists mattered.”

While the Iranian and North Korean ideologies may be different, their hatred of the West brings them together, according to Rubin.

“Add into the mix that Iran wants technology and North Korea wants cash, and it’s a match made in hell—one could even say it’s an axis of evil,” he said.

The Middle East is watching North Korea

Col. (res.) Dr. Shaul Shay, director of research for the Institute for Policy and Strategy at Israel’s IDC Herzliya research college, said Middle Eastern states such as Iran are watching how America deals with the North Korean crisis. 

“North Korea had supported Syria to build the nuclear reactor in Deir ez-Zor and Tehran used North Korean knowledge to build its nuclear program,” Shay told JNS.org.

Shay said failure to thwart North Korea “may be a prelude to a more challenging threat from Tehran.” The Americans should use a combination of military and political threats while recruiting China and Russia to defuse the tensions and prevent North Korea from going nuclear, he advised.

“So far, Iran is responding to the U.S. sanctions with further provocations,” he said. “Iran’s parliament voted Sunday to allocate $520 million to develop its missile program to fight Washington’s ‘adventurism’ and sanctions, and to boost the foreign operations of the country’s Revolutionary Guard.”

Ali Alfoneh, an Iran analyst and non-resident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, told JNS.org that “as long as Tehran complies with the JCPOA (the nuclear agreement’s formal name), as it apparently is doing, as the U.S. government recognized on July 18, I see no similarities” between the Iranian and North Korean issues.

If Tehran fails to comply with the nuclear deal, Alfoneh said, then resemblances with North Korea may emerge.

“The campaign against North Korea,” said Shay, “may define the American position against Iran.”

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++