Additional Resources
Top Commentators:
- Elliott Abrams
- Fouad Ajami
- Shlomo Avineri
- Benny Avni
- Alan Dershowitz
- Jackson Diehl
- Dore Gold
- Daniel Gordis
- Tom Gross
- Jonathan Halevy
- David Ignatius
- Pinchas Inbari
- Jeff Jacoby
- Efraim Karsh
- Mordechai Kedar
- Charles Krauthammer
- Emily Landau
- David Makovsky
- Aaron David Miller
- Benny Morris
- Jacques Neriah
- Marty Peretz
- Melanie Phillips
- Daniel Pipes
- Harold Rhode
- Gary Rosenblatt
- Jennifer Rubin
- David Schenkar
- Shimon Shapira
- Jonathan Spyer
- Gerald Steinberg
- Bret Stephens
- Amir Taheri
- Josh Teitelbaum
- Khaled Abu Toameh
- Jonathan Tobin
- Michael Totten
- Michael Young
- Mort Zuckerman
Think Tanks:
- American Enterprise Institute
- Brookings Institution
- Center for Security Policy
- Council on Foreign Relations
- Heritage Foundation
- Hudson Institute
- Institute for Contemporary Affairs
- Institute for Counter-Terrorism
- Institute for Global Jewish Affairs
- Institute for National Security Studies
- Institute for Science and Intl. Security
- Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center
- Investigative Project
- Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs
- RAND Corporation
- Saban Center for Middle East Policy
- Shalem Center
- Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Media:
- CAMERA
- Daily Alert
- Jewish Political Studies Review
- MEMRI
- NGO Monitor
- Palestinian Media Watch
- The Israel Project
- YouTube
Government:
Back
(Wall Street Journal) Gordon Lubold and Dion Nissenbaum - In response to the deadly gas attack on civilians in Syria, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis presented the White House with three military options, according to people familiar with the decision-making. The most conservative option would have hit a narrow set of targets related to Syria's chemical-weapons capabilities. The second option proposed strikes on a broader set of Syrian regime targets, including suspected chemical-weapons research facilities and military command centers. The most expansive proposal, which might have included strikes on Russian air defenses in Syria, was designed to cripple the regime's military capabilities. It was three times the size of the one eventually carried out by U.S., British and French forces. Mr. Trump approved a hybrid plan that reflected a melding of the first two options.2018-04-18 00:00:00Full Article
U.S. Considered Launching Syria Strikes Three Times Bigger
(Wall Street Journal) Gordon Lubold and Dion Nissenbaum - In response to the deadly gas attack on civilians in Syria, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis presented the White House with three military options, according to people familiar with the decision-making. The most conservative option would have hit a narrow set of targets related to Syria's chemical-weapons capabilities. The second option proposed strikes on a broader set of Syrian regime targets, including suspected chemical-weapons research facilities and military command centers. The most expansive proposal, which might have included strikes on Russian air defenses in Syria, was designed to cripple the regime's military capabilities. It was three times the size of the one eventually carried out by U.S., British and French forces. Mr. Trump approved a hybrid plan that reflected a melding of the first two options.2018-04-18 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|