Israel Was Days from Collapse - Media Silent! The US, UK and Israel secret services were operating from Azerbaijan to monitor operations in Iran. COL. Douglas Macgregor

Israel was days from collapse. The US, UK and Israel secret services were operating from Azerbaijan to monitor operations in Iran.

Colonel Douglas Macgregor is of the opinion that the Israel was going to collapse in days if the war continue, he was answering to a question from a Swedish Journalist in the context of recent Israeli aggression against Iran without any provocation from Iranian side.

Scott Ritter former United States Marine Corps Intelligence Officer and the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) Weapons Inspector is also of the same view. Their analyses can not be dismissed by the pro Israel lobby ignoring Israel's vulnerabilities, such as economic strain, demographic challenges, and military overextension. If Israeli lobby reject Macgregor news that a third of Tel Aviv has been damaged and that Israel's defences, like the Iron Dome, have been less effective than advertised, if not correct then why Israel was forced to imposed censorship from covering. This news confirm by Ritter that Israel was facing an existential crisis due to its economic collapse and global rejection of its policies, predicting its demise could unfold within a year to a decade.

Professor John Mearsheimer is also of the same view that Israel is "in real trouble" while answering to explains why he didn't expect Trump to be a warmonger and how US support of Israel is irrational and against its own interests.

However, these claims should be approached with skepticism. Both Macgregor and Ritter predictions may not always fully materialize, or not in line with establishment or look like more close to the Russian from establishment point of view, but one cannot ignore the facts on ground. The point that Macgregor's assertion of widespread destruction in Tel Aviv lacks corroboration because media was censored and authority was busy in disseminating disinformation by using pro-government media outlets.

Israel faces significant challenges, including economic pressures from ongoing conflicts, a high cost of living, and international criticism over its actions in Gaza and elsewhere. The demographic balance between Jewish and Arab populations, combined with the occupation of Palestinian territories, poses long-term governance issues. Yet, the claim that Israel would collapse "in days" if the war continues may be overstatement but indicators were heading in the same direction forcing the US to involved directly in the war which was started by Israel in violation of the UN Charter. Israel's military may be most advanced in the region, with substantial U.S. backing, including recent commitments to provide military aid yet it failed to stamp out Hamas up to now suggest its weakness.

On the other hand, prolonged conflict could exacerbate existing strains. Iran's missile capabilities and Arab resistance also pose serious challenge to Israel's expansionist drive, as seen in recent war. If these intensify, particularly with hypersonic missiles that challenge Israel's defences, the situation could deteriorate. However, predicting a collapse in days may be ignores Israel's strategic depth and adaptability.

In conclusion, while Macgregor, Ritter and Prof Mearsheimer highlight real vulnerabilities. If their timeline for Israel's collapse is not true then what was the reason forcing the US to get involved directly in the war which was a u-turn from Trump administration.

Though there is agreement that situation is volatile, may be Israel's immediate collapse is unlikely without a dramatic escalation or unforeseen internal breakdown but Israel went to Syria suggesting that it is struggling to survive.

Israel influence the US foreign policy:

The influence of the Israeli lobby on U.S. foreign policy is a widely discussed and contentious topic. The lobby, primarily through groups like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), has significant impact due to its well-organized advocacy, financial contributions, and ability to mobilize public and political support. Here’s a balanced take:

Influence is substantial but not absolute. AIPAC and similar groups effectively shape U.S. policy by lobbying for military aid (e.g., $3.8 billion annually to Israel), promoting favourable legislation, and ensuring strong bipartisan support for Israel. This is facilitated by a network of donors, think tanks, and media influence that aligns U.S. policy with Israeli interests, particularly on issues like Iran, the Palestinian territories, and Middle East security. For example, the U.S.’s consistent vetoes of UN resolutions critical of Israel and its reluctance to pressure Israel on settlement expansion reflect this influence. The lobby’s success stems from its alignment with broader U.S. strategic goals, like countering Iran and maintaining a key ally in the region.

Critics overstate its power. Some, like scholars John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, argue in The Israel Lobby that this influence distorts U.S. foreign policy, prioritizing Israel’s interests over America’s. They point to cases like the Iraq War, where pro-Israel groups allegedly amplified calls for intervention. However, this view can oversimplify complex decisions—U.S. policy is also driven by defense contractors, oil interests, and geopolitical strategies. The Israeli lobby is one of many players, not a monolith controlling Washington. Claims of it “running” U.S. policy often veer into exaggeration or conspiracy, ignoring the broader context of U.S. imperialism and domestic politics.

Counterarguments highlight shared interests. Supporters argue that U.S.-Israel alignment reflects mutual values (democracy, counterterrorism) and strategic benefits (intelligence sharing, military cooperation). Israel’s role as a reliable ally in a volatile region predates the lobby’s influence, rooted in Cold War dynamics and continued through shared threats like Iran’s nuclear ambitions. The lobby amplifies this but doesn’t create it.

Nuance is key. The lobby’s influence is undeniable—its ability to shape narratives and pressure politicians through campaign funding and voter mobilization is well-documented. But it operates within a system where other lobbies (e.g., Saudi Arabia, defense industries) also wield power. Critiques sometimes ignore how U.S. policymakers use Israel as a strategic asset, not just a client state. Conversely, dismissing the lobby’s role as negligible ignores its tangible impact on specific policies, like sanctions on Iran or Gaza-related aid restrictions.

In short, the Israeli lobby is a major player in U.S. foreign policy, particularly on Middle East issues, but it’s not an all-powerful puppet master. Its influence is best understood as part of a broader ecosystem of interests, amplified by effective organization and alignment with U.S. strategic priorities. Always dig into primary sources, like congressional voting records or AIPAC’s public filings, to separate fact from hyperbole.