Podcast appearances and mentions of John Spencer

John Spencer is one of the world's foremost authorities on urban warfare, the kind of fighting that's reshaping modern conflict, from Gaza to Ukraine. A retired U.S. Army major, John served more than 25 years in uniform and now leads research as the Chair of Urban Warfare Studies at the Modern War Institute at West Point.He's walked the streets of Mariupol, studied the rubble of Gaza, and is now also analyzing India's own Operation Sindoor, offering insights to militaries around the world on how wars are fought — and lost — in cities. What makes John unique is not just his battlefield experience or academic expertise, but his ability to explain the brutal logic of urban warfare in a way that's deeply human, brutally honest, and urgently relevant.

Welcome to The Times of Israel's newest podcast series, Friday Focus. Each Friday, join diplomatic reporter Lazar Berman and host deputy editor Amanda Borschel-Dan for a deep dive into what's behind the news that spins the globe. This week, we're joined by John Spencer, the chief of urban warfare studies at the Modern War Institute at West Point, a research center dedicated to the study of war and warfare. Spencer is a retired Major in the US Army and is a leading expert in military operations in dense and subterranean urban areas. Spencer reached out to us after we released a Friday Focus podcast, "10 truths about the Gaza war, 20 months in," based on Berman's in-depth analysis, "For now, victory is still within reach: 10 truths about the Gaza war, 20 months in." Today's conversation is a meeting of the minds in which Berman and Spencer delve into the nuts and bolts of the war in Gaza so far. Friday Focus can be found on all podcast platforms. This episode was produced by the Pod-Waves and the video was edited by Thomas Girsch. IMAGE: IDF forces operate in the Gaza Strip in this July 3, 2025, handout photo. (IDF)See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

How has the media distorted Israel's response to the October 7 Hamas attacks? In this powerful conversation from AJC Global Forum 2025, award-winning journalist and former AP correspondent Matti Friedman breaks down the media bias, misinformation, and double standards shaping global coverage of Israel. Moderated by AJC Chief Communications and Strategy Officer Belle Etra Yoeli, this episode explores how skewed narratives have taken hold in the media, in a climate of activist journalism. A must-listen for anyone concerned with truth in journalism, Israel advocacy, and combating disinformation in today's media landscape. Take Action: Take 15 seconds and urge your elected leaders to send a clear, united message: We stand with Israel. Take action now. Resources: Global Forum 2025 session with Matti Friedman:: Watch the full video. Listen – AJC Podcasts: The Forgotten Exodus: Untold stories of Jews who left or were driven from Arab nations and Iran People of the Pod:  Latest Episodes:  John Spencer's Key Takeaways After the 12-Day War: Air Supremacy, Intelligence, and Deterrence Iran's Secret Nuclear Program and What Comes Next in the Iranian Regime vs. Israel War Why Israel Had No Choice: Inside the Defensive Strike That Shook Iran's Nuclear Program Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you've appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Transcript of the Interview: Manya Brachear Pashman: I've had the privilege of interviewing journalism colleague Matti Friedman: twice on this podcast. In 2022, Matti took listeners behind the scenes of Jerusalem's AP bureau where he had worked between 2006 and 2011 and shared some insight on what happens when news outlets try to oversimplify the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Then in 2023, I got to sit down with Matti in Jerusalem to talk about his latest book on Leonard Cohen and how the 1973 Yom Kippur War was a turning point both for the singer and for Israel.  Earlier this year, Matti came to New York for AJC Global Forum 2025, and sat down with Belle Yoeli, AJC Chief Strategy and Communications Officer. They rehashed some of what we discussed before, but against an entirely different backdrop: post-October 7. For this week's episode, we bring you a portion of that conversation.  Belle Yoeli:   Hi, everyone. Great to see all of you. Thank you so much for being here. Matti, thank you for being here.  Matti Friedman:   Thanks for having me.  Belle Yoeli:   As you can tell by zero empty seats in this room, you have a lot of fans, and unless you want to open with anything, I'm going to jump right in. Okay, great.  So for those of you who don't know, in September 2024 Matti wrote a piece in The Free Press that is a really great foundation for today's discussion. In When We Started to Lie, Matti, you reflect on two pieces that you had written in 2015 about issues of media coverage of Israel during Operation Protective Edge in 2014. And this piece basically talked about the conclusions you drew and how they've evolved since October 7. We're gonna get to those conclusions, but first, I'm hoping you can describe for everyone what were the issues of media coverage of Israel that you first identified based on the experience in 2014? Matti Friedman:   First of all, thanks so much for having me here, and thanks for all of the amazing work that you guys are doing. So it's a real honor for me. I was a reporter for the AP, between 2006 and the very end of 2011, in Jerusalem. I was a reporter and editor. The AP, of course, as you know, is the American news agency. It's the world's largest news organization, according to the AP, according to Reuters, it's Reuters. One of them is probably right, but it's a big deal in the news world.  And I had an inside view inside one of the biggest AP bureaus. In fact, the AP's biggest International Bureau, which was in Jerusalem. So I can try to sketch the problems that I saw as a reporter there. It would take me seven or eight hours, and apparently we only have four or five hours for this lunch, so I have to keep it short. But I would say there are two main problems. We often get very involved. When we talk about problems with coverage of Israel. We get involved with very micro issues like, you call it a settlement. I call it a neighborhood. Rockets, you know, the Nakba, issues of terminology. But in fact, there are two major problems that are much bigger, and because they're bigger, they're often harder to see. One of the things that I noticed at the Bureau was the scale of coverage of Israel. So at the time that I was at the AP, again, between 2006 and the very end of 2011 we had about 40 full time staffers covering Israel. That's print reporters like me, stills photographers, TV crews. Israel, as most of you probably know, is a very small country. As a percentage of the world's surface, Israel is 1/100 of 1% of the surface of the world, and as a percentage of the land mass of the Arab world, Israel is 1/5 of 1%. 0.2%.  And we had 40 people covering it.  And just as a point of comparison, that was dramatically more people than we had at the time covering China. There are about 10 million people today in Israel proper, in China, there are 1.3 billion. We had more people in Israel than we had in China. We had more people in Israel than we had in India, which is another country of about 1.3 billion people. We had more people in Israel than we had in all of the countries of Sub-Saharan Africa. That's 50 something countries. So we had more people in Israel than we had in all of those countries combined. And sometimes I say that to Jews, I say we covered Israel more than we covered China, and people just stare at me blankly, because it's Israel. So of course, that makes perfect sense.  I happen to think Israel is the most important country in the world because I live there. But if the news is meant to be a rational analysis of events on planet Earth, you cannot cover Israel more than you cover the continent of Africa. It just doesn't make any sense. So one of the things that first jumped out at me– actually, that's making me sound smarter than I am. It didn't jump out at me at first. It took a couple of years. And I just started realizing that it was very strange that the world's largest organization had its largest international bureau in the State of Israel, which is a very small country, very small conflict in numeric terms. And yet there was this intense global focus on it that made people think that it was the most important story in the world. And it definitely occupies a place in the American political imagination that is not comparable to any other international conflict.  So that's one part of the problem. That was the scope, the other part was the context. And it took me a while to figure this out, but the coverage of Israel is framed as an Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The conflict is defined in those terms, the Israeli Palestinian conflict, and everyone in this room has heard it discussed in those terms. Sometimes we discuss it in those terms, and that is because the news folks have framed the conflict in those terms. So at the AP bureau in Jerusalem, every single day, we had to write a story that was called, in the jargon of the Bureau, Is-Pals, Israelis, Palestinians. And it was the daily wrap of the Israeli Palestinian conflict. So what Netanyahu said, what Abbas said, rockets, settlers, Hamas, you know, whatever, the problem is that there isn't an Israeli=Palestinian conflict. And I know that sounds crazy, because everyone thinks there is.  And of course, we're seeing conflicts play out in the most tragic way right now in Gaza. But most of Israel's wars have not been fought against Palestinians. Israel has unfortunately fought wars against Egyptians and Jordanians and Lebanese and Iraqis. And Israel's most important enemy at the moment, is Iran, right? The Iranians are not Palestinian. The Iranians are not Arab. They're Muslim, but they're not Arab. So clearly, there is a broader regional conflict that's going on that is not an Israeli Palestinian conflict, and we've seen it in the past year. If we had a satellite in space looking down and just following the paths of ballistic missiles and rockets fired at Israel. Like a photograph of these red trails of rockets fired at Israel. You'd see rockets being fired from Iraq and from Yemen and from Lebanon and from Gaza and from Iran. You'd see the contours of a regional conflict.  And if you understand it's a regional conflict, then you understand the way Israelis see it. There are in the Arab world, 300 million people, almost all of them Muslim. And in one corner of that world, there are 7 million Jews, who are Israelis. And if we zoom out even farther to the level of the Islamic world, we'll see that there are 2 billion people in the Islamic world. There's some argument about the numbers, but it's roughly a quarter of the world's population. And in one corner of that world there, there are 7 million Israeli Jews. The entire Jewish population on planet Earth is a lot smaller than the population of Cairo.  So the idea that this is an Israeli-Palestinian conflict, where Israelis are the stronger side, where Israelis are the dominant actor, and where Israelis are, let's face it, the bad guy in the story, that's a fictional presentation of a story that actually works in a completely different way. So if you take a small story and make it seem big. If you take a complicated regional story and you make it seem like a very small local story involving only Israelis and Palestinians, then you get the highly simplified but very emotive narrative that everyone is being subjected to now. And you get this portrayal of a villainous country called Israel that really looms in the liberal imagination of the West as an embodiment of the worst possible qualities of the age. Belle Yoeli:   Wow. So already you were seeing these issues when you were reporter, earlier on. But like this, some of this was before and since, since productive edge. This is over 10 years ago, and here we are. So October 7 happens. You already know these issues exist. You've identified them. How would you describe because obviously we have a lot of feelings about this, but like, strictly as a journalist, how would you describe the coverage that you've seen since during October 7, in its aftermath? Is it just these issues? Have they? Have they expanded? Are there new issues in play? What's your analysis? Matti Friedman:   The coverage has been great. I really have very I have no criticism of it. I think it's very accurate. I think that I, in a way, I was lucky to have been through what I went through 10 or 15 years ago, and I wasn't blindsided on October 7, as many people were, many people, quite naturally, don't pay close attention to this. And even people who are sympathetic to Israel, I think, were not necessarily convinced that my argument about the press was right. And I think many people thought it was overstated.  And you can read those articles from 2014 one was in tablet and one was in the Atlantic, but it's basically the two chapters of the same argument. And unfortunately, I think that those the essays, they stand up. In fact, if you don't really look at the date of the essays, they kind of seem that they could have been written in the past year and a half. And I'm not happy about that. I think that's and I certainly wrote them in hopes that they would somehow make things better. But the issues that I saw in the press 15 years ago have only been exacerbated since then. And October seven didn't invent the wheel. The issues were pre existing, but it took everything that I saw and kind of supercharged it.  So if I talked about ideological conformity in the bureaus that has been that has become much more extreme. A guy like me, I was hired in 2006 at the AP. I'm an Israeli of center left political leanings. Hiring me was not a problem in 22,006 by the time I left the AP, at the end of 2011 I'm pretty sure someone like me would not have been hired because my views, which are again, very centrist Israeli views, were really beyond the pale by the time that I left the AP, and certainly, and certainly today, the thing has really moved what I saw happening at the AP. And I hate picking on the AP because they were just unfortunate enough to hire me. That was their only error, but what I'm saying about them is true of a whole new. Was heard. It's true of the Times and CNN and the BBC, the news industry really works kind of as a it has a herd mentality. What happened was that news decisions were increasingly being made by people who are not interested in explanatory journalism. They were activists. Activists had moved into the key positions in the Bureau, and they had a very different idea of what press coverage was supposed to do. I would say, and I tried to explain it in that article for the free press, when I approach a news story, when I approach the profession of journalism, the question that I'm asking is, what's going on? That's the question I think you're supposed to ask, what's going on? How can I explain it in a way that's as accurate as as possible? The question that was increasingly being asked was not what's going on. The question was, who does this serve? That's an activist question. So when you look at a story, you don't ask, is it true, or is it not true? You ask, who's it going to help? Is it going to help the good guys, or is it going to help the bad guys?  So if Israel in the story is the villain, then a story that makes Israel seem reasonable, reasonable or rational or sympathetic needs to be played down to the extent possible or made to disappear. And I can give you an example from my own experience.  At the very end of 2008 two reporters in my bureau, people who I know, learned of a very dramatic peace offer that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert had made to the Palestinians. So Olmert, who was the prime minister at the time, had made a very far reaching offer that was supposed to see a Palestinian state in all of Gaza, most of the West Bank, with land swaps for territory that Israel was going to retain, and a very far reaching international consortium agreement to run the Old City of Jerusalem. Was a very dramatic. It was so far reaching, I think that Israelis probably wouldn't have supported it. But it was offered to the Palestinian side, and the Palestinians rejected it as insufficient. And two of our reporters knew about this, and they'd seen a map of the offer. And this was obviously a pretty big story for a bureau that had as the thrust of its coverage the peace process.  The two reporters who had the story were ordered to drop it, they were not allowed to cover the story. And there were different explanations. And they didn't, by the way, AP did not publish the story at the time, even though we were the first to have it. Eventually, it kind of came out and in other ways, through other news organizations. But we knew at first. Why were we not allowed to cover it? Because it would have made the Israelis who we were trying to villainize and demonize, it would have made Israel seem like it was trying to solve the conflict on kind of reasonable lines, which, of course, was true at that time. So that story would have upended the thrust of our news coverage. So it had to be made to go away, even though it was true, it would have helped the wrong people. And that question of who does this serve has destroyed, I want to say all, but much, of what used to be mainstream news coverage, and it's not just where Israel is concerned.  You can look at a story like the mental health of President Biden, right. Something's going on with Biden at the end of his term. It's a huge global news story, and the press, by and large, won't touch it, because why? I mean, it's true, right? We're all seeing that it's true, but why can't you touch it? Because it would help the wrong people. It would help the Republicans who in the press are the people who you are not supposed to help.  The origins of COVID, right? We heard one story about that. The true story seems to be a different story. And there are many other examples of stories that are reported because they help the right people, or not reported because they would help the wrong people. And I saw this thinking really come into action in Israel 10 or 15 years ago, and unfortunately, it's really spread to include the whole mainstream press scene and really kill it.  I mean, essentially, anyone interested in trying to get a solid sense of what's going on, we have very few options. There's not a lot, there's not a lot out there. So that's the broader conclusion that I drew from what I thought at the time was just a very small malfunction involving Israel coverage. But Israel coverage ends up being a symptom of something much bigger, as Jews often are the symptom of something much bigger that's going on.  So my problems in the AP bureau 15 years ago were really a kind of maybe a canary in the coal mine, or a whiff of something much bigger that we were all going to see happen, which is the transformation of the important liberal institutions of the west into kind of activist arms of a very radical ideology that has as its goal the transformation of the west into something else. And that's true of the press, and it's true of NGO world, places like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, which were one thing 30 years ago and are something very different today. And it's also true of big parts of the academy. It's true of places like Columbia and places like Harvard, they still have the logo, they still have the name, but they serve a different purpose, and I just happen to be on the ground floor of it as a reporter. Belle Yoeli:   So obviously, this concept of who does this serve, and this activist journalism is deeply concerning, and you actually mentioned a couple other areas, academia, obviously we're in that a lot right now in terms of what's going on campus. So I guess a couple of questions on that. First of all, think about this very practically, tachlis, in the day to day.  I'm a journalist, and I go to write about what's happening in Gaza. What would you say is, if you had to throw out a percentage, are all of them aware of this activist journalist tendency? Or you think it's like, like intentional for many of them, or it's sort of they've been educated that way, and it's their worldview in such a way that they don't even know that they're not reporting the news in a very biased way. Does that make sense? Matti Friedman:   Totally. I think that many people in the journalism world today view their job as not as explaining a complicated situation, but as swaying people toward the correct political conclusion. Journalism is power, and the power has to be wielded in support of justice. Now, justice is very slippery, and, you know, choosing who's in the right is very, very slippery, and that's how journalism gets into a lot of trouble. Instead of just trying to explain what's going on and then leave, you're supposed to leave the politics and the activism to other people. Politics and activism are very important.  But unless everyone can agree on what is going on, it's impossible to choose the kind of act, the kind of activism that would be useful. So when the journalists become activists, then no one can understand what's what's going on, because the story itself is fake, and there are many, many examples of it. But you know, returning to what you asked about, about October 7, and reporting post October 7, you can really see it happen. The massacres of October 7 were very problematic for the ideological strain that now controls a lot of the press, because it's counterintuitive. You're not supposed to sympathize with Israelis.  And yet, there were a few weeks after October 7 when they were forced to because the nature of the atrocities were so heinous that they could not be ignored. So you had the press covering what happened on October 7, but you could feel it. As someone who knows that scene, you could feel there was a lot of discomfort. There was a lot of discomfort. It wasn't their comfort zone, and you knew that within a few weeks, maybe a month, it was gonna snap back at the first opportunity.  When did it snap back? In the story of the Al Ahli hospital strike. If you remember that a few weeks in, there's a massive global story that Israel has rocketed Hospital in Gaza and killed about 500 people and and then you can see the kind of the comfort the comfort zone return, because the story that the press is primed to cover is a story about villainous Israelis victimizing innocent Palestinians, and now, now we're back. Okay. Now Israel's rocketing hospital. The problem was that it hadn't happened, and it was that a lot of stories don't happen, and they're allowed to stand.  But this story was so far from the truth that even the people involved couldn't make it work, and it had to be retracted, but it was basically too late. And then as soon as the Israeli ground offensive got into swing in Gaza, then the story really becomes the same old story, which is a story of Israel victimizing Palestinians for no reason. And you'll never see Hamas militants in uniform in Gaza. You just see dead civilians, and you'll see the aftermath of a rocket strike when the, you know, when an Israeli F16 takes out the launcher, but you will never see the strike. Which is the way it's worked in Gaza since the very end of 2008 which is when the first really bad round of violence in Gaza happens, which is when I'm at the AP.  As far as I know, I was the first staffer to erase information from the story, because we were threatened by Hamas, which happened at the very end of 2008. We had a great reporter in Gaza, a Palestinian who had always been really an excellent reporter. We had a detail in a story. The detail was a crucial one. It was that Hamas fighters were dressed as civilians and were being counted as civilians in the death toll, an important thing to know, that went out in an AP story. The reporter called me a few hours later. It was clear that someone had spoken to him, and he told me, I was on the desk in Jerusalem, so I was kind of writing the story from the main bureau in Jerusalem. And he said, Matti, you have to take that detail out of the story. And it was clear that someone had threatened him. I took the detail out of the story. I suggested to our editors that we note in an Editor's Note that we were now complying with Hamas censorship. I was overruled, and from that point in time, the AP, like all of its sister organizations, collaborates with Hamas censorship in Gaza.  What does that mean? You'll see a lot of dead civilians, and you won't see dead militants. You won't have a clear idea of what the Hamas military strategy is. And this is the kicker, the center of the coverage will be a number, a casualty number, that is provided to the press by something called the Gaza health ministry, which is Hamas. And we've been doing that since 2008, and it's a way of basically settling the story before you get into any other information. Because when you put, you know, when you say 50 Palestinians were killed, and one Israeli on a given day, it doesn't matter what else you say. The numbers kind of tell their own story, and it's a way of settling the story with something that sounds like a concrete statistic. And the statistic is being, you know, given to us by one of the combatant sides. But because the reporters sympathize with that side, they're happy to play along. So since 2008, certainly since 2014 when we had another serious war in Gaza, the press has not been covering Gaza, the press has been essentially an amplifier for one of the most poisonous ideologies on Earth. Hamas has figured out how to make the press amplify its messaging rather than covering Hamas. There are no Western reporters in Gaza. All of the reporters in Gaza are Palestinians, and those people fall into three categories. Some of them identify with Hamas. Some of them are intimidated by Hamas and won't cross Hamas, which makes a lot of sense. I wouldn't want to cross Hamas either. So either. And the third category is people who actually belong to Hamas. That's where the information from Gaza is coming from. And if you're credulous, then of course, you're going to get a story that makes Israel look pretty bad. Belle Yoeli:   So this is very depressing. That's okay. It's very helpful, very depressing. But on that note, I would ask you so whether, because you spoke about this problem in terms, of, of course, the coverage of Israel, but that it's it's also more widespread you talk, you spoke about President Biden in your article, you name other examples of how this sort of activist journalism is affecting everything we read. So what should everyone in this room be reading, truly, from your opinion. This is Matti's opinion. But if you want to you want to get information from our news and not activist journalism, obviously The Free Press, perhaps. But are there other sites or outlets that you think are getting this more down the line, or at least better than some, some better than others?  Matti Friedman:   No, it's just The Free Press. No. I mean, it's a question that I also wrestle with. I haven't given up on everyone, and even in publications that have, I think, largely lost the plot, you'll still find good stuff on occasion. So I try to keep my eye on certain reporters whose name I know. I often ask not just on Israel, but on anything, does this reporter speak the language of the country that they're covering? You'd be shocked at how rare that is for Americans. A lot of the people covering Ukraine have no idea what language they speak in Ukraine, and just as someone who covers Israel, I'm aware of the low level of knowledge that many of the Western reporters have. You'll find really good stuff still in the Atlantic. The Atlantic has managed, against steep odds, to maintain its equilibrium amid all this. The New Yorker, unfortunately, less so, but you'll still see, on occasion, things that are good. And there are certain reporters who are, you know, you can trust. Isabel Kirchner, who writes for The New York Times, is an old colleague of mine from the Jerusalem report. She's excellent, and they're just people who are doing their job. But by and large, you have to be very, very suspicious of absolutely everything that you read and see. And I'm not saying that as someone who I'm not happy to say that, and I certainly don't identify with, you know, the term fake news, as it has been pushed by President Trump.  I think that fake news is, you know, for those guys, is an attempt to avoid scrutiny. They're trying to, you know, neuter the watchdog so that they can get away with whatever they want. I don't think that crowd is interested in good press coverage. Unfortunately, the term fake news sticks because it's true. That's why it has worked. And the press, instead of helping people navigate the blizzard of disinformation that we're all in, they've joined it. People who are confused about what's going on, should be able to open up the New York Times or go to the AP and figure out what's going on, but because, and I saw it happen, instead of covering the circus, the reporters became dancing bears in the circus. So no one can make heads or tails of anything. So we need to be very careful.  Most headlines that are out there are out there to generate outrage, because that's the most predictable generator of clicks, which is the, we're in a click economy. So I actually think that the less time you spend following headlines and daily news, the better off you'll be. Because you can follow the daily news for a year, and by the end of the year, you'll just be deranged. You'll just be crazy and very angry.  If you take that time and use it to read books about, you know, bitten by people who are knowledgeable, or read longer form essays that are, you know, that are obviously less likely to be very simplistic, although not, you know, it's not completely impossible that they will be. I think that's time, that's time better spent. Unfortunately, much of the industry is kind of gone. And we're in an interesting kind of interim moment where it's clear that the old news industry is basically dead and that something new has to happen. And those new things are happening. I mean, The Free Press is part of a new thing that's happening. It's not big enough to really move the needle in a dramatic way yet, but it might be, and I think we all have to hope that new institutions emerge to fill the vacuum.  The old institutions, and I say this with sorrow, and I think that this also might be true of a lot of the academic institutions. They can't be saved. They can't be saved. So if people think that writing an editor, a letter to the editor of the New York Times is going to help. It's not going to help. Sometimes people say, Why don't we just get the top people in the news industry and bring them to Israel and show them the truth? Doesn't help. It's not about knowing or not knowing. They define the profession differently.  So it's not about a lack of information. The institutions have changed, and it's kind of irrevocable at this point, and we need new institutions, and one of them is The Free Press, and it's a great model of what to do when faced with fading institutions. By the way, the greatest model of all time in that regard is Zionism. That's what Zionism is. There's a guy in Vienna in 1890 something, and his moment is incredibly contemporary. There's an amazing biography of Herzl called Herzl by Amos Elon. It's an amazing book. If you haven't read it, you should read it, because his moment in cosmopolitan Vienna sounds exactly like now. It's shockingly current. He's in this friendly city. He's a reporter for the New York Times, basically of the Austro Hungarian empire, and he's assimilated, and he's got a Christmas tree in his house, and his son isn't circumcised, and he thinks everything is basically great. And then the light changes.  He notices that something has changed in Vienna, and the discourse about Jews changes, and like in a Hollywood movie, the light changes. And he doesn't try to he doesn't start a campaign against antisemitism. He doesn't get on social media and kind of rail against unfair coverage. He sits down in a hotel room in Paris and he writes this pamphlet called the Jewish state, and I literally flew from that state yesterday. So there's a Zionist model where you look at a failing world and you think about radical solutions that involve creation. And I think we're there. And I think Herzl's model is a good one at a dark time you need real creativity. Belle Yoeli:   Thank God you found the inspiration there, because I was really, I was really starting to worry. No, in all seriousness, Matti, the saying that these institutions can't be saved. I mean the consequences of this, not just for us as pro-Israel, pro-Jewish advocates, but for our country, for the world, the countries that we come from are tremendous.  And the way we've been dealing with this issue and thinking about how, how can you change hearts and minds of individuals about Israel, about the Jewish people, if everything that they're reading is so damaging and most of what they're reading is so damaging and basically saying there's very little that we can do about that. So I am going to push you to dream big with us. We're an advocacy organization. AJC is an advocacy organization. So if you had unlimited resources, right, if you really wanted to make change in this area, to me, it sounds like you're saying we basically need 15 Free Presses or the new institutions to really take on this way. What would you do? What would you do to try to make it so that news media were more like the old days? Matti Friedman:   Anyone who wants unlimited resources should not go into journalism. I have found that my resources remain limited. I'll give you an answer that is probably not what you're expecting or not what you want here. I think that the fight can't be won. I think that antisemitism can't be defeated. And I think that resources that are poured into it are resources wasted. And of course, I think that people need legal protection, and they need, you know, lawyers who can protect people from discrimination and from defamation. That's very important. But I know that when people are presented with a problem like antisemitism, which is so disturbing and it's really rocking the world of everyone in this room, and certainly, you know, children and grandchildren, you have a problem and you want to address it, right? You have a really bad rash on your arm. You want the rash to go away, and you're willing to do almost anything to make it go away. This has always been with us. It's always been with us.  And you know, we recently celebrated the Seder, and we read in the Seder, in the Haggadah, l'chol dor vador, omdim aleinu l'chaloteinu. Which is, in every generation, they come at us to destroy us. And it's an incredibly depressing worldview. Okay, it's not the way I wanted to see the world when I grew up in Toronto in the 1990s. But in our tradition, we have this idea that this is always gonna be around. And the question is, what do you do? Do you let other people define you? Do you make your identity the fight against the people who hate you? And I think that's a dead end.  This crisis is hitting the Jewish people at a moment when many of us don't know who we are, and I think that's why it's hitting so hard. For my grandfather, who was a standard New York Jew, garment industry, Lower East Side, poor union guy. This would not have shaken him, because he just assumed that this was the world like this. The term Jewish identity was not one he ever heard, because it wasn't an issue or something that had to be taught. So if I had unlimited resources, what I would do is I would make sure that young Jewish people have access to the riches of Jewish civilization, I would, you know, institute a program that would allow any young Jewish person to be fluent in Hebrew by the time they finish college. Why is that so important? Why is that such an amazing key?  Because if you're fluent in Hebrew, you can open a Tanakh, or you can open a prayer book if you want. Or you can watch Fauda or you can get on a plane to Israel and hit on Israeli guys. Hebrew is the key to Jewish life, and if you have it, a whole world will open up. And it's not one that antisemites can interfere with. It does not depend on the goodwill of our neighbors. It's all about us and what we're doing with ourselves. And I think that if you're rooted in Jewish tradition, and I'm not saying becoming religious, I'm just saying, diving into the riches of Jewish tradition, whether it's history or gemara or Israel, or whatever, if you're if you're deep in there enough, then the other stuff doesn't go away, but it becomes less important.  It won't be solved because it can't be solved, but it will fade into the background. And if we make the center of identity the fight against antisemitism, they've won. Why should they be the center of our identity? For a young person who's looking for some way of living or some deep kind of guide to life, the fight against antisemitism is not going to do it, and philanthropy is not going to do it. We come from the wisest and one of the oldest civilizations in the world, and many of us don't know how to open the door to that civilization, and that's in our hands. And if we're not doing it, it's not the fault of the antisemites. It's our own fault. So if I had unlimited resources, which, again, it's not, it's not going to happen unless I make a career change, that's where I would be putting my effort. Internally and not externally.  Belle Yoeli:   You did find the inspiration, though, again, by pushing Jewish identity, and we appreciate that. It's come up a lot in this conversation, this question about how we fight antisemitism, investing in Jewish identity and who we are, and at the same time, what do we do about it? And I think all of you heard Ted in a different context last night, say, we can hold two things, two thoughts at the same time, right? Two things can be true at the same time. And I think for me, what I took out of this, in addition to your excellent insights, is that that's exactly what we have to be doing.  At AJC, we have to be engaging in this advocacy to stand up for the Jewish people and the State of Israel. But that's not the only piece of the puzzle. Of course, we have to be investing in Jewish identity. That's why we bring so many young people to this conference. Of course, we need to be investing in Jewish education. That's not necessarily what AJC is doing, the bulk of our work, but it's a lot of what the Jewish community is doing, and these pieces have to go together. And I want to thank you for raising that up for us, and again, for everything that you said. Thank you all so much for being here. Thank you. Manya Brachear Pashman: If you missed last week's episode, be sure to tune in as John Spencer, Chair of Urban Warfare Studies at West Point, breaks down Israel's high-stakes strike on Iran's nuclear infrastructure and the U.S. decision to enter the fight. 

Hometown Radio 07/02/25 5p: Hometown Grocer John Spencer gets us ready for the 4th

John Spencer, Chair of Urban Warfare Studies at West Point, joins guest host Casey Kustin, AJC's Chief Impact and Operations Officer, to break down Israel's high-stakes strike on Iran's nuclear infrastructure and the U.S. decision to enter the fight. With Iran's terror proxy network reportedly dismantled and its nuclear program set back by years, Spencer explains how Israel achieved total air superiority, why a wider regional war never materialized, and whether the fragile ceasefire will hold. He also critiques the international media's coverage and warns of the global consequences if Iran's ambitions are left unchecked. Take Action: Take 15 seconds and urge your elected leaders to send a clear, united message: We stand with Israel. Take action now. Resources and Analysis: Israel, Iran, and a Reshaped Middle East: AJC Global Experts on What Comes Next AJC Advocacy Anywhere - U.S. Strikes in Iran and What Comes Next  Iranian Regime's War on America: Four Decades of Targeting U.S. Forces and Citizens AJC Global Forum 2025: John Spencer Breaks Down Israel's War and Media Misinformation Listen – AJC Podcasts: The Forgotten Exodus: Untold stories of Jews who left or were driven from Arab nations and Iran People of the Pod:  Latest Episodes:  Iran's Secret Nuclear Program and What Comes Next in the Iranian Regime vs. Israel War Why Israel Had No Choice: Inside the Defensive Strike That Shook Iran's Nuclear Program Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you've appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Transcript of the Interview: Casey Kustin:   Hi, I'm Casey Kustin, AJC's Chief Impact and Operations Officer, and I have the pleasure of guest hosting this week's episode. As of the start of this recording on Wednesday, June 25, it's been 13 days since Israel launched precision airstrikes aimed at dismantling the Iranian regime's nuclear infrastructure and degrading its ballistic missile capabilities to help us understand what transpired and where we are now, I'm here with John Spencer, Chair of Urban Warfare Studies at the Modern War Institute at West Point, co-director of the Urban Warfare Project and Executive Director of the Urban Warfare Institute.  John, welcome to People of the Pod. John Spencer:   Hey, Casey, it's good to see you again.  Casey Kustin:   Thanks so much for joining us. John, you described Israel's campaign as one of the most sophisticated preemptive strike campaigns in modern history, and certainly the scope and precision was impressive. What specific operational capabilities enabled Israel to dominate the Iranian airspace so completely? John Spencer:   Yeah, that's a great question, and I do believe it basically rewrote the book, much like after the 1973 Yom Kippur War, where Israel did the unthinkable, the United States military conducted 27 different studies, and it fundamentally changed the way we fight warfare. It's called Air-Land Battle. I think similarly with Operation Rising Lion, just the opening campaign rewrote what we would call, you know, Shock and Awe, Joint Forcible Entry, things like that. And the capabilities that enabled it, of course, were years of planning and preparation. Just the deep intelligence infiltration that Israel did before the first round was dropped. The Mossad agents texting the high command of the IRGC to have a meeting, all of them believing the texts. And it was a meeting about Israel. They all coming together. And then Israel blew up that meeting and killed, you know, in the opening 72 hours, killed over 25 senior commanders, nine nuclear scientists, all of that before the first bomb was dropped.  But even in the opening campaign, Israel put up over 200 aircrafts, almost the entire Israeli air force in the sky over Iran, dominating and immediately achieving what we call air supremacy. Again, through years of work, almost like a science fiction story, infiltrating drone parts and short range missiles into Iran, then having agents put those next to air defense radars and ballistic air defense missile systems. So that as soon as this was about to begin, those drones lost low cost drones and short range missiles attacked Iranian air defense capabilities to give the window for all of the Israeli F-35 Eyes that they've improved for the US military since October 7 and other aircraft.  Doing one of the longest operations, seconded only to one other mission that Israel has done in their history, to do this just paralyzing operation in the opening moment, and then they didn't stop. So it was a combination of the infiltration intelligence, the low-tech, like the drones, high-tech, advanced radar, missiles, things like that. And it was all put together and synchronized, right? So this is the really important thing that people kind of miss in military operations, is how hard it is to synchronize every bit of that, right? So the attack on the generals, the attack on the air defenses, all of that synchronized. Hundreds of assets in a matter of minutes, all working together. There's so much chance for error, but this was perfection. Casey Kustin:   So this wasn't just an operational success, it was really strategic dominance, and given that Iran failed to down a single Israeli Aircraft or cause any significant damage to any of Israel's assets. What does that tell us about the effectiveness of Iran's military capabilities, their Russian built air defenses that they have touted for so long? John Spencer:   Absolutely. And some people say, I over emphasize tactics. But of course, there's some famous sayings about this. At the strategic level, Israel, one, demonstrated their military superiority. A small nation going against a Goliath, a David against a Goliath. It penetrated the Iranian myth of invincibility. And I also failed to mention about how Israel, during this opening of the campaign, weakened Iran's ability to respond. So they targeted ballistic missile launchers and ballistic missile storages, so Iran was really weakened Iran's ability to respond. But you're right, this sent a signal around the Middle East that this paper tiger could be, not just hit, it could be dominated. And from the opening moments of the operation until the ceasefire was agreed to, Israel eventually achieved air supremacy and could dominate the skies, like you said, without losing a single aircraft, with his really historic as well. And hit what they wanted with what they wanted, all the military infrastructure, all the senior leaders. I mean, eventually they assigned a new commander of the IRGC, and Israel found that guy, despite him running around in caves and things.  It definitely had a strategic impact on the signal to the world on Israel's capabilities. And this isn't just about aircraft and airstrikes. Israel's complete dominance of Iran and the weakness, like you said. Although Israel also taught the world back when they responded to Iran's attack in April of last year, and in October of last year, is that you probably shouldn't be buying Russian air defense systems like S-300s. But Iran still, that was the backbone of their air defense capabilities, and Israel showed that that's a really bad idea. Casey Kustin:   You mentioned the component of this that was not just about going after infrastructure sites, but targeting Iranian military leadership and over 20 senior military and nuclear figures, according to public reporting. This was really a central part of this campaign as well. How does this kind of decapitation strategy alter the regime's military capability now, both in this immediate short term, but also in the long term, when you take out that kind of leadership? John Spencer:   Yeah, absolutely. I mean, much like when the United States took out Qasem Soleimani, the head of the Quds Force, who had been decades of leadership of the Quds Force, the terror proxies, which I'm sure we'll talk about, overseeing those to include the ones in Iraq, killing my soldiers. It had a ripple effect that was, it's hard to measure, but that's decades of relationships and leadership, and people following them. So there is that aspect of all of these. Now we know over 25 senior IRGC and Iranian basically leadership, because they killed a police chief in Tehran and others. Yet that, of course, will ripple across.  It paralyzed the leadership in many ways during the operation, which is the psychological element of this, right? The psychological warfare, to do that on the opening day and then keep it up. That no general could trust, much like Hezbollah, like nobody's volunteering to be the next guy, because Israel finds him and kills him. On the nuclear though, right, which all wars the pursuit of political goals. We can never forget what Israel said the political goals were – to roll back Iran's imminent breakout of a nuclear weapon, which would not only serve to destroy Israel, because that's what they said they wanted to do with it, but it also gives a nuclear umbrella, which is what they want, to their exporting of terrorism, and the Ring of Fire, the proxy networks that have all been defanged thanks to Israel. That's the reason they wanted. So in taking out these scientists.So now it's up to 15 named nuclear scientists. On top of the nuclear infrastructure and all the weaponization components. So it's not just about the three nuclear enrichment sites that we all talked about in the news, you know, Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan. It's about that complete, decades-long architecture of the scientists, the senior scientists at each of the factories and things like that, that does send about, and I know we're in right now, as we're talking, they're debating about how far the program was set back. It holistically sets back that definitely the timeline.  Just like they destroyed the Tehran clock. I'm sure you've heard this, which was the doomsday clock that Iran had in Tehran, which is the countdown to the destruction of Israel. Israel stopped that clock, both literally and figuratively. Could they find another clock and restart it? Absolutely. But for now, that damage to all those personnel sets everything back. Of course, they'll find new commanders. I argue that you can't find those same level of you know, an Oppenheimer or the Kahn guy in Pakistan. Like some of those guys are irreplaceable. Casey Kustin:   So a hallmark of Israeli defense policy has always been that Israel will take care of itself by itself. It never asks the United States to get involved on its behalf. And before President Trump decided to undertake US strikes, there was considerable public discussion, debate as to whether the US should transfer B2s or 30,000 pound bunker busters to Israel. From purely a military perspective, can you help us understand the calculus that would go into why the US would decide to take the action itself, rather than, say, transfer these assets to Israel to take the action? John Spencer:   Sure. It's a complex political question, but actually, from the military perspective, it's very straightforward. The B2 stealth fire fighter, one of our most advanced, only long range bomber that can do this mission right, safely under radar, all this stuff. Nobody else has it. Nobody else has a pilot that could do it. So you couldn't just loan this to Israel, our strongest ally in the Middle East, and let them do the operation. As well as the bomb. This is the only aircraft with the fuselage capable of carrying this side. Even the B-52 stratomaster doesn't have the ability to carry this one, although it can push big things out the back of it. So just from a logistics perspective, it wouldn't work.  And then there's the classification. And there's many issues with, like, the somebody thinking that would have been the easiest, and even if it was possible, there's no way to train an Israeli pilot, all the logistics to it, to do it. The Israel Begin Doctrine about, you know, taking into their own hands like they did in Iraq in 1981 and Syria in 2007, is still in full effect, and was shown to be literally, a part of Israel's survival is this ability to, look, I understand that allies are important. And I argue strongly that Israel can never go at it alone, and we should never want it to. The strength of any nation is its allies.  And the fact that even during this operation, you saw immense amounts of American military resources pushed into the Middle East to help defend Israel and US bases but Patriot systems on the ground before this operation, THAAD systems on the ground before the system. These are the advanced US army air defense systems that can take down ballistic missiles. You had Jordan knocking down drones. You had the new Assad replacement guy, it's complex, agreeing to shoot things down over their airspace. That is part of Israel's strength, is its allies.  I mean, the fact that you have, you know, all the Arab nations that have been helping and defending Israel is, I think, can't be underscored under Israel doesn't, shouldn't need to go it alone, and it will act. And that's the Begin Doctrine like this case. And I do believe that the United States had the only weapon, the only capability to deliver something that the entire world can get behind, which is nuclear proliferation, not, you know, stopping it.  So we don't want a terror regime like the Islamic regime, for so many different reasons, to have a nuclear weapon close to breakout. So United States, even the G7, the United Nations, all agree, like, you can't have a nuclear weapon. So the United States doing that limited strike and midnight hammer, I think, was more than just about capabilities. It was about leadership in saying, look, Iran's double play that the economic sanctions, or whatever, the JCPOA agreement, like all these things, have failed. Conclusively, not just the IAEA statement that they're 20 years that now they're in violation of enrichment to all the different intelligence sources. It was not working. So this operation was vital to Israel's survival, but also vital for the world and that too, really won in this operation. Casey Kustin:   Vital both in this operation, in the defense of Israel, back in April 2024 when Iran was firing missiles and we saw other countries in the region assist in shooting them down. How vital is Israel's integration into CENTCOM to making that all work? John Spencer:   Oh, I mean, it's life saving. And General Carrillo, the CENTCOM Commander, has visited Israel so much in. The last 20 months, you might as well have an apartment in Tel Aviv. It's vital, because, again, Israel is a small nation that does spend exponential amounts of its GDP in its defense. But Iran, you know this, 90 million much greater resources, just with the ballistic missile program. Why that, and why that was so critical to set that back, could overwhelm Israel's air defense systems. Could. There's so much to this, but that coordination. And from a military to military perspective, and this is where I come and get involved, like I know, it's decades long, it's very strong. It's apolitical on purpose. It's hidden. Most people don't know it, but it's vital to the survival of our greatest ally in the Middle East. So it meets American interest, and, of course, meets Israel's interest. Casey Kustin:   Can you help us understand the Iranian response targeting Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, because this seemed like a very deliberate way for the regime to save face and then de-escalate. But if the ceasefire falls apart, what are the vulnerabilities for us, troops and assets in the region. How well positioned are our bases in Qatar, Al Dhafra in the UAE, our naval assets in Bahrain, our bases in Iraq? How well positioned are we to absorb and deter a real retaliatory response? John Spencer:   Yeah, it's a great question. I mean, first and foremost, you know, there is a bit of active defense. So, of course, all of our US bases are heavily defended. A lot of times, you can see things are about to happen, and you can, just like they did, they moved to naval aircraft that would have been even vulnerable in some of these locations, out to sea, so they can't be touched. Heavily defended. But really, active defense is absolutely important, but really deterrence is the greatest protection. So that has to be demonstrated by the capability, right? So the capability to defend, but also the capability to attack and the willingness to use it.  This is why I think that supposedly symbolic to the 14 bunker busters that the United States dropped during Operation Midnight Hammer. Iran sent 14 missiles. President Trump says, thanks for the heads up. You know, all of it was evacuated, very symbolic, clearly, to save face and they had a parade, I guess, to say they won something. It's ludicrous, but sometimes you can't get inside the heads of irrational actors who are just doing things for their own population.  Our bases, the force protection is heavy. I mean, there's never 100% just like we saw with all the air defenses of Israel, still about 5% or if not less, of the ballistic missiles got through one one drone out of 1000 got through. You can never be 100% but it is the deterrence, and I think that's what people miss in this operation. It set a new doctrine for everyone, for the United States, that we will use force with limited objectives, to send an immense amount of strength.  And when somebody says there's a red line now that you should believe that, like if you would have injured a single American in the Middle East, Iran would have felt immense amount of American power against that, and they were very careful not to so clearly, they're deterred. This also sent a new red line for Israel, like Israel will act just like it did in other cases against even Iran, if they start to rebuild the program. War is the pursuit of political objectives, but you always have to look at the strategic on down. Casey Kustin:   On that last point, do you think we have entered a new phase in Israeli military doctrine, where, instead of sort of a more covert shadow war with Iran, we will now see open confrontation going forward, if necessary? John Spencer:   Well, you always hope that it will not be necessary, but absolutely this event will create, creates a new doctrine. You can see, see almost everything since October 7, and really there were just things that were unconceivable. Having studied and talked to Israeil senior leaders from the beginning of this. Everybody thought, if you attacked Hezbollah, Iran, was going to attack and cause immense amounts of destruction in Israel. Even when Israel started this operation, their estimates of what the damage they would incur was immense. And that it didn't is a miracle, but it's a miracle built in alliances and friendships with the United States and capabilities built in Israel.  Of course, Israel has learned a lot since October 7 that will fundamentally change everything about not just the military doctrine, but also intelligence services and many aspects that are still happening as they're fighting, still to this day in Gaza to achieve the realistic, measurable goal there. Yes, it absolutely has set forth that the old ways of doing things are gone, the you know, having these terror armies, the ring of fire that Israel has defanged, if not for Hamas dismantled and destroyed.  It sets a new complete peace in the Middle East. But also a doctrine of, Israel is adapting. I mean, there's still some elements about the reserve forces, the reigning doctrine, that are evolving based on the magnitude of the war since October 7. But absolutely you're right about they will, which has been the doctrine, but now they've demonstrated the capability to do it to any threat, to include the great, you know, myth of Iran. Casey Kustin:   So when you talk about this defanging of the Iranian proxy network obviously, Israel undertook significant operations against Hezbollah. Over the last year, they've been in active conflict with the Houthis. How does this operation now alter the way that Iran interacts with those proxies and its capacity to wage war against Israel through these proxies? John Spencer:   Yeah, cripples it, right? So Iran's nuclear ambition and its terror campaign are literally in ruins right now, both literally and figuratively. Hezbollah was defanged, the leadership, even taking out Nasrallah was believed to have caused catastrophic consequences, and it didn't. So, absolutely for Iran, also during this operation, is sniffing because all of his proxies were silent. I think the Houthis launched two missiles because thanks to Israel and the United States, the Houthi capabilities that should never have been allowed to amass, you know, this pirate terror empire. They didn't make those greatest shore to sea arsenal out of falafels. It got it straight from Iran, and that pipeline has already been cut off, let alone the capabilities.  Same thing with Hezbollah, which relied heavily on pipelines and infrastructure of missiles and everything being fed to it by Iran. That's been cut. The Assad regime being the drug empire, support of Hezbollah to rule basically, in Lebanon, has been cut. Hezbollah couldn't come to the aid of Assad. All of these variables. And of course, Hamas will never be able to do anything again, period. It all causes Iran to have to rethink everything. From, you know, not only their own national defense, right air defense capabilities and all this, but their terror campaign, it isn't just in ruins. There's a new doctrine, like it's not acceptable.  Now, of course, that's going to be hard to fully reign in. You have Shia backed groups in Iraq, you have a lot of bad things going on, but the Quds Force, which is its job, it's all shattered. Of course, they'll try to rebuild it. But the fact that these terror proxies were already so weakened by Israel that they couldn't do anything and remain silent. Hezbollah just was silent basically during this, is very significant to the peace going forward. I mean, there, there's still a lot of war here, but Israel and the United States have rewritten the map of the Middle East. Casey Kustin:   in the hours days that followed the US deciding to engage here. A lot of the conversation focused on the possibility of triggering now broader regional escalation, but we didn't see that, and it sort of shattered that myth that if Israel or the US were to go after Iran, that it would spiral into a broader Middle East conflict. Why did we not see that happen? Why did this remain so controlled? John Spencer:   So many reasons that really go back a few months, if not years? Mean going back to the first the Abraham Accords, President Trump's recent tour of the Gulf states and his story. Turic financial deals Israel's like we talked about with the Arab nations that were part of protecting it, the fact that the so on, that very geopolitical aspect. And we saw Iran turn to Russia, because there's always geopolitical considerations. Iran turned to Russia. Said, you're going to help us out. We signed this security agreement last year. We've been helping you in Ukraine do the awful things you're doing there.  And Russia said, No, that's not what we said. And it called called President Trump. President Trump says, how about you worry about mediating a ceasefire in Ukraine? And well, so they turned to China and the fact that there was nobody again, and that all the work that had been done with all the people that also disagree, nation states like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, all those others. Those are many of the contributing factors.  But war also, I wrote this piece about, this isn't Iraq, this isn't Afghanistan, this isn't Libya. I really hate the lazy comparisons. This was contained and not able to spill out by constant communication from day one of what the goals were. Limited objective to roll back a threat to the world nuclear program and the ballistic program as well. That prevents the ability for even the Islamic regime to say, you know, my survival is at risk, I need to escalate this, right? So, being clear, having strategic clarity from Israel, and when the United States assisted, from the United States. You know, war is a contest of wills, not just between the military is fighting it, but the political element and the population element. So, you know, being able to communicate to the population in Israel and like, what's the goal here? Like, how long are we gonna have to do this? And to the United States. Like, what are our interests? Keeping it the goal limited, which all parties did.  And even, in fact, you had the G7 meeting during this and they signed an agreement, we agree Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. That is a big part of how you permit the spill out. But it does have many contextual elements of the broader, this isn't black and white between Israel and Iran. It's much bigger than that. And that, and we saw all that work that has been done to show strength through peace, or peace through strength, in all the forms of national power that have been rallied against what is chaos that the Islamic regime wants in the Middle East. Casey Kustin:   So now that we've had a few days to begin to assess the impact of both the US and the Israeli strikes based on what's publicly available. I think you wrote that the nuclear timeline has been pushed back years. We saw some reporting in the New York Times yesterday saying it's only set back months. It seems this morning, the US is concurring with the Israeli assessment that it's been set back years. A lot of talk about where certain Where did certain stockpiles of enriched uranium, and how confident can we be at this point in any of these assessments? John Spencer:   So yes, as we're talking, people are trying to make it political. This should be a non partisan, non political issue. I'm an objective analyst of war. If you just write down all the things that Israel destroyed, validated by satellite imagery. then the fact that somebody And even the spinning of words where like we saw with that leaked report, which was the preliminary thoughts about something, it isn't comprehensive, right?  So one, BDA has never come that fast. Two, we do know, and Iran has validated, like all these scientists dead, all these generals dead, all these components of the nuclear program, damaged or destroyed. The idea that somebody would say, well, you only set it back a couple months to me, it's just anti-intellectual. Look, Natanz, Esfahan, Fordo, we can debate about how much stuff is inside of that mountain that was destroyed, although 14 of the world's best bunker buster munitions, 30,000 pounds punching through.  I just think, it's not a silly argument, because this is very serious. And yes, there could be, you know, hundreds of pounds of enriched uranium up there, a certain percentage that got floated around. That's not the, the things that set the timeline of breakout. Breakout included all the components of the knowledge and capability to reach breakout and then weaponization of a nuclear bomb. There's nobody, I think, who can comprehensively, without nuancing the words say that Israel wasn't very effective, and the United States assistance in only what the United States could do, at setting this program back and actually stopping the immediate danger. Of course, Iran is still a danger. The program is still a danger, but I just think it's so political that they're trying to say that, well, you only said it back a couple months. That's like, that's ridiculous. Casey Kustin:   So as an objective analyst of war, but also as someone who's really been a voice of moral clarity and has called out the international media over the last 18 months for a lot of this disinformation, misinformation, bias reporting. Before we go, John, what is one consequence of this operation that the international media is just missing? John Spencer:   One is that, I think the international media who are debating whether Iran was literally using an opposing opinion against global thought that Iran was close to a nuclear bomb, they missed that completely and tried to politicize it to where, just giving disinformation agents that tidbit of a headline that they need. I do believe in journalistic standards, fact checking, those elements and holding those people accountable. I live in the world of experts. People on the platform X who think they're experts.  But when you have national media running headlines for sensationalism, for clicks, for you know, struggling for opposition to just political administration, we should learn to really question a single report as valid when there's overwhelming opposition. I don't know how to put that succinctly, but you think we would learn over the last, you know, 20 months of this lies, disinformation, statistical warfare, the things like that that, yeah, it's just crazy that that somebody would think in any way this wasn't an overwhelming success for the world, that this program was set back and a new doctrine for treating the program was established. Casey Kustin:   Finally, John, before we wrap up here, the question on everyone's mind: can the ceasefire really hold? John Spencer:   So, you know, I don't do predictions, because I understand wars uncertainty. It's human. It's political. It looks by all signs, because of how Iran was dominated, and how the United States showed that if it isn't contained, then immense amounts of force and of course, Israel's superiority, I believe that the ceasefire will hold. It was normal. And I made some some posts about the historical examples of wars coming to an end, from the Korean War, to the Yom Kippur war, Bosnia War, where you had this transition period where you're rolling back forces and everything. But the by the fact that Iran has said, Yeah, we agreed. We have stopped our operation. All signs for me are saying that this ceasefire will hold, and now the world's in a better place. Casey Kustin:   John, thank you so much for the insight, for, as I said, your moral clarity that you bring to this conversation. We appreciate you joining us today on People of the Pod. John Spencer:   Thank you so much.   

Western militaries won't be able to do C2 in urban warfare scenarios well enough to prevail. So says Professor John Spencer, author, researcher, commentator and veteran of numerous campaigns. Recent lessons from urban fights demand that HQ staffs refocus on things they can control and need to influence (the Info Ops battle, allocation of scarce resources like engineers, as well as critical CIMIC, legal, PAO issues), whilst combat leaders on the ground will need to understand – and exploit – legacy equipment and tools that find utility in complex urban battles; think sound powered telephones, or procedural and paper Fire Support Co-ordination Measures (FSCMs). John's advice is to train hard, understand the terrain, and what you – and your enemy – is capable of in this unique environment.

We are back, kind of...It's a one off mid close season podcast as Ross and John speak to Brad Spencer's Dad, former Scotland and Chelsea striker John Spencer. He gives us an insight into his career, his views on the team and what we can expect in the Premiership. That and the guys discuss the signings of Scott Bain and Brian Graham, season ticket sales and the return of the academy. Plus news on Falkirk Daft Live V and the boys big charity football match. Expect the Unexpected! Behind the Wall – Behind the Bairns since 1985 Falkirk's best selection of fine wines lagers, craft and cask ales, fantastic value food and great service. Check out what's on www.behindthewall.co.uk Join the FFIT T8s   / 1803421196843918  Get the new Falkirk Daft t-shirt's: https://pintsnprints.co.uk/collection... And Remember sign up for our Discord and Social Media: Discord -   / discord  Twitter/Insta/Facebook - @Falkirkdaft Get Merch: merch.falkirkdaft.co.uk For any sponsorship enquiries email sales@falkirkdaft.co.uk Subscribe to our YouTube channel and remember to leave a review where you get your podcasts.   / @falkirkdaft  

From "In The Pits" join John, Scott, Spencer and Jackson for this weeks Motorsports Racing News Review!

From"In The Pits" join John, Scott, Spencer and Mark for this weeks motorsports racing news conversation and update!

AJC honors Paraguayan President Santiago Peña and student groups; university leaders discuss protecting Jewish life in education; and urban warfare expert John Spencer addresses countering misinformation about Israel in another plenary session from this year's Global Forum.

What does it really take to build a business from scratch—again? In this candid and practical conversation, I'm joined by entrepreneur and business strategist John Spencer Williams, who shares the story of walking away from an established career to rebuild a business from the ground up. We dive deep into: The challenges (and freedoms) of starting over in today's landscape How to validate an idea before investing time or money Building momentum with no audience, no team, and no safety net The mental models John uses to avoid overwhelm and move fast Why simplicity always beats scale in the early days John's new course https://theideaslab.org/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Teaching has always been challenging, but right now it feels heavier. In this piece, I share a conversation with Mike, a fifth-grade teacher who's feeling the weight of tech distractions, AI-written essays, student apathy, and the pressure to do it all. The usual quick fixes... The post Deeper Learning is a Better Path Forward appeared first on John Spencer.

From "In The Pits" join John, Scott, Spencer, Phil and Jaskson for this weeks motorsports racing news update!!

GAZA AID, HAMAS, AND THE 'DAY AFTER'HEADLINE 1: Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam is talking about normalization with Israel.HEADLINE 2: The United States, Britain, France, and Germany, are planning to submit a resolution to the International Atomic Energy Agency board declaring Iran non-compliant with its non-proliferation obligations. Because it is.HEADLINE 3: A Saudi-led delegation of Arab foreign ministers was supposed to visit the West Bank yesterday. Israel blocked it. --FDD Executive Director Jon Schanzer delivers timely updates and sharp analysis, followed by a conversation with John Spencer, who serves as the chair of urban warfare studies at West Point's Modern War Institute.Learn more at: https://www.fdd.org/fddmorningbrief/

Send us a text Connect with Israelis, Palestinians, and global voices having real conversations every day -  Join the afterparty: https://discord.gg/MSTfuhnj8S Socials: https://linktr.ee/adarw Support the Show: Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/sulhaPayPal: https://paypal.me/AdarW?locale.x=en_USSupport the show

In classrooms across the country, something subtle but powerful is taking shape. Amidst the distractions, the surface-level shortcuts, and the pressure to speed everything up, I've seen students quietly shift from passive to active. They’ve gone from compliant to curious and from distracted to dialed... The post Teachers Are the Champions of Depth in a Culture of Distractions appeared first on John Spencer.

The bombardment is “wholly disproportionate”, the civilian death toll and suffering is “intolerable” and the denial of aid is “unacceptable.” These are not the words of democratic leaders about Putin's war on Ukraine but those of the UK, France and Canada about Israel's ongoing offensive in Gaza. And now President Trump says it's time for Netanyahu to “wrap it up.” Israel is allowing some aid to trickle into Gaza after an 11-week blockade but aid workers say it's a drop in the ocean and the US president has acknowledged that “a lot of people in Gaza are starving.” Are we seeing a genocide? Piers Morgan speaks to editor-in-chief and CEO of Zeteo Mehdi Hasan and chair of Urban Warfare Studies War Institute Maj. John Spencer (retd.) Piers Morgan Uncensored is proudly independent and supported by: Pique: Use code PIERS for 20% off your order plus a FREE frother & glass beaker with this exclusive link: https://piquelife.com/PIERS Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

From "InThe Pits" join John, Scott, Spencer Phil, and Jackson for this weeks Motorsports Racing Review!!

A missile strike by Houthi terrorist hit Israeli soil near Tel Aviv's largest airport on Sunday, surprisingly evading air defense systems causing multiple international flights. In the wake of the missile attack, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the military operation in Gaza will be expanded. The Prime Minister has ordered that Israeli reservists be called up and the population of Gaza be displaced to the south while they continue their goal to root out the Hamas terror group. FOX's Eben Brown speaks with John Spencer, Chairman of Urban Warfare Studies and author of 'Connected Soldiers: Life, Leadership, and Social Connections in Modern War', who says this is a direct change of Israeli plans for post war Gaza. Click Here⁠ To Follow 'The FOX News Rundown: Evening Edition' Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

A missile strike by Houthi terrorist hit Israeli soil near Tel Aviv's largest airport on Sunday, surprisingly evading air defense systems causing multiple international flights. In the wake of the missile attack, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the military operation in Gaza will be expanded. The Prime Minister has ordered that Israeli reservists be called up and the population of Gaza be displaced to the south while they continue their goal to root out the Hamas terror group. FOX's Eben Brown speaks with John Spencer, Chairman of Urban Warfare Studies and author of 'Connected Soldiers: Life, Leadership, and Social Connections in Modern War', who says this is a direct change of Israeli plans for post war Gaza. Click Here⁠ To Follow 'The FOX News Rundown: Evening Edition' Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

A missile strike by Houthi terrorist hit Israeli soil near Tel Aviv's largest airport on Sunday, surprisingly evading air defense systems causing multiple international flights. In the wake of the missile attack, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the military operation in Gaza will be expanded. The Prime Minister has ordered that Israeli reservists be called up and the population of Gaza be displaced to the south while they continue their goal to root out the Hamas terror group. FOX's Eben Brown speaks with John Spencer, Chairman of Urban Warfare Studies and author of 'Connected Soldiers: Life, Leadership, and Social Connections in Modern War', who says this is a direct change of Israeli plans for post war Gaza. Click Here⁠ To Follow 'The FOX News Rundown: Evening Edition' Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

From "In The Pits" join John, Scott, Phil and Spencer for this weeks motorsposrts racing review!

Accidental urban warfare expert, John Spencer, joins Bridget for a discussion about navigating the concrete jungle of modern combat. He shares his evolution from a 25-year active duty service member, to analyzing hypothetical US military operations in mega-cities, teaching strategy and tactics at West Point, to finally setting up a research center called the Modern War Institute, and becoming an unofficial analyst of the war in Ukraine. Spencer offers a fascinating tour through the evolution of urban warfare, the rules of war, the technological chess match between drones and buildings, the moral gymnastics of minimizing civilian casualties, balancing military necessity with humanitarian concern, debunking the idea that if you bomb less there will be less destruction, and explaining why your Google Maps addiction is making your brain smaller. Whether he's discussing Mumbai's feral neighborhoods, Hamas's exploitation of war laws, or why soldiers reject fancy tech when bullets are flying, Spencer delivers insights that will make you see cities less as cultural hotspots and more as potential tactical nightmares. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Walk-Ins Welcome with Bridget Phetasy - Podcast Bridget Phetasy admires grit and authenticity. On Walk-Ins Welcome, she talks about the beautiful failures and frightening successes of her own life and the lives of her guests. She doesn't conduct interviews—she has conversations. Conversations with real people about the real struggle and will remind you that we can laugh in pain and cry in joy but there's no greater mistake than hiding from it all. By embracing it all, and celebrating it with the stories she'll bring listeners, she believes that our lowest moments can be the building blocks for our eventual fulfillment. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- PHETASY IS a movement disguised as a company. We just want to make you laugh while the world burns. https://www.phetasy.com/ Buy PHETASY MERCH here: https://www.bridgetphetasy.com/ For more content, including the unedited version of Dumpster Fire, BTS content, writing, photos, livestreams and a kick-ass community, subscribe at https://phetasy.com/ Twitter - https://twitter.com/BridgetPhetasy Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/bridgetphetasy/ Podcast - Walk-Ins Welcome with Bridget Phetasy https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/walk-ins-welcome/id1437447846 https://open.spotify.com/show/7jbRU0qOjbxZJf9d49AHEh https://play.google.com/music/listen?u=0#/ps/I3gqggwe23u6mnsdgqynu447wvaSupport the show

Bob covers some loose ends on the Douglas Murray / Dave Smith debate, then analyzes how a libertarian legal system would handle the thorny problem of human shields.Mentioned in the Episode and Other Links of Interest:Bob's journal article on libertarian law and military defense.Sam Harris interviews Douglas Murray on the JRE debate.Previous BMS episodes on the Murray/Smith debate (here and here).John Spencer's twitter essay critiquing Dave Smith's views on war.The link for Monetary-Metals.com.Help support the Bob Murphy Show.

The future is unpredictable. So, when we try to design learning experiences that “prepare students for the future,” we have to recognize that we don’t always know what they’ll need. In this article, I explore the counterintuitive reality that the best way to prepare students... The post Why Deeper Learning Is a Critical Advantage in the Age of AI appeared first on John Spencer.

John's website: https://www.johnspenceronline.com #Israel #hamas #gaza #middleeast #warfare #morality #islam _______________________________________ If you appreciate my work and would like to support it: https://subscribestar.com/the-saad-truth https://patreon.com/GadSaad https://paypal.me/GadSaad To subscribe to my exclusive content on Twitter, please visit my bio at https://twitter.com/GadSaad _______________________________________ This clip was posted on April 25, 2025 on my YouTube channel as THE SAAD TRUTH_1844: https://youtu.be/7M_1Fl4cr6M _______________________________________ Please visit my website gadsaad.com, and sign up for alerts. If you appreciate my content, click on the "Support My Work" button. I count on my fans to support my efforts. You can donate via Patreon, PayPal, and/or SubscribeStar. _______________________________________ Dr. Gad Saad is a professor, evolutionary behavioral scientist, and author who pioneered the use of evolutionary psychology in marketing and consumer behavior. In addition to his scientific work, Dr. Saad is a leading public intellectual who often writes and speaks about idea pathogens that are destroying logic, science, reason, and common sense.  _______________________________________

David Harris is joined by John Spencer, a former U.S. military officer, urban warfare specialist, and a keen observer of the Hamas-triggered war with Israel. 

In this powerful episode, Rabbi Pesach Wolicki and Pastor Doug Reed speak with Colonel John Spencer—Chair of Urban Warfare Studies at West Point and a globally recognized expert on modern combat—to unpack the complexities of Israel's war against Hamas. Colonel Spencer offers a clear-eyed analysis of urban warfare, the ethical challenges faced by democratic militaries, and the rigorous standards of international law. Together, they address the widespread misinformation fueling anti-Israel sentiment and explain why much of the global criticism ignores the realities of combat and the legal obligations Israel upholds on the battlefield.

John Spencer is the Chief of Urban Warfare Studies at West Point's Modern Warfare Institute, and the Executive Director of the Urban Warfare Institute. Spencer also has over 25 years of active military service as an infantry soldier, achieving the rank of Major.  He sat down with Nadav Tikochinsky, Pinsker Centre Policy Fellow, to reflect on his own experience in combat, how non-state actors are changing urban warfare, and how he sees the rules of war being misunderstood and manipulated. 

Content curation is a vital part of the creative process. In this blog post and podcast, we explore why curation matters and how we can help students learn how to engage in the curation process. Listen to the Podcast If you enjoy this blog but... The post In a World of AI, Content Curation Is More Important Than Ever appeared first on John Spencer.

Hometown Radio 04/16/2025 5p: Hometown Grocer John Spencer gets us ready for Easter

In my latest podcast episode, I interview Samantha Marsden, who shares how drama and improve strategies can help students gain creative confidence, improve their communication skills, and engage in iterative thinking. Her new book Acting Games for Improv is out and I highly recommend it.... The post Sam Marsden on the Value of Improv Games to Spark Creative Thinking appeared first on John Spencer.

We know that creativity is vital for student learning. We also know that we tend to value the things we assess. However, when we assess creativity, we can unwittingly cause students to become risk-averse. So, how do we assess creativity in a way that encourages... The post We Want Students to Be Creative, But How Do We Assess This? appeared first on John Spencer.

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit andrewsullivan.substack.comDouglas is a writer and commentator. He's an associate editor at The Spectator and a columnist for both the New York Post and The Sun, as well as a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. His books include The Madness of Crowds and The War on the West, which we discussed on the Dishcast three years ago. His new book is On Democracies and Death Cults: Israel and the Future of Civilization. We had a lively, sometimes contentious session — first on Trump, then on Israel's tactics in Gaza.This episode and a forthcoming one with Francis Collins were challenges. How to push back against someone who is your guest? I never wanted the Dishcast to be an interrogation, an Andrew Neil-style interview. But I also wanted it to air debate, so I try to play devil's advocate when appropriate. I'm sure you'll let me know how I'm doing after this one.For two clips of our convo — on Palestinians “endlessly rejecting peace,” and debating the Khalil case — pop over to our YouTube page.Other topics: the pros and cons of Trump 2.0 for Douglas; his time on the frontlines in Ukraine; the “horrifying” WH meeting with Zelensky; mineral reparations; North Korean conscripts; aggressing Greenland; Blame Canada; the Signal chat; Vance's disdain for Europe; the Houthis; MAGA isolationists; targeting law firms; race and sex discrimination under Biden; Trump defunding the Ivies; anti-Semitism on campus; the Columbia protests and criminality; the Alien Enemies Act and the 1952 law; the Ozturk case; the horrors of 10/7; Hezbollah's aborted invasion; the bombing of Gaza; human shields; dead children; hostages like Edan Alexander; Gazan protests against Hamas; the Israeli dentist who saved Sinwar's life; 9/11 and religious extremism; the 2005 withdrawal from Gaza; Ben-Gurion; Zionism; pogroms in the wake of 1948; audio clips of Hitchens and Bill Burr; the view that only Jews can protect Jews; Rushdie; the hearts and minds of Gazans; John Spencer; just war theory; Trump's Mar-a-Gaza; the West Bank settlements; ethnic cleansing; Smotrich; and the fate of a two-state solution after 10/7.Browse the Dishcast archive for an episode you might enjoy (the first 102 are free in their entirety — subscribe to get everything else). Coming up: Claire Lehmann on the success of Quillette, Evan Wolfson on the history of marriage equality, Francis Collins on faith and science and Covid, Stephen Macedo and Frances Lee on Covid's political fallout, and Paul Elie on his book The Last Supper: Art, Faith, Sex, and Controversy in the 1980s. Please send any guest recs, dissents, and other comments to dish@andrewsullivan.com.

Send us a textIn Part 2 of our conversation with John Spencer, we dive into the brutal complexities of Israel's war against Hamas, the impossible choices Israel faces, and the international double standards being applied. Topics include:Legal Reality vs. Moral Expectations: Is Israel legally obligated to provide aid to Gaza while Hamas controls it?The Dilemma of Hostages: Can military pressure force Hamas to release them, or does negotiation only drive the price up?Hamas' Human Shield Strategy: How the terror group weaponizes civilians to manipulate international law.Lessons for the West: What democratic nations must learn from Israel's military innovations and experience in urban warfare.The Broader Conflict: The Iranian-backed Houthi threat and the broader implications of Israel's war for the free world.

From Boca Raton, Florida, this is Behind the Bima. On this week's episode, Rabbi Efrem Goldberg, Rabbi Philip Moskowitz and Rabbi Josh Broide are joined by Colonel John Spencer, Chair of Urban Warfare Studies at the Modern War Institute at West Point.In this compelling conversation, John Spencer provides profound insights into the complexities of urban warfare, sharing his expertise and experiences from the battlefield. The discussion delves into the themes of moral clarity in warfare, the challenges faced by Israel in its ongoing conflicts, and the broader implications for Western military strategies.Plus: all about Rabbi Broide's move to Israel.All this and more, Behind the Bima.

About a week ago, ChatGPT rolled out a major update to its image generation and suddenly my feed was flooded with AI-generated images in the style of Studio Ghibli. While the results are impressive (yes, it finally gets hands and text right) but also pretty... The post Centaurs, Cyborgs, and Coffee-Bearded Logos – Seven Ways AI Is Changing Creativity appeared first on John Spencer.

Send us a textDive into an in‑depth conversation with John Spencer as he delivers an inside look at Israel's government communication strategy and its evolving approach to urban warfare. In this episode of Israel: State of a Nation, John—chair of Urban Warfare Studies at West Point and a renowned military analyst—breaks down the shifting battlefield dynamics, the double standards of international law, and the challenging questions about hostages, ceasefires, and the future of Gaza.Key Topics Discussed: • How Hamas' tactics and the “moral trap” shape modern urban warfare • The political stakes and international pressures influencing Israel's strategy • The role of advanced IDF tactics—including tanks, drones, and infantry innovations—in fighting an enemy entrenched in tunnels • The hostage crisis, failed ceasefire negotiations, and the dilemma of international aid • Lessons from historical battles and how they inform today's conflictIf you're looking to understand the complex interplay between military strategy, international law, and government messaging during wartime, this episode is a must‑listen.0:00 - Introduction: The War Israel Must Win5:06 - Hamas's Strategy: Sacrificing Civilians for Victory14:05 - The Double Standard: Why Israel Can't Win By Playing By the Rules27:51 - Occupation or Anarchy: Israel's Impossible Choice34:38 - Israel's Approach to Fighting in Unimaginable TerrainCo-Creator and Host - Eylon LevyCo-Creator - Guy RossExecutive Producer - Asher Westropp-EvansDirector/Editor - Benny GoldmanStudio Manager - Lotem SegevGraphics - Thomas GirschLine Producer - Tal SegalIntern - Jesse SklarInside GenevaInside Geneva is a podcast about global politics, humanitarian issues, & international aidListen on: Apple Podcasts SpotifySupport the showStay up to date at:X: https://twitter.com/stateofapodInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/stateofapod/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?... LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/state-of-a-nation

From "In The Pits" join John, Spencer, Mark, and Scott for this weeks motorsports racing news update!

We often hear about AI and student cheating. This is a valid concern. But I’d like to highlight ways that we can use AI for deeper mastery. In this post (and podcast), I explore how we can move beyond using AI for quick answers and... The post Ten Ways to Use AI for Deeper Learning and Mastery appeared first on John Spencer.

This episode of the podcast features my conversation with none other than John Spencer, Chair of Urban Warfare Studies at West Point, in front of a live Atlanta audience. Our organization recently hosted a series of MirYam Institute campus presentations featuring John as the keynote speaker. That campus tour included lectures at Columbia Law School, The Kennedy School of Government at Harvard and the Fletcher School of Law & Diplomacy at Tufts. John's initial comments were followed by audience questions from the pro., the anti and the undecided elements of the graduate student community.  That lecture series culminated with a presentation to the Atlanta Jewish community and it's that conversation that I'm pleased to share with you here. So with that, enjoy!Don't forget that you can catch nearly all of this audio content in video format on The MirYam Institute's YouTube channel, so if you'd like to ensure that you never miss any of our programming, go ahead and subscribe to that channel as well via the link below. https://www.youtube.com/@TheMirYamInstituteSupport the showThe MirYam Institute. Israel's Future in Israel's Hands.Subscribe to our podcast: https://podfollow.com/1493910771Follow The MirYam Institute X: https://bit.ly/3jkeUyxFollow Benjamin Anthony X: https://bit.ly/3hZeOe9Like Benjamin Anthony Facebook: https://bit.ly/333Ct93Like The MirYam Institute Facebook: https://bit.ly/2SarHI3Follow Benjamin Anthony Instagram: https://bit.ly/30m6uPGFollow The MirYam Institute Instagram: https://bit.ly/3l5fvED

While it’s easy to reject traditional teaching practices as “less authentic” in PBL, we explore why these ten strategies actually belong in PBL unit plans. Listen to the Podcast If you enjoy this blog but you'd like to listen to it on the go, just... The post Ten Traditional Teaching Practices that Still Belong in a PBL Unit appeared first on John Spencer.

In this latest episode, Lynn Cashell shares how she integrated AI into her student Genius Hour projects. Listen to the Podcast If you enjoy this blog but you'd like to listen to it on the go, just click on the audio below or subscribe via iTunes/Apple... The post Lynn Cashell on How She Integrated AI into Genius Hour appeared first on John Spencer.

This week, we explore the concept of “teaching in beta”—a mindset that embraces imperfection and experimentation in the classroom. Learn how veteran teachers are innovating with new strategies, taking creative risks, and continually iterating on their lessons to foster resilience and growth in both students... The post Taking a Beta Approach to Teaching and Innovation appeared first on John Spencer.

In my latest podcast episode, I interview Jed Dearybury. He’s a deep thinker and a creative spirit. As the co-author of The Playful Classroom, Jed advocates for integrating play into every aspect of school; from curriculum and instruction to assessment to the classroom culture to... The post Jed Dearybury on the Power of a Playful Mindset (Interview) appeared first on John Spencer.

Student voice and choice can be challenging. There are so many variables at work and it’s okay if it doesn’t work perfectly. In this week’s article, I share my big mistakes I made with Genius Hour and how I changed things through multiple iterations. Listen... The post The Six Biggest Mistakes I Made with Genius Hour (and How I Fixed Them) appeared first on John Spencer.

In my latest article and podcast, I share a continuum for how we can think about AI integration in our educational institutions. Listen to the Podcast If you enjoy this blog but you'd like to listen to it on the go, just click on the... The post A Continuum for Using AI in Schools appeared first on John Spencer.

MUTINY OR MURDER? 2/4: Sailing the Graveyard Sea: The Deathly Voyage of the Somers, the U.S. Navy's Only Mutiny, and the Trial That Gripped the Nation by  Richard Snow  (Author) https://www.amazon.com/Sailing-Graveyard-Sea-Deathly-Gripped/dp/1982185449 On December 16, 1842, the US brig-of-war Somers dropped anchor in the New York Harbor at the end of a voyage intended to teach a group of adolescents the rudiments of naval life. But this routine exercise ended in catastrophe. Commander Alexander Slidell Mackenzie came ashore claiming he had prevented a mutiny that would have left him and his officers dead. Some of the thwarted mutineers were being held under guard, but three had already been hanged at sea: Boatswain's Mate Samuel Cromwell, Seaman Elisha Small, and Acting Midshipman Philip Spencer, whose father was the secretary of war, John Spencer. 1904 PORT ARTHUR GUNFIGHT

MUTINY OR MURDER?  1/4: Sailing the Graveyard Sea: The Deathly Voyage of the Somers, the U.S. Navy's Only Mutiny, and the Trial That Gripped the Nation by  Richard Snow  (Author) https://www.amazon.com/Sailing-Graveyard-Sea-Deathly-Gripped/dp/1982185449 On December 16, 1842, the US brig-of-war Somers dropped anchor in the New York Harbor at the end of a voyage intended to teach a group of adolescents the rudiments of naval life. But this routine exercise ended in catastrophe. Commander Alexander Slidell Mackenzie came ashore claiming he had prevented a mutiny that would have left him and his officers dead. Some of the thwarted mutineers were being held under guard, but three had already been hanged at sea: Boatswain's Mate Samuel Cromwell, Seaman Elisha Small, and Acting Midshipman Philip Spencer, whose father was the secretary of war, John Spencer. 1867 FARRAGUT'S FLAGSHIP FRANKLIN

John Spencer is the Chair of Urban Warfare Studies at the Modern War Institute at West Point. He joined Rep. Crenshaw to explore the historical evolution of urban combat and analyze modern strategies for conquering and defending cities. John discusses how urban warfare is playing out in Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, and Ukraine. And he envisions the most likely scenarios for a Chinese invasion of Taiwan, along with potential U.S.-Mexico counterinsurgency efforts against the cartels. •    The evolution of urban warfare •    Regime change and chaos in Syria •    Why willpower often trumps raw numbers •    Hezbollah's decimation and its implications •    Israeli airstrikes in post-Assad Syria •    “The way you take a city is psychologically.” •    Russia's miscalculation in Kiev and Ukraine's resistance •    How Gaza's conflict was unlike any other •    Why banning missiles could result in more civilian casualties •    Debunking the “Zero Dark Thirty” Fallacy •    “Is that Batman??” •    Why the pager operation wouldn't have worked in Gaza •    More common misconceptions: The Abacus, Vampire, and Peace Table Fallacies •    Taiwan's defenses and civilian preparation for invasion •    U.S.-Mexico counterinsurgency strategies to combat cartels John Spencer currently serves as the Chair of Urban Warfare Studies at the Modern War Institute at West Point, Co-Director of the Urban Warfare Project, and host of the Urban Warfare Project podcast. He also serves as the Chair of Urban Warfare Studies with the Madison Policy Forum, a New York based think-tank. He is a founding member of the International Working Group on Subterranean Warfare. He is the author of three books: Understanding Urban Warfare, (Howgate Publishing, 2022), Connected Soldiers: Life, Leadership, and Social Connections in Modern War (Potomac Books, 2022; Winner of the 2023 Gold Medal Award, Best Military History Memoir, Military Writers Society of America), The Mini-Manual for the Urban Defender (John Spencer, 2022). Follow him on X at @SpencerGuard.