Posted on 01/21/2026 10:35:34 AM PST by Miami Rebel
A new edition of Tucker Carlson’s newsletter is drawing sharp backlash after he argued that an Iranian nuclear weapon could ultimately be a stabilizing force in the Middle East, prompting critics to accuse him of echoing narratives friendly to the Islamic Republic.
In the essay, Carlson reportedly contends that the chances Tehran would ever launch a nuclear strike are effectively zero, describing the use of such a weapon as “suicidal” for any regime. He contrasts that with the United States, noting it is the only country to have used nuclear weapons in war, and suggests Washington treats that history as a point of pride. Carlson goes on to argue that North Korea’s nuclear arsenal has “stabilized” the Korean Peninsula by deterring outside interventions, and poses the question of whether an Iranian bomb might produce a similar effect in its region.
He speculates that a nuclear-armed Iran could push the United States to scale back its presence in the Middle East, pressure Israel to reconsider its security posture in Gaza and the West Bank, and even make Tehran less repressive at home by reducing fears of regime change.
Those claims have provoked outrage among many pro-Israel and Iranian dissident voices, who note that the same regime is currently accused of massacring thousands of its own citizens for protesting corruption, economic collapse, and clerical rule. Carlson’s critics say his framing minimizes the scale of the crackdown and ignores the risks of placing nuclear weapons in the hands of a government that has violently suppressed dissent, armed regional militias, and repeatedly threatened Israel.
Some opponents describe the newsletter as moving beyond mere contrarianism into open advocacy for adversarial regimes, warning that treating an Iranian bomb as a net positive undermines efforts to confront both Tehran’s human-rights abuses and its nuclear ambitions. The controversy adds to a growing list of foreign-policy positions from Carlson that have divided conservatives and alarmed U.S. allies abroad.
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
Because people like you are stupid.
I’d rather let other countries work their own problems out—and for us to do the same by sending all other countries’ citizens in our country home!
Tucker has been bought off just like Marjorie Traitor Green. Over the long term, they will not enjoy their 30 pieces of silver.
It figures that a POS troll such as yourself would side with a lunatic like Tucker.
Don't you think that Iran's arming, supporting, and directing the Houthis to launch missiles at American ships is a problem?
What about when their proxy forces blew up our Marine barracks in Lebanon?
That sounds like a talking point dreamed up in Moscow or Tehran.
They aren't, so your starting premise is wrong, and therefore your conclusion is just a fantasy.
The top podcasts in the real world are The Joe Rogan Experience, Good Hang with Amy Poehler, and Crime Junkie, followed by The Daily from the New York Times.
Tucker Carson is further down the list, after The Daily, and the Shawn Ryan Show, and just above Up First from NPR.
“Actually, billions we give them is spent on our politicians.”
No, it isn’t. It is essentially an agreement that we will pay X amount for US weapons that will be sent to Israel. It goes to places like Lockheed Martin to purchase equipment Israel uses.
Not to pay off congressmen.
Sure...by way of Tel Aviv. 😂
By asking Trump to delay Iran attacks, Netanyahu exposes Israel's air defense holes - analysis
See my 70...link is to JPost.
How much, do you reckon, is he being paid to shill for the Moslems?
Tucker, Tucker, we hardly know ye!
Never give a Mullah a nuke, especially when all he needs is a beating.
Whoa!
That’s crazy talk.
Yeah, it sucks for you Muslims that the Joos have the bomb.
The only thing that sucks is Christian Zionism.
Interesting, if non-sourced article.
The entire basis is a purported claim that Bibi (along with Saudi, Omar, Qatar, and Egypt) asked Trump to delay an attack to avoid a broader regional war. The progenitor of this “please delay” tale is the NYT, itself citing “anonymous sources”. So step one is believing the NYT, which is a known fabulist.
Step two is believing that the reason was not, as said by the NYT, avoiding a regional war, but claiming the real reason was lack of Arrow missiles. This new claim again has no one on record supporting it.
In sum, (1) one must believe the NYT report; (2) then disbelieve the NYT report and (3) then believe an independent uncited person or persons the JP supposedly talked to about Arrow missiles.
Quite a stretch, given The Jerusalem Post (which is based in Jerusalem, not Tel Aviv, btw) is owned by Eli Azur, a curiously opaque businessman with extensive ties to the UAE and who has been accused of carrying water for the UAE in the very pages of the Jerusalem Post by publishing OpEd’s by fake people that toe the UAE party line, which this story fits perfectly.
But I get it; you hate us Jews, especially Israelis. You could have been a contender, but the Jooos stood in your way.
Hey, I get it. If I was you, I’d want blame someone, too.
False.
The 'basis' of the claim is Israeli missile defenses were damaged/deficient the last time they FAFOed with Iran and contrary to IDF press releases they haven't been sufficiently repaired/upgraded to withstand another round of fighting with an opponent who can hit back.
Maybe Israel wasn't expecting such an aggressive response from Trump so Netanyahu was forced to divulge the truth and ask him for a delay.
However, the notion that Israel wanted to avoid a larger regional war is risible considering how they've conducted themselves the past two plus years. While regime change is needed in the Middle East, maybe it should start with the removal of that bloodthirsty Zionist gang in Israel.
You do know that defense contractors make major contributions to politicians that make sure there is big dollar defense spending on defense contractors, right?
omg.
“...that make sure there is big dollar defense spending on defense contractors, right?”
I worked testing of new systems at the end of my career. I know there is wasteful spending, but it is not because ISRAEL is shoveling money at defense contractors! Do not blame ISRAEL for what AMERICAN politicians do. We spend roughly $300 BILLION a year on research and weapons. Compare that to the 3-4 billion spent on weapons given to Israel.
And please notice ISRAEL has decided they need to beef up their own weapons building because they do not want to be relying on the USA.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.