With the Strait of Hormuz under the control of the Iranian Regime, and Rockets and drones raining down on our friends, without a visible objective or strategy on our part, I’ve said all I can. I lost track of where the Trump administration wanted to go with its attack when it ruled out cooperation with the Kurds. Others had a similar response.

Wall Street Journal columnist Holman Jenkins Jr, a member of that paper’s editorial board, put it this way: “The moment that gave me pause was when the administration backed away from unleashing Iran’s Kurdish rebels. Yes, if U.S. goals were limited, a certain delicacy was appropriate here. But if the U.S. means to impose maximal stress on Iran’s ruling group, if the goal is to push the Regime to the wall, then throw everything at it, including the Kurds—at least everything short of a presumably unacceptable U.S. ground invasion.”

Why not? Not only could the Kurds provide an area for the Iranian opposition to gather, arm, train, and organize, but it would also give Iran’s Azerbaijanis (AZERIAS), to the north and east of the Kurdish areas, freedom from a regime repressing them. Bordering Azerbaijan, where their ethnic brothers and sisters reside, it would allow that nation to support their brethren. Azerbaijan is friendly with Israel, and is now being attacked with drones from Iran. Together, the Kurds and Azerbaijanis constitute over 25% of Iran’s present population. A good start to any revolt.

As I’ve said, maybe our administration, the Israelis, or both have something great up their sleeves. Given Trump’s performance on tariffs, confused aims are understandable, but this muddle is uncharacteristic of Israel. Maybe there is a winning master plan proving me happily foolish, but for now, I have to move on to something else for my mental health.