Chuck Holton
Politics • Culture • News
The War in Israel Isn’t Over
Is this war actually winding down, or are we just in the eye of the storm?
December 03, 2025
post photo preview

From where I sit, the war in Israel is nowhere near over. It has simply changed shape. What started as a shock on October 7th has become a long, grinding contest across multiple fronts, and while the headlines may have grown tired, the stakes haven’t shrunk at all.

To understand what’s coming, you have to see the whole board, not just the one square called Gaza.

 

Five Fronts, One War

Israel is not dealing with a single isolated conflict. It is facing at least five interconnected fronts, each of them fragile and potentially explosive:

  1. Gaza

  2. Judea and Samaria (what the world insists on calling the West Bank)

  3. Lebanon

  4. Syria

  5. Iran and its proxy network

They overlap, feed into one another, and are all being influenced—directly or indirectly—by Tehran. When people talk about a “ceasefire,” they’re usually talking about Gaza. But if you zoom out, you’ll notice there has never really been a ceasefire at all.

 

Gaza: A “Ceasefire” in Name Only

Let’s start with Gaza, because that’s where most cameras still point, at least when they bother to look.

On paper, there’s been a ceasefire. On the ground, Hamas has been shooting at Israeli troops almost every day. There have been firefights, mortars, IED attacks, and at least a few IDF soldiers killed since that so-called pause went into effect.

The Israelis have divided the Strip into zones: a red zone where Hamas still controls the ground, and a green zone under IDF control. You’d think the green zone would be relatively stable, but in reality Hamas fighters keep emerging from tunnel shafts inside those areas and ambushing Israeli patrols. More than forty of those fighters have been killed in these incidents alone.

So if you’re picturing neat front lines and a quiet truce, erase that image. Gaza is still a warzone, it’s just a slower, dirtier, more subterranean version of the earlier stages.

The map we’re looking at right now will probably define Gaza for the foreseeable future. Israel is unlikely to pull completely out of the green zone anytime soon. If it did, there are at least nine local militias in that territory—tribal groups that hate Hamas—who would instantly start fighting for control. You’d see a civil war inside a war.

On top of that, Hamas still holds weapons, still has command structures, and still has fighters who believe, very sincerely, that Israel has no right to exist. That’s why Israel’s second war aim—after bringing the hostages home—was to dismantle Hamas as a fighting force. They have not finished that job, and they know it.

 

The Hostages and the Narrative of “Israel is Losing”

A lot of pundits you see online—especially people like Douglas Macgregor, Scott Ritter, and some of the usual talking heads—keep repeating the line that “Israel has lost this war” and is collapsing from within.

That claim doesn’t hold up.

Israel has managed to secure the return of every single hostage except one. When this war began, I honestly didn’t think that was possible. The chaos in Gaza, the tunnel networks, the sheer brutality of Hamas made it seem almost inevitable that many captives would simply disappear—killed, buried, or used as human shields until the end.

Yet here we are: one hostage still unaccounted for, and even his remains may soon be recovered. That is an extraordinary outcome by any military or intelligence standard, and it is a victory no matter what the doom-mongers say.

At the same time, Israel has been quietly preparing for the next phase. Their defensive capabilities are actually stronger now than they were on October 6th. The Iron Beam laser defense system—something the United States and Russia both struggled to make operational—is finally being fielded. It’s not science fiction anymore; it’s an actual working layer in their air-defense umbrella. That’s going to matter a lot if this war expands into a full regional conflict.

So no, Israel is not crumbling. It is bruised, deeply divided internally in some ways, but militarily more ready than at any time since the fighting began.

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
7
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
Bondi Beach Massacre

Here's a longer version of the videio I showed on today's live:

00:10:42
Want to See What Combat is Like?

Several infantrymen from the Azov battalion clearing houses near Toretsk. Witness the utter destruction, and the horrific conditions created by this war. Warning: Foul language is used (in Ukrainian with subtitles)

00:12:51
September 18, 2025
Benjamin Netanyahu Explains the Israeli Economy

Netanyahu was once Israeli Finance Minister - and it shows. He understands a lot about economics, and is worth listening to in order to get a sense for where Israel's economy is headed.

00:08:49
Episode 622 - Field Producer Dennis Azato and Chuck Reminisce

My erstwhile field producer and cameraman Dennis Azato has accompanied me on ten years of adventures across the globe. Today he joins me in Ukraine and we spend some time remembering our many trips together.

Episode 622 - Field Producer Dennis Azato and Chuck Reminisce

Thank you to everyone who opened their hearts and homes to these puppies. We’re so grateful they’ve gone to such wonderful families. This community truly shows up in times of need, and we are incredibly thankful for every message, share, and offer of help. Merry Christmas!

post photo preview

Chuck, Merry Christmas to you, your wife, and entire family. May God Bless you all and thank you for all you do.

Christmas Special Live Call Link

Reminder: Live Call with Chuck Tomorrow at 12PM

Join Chuck Holton and the Hot Zone crew tomorrow, December 20th at 12PM for a special live call!

We’ll be announcing the winners of the Christmas giveaway and giving you an inside look at what’s coming next for The Hot Zone.

 

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
post photo preview
Three Americans Killed in Syria — and the Question Washington Doesn’t Want to Answer

Breaking news this Saturday: three Americans are dead in Syria tonight, three more are wounded, and the attack—described by U.S. Central Command as an ambush carried out by a lone ISIS gunman—has once again dragged the Syrian war back into the American consciousness for a few brief hours, which is usually all the time the public gives it before the news cycle moves on and the families are left to carry the weight alone.

 

CENTCOM says two of the dead were U.S. service members and one was an American civilian contractor, and that the attacker was engaged and killed as well, with names being withheld until next of kin are notified, which is the right thing to do; but even with those official facts in hand, I want to slow the pace down a little bit and do what I always try to do here—put this in context—because in a place like Syria, the story you get in the headline is almost never the story that explains why this happened.

I’m not interested in reporting tragedy like it’s a scoreboard, and I’m not interested in repeating a paragraph of breaking news without the background that makes it intelligible; I spent eight years in the military, and I’ve spent more than twenty years following the U.S. military across the globe—Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria included, with more than a dozen trips into Afghanistan, roughly fifteen into Iraq, and seven or so into Syria—so when Americans die in a place most people couldn’t find on a map, I feel a responsibility to show you what the map actually means.

The desert isn’t empty—ISIS hides in the “nothing”

The reported location of the attack is Palmyra—Palmira on some maps—an ancient city in central Syria that sits on the edge of a brutal expanse of desert, the kind of wide open, sun-blasted country where outsiders assume nothing lives and nothing happens, when in reality it’s exactly the kind of terrain insurgents love because “nothing” is a perfect disguise, a perfect place to move, cache weapons, blend into small villages, disappear into wadis, and wait for opportunities.

Palmyra also sits inside territory controlled by Syria’s new administration under Ahmed al-Sharaa, and if that name makes you pause, it should, because this is where Syrian politics gets complicated in the way only Syria can do: al-Sharaa rose through jihadist ranks, he has a history tied to insurgent warfare against Americans in Iraq, he was captured and held for years, and he later returned to Syria and consolidated power with strong Turkish backing—so when you hear phrases like “new Syrian administration” or “transitional government,” don’t imagine a Western-style democracy that suddenly appeared out of the sand; imagine a patchwork of militias, alliances of convenience, old enemies wearing new uniforms, and a leadership class that wants international legitimacy while carrying a past that cannot be scrubbed clean with a new suit and a new flag.

Now layer on top of that the reality that ISIS is not gone from Syria, not even close.

U.S. estimates have long suggested there are still roughly 2,000 to 3,000 ISIS fighters operating in and around the central Syrian desert, and there are far more than that if you include facilitators, family networks, financiers, and the enormous number of ISIS-linked detainees and relatives held in camps and makeshift prisons; and while that fight has mostly slipped out of the American public’s view, it continues quietly, relentlessly, week after week, because the moment pressure is relieved in a place like this, the violence doesn’t fade—it regroups.

Why American troops are still there—despite everything

The United States currently has about 900 troops in Syria, a number that matters because it tells you how thin the margin is between “containment” and “collapse,” especially when the enemy has deep local roots and decades of practice living off the land and off the grievances of the people around them; and those American troops are there for one primary purpose: to keep a lid on ISIS so we don’t wake up one day to another wave of mass executions, terror-state governance, and regional destabilization that forces the world back into a far more expensive war.

That’s the mission, and it’s not abstract; when ISIS surged the last time, the human cost was staggering, and it wasn’t paid by politicians or pundits—it was paid by Iraqi soldiers, Kurdish fighters, civilians, and yes, Americans too—and the reason our presence in Syria still functions as a deterrent is that in a powder keg region, a small, capable American footprint has a way of discouraging ambitious actors from taking the final step that turns instability into open war.

But here is the part that doesn’t get said out loud very often: the mission in Syria is increasingly tangled up in partnerships that are, at best, uneasy and, at worst, morally and strategically risky.

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
post photo preview
The Dark Fleet Is Fueling the World’s Dictators — And the U.S. Might Finally Be Ready to Do Something About It

I’m coming to you today from Panama, where I’ve been digging into a story that’s far bigger than most people realize. It involves a shadowy network of ships—1,423 of them at last count—that roam the world’s oceans moving sanctioned oil for regimes like Russia, Iran, and Venezuela. Some call it the dark fleet, others the ghost fleet, but whatever the name, it’s become a lifeline for the world’s worst dictators.

Out of those 1,423 vessels, roughly 920 are sanctioned themselves. These aren’t just ships doing business in a gray area—they are part of a global ecosystem of deception, fraud, and corruption that props up authoritarian governments and undermines the international rules that keep maritime trade safe. They spoof GPS signals, turn off their transponders, swap oil with “cleaner” tankers in the dead of night, operate under shell-company ownership, and sail uninsured—floating environmental disasters just waiting to happen.

And for years, not much was done about it. But that may be changing.

Just days ago, the United States seized a massive VLCC tanker—the Skipper—carrying 1.8 million barrels of Venezuelan crude bound for Cuba. It’s a move that seems small on its own, but it hints at something larger: Washington may finally be realizing that targeting the dark fleet isn’t just desirable—it’s strategically powerful.

That raises a fascinating question: What would happen if the U.S. and its allies cracked down hard on these ghost ships—everywhere, all at once? Could it reshape global power? Could it even topple Maduro?

Let’s dig into that.

 

A Sanctions Loophole Big Enough to Sail a Tanker Through

These ghost ships function by exploiting cracks in the global maritime system. They manipulate AIS beacons, swap oil mid-ocean, hide ownership behind layers of shell companies, fly false flags, and operate without legitimate insurance. The UN’s maritime regulator has warned that these rusted, poorly maintained hulks are ticking time bombs—and we’ve already seen “Ukrainian sanctions” in action when Ukrainian sea drones blew up several shadow-fleet tankers in the Black Sea.

Imagine what happens if one of these decrepit tankers explodes in a global choke point like the Strait of Hormuz. You’d see a shock to oil markets overnight.

And yet, that’s the system that keeps Venezuela, Iran, and Russia afloat.

 

The U.S. Begins to Apply Pressure

The seizure of the Skipper wasn’t random. It’s part of a broader pressure campaign—one that former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has openly supported. He said plainly that going after these vessels is a direct way to choke off the revenue Maduro depends on to stay in power.

Pompeo also noted something key: Maduro’s regime probably has “weeks, not months” of financial runway without this illicit revenue stream. And Cuba—already experiencing rolling blackouts—relies on Venezuela for about a quarter of its total energy supply. This single tanker seizure hurts Havana even more than Caracas.

But perhaps the most important variable is geography. Satellite data reveals dozens of sanctioned tankers parked just off Venezuela’s northern coast. In theory, if the U.S. waits for them to exit Venezuela’s 200-mile EEZ, it could legally seize many of them—especially the stateless ones.

Imagine the U.S. grabbing one tanker per day.

The ripple effects would be enormous.

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals