Tucker Carlson Ignites Internal War Over Iran And Israel

Tucker Carlson’s shocking claim that a nuclear-armed Iran could stabilize the Middle East has ignited fury among conservatives, handing a propaganda win to the Ayatollah while undermining America’s steadfast ally Israel.

Story Highlights

Carlson argues Iran’s nukes would deter wars like North Korea’s arsenal, challenging U.S. and Israeli threat warnings.
Sen. Ted Cruz blasts it as “unbelievable” appeasement promoting the Ayatollah’s nukes as a “GOOD thing.”
Critics highlight Iran’s proxy aggression via Hezbollah and Hamas, rejecting North Korea analogies for a revolutionary theocracy.
President Trump’s firm stance against Iranian nukes contrasts sharply with Carlson’s isolationist pitch amid 2026 debates.

Carlson’s Controversial Newsletter

Tucker Carlson released his newsletter on January 21, 2026, claiming Iran’s nuclear weapons would stabilize the Middle East by deterring foreign intervention. He compared it to North Korea’s program, which has prevented wars on the Korean Peninsula since 2006. Carlson dismissed decades of alarmist rhetoric from U.S. and Israeli leaders, arguing no Axis of Evil state has used nukes. This stance questions Iran’s intent to use such weapons despite its history.

Immediate Backlash from Conservatives

Senator Ted Cruz immediately condemned Carlson on X, calling the idea “unbelievable” and accusing him of promoting the Ayatollah’s nukes as beneficial. Senator Lindsey Graham warned the Ayatollah would deploy them, while former intelligence chief James Clapper feared escalated attacks. Carlson labeled Benjamin Netanyahu the “warmonger-in-chief,” drawing sharp rebukes for attacking a key U.S. ally vital to countering Iranian expansionism.

Iran’s Nuclear History and Proxy Threat

Iran’s nuclear program began in the 1950s with U.S. support under the Shah but surged after the 1979 Islamic Revolution. The 2015 JCPOA deal collapsed when President Trump withdrew in 2018. U.S. airstrikes hit Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan in June 2025, yet President Pezeshkian confirmed the program persists. Iran’s proxies—Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis—pursue hegemony, unlike isolated North Korea, raising doubts about rational deterrence.

Critics Expose Dangers of Deterrence Argument

Micha Danzig in Algemeiner rejected Carlson’s “fairy tale,” noting Iran’s revolutionary theocracy glorifies martyrdom, where nukes would shield aggression rather than restrain it. Ideology overrides suicide fears, unlike Cold War rational actors. The Institute for the Study of War tracks Iran’s expansionist rhetoric masking true aims post-strikes. This view aligns with President Trump’s maximum pressure policy protecting U.S. interests and Israel.

“Giving Guns to a Crazy Man” – Tucker Suggest Iran Getting Nukes Would Make The World Safer pic.twitter.com/mnlFWbM9DC

— PBD Podcast (@PBDsPodcast) January 23, 2026

Carlson’s position fuels conservative rifts, eroding hawkish unity against Iran during 2026 election cycles. It risks normalizing appeasement, emboldening Tehran via proxies under a nuclear shield. Israel confronts existential threats with tighter timelines, while U.S. taxpayers benefit from reduced military burdens only if deterrence holds—a gamble critics deem reckless given Iran’s track record.