The Neo Socialist Brain Trust of the Ideological Obama Administration continues to “pressure” the Israeli government to essentially disembowel itself, so that there might be peace on earth and good will toward men. If Israel would simply assume indefensible boarders and give the Islamic everything they desire than surely Iran would give up its quest for nuclear weapons. Mr. Obama thinks the key to stopping a war between Iran and Israel is to settle the “Palestinian” issue. (Oh brother) This month, a show of consultations will take place between Obama and various Israeli leaders: in which the coldness developing between the two governments will ensure a dangerous turn of events for Israel and the Western Democracies. Barak Obama will attempt to convince Prime Minister Netanyahu to strip his nation naked, except for a bulls-eye on their butts, and tap dance in a minefield while Obama croons a siren song of peace to Ahmadinejad. Prime Minister Netanyahu will try to get the weak and ineffectual Obama to look with his own eyes instead of a Euro/American Socialists eyes to see that Israel has no choice but to attack. It would be better for the entire world if Israel and America would coordinate their planning, on that score, but Obama’s appeasement minded administration will have nothing to do with realities they don’t “like”.
The Irony that no one seems to talk about is how much the Israeli Government and Moderate Arab governments have in common in denying Iran nuclear technology. Moderate States like Egypt and Gulf nations are far more supportive of Israeli policy, and the unavoidable attack on Iran, than President Obama and his government. Every moderate Arab government knows full well that if Iran gets the Bomb than Iran will dictate policy for the whole region because they also know, as Israel does, that any nation not dancing to Iran’s tune is going to get clobbered. In a neighborhood of knife wielding bullies and thugs, one of the dirt bags will get an arsenal of machine guns! Iran will rule the region unless they’re stopped and the moderate Arabs know it—- and have communicated it to Washington—- but Obama spouts Democrat Ideology with his eyes wide shut! Washington and the West have nearly as much at stake as Israel because if hostile Iran comes to dominate the oil rich Middle East we’re dependant on for economic survival: we well and truly shafted. Moderate Arabs, and Israel, telling Obama that the only choice with Iran is a military strike against Iran and still Obama can’t comprehend the situation! The last time we had obstinacy and stupidity at this level it was Jimmy Carters refusal to support the Shaw of Iran according to treaty and the resulting foreign policy disaster is still going on to this very day!
Neither Iran nor Israel is going along on Mr. Obama’s slow boat to Shangri-La and it’s far more of a certainty that there will be a regional war in the middle east this year because Netanyahu is a stony eyed realist with responsibility for keeping his people safe. It’s shocking to see the degree to which Mr. Obama simply doesn’t understand or can’t relate to this simple, understandable, traditional mindset. Welcome to the real world professor Obama!
Consider the following article from Reuters in which its focus is not so much if Israel will attack it’s how they’ll break the news to the denizens of Obama Island in Washington!
Israel would inform, not ask U.S. before hitting Iran
Wed May 6, 2009 5:34am EDT
By Dan Williams – Analysis
TEL AVIV (Reuters) – When he first got word of Israel’s sneak attack on the Iraqi atomic reactor in 1981, U.S. President Ronald Reagan privately shrugged it off, telling his national security adviser: “Boys will be boys!”
Would Barack Obama be so sanguine if today’s Israelis made good on years of threats and bombed Iran’s nuclear facilities, yanking the United States into an unprecedented Middle East eruption that could dash his goal of easing regional tensions through revived and redoubled U.S. outreach?
For that matter, would Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu readily take on Iran alone, given his country’s limited firepower and the risk of stirring up a backlash against the Jewish state among war-weary, budget-strapped Americans?
Obama is no Reagan. And many experts believe the two allies are now so enmeshed in strategic ties — with dialogue at the highest level of government and military — that complete Israeli autonomy on a major issue like Iran is notional only.
So while no one questions Israel’s willingness to attack should it deem U.S.-led talks on curbing Iranian uranium enrichment a dead end, such strikes would almost certainly entail at least last-minute coordination with Washington.
Israel would want to ensure that its jets would not be shot down by accident if overflying U.S.-occupied Iraq, and to give Americans in the Gulf forewarning of possible Iranian reprisals.
“Whether or not Israel got the green light from Washington to attack Iran is almost immaterial, as everybody in the region would believe that the U.S. was complicit,” said Karim Sadjadpour of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
One U.S. diplomat envisaged Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak telephoning Pentagon chief Robert Gates, unannounced, “to give a heads-up and explain” once the mission were under way.
Gates and the U.S. military brass have voiced distaste for pre-emptive strikes on Iran, which says its uranium enrichment is for legitimate electricity production, not weapons. But their public comments have acknowledged that Israel could break rank.
“I do not doubt that Israel will do what it thinks it needs to do, regardless of whether the U.S. approves,” said Mark Fitzpatrick, non-proliferation expert at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London.
“Israel would seek forgiveness, not permission.”
A retired Israeli general who advises the government on strategic issues suggested there was a tacit synchronicity in recent messages about Iran from Israel and the United States:
“The Israeli threat adds urgency to Obama’s calls for diplomatic engagement, and should Israel take things into its hands, the Americans retain wriggle room, some deniability.”
Israel’s bombing in 2007 of what the CIA described as a North Korean-built reactor in Syria may provide a precedent.
According to a source familiar with the operation, Israel carried out the sortie alone, but only after “letting the Americans know that something like this could happen. It’s the difference between informing, and seeking consent.”
It was the United States which, a year later, published the allegations about the bombed site, pitting its clout as a superpower against Syrian denials. Israel, which has never discussed the attack, was spared the burden of proving its case.
As both Obama and Netanyahu head new governments, the Israeli former general said any joint strategy would go unformed at least until the leaders held their first summit on May 18.
“There’s a sense that no decision has been made on either side,” he said. “My impression is that the current American statements are for the record, to convince the international community about the seriousness of the Obama administration’s efforts to talk Tehran into a solution.”
Regardless of Obama’s eventual stance, it would be severely tested should U.S. interests be threatened — say, with Iran answering an Israeli bombing by goading Shi’ites in Iraq to stoke the embers of their insurgency, or by choking off oil exports.
“Whatever temporary sense of solidarity with Israel that ensued would be through gritted teeth,” said Fitzpatrick, a former U.S. State Department official.
Then again, drawing in the United States, with its superior air power, could serve Israel’s endgame of putting paid to Iran’s nuclear facilities. Most analysts think Israel’s warplanes might set back Iran’s plans by a few years at best and could never erase the knowledge of Iran’s atomic scientists.
After reacting to the 1981 Iraq strike by saying — according to then-National Security Adviser Richard Allen — “You know what, Dick? Boys will be boys!,” Reagan rapped Israel by holding up a shipment of F-16 jets.
Future U.S. administrations would thank the Israelis for denting the might of Saddam Hussein — whom the Reagan White House backed against Iran at the time.
Fitzpatrick said U.S. public opinion would swing in Israel’s favor “if Iran is stopped from achieving a nuclear weapons capability, and the price is not too great in terms of attacks on American citizens and facilities.”
Obama’s punitive options could, in theory, include cutting the billions in U.S. defense aid and loan guarantees to Israel, though he would face opposition in an Israel-friendly Congress.
Washington could also call for a nuclear-free Middle East as part of a regional peace drive, arguing that, with Iran neutralized and the Arab world mollified, Israel’s own assumed atomic arsenal should no longer go unchecked.