Tag Archives: rumors of war

Preparing for War: Middle East War Coming Soon

 

 

This is the kind of deal making and last ditch diplomatic moves before a major conflict begins.  The Jerusalem Post has confirmed that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has taken a clandestine trip to Russia according to a Kremlin spokesman.  Nothing is known of the subject matter, or of the officials involved but the probability is that it involved the situation in Iran and perhaps Syria.  It was staged without knowledge of, nor coverage of the press corps, and without the trappings of an official state visit.  A leased Jet supposedly took the prime minister on this cloak and dagger mission and no information of any meaningful nature has been released by either government to a hoodwinked press corp.

You need not be Einstein to conclude that time is rapidly running out on Middle East peace.  If Middle East Oil is interdicted or facilities destroyed by a regional war the economic effects could be catastrophic throughout the world.  Israel has no option at all and must attack or be destroyed by an Iranian Nuclear Bomb and the fact that hush-hush meetings are taking place between Russia and the Prime Minister of Israel can only mean that the day of reckoning is close at hand.

 

Kremlin official confirms PM’s trip

Sep. 9, 2009
Herb Keinon and jpost staff , THE JERUSALEM POST

A senior Kremlin official confirmed Wednesday to the Russian paper Kommersant that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu did indeed make a clandestine trip to Russia on Monday.

Commenting on the visit, the official said that “this kind of development could only be related to new and threatening information on Iran’s nuclear program.”

The Russian newspaper quoted experts speculating that such a trip would only be justified under extraordinary circumstances, “for example, in the case of Israel planning to attack Iran.”

The report comes despite a statement Wednesday from the Kremlin press service that “nothing is known” about reports of the visit. Dmitry Peskov, a spokesman for Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, also said he had no information, the Interfax news agency reported.

Nevertheless, there was never any official denial of the report from Moscow.

On Wednesday night, the Prime Minister’s Office appeared to stick to its original version of events: that Netanyahu was occupied with “secret and classified activities” during his unexplained absence of over 12 hours.

The PMO announced that Military Secretary to the Prime Minister Lt.-Gen. Meir Kalifi was not in contact with the prime minister.

According to the announcement, Kalifi undertook an independent initiative to safeguard these activities, and National Security Adviser Uzi Arad had no part in the affair.

Earlier Wednesday, the office neither explicitly confirmed nor denied a story that appeared in Yediot Aharonot claiming that Netanyahu had flown to Russia to talk about planned Russian arms sales to Iran.

Instead, Netanyahu’s spokesmen referred reporters back to the statement issued Monday evening amid a swirl of rumors that Netanyahu had gone abroad.

That statement, oddly released in the name of Kalifi and not in the name of spokesman Nir Hefetz, said, “The prime minister is visiting a security installation in Israel today.”

Asked explicitly if Netanyahu had left the country, another Netanyahu spokesman, Mark Regev, referred back to that statement.

That statement, however, did not rule out the possibility of a trip abroad, since after briefly visiting a security installation, Netanyahu could very well have flown overseas.

Faced with anger from the Israeli press that the Prime Minister’s Office had lied about Netanyahu’s whereabouts, Channel 2 reported Kalifi saying Wednesday night that, “in matters of national security, I take the prerogative of not saying the whole truth.”

Hefetz reportedly refused to issue Monday evening’s statement in his name because he was unable to confirm its veracity.

The whole mysterious episode has focused the spotlight on a reported fissure inside the Prime Minister’s Office, with Kalifi and Arad on one side, and Hefetz and Cabinet Secretary Tzvi Hauser on the other.

According to various new reports on Wednesday, Netanyahu – who was reportedly accompanied by Kalifi and Arad on the reported trip – leased a private jet from Merhav, a company owned by Israeli mogul Yossi Maiman, one of the shareholders of Channel 10 and EMG, an Egyptian company supplying gas to the Israel Electric Corp.

This was apparently done to make the trip as discrete as possible, since using an Israel Air Force jet – it was apparently thought – would have raised the suspicions of the Israeli media.

Maiman was reportedly not directly involved in leasing the jet, as this was done through a company he owns.

Senior Foreign Ministry officials, meanwhile, denied any knowledge of the trip, saying that Israel’s envoy in Moscow was also not appraised of it.

What is almost as mysterious as whether the trip took place, is what might have been discussed, with speculation focused on Iran, possible Russian arms deals to Iran and Syria, or the disappearance of the Arctic Sea cargo ship – suspected of carrying Russian made S-300 anti-aircraft missiles bound for Iran – that went missing last month.

The trip, if indeed it took place, would not have been the result of an impromptu, emergency decision, since there was already talk among Netanyahu’s inner circle during his visit to London and Berlin two weeks ago about a possible visit to Russia ahead of the United Nations General Assembly meeting at the end of the month.

Interestingly, almost exactly two years ago, then-prime minister Ehud Olmert paid a lightning visit to Moscow to meet with then-Russian president Vladimir Putin, a day after the Russian leader returned from a trip to Teheran in which he warned outside powers not to attack Iran and said there was no evidence it was developing nuclear arms.

Back then, the Prime Minister’s Office tried to dissociate Olmert’s trip from Putin’s statements in Iran, but it was clear from the snap manner in which that meeting at the Kremlin was organized and announced that the Iranian nuclear issue would dominate the discussion.

At that time, however, the Prime Minister’s Office issued a statement a day ahead of the trip, informing the media of the visit, even though they were not invited to cover it.

This article can also be read at http://www.jpost.com /servlet/Satellite?cid=1251804532464&pagename=JPArticle%2FShowFull
[

Advertisements

The Joe Biden Follies: Chronically Befuddled VP Green Lights Israel to Attack Iran

 

 

It should provide low level entertainment, in addition to some fascination by political junkies, to see how the Obama Administration reacts to the Befuddled Vice President’s remarks that seemed to give a green light to an Israeli attack on Iran.  Biden is notorious for foot-in-mouth disease, much to the reported consternation of Obama, who in latter days has tried, gamely, to keep Biden out of range of any microphones.

The White House maintains that nothing has changed in official US Policy and that Obama is still anxious to “talk nicely” to Iran and thus end their nuclear program. Lately, the Iranian government has cracked down, in brutal fashion, on its own people who took to the streets to protest an obviously stolen election. This made the Obama Charismatic I Respect Your Despotic-Freaky-Islamic-Terror-State policy look kind of silly if not naive. Having thrown Israel and moderate Arab states like Egypt under the bus, all to stroke Obama’s new best friend Iran, our American potentate has begun to look kinda stupid for abandoning our real allies for a fantasy about Obama’s own personal charisma. 

Ooooops! 

The only valid measure to measure Obama’s intentions, is his actions, because most of his words are meaningless, if not outright lies, chosen to mollify any given audience.  The Obama of the campaign trail and the Socialist-Fascist commissar his actions have proven him to be, since being sworn in, is ample evidence that the man is an unprincipled political opportunist for whom “the ends justify the means.”  Socialism-Fascism is clearly the ends that our Potentate Obama has in mind and he’s moved with blinding speed to achieve his ends with major nationalizations of the economy and by turning congress from a democratic deliberative body into a rubberstamp organization of fawning political sycophants that won’t bother to read legislation before passing it.  (So much for the checks and balances)

 A congress that falls down at the feet of the president with sickening adulation has forsaken its sacred obligation to function as a check on presidential power.  We depend on these checks and balances to keep a charismatic would-be-dictator from getting into office and proclaiming himself to be the new king or potentate. A congress this in awe of the president is even more dangerous than a press corps who has renounced its sacred obligation to report factual news instead of being the press office for some charismatic new president or potentate. 

So is the Administration Official, speaking for the president correct when he maintains our policy hasn’t changed?  Or is the Befuddled Vice President not actually speaking out of turn but simply providing cover by signaling a humiliating change of policy that Mr. Obama should have done himself? 

The weeks to come will tell the tale by the degree to which the Administration maintains that no change in policy has taken place.  Obama is now on record for having green lighted Israel and for insisting that we don’t want to interfere in Iranian Affairs.  It’s a lot like the campaign trail in that this man seems to have it both ways which given his opportunistic nature means that Obama is waiting to see which way the wind shifts in the days to come.  Personally I think the President should make it abundantly clear to all concerned where the USA stands on this critical issue if he wants his best chance to avoid war.  Unfortunately that would require our potentate, Obama, to stand on principle: which is about as likely as a Biden News conference that’s free of major gaffs.

Consider this story I found on Drudge written by the Associated Press National Security Writer:

Biden: Israel free to set own course on Iran

 

By ROBERT BURNS, AP National Security Writer Robert Burns, Ap National Security Writer – Sun Jul 5, 4:09 pm ET

WASHINGTON – Vice President Joe Biden signaled that the Obama administration would not stand in the way if Israel chose to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities, even as the top U.S. military officer said any attack on Iran would be destabilizing.

Biden’s remarks suggested a tougher U.S. stance against Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Nonetheless, administration officials insisted his televised remarks Sunday reflected the U.S. view that Israel has a right to defend itself and make its own decisions on national security.

In an interview on ABC’s “This Week,” Biden also said the U.S. offer to negotiate with Tehran on its nuclear program still stands. Some thought the administration’s approach might change in light of the Iranian government’s harsh crackdown on protesters after the June 12 presidential election. Opponents of the ruling authorities claimed the vote was rigged against them.

“If the Iranians respond to the offer of engagement, we will engage,” Biden said.

It was after meeting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House on May 18 that President Barack Obama said it should be clear by year’s end whether Iran was open to direct negotiations. Obama told The Associated Press last Thursday that persuading Iran to forego nuclear weapons has been made more difficult by the crackdown after the disputed re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Biden was asked whether Netanyahu was taking the right approach by indicating that Israel would take matters into its own hands if Iran did not show a willingness to negotiate by the end of the year.

“Look, Israel can determine for itself — it’s a sovereign nation — what’s in their interest and what they decide to do relative to Iran and anyone else,” Biden replied. He added that this was the case, “whether we agree or not” with the Israeli view.

Biden was then asked more pointedly whether the U.S. would stand in the way if the Israelis, viewing the prospect of an Iranian nuclear bomb as a threat to the existence of the Jewish state, decided to launch a military attack against Iranian nuclear facilities.

“Look, we cannot dictate to another sovereign nation what they can and cannot do,” he said.

Pressed further on this point with a reminder that the U.S. could impede an Israeli strike on Iran by prohibiting it from using Iraqi air space, Biden said he was “not going to speculate” beyond saying that Israel, like the U.S., has a right to “determine what is in its interests.”

Navy Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Sunday that he has been concerned “for some time concerned about any strike on Iran.” He also said military action should not be ruled out and that a nuclear-armed Iran is a highly troubling prospect.

In Jerusalem, the Israeli government had no comment on Biden’s remarks.

White House spokesman Tommy Vietor said Biden was not signaling any change of approach on Iran or Israel.

“The vice president refused to engage hypotheticals, and he made clear that our policy has not changed,” Vietor said. “Our friends and allies, including Israel, know that the president believes that now is the time to explore direct diplomatic options.”

The Netanyahu government says it prefers to see Iran’s nuclear program stopped through diplomacy but has not ruled out a military strike. Israel, within easy range of an Iranian ballistic missile, has been skeptical of the administration’s aim of engaging in dialogue with Iran rather than threatening sanctions and military action.

The New York Times reported in January, shortly before Obama took office, that President George W. Bush had deflected an Israeli request in 2008 for specialized U.S. bombs that it would use for an airstrike on Iran’s main nuclear complex at Natanz. And it reported that Bush was persuaded by aides, including his defense chief, Robert Gates, that a U.S. strike on Iran would probably be ineffective.

Obama retained Gates as his defense secretary.

Iran insists that its nuclear program is only for peaceful purposes.

There are many reasons for Washington to oppose an Israeli attack on Iran now, including the presence in neighboring Iraq of about 130,000 American troops, who could become targets for Iranian retaliation. The security consequences could be much broader.

Mullen, who as Joint Chiefs chairman is the top military adviser to Obama and Gates, said he worries about unpredictable consequences of an attack on Iran.

“I worry about it being very destabilizing not just in and of itself but the unintended consequences of a strike like that,” he told CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “At the same time, I’m one that thinks Iran should not have nuclear weapons. I think that’s very destabilizing.”

Mullen said he worries that, in the event Iran were to obtain a nuclear weapon, other countries in the Middle East would feel compelled to follow suit. That would open a door to a proliferation of nuclear technology that would be destabilizing, Mullen said, adding that this is a subject he discusses regularly with his Israeli counterpart.

The prospect of a regional nuclear arms race was raised by Obama in an AP interview Thursday.

“The biggest concern is not simply that Iran can threaten us or our allies like Israel or its neighbors in the region,” Obama said. “A very real concern is, is that Iran possessing a nuclear weapon triggers an arms race in the region and suddenly countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia and Turkey all feel obliged to get nuclear weapons. And if you’ve got the most volatile region in the world and everybody armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons, you’ve got a recipe for potential disaster.”

Most experts believe that wiping out the Iranian nuclear program is beyond the ability of Israel’s military. In 1981 the Israeli air force destroyed Iraq’s nuclear reactor in a lightning strike. But Iran’s facilities are scattered around the country, some of them underground.

Obama Talking Tough to Israel: A Strange Diplomatic Dance Between Washington and Tel Aviv

 

 

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.”

SYRIAN PRECEDENT

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.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Times Up: Why Israel Must Attack Iran Immediately Without Regard to Obama

 

 

 

In the end the State of Israel can’t let the “Mad Mullahs” of Iran get their paws on a single nuclear bomb to say nothing of 60 nuclear bombs within 18 months.  If the demented Ahmadinejad acquires a bomb he’ll surely use it on Israel.  All he needs is a single successful nuclear detonation and the Jews are finished, Israel is lost, and the Arabs will have to go to work on the “Great Satan”, the United States directly. “The little Satan,” as hordes of peace loving Islamic fanatics call Israel, is so small a nation that just one nuclear strike will destroy it and a half dozen will probably kill all the Jews, millions of them, in an act that rivals anything Hitler did.  It’s overwhelmingly obvious that either the Jews destroy the bomb making facilities in Iran or a second holocaust will destroy the Jewish homeland. The Principle of Self Defense has given Israel the green light to strike Iran and Syria for some time now the same principle of self defense mandates an attack.

It’s as plain as the nose on your face:  Times Up, regardless of world opinion; or the sniveling of Mr. Obama you must attack now while you have a chance because if you wait much longer your delay will be paid by the blood of millions of your fellow Israeli citizens. Consider this chilling report from the Debka File:

http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=6035

 

Iran could produce first nuke in 60 days with 7,000 centrifuges working 24/7 – Western experts

DEBKAfile Special Report

April 21, 2009, 12:17 PM (GMT+02:00)

DEBKAfile‘s military sources cite some Western intelligence and nuclear weapons experts as predicting that Iran could turn out nuclear weapons some time in the next 12 months.

This estimate is based on Tehran’s announcement that 7,000 centrifuges are in operation to enrich uranium. If all those machines were to work at top speed day and night, seven days a week, they could produce enough weapons-grade uranium to build a bomb in 60 days, say some intelligence sources. According to American experts, given the current rate of the program’s development, Iran will be in a position to manufacture as many as 60 nuclear bombs and warheads in 12 to 18 months.

This judgment was confirmed by Israel’s military intelligence (AMAN) chief, Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin in his latest briefing to the cabinet Monday, April 20. He reported that Iran is going all-out for enriched uranium from overseas to shorten the process.

Japanese sources recently reported that a North Korean boat shipped a large quantity to Iran earlier this year. According to the big-circulation The Nikkei, the North Korean vessel’s hold carried a secret cargo of uranium highly-enriched to 50-60 percent. The ship set out for Iran in December, moving moved at a leisurely pace so as not to call attention from Western spy satellites, surveillance vessels and warships. Earlier this year, the illegal consignment was dropped at an Iranian port for transport to a facility near Tehran, according to the Japanese paper.

Yadlin noted that extreme economic crisis has not delayed Tehran’s headlong nuclear progress or curtailed its designs on other Middle East countries – Hizballah’s subversive activities in Egypt are not a lone instance. Inflation is officially put at 30 percent but is probably closer to 50 percent, while unemployment is deepening, yet Tehran upped the 2009 appropriation for its nuclear program by 15 percent.

Rather than translating the crisis into leverage for persuading Iran to abandon its nuclear objectives, the Israeli intelligence chief noted that the Obama administration has opened the door to dialogue with all the extremists of the Middle East, including Iran, albeit “with open eyes.”

Iran, for its part, is accelerating its nuclear program, taking full advantage of the undercover communications with Washington which are aimed at gaining Tehran’s cooperation for the US war effort in Afghanistan and Pakistan.


 

Obama’s Perceived Weakness Means a Middle East War Sooner Rather than Later

 

 

Barak Obama is playing a high stakes game of chicken with Israel will trying to use his legendary charm and bonhomie to persuade our Islamic brethren to get all peaceful and chummy with us; and the rest of the word, including an indefensible and newly emasculated Israel. Just as Mr. Obama has made a spectacle of his weakness in the summit of the Americas, just as he did in Europe, if President Sarkozy is to be believed, he’s going to do with Islamic countries.  Obama is going to listen.  Obama is going to apologize.  Obama is going to not defend American interests because collage career, and his church in Illinois, taught him that America is evil and shouldn’t be defended.  Caught in the crossfire of Obama’s crazed socialist ideology, and latent anti Americanism, is the Jewish State of Israel who’s surrounded by jealous and perpetually bellicose Muslim nations.  Obama has made it clear that Israel will be required to take our two state solutions and give up the more settlements and the strategically vital positions and probably Jerusalem as well.  In return the Arabs and the Islamic people will give them peace.  Sure they will.

Both the Arabs and Israel know that Mr. Obama is dead wrong and his dangerous inability to deal with the facts on the ground have necessitated the Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, to make a very lonely and dangerous decision.  Israel is going to have to disarm Iran of its nuclear program all by itself.  The danger only increases while they wait and they might as well do it now and get it over with because there’s going to be major trouble with the Obama Administration over the unilateral action they forced Israel to take.  Can anyone in Israel, observing Obama on the world stage, think that he might be persuaded to change his mind regarding groveling at the feet of Islam?  Can anyone believe that Iran won’t turn Tel Aviv into a mushroom cloud the first chance they get?  (Anyone but Obama and the Democrats in congress that is?)

It’s a classic error to make if you’re a democrat president.  In World War II President Roosevelt wanted to move the fleet from San Diego to Pearl Harbor Hawaii to send a message to the Japanese that American would not put up with any more of their militarism and expansionism.  Why do all Democrats love to send these “messages”?  (But I digress)  The Japanese took one look at the “message” and failed to find a “deterrent” but instead found an existential threat leveled at their throat: and they immediately began preparation to destroy the American Fleet.  History tells the rest of the story.  Japan would not put up with an existential threat to her people any more that we would; or any more than Israel will.  The War between Israel and Iran will likely be the next big shoe to drop and if the Iranians react badly and start blowing up the oil fields of its neighbors in the Persian Gulf,  the economic fallout in the west could be catastrophic. 

Obama has made a strategic decision to work against the Israelis rather than with them.  His neo socialist transnationalism demands that he sell his soul to the fashionable Anti Semitic crap that the sophisticated people in Europe and the United Nations have been spouting for decades.  No objective observer can blame Israel for taking out a guy like Ahmadinejad when he’s inches away from getting nuclear weapons.  Obama is acting on the sugar-plum, internationalist, dogma of academia and the goofy church of Jeremiah Wright: rather than the facts on the ground and actual history to inform his decisions.  The result this time is going to be war.  It could hit at any time this year.  It could be as early as this week or summers end but its definitely coming. 

Consider some clips from recent news articles starting with the Debka File:

http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=1387

 

Washington may believe it can live with a nuclear-armed Iran – a decision probably taken first under the Bush presidency. But Israel cannot, and may have no option but to part ways with the Obama administration on this point. As a nuclear power, Iran will be able to bend Jerusalem to the will of its enemies: Israel will be forced to unconditionally give Syria the Golan plus extra pieces of territory; tamely accept a Hamas-dominated Palestinian West Bank louring over its heartland and let the Lebanese Hizballah terrorize Galilee in the north at will. All three will make hay under Iran’s nuclear shield.

Israel will be stripped of most of its defenses against a radical Islamic Republic anointed by Washington as the reigning regional power and dedicated to its destruction.

Israel is not the only country in peril.

Unlike Israel, Hosni Mubarak of Egypt has stuck his neck out, backed quietly by Saudi Arabia, as the only Middle East ruler to stand up to the threat Iran poses to the region directly and through its surrogate, Hizballah. He is openly critical of Washington’s courtship of the revolutionary Islamic republic.

Syria is another object of Obama’s charm offensive for extremists regardless of Bashar Assad’s blunt statement Friday, April 17, to the pro-Hizballah Lebanese publication al Akhbar that Damascus will not loosen its strategic ties with Tehran or stop supporting the Lebanese Shiite group [with arms] because Hizballah is dedicated to fighting Israel.

For the first time in years, the administration this week sent a high-ranking delegation to Syria’s independence day celebrations at Washington’s Mandarin Oriental Hotel, headed by Jeffrey Feltman, former ambassador and Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs.

The thaw in relations has gone so far that some Washington wags are calling Assad’s capital “Syria on the Potomac.”

To gain points with these new friends, Obama’s White House is not above nudging Israel to please them. This week, his chief of staff Rahm Emanuel told Jewish leaders whom he met in Washington that if Israel wants America’s help for thwarting Iran’s nuclear program, it must first start evacuating West Bank settlements.

This was of course cynical claptrap.                  

So what options are left to Israel at this juncture?

1. To bow under the Obama tempest until it blows over, in keeping with the old proverb which says that the trees bowing in the wind remain standing. The question is will Israel’s trees still be standing when the storm has passed and, if so, in what strategic environment?

2. To follow the example set by Likud’s first prime minister Menahem Begin in 1981. He stood up to Ronald Reagan’s fierce objections and sent the Israeli Air force to smash the Iraqi nuclear reactor before it was operational, which Saddam Hussein never rebuilt. By following in Begin’s footsteps before it is too late, Netanyahu would change the rules of the game regionally and globally.

(The London Times reported from Jerusalem Saturday that the Israeli military is preparing itself to launch a massive aerial assault on Iran’s nuclear facilities within days of being given the go-ahead by its new government. Two civil defense drills have been scheduled to prepare the population for missiles that could fall on any part of the country without warning.)

3. Israel could go for a more modest target, one of Iran’s faithful surrogates – Syria or Hizballah – to warn Washington that a larger operation is in store for their boss. If the Gaza offensive against Hamas last January was meant to send this message, it failed. Hamas is still the dominant Palestinian power and Barack Obama was not diverted from forging ahead with his policies of rapprochement with Iran and other radical world leaders.

Now consider this from the Times Online at this URL:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6115903.ece

“Israel wants to know that if its forces were given the green light they could strike at Iran in a matter of days, even hours. They are making preparations on every level for this eventuality. The message to Iran is that the threat is not just words,” one senior defense official told The Times.

 

Officials believe that Israel could be required to hit more than a dozen targets, including moving convoys. The sites include Natanz, where thousands of centrifuges produce enriched uranium; Esfahan, where 250 tons of gas is stored in tunnels; and Arak, where a heavy water reactor produces plutonium.
The distance from Israel to at least one of the sites is more than 870 miles, a distance that the Israeli force practiced covering in a training exercise last year that involved F15 and F16 jets, helicopters and refueling tankers.Israel has made public its intention to hold the largest-ever nationwide drill next month.
Colonel Hilik Sofer told Haaretz, a daily Israeli newspaper, that the drill would “train for a reality in which during war missiles can fall on any part of the country without warning … We want the citizens to understand that war can happen tomorrow morning”.

“Israel has made it clear that it will not tolerate the threat of a nuclear Iran. According to Israeli Intelligence they will have the bomb within two years … Once they have a bomb it will be too late, and Israel will have no choice to strike — with or without America,” an official from the Israeli Defense Ministry said.

Now consider this from the Age.Com.AU

http://www.theage.com.au/world/obamas-stance-worries-israelis-20090417-aa90.html

 

Obama’s stance worries Israelis

  • Jason Koutsoukis
  • April 18, 2009

CAN Israel still call the United States its best international friend? Apparently not, if you believe the tone of the local media.

Watching the drama unfold inside Israel, the increasingly tense dialogue between US President Barack Obama and new Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is taking on all the trappings of a duel.

Almost every day brings news of another sore point between the two countries, a source of yet further inflammation of their once warm relations.

One could be forgiven for thinking that the more immediate threat to Israel’s national security lay across the Atlantic rather than from closer to home.

It is bad enough that President Obama uses almost every opportunity he can to set the parameters of a final peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. Now US officials are openly using Israeli anxiety over Iran’s fledging nuclear program as a bargaining chip to force Israel’s hand on giving up control of the West Bank Palestinian territory.

No less a figure than White House chief-of-staff Rahm Emanuel — whose father fought with the militant Zionist group the Irgun, and whose appointment had provided such reassurance to Israeli officials — was quoted this week laying down the law to Israel.

If Israel wants US help to defuse the Iranian threat, Mr Emanuel was reported to have told Jewish leaders in Washington, then get ready to start evacuating settlements in the West Bank.

Then on Thursday came the news that Mr Netanyahu’s planned first meeting with President Obama in Washington next month had been called off.

Mr Netanyahu had hoped to capitalize on his attendance at the annual American Israel Public Affairs Committee conference in Washington to visit the White House.

But Administration officials informed Mr Netanyahu’s office that the President would not be “in town”.

Washington sources added that the Obama Administration would not be continuing the tradition that had developed during the Bush years of hosting Israeli prime ministers whenever they showed up in town, sometimes with just a phone call’s notice.

It might have been no more than coincidence, but yesterday Israeli defense officials told the liberal daily Haaretz that Israel’s $US15 billion ($A21 billion) purchase of 75 US-made F-35 Joint Strike Fighter jets was now under review due to “the unexpected high cost and disagreements with the manufacturer”.

Contrary to initial expectations, President Obama has wasted no time becoming fully engaged in the Middle East peace process, despite the magnitude of his domestic political agenda. While Mr Netanyahu has refused to endorse a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict agreed to by his predecessor, President Obama has made it abundantly clear that the US will accept nothing less than Israel living side by side with a sovereign Palestinian state.

Mr Obama is also demanding a freeze on Jewish settlement expansion in the West Bank, and has dropped the Bush administration’s opposition to Hamas being part of a future Palestinian Authority government.

According to prominent Israeli political commentator Maya Bengal, who writes for the country’s second-largest selling newspaper Maariv, the holiday is over.

“As Passover comes to an end, so comes to an end, it seems, the days of grace granted to the Netanyahu Government by the American Administration,” says the commentator.

 

 

 

 

Close Enough for Government Work: Obama Doesn’t Care if Iran Has Nuclear Weapons

 

 

In his effort to show the Muslim world what a swell guy he is; our new President is sending all the wrong signals concerning his willingness to confront the Islamic state of Iran and its quest for weapons of mass destruction.  While Obama’s is a more politically correct and hip foreign policy it’s also an act of ostridge  like stupidity as he hides his head in the sand while Israel is forced to act unilaterally against the psychotic state of Iran.  Obama cares about America’s image in the world more than he cares about a regional war where oil shipments are disrupted long enough to plunge the world into a catastrophic meltdown of economic and governmental structures. Someone should explain the kind of damage riots in the streets can do to his reelection campaign before a regional war, potentially a limited nuclear war in the middle east can come to fruition.

Even the king of Saudi Arabia was said to be cross with our “progressive” democrat messiah and essentially accused him of not having a clue of what he’s doing. Moderate Arab powers like Egypt look on in disbelief as Obama kisses the backside of psychotic Islamic extremists and ignores the position moderates like Egypt would be in if Iran joined the nuclear club.  In short order there would be no more moderate Arab states in the Middle East or the moderate states would be forced to pursue their own nuclear weapons programs to retain their independence from Iran. Mr. Obama should simply announce that his main foreign policy advisor is Jimmy Carter and get it over with.  The world is on the brink of a potentially catastrophic regional war in the Middle East and the president of the United States is, for all intents and purposes, James Earl Carter.

It’s well known that Democrats don’t excel at foreign policy, nor at defense policy, but with such acts of stunning stupidity from the White House it’s a sure bet that every tin-pot would-be dictator on the planet is planning offensive operations before Obama’s term is up. I guess that Barak Obama is too worldly and sophisticated to have learned the rules of the playground from the elite schools he attended.

For all the perpetual adolescents that make up the Democrat Party in the United States and who shout things like “Give Peace a Chance” I’d like to say this:  “Now your baby boom stupidity is going to have real consequences because a regional war in the middle east after the recent price spikes could make such a war a jump ball for the major militaries on the planet.  The law of unintended consequences is going crazy and all we’ve got is a weak baby boom, indoctrinated president, who thinks he’s real special and has lots of self esteem.  God help us all!  Thanks Liberals, this is going to be your war and I think it just might be a pretty bad one.

WELCOME BACK CARTER!

Here’s the report from the Debka File and the URL:

http://www.debka.com/index1.php

Saudis also dismayed by Obama’s seeming tolerance of nuclear Iran

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report

April 7, 2009, 10:15 AM (GMT+02:00)

 

President Barack Obama’s declaration in the Turkish parliament Monday, April 6, that the US is not at war with Islam provided cold comfort in Riyadh and Cairo, where his drastic policy shift of détente with Tehran, first revealed by DEBKA-Net-Weekly last month, is causing jitters.

The Financial Times’ prediction that the US “may cede to Iran’s nuclear ambition” only added to the unease in the Middle East at large.

On the sidelines of the G20 summit in London, Saudi King Abdullah made his views known in a face-to-face interview with the US president on April 2. The White House communiqué reported blandly: Obama and Abdullah discussed international cooperation regarding the global economy, regional political and security issues, and cooperation against terrorism.

Iran was not mentioned. However, according to DEBKAfile‘s Middle East sources, Abdullah took the US president sternly to task over his emerging policy on Iran, Syria and Iraq, accusing him to giving the Islamic Republic free rein for its nuclear, expansionist and terrorism-sponsoring Middle East policies.

Both parties tried to keep their abrasive encounter away from the public eye and their media, although the photo attached betrays its chilly atmosphere.

The Financial Times was the first Western mainstream publication to pick up on the new pro-Iran policy trend dominating Obama’s Washington: “US officials are considering whether to accept Iran’s pursuit of uranium enrichment… discussing whether the US will eventually have to accept Iran’s insistence on carrying out the process.”

The newspaper quoted Trita Parsi, president of the National Iranian American Council as warning: “The US may still have zero as its opening position [in its dialogue with Iran], while recognizing it may not be where things stand at the end of a potential agreement.”

DEBKAfile‘s military sources fear that Tehran has been given a free run to perfect its ability to make bombs and warheads in the shortest possible time from the moment of decision.

Our sources report that the US president’s two-day stay in Ankara and his words of peace towards the Muslim world were seen in Riyadh and Cairo as ignoring the most pressing concerns of the leading Muslim Arab powers of the region.

Israeli leaders have been less reticent about their concerns. President Shimon Peres pointed out to visiting US congressmen in Jerusalem Monday that Iran has hoodwinked the entire world in its drive for a nuclear bomb whose main target would be the Jewish state; Israel’s population is short of adequate means of self-defense. Deputy Chief of Staff, Maj. Gen. Dan Harel warned that a nuclear-armed Iran would shield Middle East terror groups, so magnifying the threat to Israel manifold. But, he added, the IDF was fully capable of backing up any government decision to tackle this existential threat.

Prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu diplomatically praised President Obama for his renewed commitment to Israeli security, omitting mention of Iran in the same way as he ignored the US president’s demand for a Palestinian state to rise alongside Israel in his speech to parliament in Ankara. Netanyahu commented that his new government is in the process of formulating its policies. This left him an opening to dispute administration polices when he arrives in Washington on May 3.

Obama’s Biggest Early Test: War is Coming to Iran and Israel

 

The gaff-prone Vice President of the United States, Joe Biden, warned famously that within the first six months of an Obama administration he would be sorely tested in a foreign policy crisis, and that his answer may seem to be wrong; but we must stick with him.  Lots of people think that the firing of the North Korean Missile is the crisis Biden was warning of but I suspect it may be the impending attack on Iran by Israel.

 Benjamin Netanyahu is now Prime Minister of Israel and he’s not going to put up with any more Iranian antics and he certainly will attack, regardless of White House approval, in an effort to stop the Iranian Nuclear program.  If we in the United States were wise we’d help him do it and make sure it was as effective as it needs to be. We’re going to be blamed along with Israel and we may suffer big time oil shortages that destroy what’s left of the economy if we aren’t paying attention.  Many of our Persian Gulf Allies are quite convinced that if anyone attacks Iran’s Nuclear Program that Iran will attack, via rockets, all the oil facilities in the Persian Gulf in an attempt to crash the western economies. 

Having Barak Obama in the midst of an all consuming economic crisis is bad enough but Mr. Obama has indicated a disdain for his foreign policy duties several times during his few months in the White House.  He’s made no secret that he considers Prime Minister Netanyahu a “right winger” and he’s made no secret of reaching out to Arabs and Muslims at every opportunity in an effort to demonstrate the “fairness” that so important to a “Progressives” self image.  Many people question his commitment to Israel and I dare say that his commitment will be tested soon in what’s likely to become a regional war in the Middle East.  I believe the attack could come at any time this year and I don’t’ think Obama is aware of the Prime Ministers resolve on this issue. 

I pray that the United States will maintain its support for Israel and head this blunt warning from the Prime Minister and make ACTIVE PREPERATIONS FOR A REGIONAL WAR IN THE MIDDLE EAST.  Obama seems to have great regard for his ability to dialogue with implacable enemies and somehow bring peace but: I also hope he stations several aircraft carrier groups and anti missile assets in the Persian Gulf.  Cynic that I am I tend to place more faith in a fully operational battery of patriot missiles and a couple of carrier groups than I do in the golden oratory of Barak Obama.

Here is a telling article from the Jerusalem Post on the subject:

 

PM: We may be forced to attack Iran

Apr. 1, 2009
JPost.com Staff , THE JERUSALEM POST

The primary imperative for the United States and President Barack Obama is to put an end to Iran’s nuclear race, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said before his swearing-in Tuesday, adding that if the US failed to do so Israel might be forced to resort to a military strike on the Islamic Republic’s nuclear installations.

“The Obama presidency has two great missions: fixing the economy, and preventing Iran from gaining nuclear weapons,” Netanyahu told The Atlantic. The Iranian drive for a nuclear weapon was a “hinge of history,” he said, emphasizing that all of “Western civilization” was responsible for preventing an Iranian bomb.

“You don’t want a messianic apocalyptic cult controlling atomic bombs,” Netanyahu said of the Iranian regime. “When the wide-eyed believer gets hold of the reins of power and the weapons of mass death, then the entire world should start worrying, and that is what is happening in Iran.”

Netanyahu suggested that Israeli preemptive strikes against perceived threats were the result of the Jewish people learning from a long history of grappling against those who threatened their collective existence. He cited Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s repeated calls to “wipe Israel off the map,” as well as a recent remark by the country’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, to the effect that Israel was a “cancerous tumor.”

However, despite Iran’s singling-out of Israel, he said, the rest of the world would be well advised to take the threat emanating from Teheran seriously. He voiced support for Obama’s strategy of engaging Iran in dialogue, as long as the negotiations worked swiftly to convince Iran to relinquish its nuclear program.

“How you achieve this goal is less important than achieving it,” he said, although he was not optimistic regarding the chances that dialogue could persuade Iran to reconsider its interests. Nevertheless, he said, economic sanctions could still make a difference. “I think the Iranian economy is very weak, which makes Iran susceptible to sanctions that can be ratcheted up by a variety of means,” he said.

Iran’s leadership, Netanyahu added, was not immune to pressure, but fanatic elements made it extremely dangerous to risk relying on economic sanctions alone.

“Iran is a composite leadership, but in that composite leadership there are elements of wide-eyed fanaticism that do not exist right now in any other would-be nuclear power in the world. That’s what makes them so dangerous,” he said. “Since the dawn of the nuclear age, we have not had a fanatic regime that might put its zealotry above its self-interest. People say that they’ll behave like any other nuclear power. Can you take the risk? Can you assume that?”

Netanyahu cited Teheran’s tactics during its protracted war with Iraq in the 1980s as evidence of irrational behavior on the part of Iran. “[They] wasted over a million lives without batting an eyelash,” he said. “It didn’t sear a terrible wound into the Iranian consciousness. It wasn’t Britain after World War I, lapsing into pacifism because of the great tragedy of a loss of a generation. You see nothing of the kind.”

This article can also be read at http://www.jpost.com /servlet/Satellite?cid=1238562879456&pagename=JPArticle%2FShowFull
[ Back to the Article ]