If Israel launches a military attack (= act of war) against Iran, what would the main goal of this attack be?
There is good reason to believe that the goal would be not the direct physical destruction/incapacitation of Iran’s nuclear programs but rather, to trigger an all-out US-Iran war in the course of which, Israel’s planners hope, the US would do the dirty work in Iran that it is unable to do itself.
This is a course of action of greatest consequence for Americans.
The best assessments available indicate that– under even the “best case” scenario, from Israel’s viewpoint– an Israeli strike force could not itself “destroy” Iran’s nuclear technology program anywhere near completely, and the Iranian program would be set back by at most a couple of years.
But meanwhile, Iran, subjected to this act of war, would almost certainly retaliate. The retaliation would, with equal predictability, include actions against Israel’s prime ally in the region, the United States. (And, as I have written here many times before, Iran would have considerable justification under international law for including US targets in its retaliation.)
Of course, US forces would in turn respond.
Thus, an Israeli strike against Iran would almost certainly trigger a direct, and of course massive, war between Iran and the US. The US could be expected to launch considerably heavier strikes against the Iranian nuclear facilities and to try to inflict other substantial– perhaps even fatal?– damage on the Iranian government.
Iran could be expected to counter with attacks against US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, against the vulnerable supply lines that support those forces, and possibly– in the event that the collapse of the Teheran regime seems imminent– with actions designed to paralyze US resupply efforts and world oil markets by blocking chokepoints like the Straits of Hormuz.
Triggering this big US-Iran war, rather than the direct ‘destruction’ of Iran’s nuclear capabilities, would most likely be the actual, though never openly stated, main goal of an Israeli attack against Iran.
I have reason to believe that this analysis of the likely course of events and of Israel’s actual war goal in Iran were clearly understood in the Bush White House.
Bush quite rightly also concluded that an all-out US-Iran war would be disastrous for the US’s positions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the entire region. For that reason, he and his officials went to some lengths to rein Israel in from launching– or even preparing for– the triggering attack against Iran.
But to what extent is this evaluation of the strategic realities shared by the Obama White House?
As Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett made clear in the excellent op-ed they published in Sunday’s NYT, the present administration has done almost nothing to follow up in practice on the president’s campaign-era promises to reach out in a serious way to Iran.
Secretary of State Clinton has done very little to back away from her campaign-era promises to “obliterate” Iran, and has chosen as her principal Iran-affairs adviser Dennis Ross, a clear hawk on Iranian affairs.
The Mann-Leveretts noted that Obama has meanwhile kept in place a well-funded (and Bush-initiated) program that seeks to overthrow the Iranian regime. As they note, keeping that program in place sends a powerful message to Iran’s rulers that “American intentions toward the Islamic Republic remain, ultimately, hostile.”
It also sends a powerful message to the Israeli government that their launching of a “triggering” military attack against Iran might actually be welcomed by all those in Washington– in the administration as well as in Congress– who continue to seek the overthrow of the Islamic republic by some variety of means.
Obama won the election last November; and before that he won the primary against Hillary Clinton. He won both races in good part because the American people supported his approach of making a sincere effort to de-escalate our country’s tensions with Iran, rather than the much more belligerent stances that both Clinton and McCain advocated towards Iran.
He won in good part because the American people are smart enough to see that a policy of belligerency, of hyping alleged threats, and blocking avenues for diplomatic de-escalation served our country very badly in Iraq– and can reliably be expected to be disastrous for our country if it is applied to Iran.
At this point, he needs to take actions through many different means to make sure that all parts of his administration are on the same page, giving clear backing to the stance of sincere diplomatic engagement with Iran that he outlined so eloquently and so correctly during the election campaign.
He needs to axe that destabilize-Iran program immediately.
And he needs to make absolutely clear to the Israeli government and its many remaining supporters in the US Congress, using a whole variety of both public and private means, that he judges that any Israeli military attack against Iran directly threatens our country’s interests, and that therefore he will do whatever it takes to ensure that Israel launches no such attack.
Americans should be quite clear: It is our forces and our interests, not Israel’s, that are on the front-line against Iran. We cannot continue to give Israel the extremely generous support it has had from Washington for the past 40-plus years if Israel takes a single action, at any level, that puts our country’s people at risk.
The Mann-Leveretts argue that “in all likelihood” it is already too late for Obama to correct his administrations policies toward Iran. I am not so pessimistic. But if he is to correct his stance that means taking action not only to correct Washington’s policies but also, equally importantly, to rein in an Israel that on this matter may have interests that are very different indeed than those of Americans.
88 thoughts on “Does Obama understand Israel’s war goal in Iran?”
Comments are closed.
Okay, Helena, I’m game. On what exactly do you base the assertion that there is “good reason to believe…” that this is the goal, or that “Israel’s planners hope, the US would do the dirty work in Iran that it is unable to do itself”?
Are you privy to “Israel’s planners”? Or are you just punting here? I think you really are becoming increasingly wacky of late!
At any rate, after yesterday’s nuclear test by North Korea, it seems that talking is looking less like an option with Iran.
JES, my argument revolves importantly around this point, made quite clearly right there in the post: The best assessments available indicate that– under even the “best case” scenario, from Israel’s viewpoint– an Israeli strike force could not itself “destroy” Iran’s nuclear technology program anywhere near completely, and the Iranian program would be set back by at most a couple of years.
Therefore, in launching an act of war against Iran, what could any rational Israeli leader be hoping to achieve?
Let’s assume (though this is not always necessarily assumable) that your country’s leaders are indeed “rational.”
So if, as they seem to be, Israel’s leaders– primarily, Netanyahu and Barak– really are intent on undertaking a serious act of war against Iran, what would their real war aim be?
This has, of course, been extensively war-gamed by the US military; and the “triggering” war aim is the best explanation they can come up with.
My analysis on these points is by no means wacky. It is, actually, very mainstream among US military and high-level strategic planners. (By the latter, I mean people considerably above the paygrade and an intellectual level of, say, a Jane Harman.)
Indeed, it is quite possible that the “review of the war-plans regarding Iran” that Bob Gates recently ordered had more to do with closing any remaining loopholes through which a reckless Israeli leader might launch a war against Iran and otherwise firewalling the US against malicious Israeli triggerism than with updating any US plans to actually invade Iran itself.
And what, may I ask, makes you so certain that Netanyahu and Barak are intent on attacking Iran?
I don’t know how Jane Harman figures in on this (but I guess that’s just your wackiness kicking in)? I also don’t know how “paygrade” comes into it (snark alert), but perhaps you can share with us exactly who your sources are?
Where has it been “war-gamed”, extensively or otherwise? By whom?
Perhaps – and I throw this out there as an educated guess, because you appear to have set the tone here – Israel and the US are actually working together on this one to place pressure on Iran?
Triggering this big US-Iran war, rather than the direct ‘destruction’ of Iran’s nuclear capabilities, would most likely be the actual, though never openly stated, main goal of an Israeli attack against Iran.
Just as enabling the Iraq war, though never openly stated, was the goal of keeping the buildup to 9/11 under wraps in the US.
This is why it is so important for the POTUS to state openly that Israel is ON ITS OWN if it chooses to attack Iran or any other country.
Bush quite rightly also concluded that an all-out US-Iran war would be disastrous for the US’s positions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the entire region. For that reason, he and his officials went to some lengths to rein Israel in from launching– or even preparing for– the triggering attack against Iran.
But to what extent is this evaluation of the strategic realities shared by the Obama White House?
Obama’s failure to do so is traitorous, and grounds for impeachment. He is clearly the pawn of the AIPAC and is going to allow Israel to start a war that no one can finish, but one that will surely drag America along for the disastrous “ride”.
The ones to blame for this are those who willfully ignored all the things Obama actually said and all the people he took money from in his run for president. He is just another, individual, hired hand of the Lobby when it comes down to it.
There is such a thing a due diligence, and the people who closed their eyes and voted for Obama hoping to kick the can down the block just one more time are the ones responsible for all the disastrous consequences of his smiling, reign.
Just as enabling the Iraq war, though never openly stated, was the goal of keeping the buildup to 9/11 under wraps in the US.
Well John Francis, I ‘spect that Helena will be thrilled to have a nut case like you supporting her position here. LOL.
Uri Avnery reports that Obama has taken the required actions in private. I certainly hope that he is correct:
No doubt Netanyahu asked for permission to attack Iran, or – at the very least – to threaten such an attack. The answer was a flat No. Obama is resolved to prevent an Israeli attack. He has warned the Israeli government unequivocally. Just to make sure that the message has been properly absorbed, he sent the CIA chief to Israel to deliver the message personally to every Israeli leader.
The Israeli plan for a military attack on Iran has been taken off the table – if it was ever lying there.
But Uri Avnery’s unspoken conclusion is that Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian land will continue to accelerate.
IN THE MEANTIME, throughout the world there is a growing consensus that the only way to get the wheels of peace moving again is for Obama to publish his peace plan and call upon both sides to accept it. If need be, in popular referendums.
He could do this in the speech he is due to deliver in two weeks time in Cairo, during his first presidential trip to the Middle East. Not by accident, he will not come to Israel during this trip, something that is almost unprecedented for a US president.
Since Obama refuses to stop the settlements, I still see no reason to regard Obama as anything but a stooge of the AIPAC, albeit one with enough of an instinct for self-preservation not to go along with WWIII. I take him to be committed to bleeding the Palestinians to death which is clearly the Israeli plan.
I do hope that Avnery is right about Obama and the message to Israel — you’re on your own if you start another war.
I won’t be holding my breath for Obama’s “publishing his peace plan and calling upon both sides to accept it. If need be, in popular referendums.” Although I will applaud long and loud if it is just and forthcoming.
I’m afraid Obama simply cannot forget on which side his bread has been buttered, and who buttered it.
Well, John Fracis, I’m afraid that Uri Avnery really doesn’t know anything more than Helena in this regard. He’s just guessing.
Actuallly, it’s not nearly enough– and indeed, it would be quite unhelpful– for Obama to send a message to Netanyahu that “you’re on your own if you attack Iran.” That, in effect, tells Bibi he can make his own decision on the matter.
No, Israel is not “on its own” in this, in any respect at all– certainly, after all the enormous dollops of military and other aid the US has lavished on it for the past 40 years, no-one could reasonably conclude that it is “on its own”, as it uses US-built and -donated fighter jets and other platforms to launch this attack, most likely by transitting for some portion of the mission through US-controlled airspace or bodies of water.
Plus, as I noted in my main post, it is not even Israel’s people who are on the front-line in any potential war with Iran.
Thus, the US message has to be not “you’re on your own” but rather “Our interests in this matter are ways bigger than yours, little guy, so stand aside while we deal with it otherwise our entire relationship is on the line.”
JES, please know that your devotion to getting out there and trying to use all the tricks in the hasbara handbook (character defamation, divide and rule, etc) doesn’t give you the right to hog this or any other discussion.
Yes JES everyone is just guessing, except for those like yourself whose position is that anything Israel’s government does needs to be defended.
But Helena’s guessing is educated: Israel has no ability to mount a succesful attack on Iran without US assistance and the assistance of US ‘allies.’
But what it could do, taking advantage of its political credit in Washington, is to involve the US against the wishes of the President and the people. Helena outlines the sort of scenario. And it is one which rings alarmingly true.
It is insane, very dangerous, highly risky and an act of desperation.
In other words it is just the sort of gamble one expects from a government in the fascist-terror tradition of Irgun and the Stern Gang. Just as the successful but disastrous and genocidal invasion of Iraq was.
Nature abhores vacuums and when the neo-cons expelled the vaguely socialist sentimental progressivism, that they had sucked in from their mothers’ breasts, from their minds, in shot fascism.
Not in the original form which the young terrorist leaders had so admired in Italy and even in Germany but in a naturalised Hebrew version preached by Messrs Begin and Shamir.
And it is fascism which, with its ruthless tactics, shabby tricks, lies and violence, its racist contempt for the ‘other’ and its enticement of the populace into shameful, vicious attitudes and practises, exemplified by the IDF running amok in Gaza and the settlement policies which strike at the very centre of Palestinian dignity; it is this discredited and dangerous mode of thinking that is one of the strongest currents in US political discourse today.
If Israel does manage to involve the United States in a war on Iran there will be no way out for Americans, the die will have been cast, further thought will be redundant. There will be war for the foreseeable future, which might not be very long. And Israel will be gone long before it is over.
The folks who brought us Iraq always did want to march on to Iran; what they did in Iraq doesn’t trouble them and what happens in Iran they care nothing of.
Their belief is that, if violence doesn’t solve problems it certainly postpones them and is terrific fun to watch, from a distance, on a sunny imperial afternoon, sipping tea and eating honey covered crumpets, with every new day bringing news of victory and the deaths of more muslim children.
As the height of JES’s critique is to call someone else a nutcase may I suggest he is a discourteous Troll. The latest recommendations are not to publish Troll drivel.
Ms. Cobban’s commentary provides a point of view that is quite focused on the players that make up the Israel-Iran-US trio.
Its hard to vizualise that any “military” action by either one or all three will have no repercussions outside their areas.
The present realities are that the US is committed militarily in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Three Arab/muslim states with a combined population of 260 million.
To take on Iran military on behalf of Israel or co-jointly with Israel would result in the US at war with some 300 million Arab/Iranian/Afghan/Pakistan/Muslims.
What and how would such events impact the present status quo? How will the rest of the Muslim/Arab/Asiatic nations react? What are the chances that Israel will be obliterated versus Iran being obliterated?
Hitler and his general staff in their comfortble bunkers had the invasion of Russia won before even his troops were given their marching orders.
The promoters of “get Iran” in their air-conditioned offices on K street, with AIPAC and/or the neocons in DC or Tel Aviv will in all probability end up with the same results Hitler got>
It stands to logic that Iran is not going to go away. The possibility that israel might is quite high. Which forces one to consider the possibility that that is the end game of those who are calling the shots.
The Israelis are fearful of Iran. However they are not as concerned with Iran as they are concerned with the thought of foregoing their plans for territorial expansion. So the Iran “issue” is a convenient distraction for them vis-à-vis the USA. The Israelis can emote theatrically on their mortal fear of Iran with some plausibility which allows them to avoid the subject that truly frightens them, permitting the Palestinians an autonomous state. The Iran quasi-hysteria serves as cover for the Israelis to leave the Palestinian issues in perpetual limbo.
Yes, of course the Israelis would love to broker a war between the USA and Iran. The Israelis do not want to be alone in a protracted conflict with Iran and her friends so the Israelis will do what they can to instigate US-Iran hostilities. The Israelis are solely concerned with what is best for Israel and that scenario would serve the interests of Israel well. The unpopular-in-Israel decisions required to make satisfactory accomodations with the Palestinians could thus be delayed even further via a war with Iran (a war preferably fought by the Americans even if Israel proceeds with a first strike to get a war started. I do not think that Israel will attack Iran by the way which is a subject for another discussion.). As stated earlier, Iran is a convenient but important distraction for the Israelis. Recognising a sovereign Palestinian state is the real issue and Israel wants to avoid and delay that into perpetuity.
I’m quite surprised at Helena’s post. I assumed that Israel’s wag-the-dog motivation was widely understood. And, really, what other motivation could there be, since it’s obvious that Israel, despite its bluster, simply cannot project enough power far enough–short of nuking Iran–to do long term damage. JES, instead of simply sniping at Helena, could have done us a real service by providing an alternative explanation for a potential Israeli attack.
As to Iran’s response to a minor Israeli attack, I believe it would not be immediate, but at a time and place of its choosing. In the interim, it could look forward to massive amounts of military aid, all defensive of course, from Russia and China.
Dimitrijevic’s comments are as the saying goes. Spot on.
One can only add that “nothing lasts forever”.
Hellooooo! If you take the trouble to read and understand my posts, you will see that what I am questioning is your assumption that, because Israel does not have the means to go it alone that it is trying to drag the US into doing the “dirty work”. Further, is your assumption that Israel’s leadership is intent on attacking Iran. Again, it is these – unfounded – assumptions that I am questioning.
JES, please know that your devotion to getting out there and trying to use all the tricks in the hasbara handbook (character defamation, divide and rule, etc) doesn’t give you the right to hog this or any other discussion.
Let me see. What have you taken from the “Pallywood Playbook”, Helena? You have accused me of being “insensitive” simply because I expressed my concern about my countrymen without making a perfunctory statement of compassion about Palestinians. You have accused me of being in a “defensive crouch”, simply because you didn’t have any factual arguments to present. I’d say that that amounts to character defamation.
Helena, you know very well that Obama has repeatedly, publically, told Israel precisely that, has told Israel that it has a free hand. He did this when he met with Netanyahu last week.
I cannot understand why you and other seemingly progressive commentators insist on reading tea leaves to try to find out that Obama actually has a constructive foreign policy. Believe what you see. There is no CONSTRUCTIVE way forward to a just peace that doesn’t involve confronting Israel in a public way. Unless Israel is publically and explicitly warned not to attack Iran, they will surely do it and soon. Obama cannot continue to berate Iran, to hype the Iran ‘threat’, and to declare that Israel is certainly free to attack Iran if it sees fit, and then do an about face if Israel does in fact attack. If Israel attacks, the US will be drawn in immediately. So that must be what Obama is counting on.
We need to stop seeing in Obama what we would like to see. We need to start seeing him for what he is showing himself to be. Obama can change direction whenever he chooses, but right now he is steaming towards war.
What does Israel seek? I don’t think Israel’s leaders fear Iran. They know better than anyone how overwhelming their regional advantage is. So what are they after? Maybe it’s just a matter of domestic political advantage – fearmongering and warmongering tamps down the left and excites the right. It’s a winning strategy for rightist parties. But it’s also a dangerous strategy, because sooner or later it almost necessitates follow through. So what is the real endgame? I think Israel’s leaders are thinking far more boldly than we like to suppose. My guess is that once the war starts, they will pretty much leave Iran to the US. They will focus on settling local scores and achieving the dream of Greater Israel. I think they will sweep through Gaza and the West Bank, that they will consolidate their position in Syria and will sieze Southern Lebanon.
What does the US want? Well, I think that too involves much larger ambitions than we like to suppose, relating to global geo-poltics, resource wars, etc..
Or maybe it’s just all about the military industrial complex, so central to the economies of the US and Israel, and maybe it’s all shadow box theater for financial gain. One can’t underestimate the political impact of simple greed.
I suppose my big question is just how vulnerable is the US ‘political system’ to being hijacked by extreme internal fanatics? (I suppose some might even argue that it has already happened!)
Obviously the neocon led post 9/11, ongoing WOT debacle, doesn’t bode well! Using 9/11 plus some US manufactured ‘anthrax’ the whole country was ‘hijacked’ and manipulated into an obscene war of aggression, with all its attendant lies, propaganda, and hype!! The ‘New Pearl Harbor’ was most certainly a hijacking of huge proportions!!!! – with immense consequences for all of us.
Just how entrenched, and influential, and organized, are the ‘crazies’ as Colin Powel described them? And just how far are they (whoever ‘they’ are) prepared to go to reach their extreme goals?
It seems to me that the US is in a particularly vulnerable state at the moment with incredibly powerful ‘extreme’ forces like the Christian Right, AIPAC, the military industrial complex etc., and a whole host of others, social and economic, building up into a perfect storm.
I’m not at all sure that rational thinking and common sense will carry the day.
An Israeli ‘trigger’ strike on Iran might not be in the US general interest – but it would certainly open a lot of possibilities for the ‘crazies’!!!!
JES, instead of simply sniping at Helena, could have done us a real service by providing an alternative explanation for a potential Israeli attack.
John, you’re kidding right? The alternative explanation is that Israel probably does not want to attack Iran, and it certainly doesn’t want the US to do so. (Remember the 1991 Gulf War?) What Israel probably wants (and this is what the leaders have been saying all along) is for the US and the Europeans simply not to take the military option off the table while they ratchet up the sanctions. I assume that what Helena wants is for Obama to continue his promise of “respect” for the Islamic Republic of Iran. We all saw yesterday how well that worked with North Korea.
Cheers omop.
One final point I neglected to mention: The Israelis certainly see the signs that the USA is interested in improving relations with Iran. The Americans may have finally stopped pouting about their asset the Shah being overthrown in ’79 and they’re prepared to swallow a bit of pride and look after their own interests in the region first. The Americans realise Iran can be an extremely valuable ally and economic partner/consumer of American goods in the region as opposed to a sworn enemy under economic embargo. Iran has much political influence in the Muslim world, it possesses vast, only lightly tapped petroleum and gas reserves and the country is home to seventy million people, the majority of them under the age of forty.
Israel on the other hand is a near-pariah state worldwide, it has a population one tenth the size of Iran’s and virtually zero natural resources.
Which country would it be more logical for the Americans to court, Israel or Iran?
The Israelis see all this of course, and like a displaced spouse they’re scheming to break up the relationship between America and her possible new best friend in the region. What better way to nip all that in the bud than by maneuvering Iran and the USA into a war against each other?
JES–Right. So Israel is just blackmailing the West with threats of attacking Iran? Seems to me that they could make the same argument without the blackmail.
Now, if Israel were to attack Iran–the whole point of this thread–what would the goal be? Please provide an alternative case to what Helena has argued. Unless presented with a plausible alternative, wag the dog has to be the goal.
John, where exactly is Israel threatening to attack Iran? I believe that the total “threats” of Israel have been two exercises (one a joint exercise with Greece) that involved long-distance flights. However, for their part, the Iranians have carried out a number of tests of missiles with a range that can reach Israel.
By the way, “Wag the Dog” was a movie. I don’t think that was meant to be taken literally, and, as I recall, it was the President of the United States who “wagged the dog”.
Ooooooooh, those nasty Jews. Even I underestimated their cleverness. Oops, I forgot, they started WWII also
Speech by Adolf Hitler, January 31, 1939 (Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals – Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1949-1953, Vol XIII, p. 131):
Today I will once more be a prophet: If the international Jewish financiers in and outside Europe should succeed in plunging the nations once more into a world war, then the result will not be the bolshevization of the earth, and thus the victory of Jewry, but the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe!
JES–Guess you need to follow the news more closely. Here’s but one example of an interview with Bibi, where the interviewer concludes that is Israel threatening to attack Iran.
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200903u/netanyahu
The impression is widespread and Bibi has done nothing to erase it, only say that he won’t attack before the end of the year.
Now maybe you could answer the question of what Israel might hope to accomplish by such an attack, if not to drag the US into it. If nothing is to be accomplished, why won’t Bibi quell the rumors?
Jes – this is the age of the internet — such threats are easy to find. Now you’re just being disingenuous at best. Try just today’s issue of Ha’aretz:
Haaretz: IDF Chief, ‘I’m preparing all possible measures against Iran’
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1088339.html
“Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi told lawmakers on Tuesday he was preparing every possible measure Israel could take to thwart Iran’s nuclear ambitions. ‘As chief of staff, my position is to prepare all the alternatives for dealing with the Iranian nuclear problem, which is what I am doing,’ Lt. Gen. Ashkenazi told the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee.
Ashkenazi’s comments came after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Monday that if Israel does not eliminate the Iranian threat, no one will. ‘Iran is continuing with its program,’ the IDF chief added. ‘Nuclear weapons in Iran’s hands could undermine the stability of the entire Middle East.'”…
Netanyahu wants a war with Iran and he’s doing his level best to push it: (Here’s he indicates Israel will start it — and of course, he also knows that Israel can’t finish it — that the US will be dragged into the hell…. This isn’t Osirak — winep’s cakewalk thesis notwithstanding)
Haaretz: Netanyahu: If Israel doesn’t take out Iranian threat, no one will.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1088065.html
“‘If Israel does not eliminate the Iranian threat, no one will,’ Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Monday. ‘Israel is not like other countries,’ Netanyahu told his Likud faction in a meeting which came one week after his meeting with President Barack Obama at the White House. ‘We are faced with security challenges that no other country faces, and our need to provide a response to these is critical, and we are answering the call.'”
With all due respect,… I would say that JES’s version of reality is well encapsulated in today’s Onion report: (ht to Prof. Isador)
http://www.theonion.com/content/news_briefs/israeli_pm_debuts_new_road
Israeli PM Debuts New Road Map For Continued Strife
May 14, 2009 | Issue 45•20
Article Tools
JERUSALEM—In a historic speech before the U.N. Tuesday, newly elected Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu unveiled a comprehensive plan to extend political discord and senseless violence in the Middle East through the next 25 years. Key elements of the 60-page road map include a symbolic and ultimately fruitless 2010 regional summit, a tenuous cease-fire that will be violently broken mid-autumn by an as-yet-unnamed splinter group, a series of hope-shattering assassinations, and two untimely comas. “I intend to lead the nation of Israel out of this senseless, bitter fighting and chaos, and into a new era of organized, carefully thought-out fighting and chaos,” Netanyahu said. “If Israelis and Arabs work together, we can put off lasting peace indefinitely.” Sources close to the prime minister indicated that Netanyahu would be willing to consider Palestinian statehood if such a move led to a full-scale Mideast war.
Helena, thanks for this timely and pointed post.
“The Israelis are fearful of Iran.”
I don’t believe for a moment that Israeli officials are fearful of Iran. Iran never has and does not now and will not in the forseeable future pose a threat to Israel’s security.
This will surely help:
http://www.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/11C32A23-0519-405C-B984-275D3DF65B07.htm
Obama going to Saudi to discuss the Iranian threat….
JES – given the scenario Helena depicts, don’t you think Israel would greet US help with profound relief?
More generally on this post: is Iran prepared to go to war with Israel and (possibly) the United States? In this day and age? Never could I have imagined the shia mullahs, inheritors of ancient Persia, behaving like Saddam Hussein. It’s bizarre.
Helena’s sequence of events assumes the Iranians are irrational. A rational player would not retaliate against the US but would do so via Hamas, Hizbulla, and international terrorism. There is every precedent for that and none for a direct confrontation. The only cases Iran attacked the US was with multiple veils of deniability like Beirut, Kobar towers, and so on.
It makes even less sense if the Israeli attacks do not damage the Iranian nuclear foundations. They’ll press on only now with more global sympathy.
Her post is just a case of obsession for anything Israeli and sympathy for anything Persian, either a case of corrupt advocacy or pathological hatred beyond what modern medicine can cure.
Israel’s position is endemically unstable and will always result in conflict and that will always result in her having to kill her neighbors.
To divert world opinion from this odious status quo, and world opprobrium as a pariah state, Israel must endeavor to convince both the US and the world that HER enemies are THEIR enemies.
That, in essence, is the rational behind the continuous Israeli propaganda emanating from her embassies worldwide.
Israel sits with a massive secret nuclear arsenal and it needs to try to justify its untenable position as a blue canary in a yellow canary nest.
First of all John, where does it say in the article – besides in the headline – that Israel is threatening to attack Iran? (By way of comparison, please refer to the headline here:
http://web.archive.org/web/20070927213903/http://www.iribnews.ir/Full_en.asp?news_id=200247)
Bibi has not said that he “won’t attack before the end of the year” as you maintain. He has simplly said nothing, and while I don’t find much to commend him on, I do commend him on that. Why should he telegraph to the Iranians what Israel may or may not intend to do?
Now maybe you could answer the question of what Israel might hope to accomplish by such an attack, if not to drag the US into it.
You know, it amazes me that you all take everyone else at their word but when it comes to Israelis, there is always a deeper motive. Iran states that it does not intend to build nuclear weapons, and you believe it. Yet when Israel very plainly says that, if necessary, it will attack Iran to remove the nuclear threat, you look for a “wag-the-dog” scenario.
The link above does not work. Just take off the final parenthesis.
Yes Scott, I am aware that this is the Internet Age, which makes everyone an expert! Remember, the Internet has proliferated the quantity of information out there, not the quality!
I suggest that it is you who are being disingenous. For example, in the first article you cite, you completely ignore the following in relation to Ehud Barak’s statements:
According to the defense minister, Israel is not in a position to issue ultimatums to the U.S. regarding its overtures to Iran for diplomacy. “We can only express our stance, that every dialogue be given a deadline and that comprehensive and effective sanctions are simultaneously prepared.”
That certainly doesn’t seem like a threat.
And what of COS Ashkenazi’s remarks? Well, that is precisely what I would expect a Chief of Staff to tell the legislature. I’m certain that there are contingency plans for dealing with the “Iranian nuclear problem” (those were Ashkenazi’s exact words; that these might include “thwarting” the nuclear program are the interpretation of Yuval Azulai or the Haaretz Service).
As far as the second article, again, you rely on the headline and the first line of the story, which are interpretations of the Haaretz staff. If you troubled yourself to read the actual, rambiling and incoherent quotes from Netanyahu he doesn’t even come near to saying “If Israel doesn’t take out Iranian threat, no one will….”
If you want to see what a threat looks like, you might try here (remember, we’re in the Internet Age!):
http://www.iran-press-service.com/articles_2001/dec_2001/rafsanjani_nuke_threats_141201.htm
@JES
We are also at the end of May 2009. Things have moved on. Old propaganda statements are only valid to the gullible.
(remember, we’re in the Internet Age!):
I guess that my remark at the end was a bit too nuanced. Let me be more specific: One can find anything on the Internet to support a preconceived idea. Do you understand now, “bluecandary”?
BTW, I take it that the Ayatolla still ends his weekly sermons with chants of “Death to America”, “Death to Israel”. I guess that could also be interpreted as a threat if Gabi Ashkenazi’s statements to the Knesset could!
BB, I’m not certain that I understand what you mean by the “scenario Helena depicts”. I think that the scenario is wholly dependent on her preconceived notions about Israel as an aggressive player always trying to manipulate the US into doing its bidding.
I do agree with you, however, that Israel would, and does view US help with great relief. If Israel were to attack Iran, the retaliation (despite what Helena assumes) would most likely be first and foremost against Israel’s civilian population. No one, least of all the elected leaders (or those that Helena calls elsewhere “rulers”) wants that.
At any rate, Aluf Benn has an interesting article in today’s Ha’areetz:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1088492.html
Target: Tehran. And Obama may just have boxed himself in
http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=107293
Dimitrijevic:
The Israelis see all this of course, and like a displaced spouse they’re scheming to break up the relationship between America and her possible new best friend in the region. What better way to nip all that in the bud than by maneuvering Iran and the USA into a war against each other?
eppie:
Unless Israel is publicly and explicitly warned not to attack Iran, they will surely do it and soon.
I must be getting soft. That’s exactly right. Uri Avnery or whoever is just reading tea leaves. The Israelis will claim they never received a message to stop. The US will dive in with both feet.
Obama has got to go public.
The stinking miasma has come about via behind the scenes understandings and publicity is the only cure.
I agree, of course, that Israel is not “on its own” with its wars… but if they do start more they must face the direct consequences of their acts alone. Not another drop of American blood spilt, not another American nickel spent in support of their Samsonesque theatrics.
You know now I wish Iran did have a nuclear weapon. At least the Israelis would be kept from doing doing something so vicious and foolish if they did have.
Perhaps the Russians or Chinese could loan them a few, in the interests of peace, so they wouldn’t have to build their own.
The Americans realise Iran can be an extremely valuable ally and economic partner/consumer of American goods in the region as opposed to a sworn enemy under economic embargo.
Yet, despite the total lack of natural resources, Israel has a GDP that’s slightly less than one quarter of Iran’s and a per capita GDP that is slightly over twice that of Iran.
Dear Helena,
May I suggest that you take a look at ISRAEL’S IRANIAN MYTHOLOGY, the last post on my website http://www.alanhart.net
There is no question in my mind that so-called anti-Zionism serves as a fig leaf for Jew-hatred.
There is no other explanation.
I know of no other country whose legitimacy is as relentlessly questioned and undermined as is Israel’s…
[Rest of comment redacted for violating the guidelines on both relevance and length.]
The whole claim that “Iran wants to destroy Israel” is laughable and sinister.
There are 15,000 Jews living and thriving in Tehran,the Israeli government offered to pay for these Jews to emigrate to Israel but they refused!!
This little known fact is an embarrassment to the Israeli regime because it undermines the claim that “Iranian’s want to kill Jews”
Question:would you rather be a Jew living in Tehran or a Palestinian living in Israel?..be honest.
Dave, it’s really quite a well known fact. The whole story. Even here in Israel. The Iranians don’t want to kill Jews, and most Israelis know that. They just don’t tolerate “uppity” Jews very well, and they have said time and time again that they are not willing to tolerate a Jewish state in the region. It’s not because of any injustice done to the Palestinians. It’s because they simply cannot tolerate non-Muslim self-determination on what is Muslim waqf. (Just look at whom they support in Lebanon!)
And then you have to look at the other side of those numbers. Israel today is the home to 75,000 Iranian Jews and the US to about another 100,000. So one can probably surmise that life wasn’t all that good in Iran!
Wow, say JES, I like your gig. How much can I get paid to sit at my computer around the clock monitoring, haranging, and intimidating web sites that you and your hasbara masters don’t like?
Well, I’m glad you asked inquiring…. whatever. Why don’t you send your an email, with your qualifications to:
iliketotouchmyself@roflmfao.com
Stay well and God bless.
@Robert AVrech
Violence and government repression in Dubai? Do you know where Dubai is? Then you will know it is one of the world’s favorite long-haul tourist destinations with the world’s fastest growing airline without whose orders Boeing would go belly-up in a week!
Go back to the chicken soup with lockshen and chopped liver , close your eyes and take a nap.
@Robert AVrech
OMG! That should read ‘Airbus’ not ‘Boeing! Christ, they’ll sue me!
@Robert Avrech:
“”There is no question in my mind that so-called anti-Zionism serves as a fig leaf for Jew-hatred.
There is no other explanation.””
This is an utterly false premise: If I reject the Roman Catholic Church’s ideology, does that mean I reject Christians? Does that mean I’m a Christian Hater or Catholic Hater?
The “fig-leaf” here is the Zionist use of antisemitism to divert objective critique into a moral abyss complete with images of WWII fire and brimstone. Fact is, Israel is a chartered “secular” state from its recent founding. Netanyahu recently started pushing to re-charter Israel as a Jewish state, however, and it is my opinion that the only reason for this is to formalize under international law what you attempt to do here on this thread, which is to make it a crime to criticize the state of Isreal itself.
You also try very hard to portray Israel as the most victimized nation on Earth, yet ignore Israel’s non-IAEA compliance while in possession of hundreds of un-declared nuclear WMD’s. You also ignore that Israel itself boasts of having the world’s 3rd, 4th or 5th greatest military on the planet. You ignore Israel’s non-compliance with dozens of UN Resolutions. You ignore the fact that just because people like George W. Bush convinced gullible blind-faithers in this country that he was Christian that that actually meant he was Christian, and the same goes for Likud: It’s not religious or god-fearing spirituality or practice that causes Israel’s grief today, it’s the crass, and obnoxious self-appointed dictator of international law, press and self-interest that has been steadily and persistently pushed on the world by Israel itself…
There’s the fig-leaf.
I think you are essentially correct in your assessment Helena, and that is based largely on the now historical record established by the PNAC document and the Bush-Cheney administration that launched it into full-spectrum international chaos. Most of the Bush-Cabal emerged out of deep government long before W’s 2000 Selection, and though some have jumped over the fence all the way over into the private beltway, there still are many players, some known and some not, surrounding Obama and knitted into the very fabric of today’s Washington DC. This is just plain fact. We have not changed anything meaningful with regards the firmament that resulted in the atrocity of the Bush administration.
Now if one objectively reviews the techniques and strategies of the neocons which are identical to Likud&Co and likely simply adopted from them, it is obvious that chaos, and not democracy or defensive “fears”, was the motive for invading both Afghanistan and Iraq and there never was any intention of near-term victory. Iran itself was the pot of gold at the end of their military rainbow in the ME! It was through the clouds of this very chaos, just like on 9/11, that the military/industrial/energy/police-state apparatus was able to plunder so much US wealth in addition to re-writing/overriding international/domestic law and corrupting/intimidating Justice and the Congress/UN to a point of complete ineptitude and worthlessness.
Chaos is a key strategy, and as you can see, this was the pretentious cover given to the public about the “missing nukes” incident, that poor quality control etc., etc., etc., just like on 9/11 and the anthrax attacks! But this point, about deliberate chaos underlying the current fascist strategy and resulting in a failed attempt to hijack US nukes spelled THE END for the PNAC agenda: Russia immediately announced military security partnerships with Iran and China, China shot down a satellite, Russian generals spoke to the press openly about their willingness to use preemptive nuclear capability and other not-so-subtle messages clearly aimed at all international neocons, including those in Europe.
Lie, cheat, steal, intimidate, destroy, torture, render, bribe, cover-up and all their other efforts failed possibly because not one AF pilot would fly out of Barksdale with obviously armed warheads. It’s all saber-rattling since then… maybe that’s why Obama’s so silent?
‘Obama won the election last November; and before that he won the primary against Hillary Clinton. He won both races in good part because the American people supported his approach of making a sincere effort to de-escalate our country’s tensions with Iran, rather than the much more belligerent stances that both Clinton and McCain advocated towards Iran’
Fool me once…..
When will people learn that the american democratic system is about getting elected…after which, the people are ignored.
The US is a one party system with two war mongering right wings
Helena:
Your post added valuable perspective to this debate. I guess that’s why your comments are all trashed up with hasbara. That means that you are right on target.
It is beyond disappointing that Obama is missing such a great opportunity for a certain rapprochement with Iran. I would imagine that the conditions are primed for Iran to be accorded full membership in the SCO.
John, where exactly is Israel threatening to attack Iran? I believe that the total “threats” of Israel have been two exercises (one a joint exercise with Greece) that involved long-distance flights. However, for their part, the Iranians have carried out a number of tests of missiles with a range that can reach Israel.
Israel has been threatening for years.
Here’s an example:
What to do with Iran? By General Oded Tira
http://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-3346275,00.html
President Bush lacks the political power to attack Iran. As an American strike in Iran is essential for our existence, we must help him pave the way by lobbying the Democratic Party
(which is conducting itself foolishly) and US newspaper editors. We need to do this in order to turn the Iranian issue to a bipartisan one and unrelated to the Iraq failure.
Israel’s Netanyahu Claims President Bush Promised Unilateral Nuclear Bomb Attack Against
Iran
http://www.veteransforcommonsense.org/?Page=Article&ID=9104
U.S. rebuffs Israeli request for arms geared toward Iran strike
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=1010938
Helena is right about Israel’s desire for a wider war with Iran..not just bombing their nuclear sites, but involving the US to do that “realignment” of the ME that will make Israel “the” dominant and regional power.
I doubt there has been much written or any books published about Israel or the ME in the last seven years that I haven’t read…and in those 7 years I went thru the entire British National Achives documents on the rise of zionism, creation of Israel and ME history. Through every presidential library from Truman to Bush I, through the Library of Congress for every report and study on Israel, through
Thomas.gov and govtrac for every bill written, resolution made, word uttered and speech given in behalf of Israel by our vichy congress, through everything ever published by AIPAC,JINSA, and other assorted Israeli organs.
So I am going to tell you what I learned from all that about Israel in a true story you can understand.
When I was a teenager back in the fifties a associate of my father rescued an abused monkey from one of those traveling zoo shows. This man pampered the little monkey and took him everywhere he went…into resturants and stores where pets would not normally be allowed..but the story of the monkey entranced everyone and they made allowences for the man and the monkey because everyone was taken with the story of the rescue of the abused little fellow. The man dressed the monkey as you would a child and all the monkey had to do was point to something and the man would get it for him.
One day my father remarked to me that he thought the monkey was becoming dangerous. The man had brought the monkey into his office and the monkey went wild and jumped all over people and generally destroyed the office and the man couldn’t control him…he had spoiled and catered to the monkey and failed to discipline his behavior to the point where the monkey was the tyrant of the man.
Sometime later we heard that the man was in the hospital, the monkey had attacked him. The man had taught the monkey to fetch things and to go about the house doing whatever he wanted for the most part. What happened was the man was sitting on his porch and told the monkey to go get them cokes from the fridge, something the monkey had done many times before. Except this time when the monkey came back he didn’t want to hand over a coke to the man, he wanted to keep both cokes. The man tried to take it from the monkey and the monkey attacked him. Hit him in the head with the coke bottle, almost put his eye out and ripped off part of his ear.
I don’t remember hearing what happened to the monkey after that..whether he was put down or returned to some zoo, but the man had to get rid of the monkey.
The monkey in this true story is Israel and the man of course is the US…..there’s a saying that no good deed goes unpunished…I don’t beleive that is true but I do believe it is true in the case of Israel.
The real facts of zionism, Israel and it’s supporters for those who study “real” documented history, is that they are friends to no one and are no friends of the US and the American people…that’s just a fact.
Obama needs to channel Eisenhower if the US is to survive the Israeli ME madness.
I would like to suggest for anyone who wants to get up to speed on Israel and Iran.. without laboring for 7 years in acheives..to read Trisa Parsi’s “Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran, and the United States”.
And W&M’s “Israel Lobby”…W&M in particular for a good look at how Israel has actively worked to undermind and ruin US efforts at diplomatic relations with ME countries for years and years.
Israel doesn’t want to be “accepted” by the other ME countries, they want to be the “power center”, both economically and militarily in the ME and they expect their minons in the US to see to it that the US makes that happen for them, preferably by crushing or destroying any ME country that stands in their way or opposes their agenda.
Isreal is the scorpion on the frog’s back, always has been, always will be…unless the US public refuses to stand for it any longer.
Also very interesting ….Clinton speaks
No exceptions to Israeli settlement freeze: Clinton
By Lachlan Carmichael – 10 hours ago
WASHINGTON (AFP) — US President Barack Obama has made it clear to Israel he wants no “natural growth exceptions” to his call for a freeze in West Bank settlements, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Wednesday.
Her remarks about settlements during a visit by Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul Gheit of Egypt, a key mediator in peace talks, were the most explicit yet since Obama came to office in January.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told his cabinet Sunday he did not intend to build new settlements but that “it makes no sense to ask us not to answer to the needs of natural growth and to stop all construction,” aides said.
But Clinton said the “president was very clear when Prime Minister Netanyahu was here during his visit to the White House on May 18.
“He wants to see a stop to settlements. Not some settlements, not outposts, not natural growth exceptions,” Clinton said.
“We think it is in the best interest of the effort that we are engaged in, that settlement expansion cease,” she said.
“That is our position, that is what we have communicated very clearly not only to the Israelis but to the Palestinians and others. And we intend to press that point,” she said.”>>>
Huummm..o.k…so how shall Obama enforce this?…be sending in the US Marines or by refusing Israel any more of our hardworking taxpayers money? If it were up to me I would send in the Marines ‘and’ take Israel off our credit card.
Thank you very much Carroll. So, we are nothing but trained monkeys, are we? Or are we scorpions? And you, Carroll? What are you? I’d say an ass.
Oh come on MRW, where do you see here that the Israeli government is threatening Iran?
And you still haven’t gotten around to dealing with this:
http://tinyurl.com/pba7sj
I can’t believe Israel is still using that tattered, worn out “we won’t build new settlements, but we will accommodate natural growth of the existing ones” scam that they have been using now for over a decade.
“I can’t believe Israel is still using that tattered, worn out “we won’t build new settlements, but we will accommodate natural growth of the existing ones” scam that they have been using now for over a decade.”
And I can’t believe Israel is still getting away with it. You’d think that nothing could be more critical to any negotiations.
Great mystery to me why the PLO and Arafat did not make settlement freeze a non-negotiable condition for signing Oslo. I read Abbas’ book but he skates over the issue. After Said’s death I emailed Rashid Khalidi and asked him if the great man had ever addressed the subject. Apparently not, because Khalidi referred me to his own book, which had just been published. I read it too, but Khalidi did not really address the issue either.
It wasn’t just Oslo. Arafat/PLO could have made it a red-line condition at any time over the next few years. They could have demanded Israel freeze settlement growth as a condition of the PA attending Camp David. It could have been demanded as a price for PA participation in all subsequent negotiations on the Road Map, Annapolis etc.
But they never have. For some reason the Palestinian leadership likes to bitterly attack settlement growth but not take the simple action that will force Israel to give in. Why? Any ideas Shirin?
Israel doesn’t want to be “accepted” by the other ME countries, they want to be the “power center”, both economically and militarily in the ME and they expect their minons in the US to see to it that the US makes that happen for them, preferably by crushing or destroying any ME country that stands in their way or opposes their agenda.
Perhaps you could share with us some of the facts of your seven-year study of all the sources you say you have studied, that have led to this sweeping generalization? (Particularly who are the “they” you refer to and what do you mean by “accpeted”.)
BB, it’s been their insisence on not conveying to their people in the diaspora that there is simply not going to be any large-scale right of return to Israel that has kept the Palestinian leadership from insisting on a settlement freeze.
Saeb Erekat was on TV in Israel a year after the start of the intifada II, and he said that, following Taba, the two sides were as close to an agreement as they ever came, with the territorial issues all worked out (including, presumably, the removal of some settlements and exchange of alternative land for the larger blocs of settlements).
But Arafat had already decided to go to war, because he could not end the conflict without losing power. So, I agree with you in that I can’t believe that the Palestinians are still using that tattered, worn out scam of settlements when they could have demanded it as a non-negotiable item at any time over the past decade and a half.
JES? SHUTUP!
nobody respond to this jerk and maybe it will go away,and a serious comment session may emerge.
The isralies will kill themselves in IRAN and perhaps us too.EVERYONE is downwind!
If it were up to me I would send in the Marines ‘and’ take Israel off our credit card.
Uh Carroll, if I were you, I’d remember that US forces are spread pretty thin these days!
(But then, what do I know? I’m just a trained monkey after all.)
JES? SHUTUP!
Wow, the only Israeli in the room, the sole qualified representative of Israeli public opinion, and NSB commands him to remain silent. How arrogant can you possibly get!
So tell us NSB, why on earth should the rest of us ignore JES’ perspective in favor of the paranoid inferences of US-based outsiders like yourself?? lest we forget these same outsiders have been flogging a big Israeli-Iranian (or was that US-Iranian?? ) showdown for years with nothing to show for it.
Thank you very much Carroll. So, we are nothing but trained monkeys, are we? Or are we scorpions? And you, Carroll? What are you? I’d say an ass.
Posted by JES at May 28, 2009 02:16 AM >>>>>
If the shoe fits…
That monkey story is actually true and illustrates perfectly how the US created the Israel problem.
I see a lot of Israeli activist like you on the net and the most striking thing about you all is your ‘myth making” about jewish history and rejection of reality concerning Israel.
It’d amazing to me that you Israeli activist weave lies into every defense of Israel. I can’t count the times I see such nonsense as “we would not have computers if not for Israel and Israel is the IT and drug research center of the world and Israel is so economically and intellecutally advanced.” These are pitiful claims that are so easily disproved that it’s embarassing. That is why no one takes you seriously.
If for instance you go to the last congressional ordered report (2005) on Israel at the LOC you can find in the first paragraph that “Israel is not economically self sufficent and could not exist without foreign “aid”.
If you go to the US Dept of Commerce you can find that Israel’s drug major firm Teva, has been sued by every US Drug corporation for stealing drug patent’s and those stolen drug patents make up 90% of Teva entire drug business.
If you look up Israel computer business you will find none…you will find that Intel put two chip making plants in Israel on a 60 million dollar ‘grant’ to give jobs to Israelis. The Israeli didn’t even build their own or invent their chips or chip making plants. If you go to the CIA reports you will find that Israel is the Number One industrial and intellectual property theft foreign group in the US. The Israelis have never been creators of anything of any import to the world, they have been theifs and confiscators of others creative work and discoveries.
The most amusing thing I have seen recently was a huge headline that “Israel was traing dogs and cats to sniff out cancer”!..as if the Israelis discovered this ability and it hasn’t been already researched, used and proved a decade ago by researchers in the US and France.
As I said this kind of tooting you own horn with lies would be embrassing to any normal person.
The ony way I know how to describe you and the whole jewish zionist Israeli thing is as a “cult”…that’s why I seldom respond to those like you…everyone knows you can’t talk reality and facts with thoses deep into a cult movement and mentality.
Thanks Vadim, but actually I believe that Eurosabra is also an Israeli. My advise on NSB is to just ignore him and perhaps he will go away!
Israel’s Netanyahu Claims President Bush Promised Unilateral Nuclear Bomb Attack Against
Iran
Umm, I think your “source” for this bombshell has thought twice about its accuracy –it’s nowhere to be found at your link. still, no less unhinged than the ridiculous claim that Israelis crave war with Iran.
Helena wouldn’t you agree that in all cases, gross generalizations about the “hostile” nature of members of an “Other” group are crude, ill-considered, and often actually escalatory??
@ Posted by bb at May 28, 2009 03:46 AM>>>
Sorry bb, I am not going to waste my time with you by giving you a thousand links, quotes and document references.
We all know this typical game. No matter what the facts or proof given,….your comeback to the facts will always be….”whaaaa, they’re all lying anti semites…the British are anti semites, Carter is anti semite”, all historians except jews are anti semites, none of it is true, the governments are full of antisemites, everyone hates the jews and lies about us,”.. ad nausum.
We’ve all been there done that…you aren’t educatable.
Sorry bb, I am not going to waste my time with you by giving you a thousand links, quotes and document references.
Carroll we have missed you these past seven years. Posts like yours are so thought provoking and informative. Are Israelis really thieving degenerates? Do they crave war? What else have you learned in your research? And pray, what keyword combination carried you here to Helena’s site to share your wisdom with us?????
Well Carroll, I suspected you were just blowing hot air with your “seven years of research crap” and all, and now you’ve proven it.
Just to set the record straight here, Israel had a GDP in 2008 of around $200 billion, less than 2.5% of that from US assistance. Here is what that report actually says in the first sentence of the first paragraph:
“Israel is not economically self-sufficient,
and relies on foreign assistance and borrowing
to maintain its economy.”
I’ve got news for you genius. The United States depends on borrowing to maintain its economy!
As for Teva, major pharmaceuticals are always suing each other. It’s part of the business. And 90% of Teva’s business is made up of generic drugs for which the patent protection has run out. Check it out!
If you look up Israel computer business you will find none…you will find that Intel put two chip making plants in Israel on a 60 million dollar ‘grant’ to give jobs to Israelis.
Utter bull. Intel has five facilities in Israel. National Semiconductor also has facilities, and Tower Semiconductors along with Audiocodes are both Israeli firms. Microsoft has R&D facilities that produce key components of the Windows OS. Motorola was, I believe, the first US firm to set up facilities here back in the 1970s. And the list goes on and on. Israel produces more hi-technology startups each year than any other place outside of the Silicon Valley, and these tend to be gobbled up by US companies. So, I’d study up a bit before embarassing yourself here.
…everyone knows you can’t talk reality and facts with thoses deep into a cult movement and mentality.
Well, well haven’t you left yourself with a nice out…. RFLMAO!!!!
BTW, in most cases it’s not that monkeys don’t want to share that makes them violent with people. It’s that they are sexually frustrated and they take their frustration out on the humans around them.
I think that was meant to be addressed to me and not BB.
At any rate, you’ve already provided enough in the way of quotes, you old anti-Semite!
I shall consider anything you spout from this point on completely irrelevant.
Good night and God bless.
Vadim, that last post of yours was precious! Especially the part about the “keyword combination”. I almost fell of my chair laughing.
Apologies to BB it was for JES.
And JES in your reply you proved my every point…every single industry you named in Israel is an American company created in the US…not by Israel. Israel lives on our off shoring, off our aid and “borrowing” from the US and on getting Israelis in our congress to give them favors and bennies to keep them going…and off Israel government bonds that they sell mainly in the US to US pensions funds…that are backed by the US treasury. The US is the only government that backs Israeli bonds. If you go to the rating chart on bonds, Israel bonds are rated at CC or lest EXCEPT when they are backed by the US and then they get a A- rating.
When and if Israel starts a war with Iran there is going to a huge flush down the toilet of US pensions fund investments in Israel government bonds….a lot of US workers and retirees are going to get an overnight education on just how deep into American pockets Israel has gotten. It isn’t going to be pretty.
You are right though about US borrowing…and in the end that is what is going to get the US and then like a domino falling will get Israel.
Ponzi schemes always end eventually.
You know Carroll, now I’m going to tell you a true story. When I was growing up in the 50s and 60s I had an uncle. He was always reading, and he could read really fast. Anywhere he went he would read up the entire library in a few days. Only problem was, he didn’t have the intellectual capacity to understand what he was reading!
Now, for your bull pucky assertions. Obviously, you don’t know what you’re talking about if you can claim that “every single industry [I] named in Israel is an American company created in the US…not by Israel.”
Just in the list that I provided, two are Israeli founded companies: Tower Semiconductors and Audiocodes. Check Point is also an Israeli founded company, as are Amdocs and Comverse, not to mention ECI and NICE Systems. Class systems was bought by Cisco (the first off-shore acquisition by Cisco) and became Cisco Israel. You don’t live here. I do, and I also work in hi-technology, so I think that I know better than you what I’m talking about here.
As for Israel Bonds, well I just looked it up. Worldwide sales of Israel Bonds in 2008 was $1.044 billion. Again, Israel’s GDP is $200 billion, so altogether the total of Israel Bonds plus US assistance is under 2% of GDP. What’s your debt like?
The US is the only government that backs Israeli bonds. If you go to the rating chart on bonds, Israel bonds are rated at CC or lest EXCEPT when they are backed by the US and then they get a A- rating.
Oh, and Carroll, where exactly did you get this information? The US goverment does not back Israel Bonds, and I don’t see anyone who rates the bonds “CC” or less as you assert.
I’m tired of hearing “Obama” this and “Obama” that…Rahm Emmanuel is running this country and everyone in Israel knows it.
well I don’t see it as a Palestinian “scam” JES. And I don;t see what the settlements have to do with “Right of Return”
Israel’s settlement policy has been disgraceful and unconscionable ever since Likud first won government back in the 70s. I say that as a pro pro zionist Leftist of the 1960s. Most of the Left supported Israel in those days.
When Israel and the PLO sidestepped the issue at Oslo, it was surely an isssue to Israel’s interests, not the PLO’s, given how much the settlements have grown since then. And am still waiting for someone to come wup with an explanation as to why the PLO, the PA and also Hamas, haven’t brought settlements to a halt instead of prolonging and expanding them.
BB, thanks for your reasonable response to my posting. On this site, that, in itself, is a rarity.
Let me try and explain why I think the settlements were as much in the perceived political interests of the Palestinian leadership as they are in those of the Israeli leadership. (But please let me be clear with you. I do not believe that the settlements were ever in the interests of Israel or Israelis, and I’ve held this view since about 1968.)
I believe that the issue was sidestepped during Oslo, simply because it was one that both sides felt they could deal with.
For Israel’s part, they could pretty much guarantee that the two major settlement blocs – the Ariel salient and the area that had been noman’s land around Jerusalem – through an equitable exchange of territory. At the time, this would have left between 50 and 75 thousand settlers, who would have probably left on their own account. Even if most or all of them hadn’t agreed to leave, the IDF and police could probably have handled evacuating them. (As we’ve seen from Gaza and Amona, the settlers really don’t have much stomach for fighting when faced with armed men.)
Now, you ask what I think this has to do with the “Right of Return”, and why I consider it a “scam”. First, let me say that I was just using Shirin’s terminology when I referred to this as a “scam”. However, I believe that this had everything to do with the PA – and in those days that meant Arafat – not being able to accept a final status agreement that included a mutual declaration of the end of the conflict and, with it, a concession on the “Right of Return”. Arafat would have had to contend with hundreds of thousands of Palestinians all over the Middle East, all carrying rusty keys for homes that are no longer there. (BTW, as an aside, did you know that there are still families in North Africa who have keys for their “homes” in Andalusia?) So, this is a case of the Palestinian leadership seeking to either (a)make all of Mandatory Palestine a Muslim state with a Jewish minority or, failing that (b) to drag the final status agreement out to the distant future.
In this sense, the settlements served the mutual interests of both at various points in the process.
[Redacted for length violation]
Hey Carroll. wattsa matter wid you?
If it were not for Israelis/zionists/neocons the US would be another Belize.
In one of her wise comments Helena said that she tolerates some of the contributors for the purpose to show what they are -which corresponds to a saying from India which goes like that “SPEAK SO I CAN SEE YOU”….
how appropriate here
Well, JES, Mahmoud Abbas has been reading moi in the comments. It seems WAPO’s Jackson Diehl interviewed el president just before his meeting with Obama, and quotes him thus:
” .. on Wednesday afternoon, as he prepared for the White House meeting in a suite at the Ritz-Carlton in Pentagon City, Abbas insisted that his only role was to wait. He will wait for Hamas to capitulate to his demand that any Palestinian unity government recognize Israel and swear off violence. And he will wait for the Obama administration to force a recalcitrant Netanyahu to freeze Israeli settlement construction and publicly accept the two-state formula.
Until Israel meets his demands, the Palestinian president says, he will refuse to begin negotiations. He won’t even agree to help Obama’s envoy, George J. Mitchell, persuade Arab states to take small confidence-building measures. “We can’t talk to the Arabs until Israel agrees to freeze settlements and recognize the two-state solution,” he insisted in an interview. “Until then we can’t talk to anyone.” ”
About time too. After that, Hamas is put under the pump, with any luck.
BB, this goes a long way to anwering your question, and it’s from straight from the horse’s mouth:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/28/AR2009052803614.html?nav=rss_opinion/columns
Ha, ha. Will you look at that. We both posted on the same article! Must be on the same “wavelength” today, as we used to say in the 60s!
I found this quote of more interest:
Obama, in contrast, has repeatedly and publicly stressed the need for a West Bank settlement freeze, with no exceptions. In so doing he has shifted the focus to Israel. He has revived a long-dormant Palestinian fantasy: that the United States will simply force Israel to make critical concessions, whether or not its democratic government agrees, while Arabs passively watch and applaud. “The Americans are the leaders of the world,” Abbas told me and Post Editorial Page Editor Fred Hiatt. “They can use their weight with anyone around the world. Two years ago they used their weight on us. Now they should tell the Israelis, ‘You have to comply with the conditions.’ ”
But it is this final paragraph that is most telling:
Instead, he says, he will remain passive. “I will wait for Hamas to accept international commitments. I will wait for Israel to freeze settlements,” he said. “Until then, in the West Bank we have a good reality . . . the people are living a normal life.” In the Obama administration, so far, it’s easy being Palestinian.
Hopefully not a ’60s hallucinatory induced wavelength, JES heh, heh. Was then and still am very conservative gal in such matters!
Abbas, that old stalwart joint founder of the PLO, obviously feels he is on strong ground with the Obama admin. In addition to which he has been able to reappoint a proven, accountable, uncorrupt, financially literate government for the west bankers. And was helped no end by the Fateh snouts spitting the dummy and going off to sulk. Meanwhile the govt rolls in funding and largesse courtesy of the Quartet.
Much depends on what happenes in the next six months,imo. But am impressed/relieved with the Obama Admin’s path, now that it has become clearer.
Yes, and, despite what people here said when he was appointed, I think that Rahm Emanuel will be a major positive influence.
I do think, however, that pressure will ultimately be placed on the Arab states to pre-implement aspects of their peace plan – if not through Abu Mazen (who appears to not be interested in doing so) then directly by the Obama administration through George Mitchell.
My take is that the current government will either fall or require a major realignment (leftward) within the next six to 12 months. Here are some things to watch.
First, an indictment of Avigdor Lieberman:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1088685.html
This will force him to resign as FM (and possibly, ultimately from the Knesset). As I have mentioned before, I see Yisrael Beiteinu as a continuation in the trend toward “third parties” that began back in the 1960s with Ben Gurion’s Rafi party. These parties tend to have a “half life” of two election cycles (i.e. they see their numbers fall of dramatically in the first election following their meteoric rise, and then disappear completely in the second).
The second development to watch out for is the internal debate on the Labour Party Constitution. Barak is trying to ram through a draft constitution that will effectively give make him the leader and give him sole power for six years. (When the ousted party secretary, Eitan Cable, saw the draft, he said “When I first saw this constitution, I knew that I had seen it before. Then I remembered: It was the same constitution that Hugo Chavez tried to pass in Venezuala!) If the democratic forces in Labour have their way, then Barak might be left alone (probably with Fouad ben-Eliezer) and leave politics, with the leftwing of the party joining the opposition.