Skip to main content

Israel calling the shots?

Who is leading whom here?   If news reports are correct Israel is goading the USA into supporting an attack on Iran.   It is also obvious that Israel is levering off the politics of the US presidential election.    Needless to say this is all a dangerous game with huge implications beyond just Israel and Iran.

"Two recent interviews apparently given by Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak provide evidence that the new wave of reports in the Israeli press about a possible Israeli attack on Iran is a means by which Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Barak hope to leverage a U.S. shift toward Israel’s red lines on Iran’s nuclear programme.

An interview given by a “senior official in Jerusalem” to Ynet News Wednesday Israeli time makes the first explicit linkage between the unilateral Israeli option and the objective of securing the agreement of President Barack Obama to the Israeli position that Iran must not be allowed to have a nuclear weapons “capability”.

In the Ynet News interview, the unnamed official is reported as explicitly offering a deal to the Obama administration: if Obama were to “toughten its stance” with regard to the Iranian nuclear programme, Israel “may rule out a unilateral attack”.

Ynet News reporter Ron Ben Yishai writes that Obama “must repeat publicly (at the U.N. General Assembly, for instance), that the U.S. will not allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons and that Israel has a right to defend itself, independently.”

And then there is this from Mondoweiss:

"After last week's fearfest over Iran fell flat, the danger duo of Netanyahu/Barak are up to their tricks again, revving up the pressure tactics for an Iran attack.

Didi Remez translates the latest bombshell from Israel via the Hebrew press. If Obama doesn't get on board by Yom Kippur there will be hell to pay during the last month of his campaign for re election. According to Maariv journalist Eli Bardenstein:

"Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak expect US President Barack Obama to say clearly that the United States will take military action to stop the Iranian nuclear program either at the UN General Assembly on September 25, which is the eve of Yom Kippur, or on some other public platform by that date."

Officials in the Prime Minister’s Bureau refused to respond [formally] to questions on this issue, but sources in Jerusalem said that officials in the Foreign Ministry and the Prime Minister’s Bureau have already begun to make preliminary efforts to coordinate this issue with the White House and with US Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice, who has very close ties to Obama.

The UN General Assembly meeting will begin on the eve of Yom Kippur. One of the first speakers will be President Obama. Despite the fact that that speech is still a month and a half away, officials in Jerusalem have already begun to take action. One high-ranking source in Jerusalem said that if Obama does make the statements that Israel expects of him to make, that will serve as a decisive contribution to Israel’s sense of confidence that the United States will indeed take military action to stop Iran, and it will also dispel fears that Israel might attack before the American presidential elections on November 6.

For Israel, time is pressing for a statement of that sort because of the tight timetable for an attack on Iran, which some people have assessed is likely to be carried out in the next two and a half months. That said, officials in the Prime Minister’s Bureau and the Defense Minister’s Bureau are aware of the fact that if Obama does decide to make a statement of that kind, he will make it only in closer proximity to the election, and not at present.

Israel has been pressing for an Iran attack for a few decades. We shouldn't be surprised the new deadline is November 6th. Is Obama going to cave to Netanyahu's scheduling?

Comments

Anonymous said…
Israel/America = Master Blaster...who runs barter town!

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...