Trending Topics:

‘Washington Post’ says Netanyahu should lead U.S. on Iran policy

on 46 Comments

Washington Post editorial deplores the daylight between US policy on Iran and Israel’s. (Hat tip Helena Cobban)

But the disagreement is still damaging. It conveys to Iran that there is no need to worry about a war; certainly, the country’s leaders have been behaving as if they feel no pressure to compromise. It also creates the bizarre spectacle of senior U.S. military and diplomatic officials focusing their time and attention on trying to prevent an Israeli attack rather than an Iranian bomb.

In the past week Mr. Netanyahu has hinted at how the U.S.-Israeli difference could be overcome: through a clear public statement by Mr. Obama of a willingness to take military action if Iran crosses certain “red lines” in its nuclear program. Israel has been seeking such a declaration for some time, but Mr. Obama has limited himself to saying that his policy is to prevent Iran from obtaining a weapon and that “all options are on the table.”

Notice that Susan Glasser, editor of Foreign Policy, seems to say much the same thing in an interview with Robert Siegel on NPR yesterday.

SIEGEL: There are rhetorical differences between the two [US political parties] over dealing with Israel. Are there substantive differences?

GLASSER: Well, there’s no question that if you look at the relationship between Obama and the administration of Benjamin Netanyahu in Israel, it’s been very frosty, very hostile. And that could lead to a potential real problem should Israel decide to take preemptive military action against Iran, for example.

That being said, you can’t look right now and say here’s what Mitt Romney would do on Israel and Iran, and here’s how it’s different than Barack Obama.

Wait, what’s the problem? That Iran would regard an attack that would kill hundreds if not thousands of people and likely result in suffering across the Middle East as having nothing to do with the U.S.? Wouldn’t it be a good thing for our troops in Afghanistan, that we be divorced from Israeli militarism? Why is Israel’s war our war?

Also, how is Glasser’s position any different from Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s insistence that there must be no daylight between the Republicans and Democrats on Israel, and no daylight between the US and Israel?

(And yes, this is about American Jewish identity, too. Can Robert Siegel interrogate the American Jewish attachment to Zionism?)

Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is senior editor of and founded the site in 2005-06.

Other posts by .

Posted In:

46 Responses

  1. HarryLaw on September 8, 2012, 10:46 am

    The idea that Israel could strike the Iranian nuclear facilities without US backing is ludicrous, any military strike would need to be in parallel with the destruction of any retaliatory response from Iran involving many weeks of bombing and thousands of sorties, something the Israelis just could not do. The middle east would be in flames, the Saudis and Gulf states if complicit would become targets, the idea that all those US assets in the middle east including the fleet in Bahrain could be sitting ducks to a strike without US approval is just not believable, no oil transiting the Strait of Hormuz, destroying the Western economies, the US Generals know this would be no walk in the park, that’s why it is not going to happen.

    • Citizen on September 8, 2012, 4:16 pm

      @ HarryLaw,
      Well, I will agree that it will be harder for the Zionists to pull off than USA’s entry into WW1, solely because of the internet. No, I’m not saying that’s the only reason our “dough boys” (Ha) were shipped “over there, over there,” but the Zionists, working from everywhere, really aided that happening, just as the Neocon stinktankers and Zionist appointees greatly aided Shrub Jr’s colossally stupid attack on Iran. And, of course, we all know that Versailles (with Zionist reps) led directly to WW2.

      Are we going to repeat this endless combo of Zionist money and top shelf angling to dictate the trajectory of the whole world, no matter what “Great Powers” exist at any give time?

  2. ehrens on September 8, 2012, 10:56 am

    The “bizarre spectacle of senior U.S. military and diplomatic officials focusing their time and attention on trying to prevent an Israeli attack rather than an Iranian bomb” only underscores just which nation actually presents the greatest danger in the region. And it’s not Iran.

    • Citizen on September 8, 2012, 4:30 pm

      @ ehrens
      Yep. Let’s keep the shackles on the country with no record of proactive wars for 250 years and not a single nuke bomb, while allowing the rogue war monger Israel with 400 nuclear bombs, and controlling the sole superpower behind the strongest military in the world by far, and more nukes, and Israel too with the UNSC vote by US proxy–let’s let Israel do whatever it pleases. That’s a recipe for peace and a balance of power, eh?

      It would be a gift from heaven if US congress folks picked up a history book or two, including one on the ME. You don’t even need a high school education to be a US Senator or House Rep. It shows.

    • NCINA on September 9, 2012, 12:03 am

      Where is your moral compass? Apparently Iran is the biggest state sponsor of terrorism by proxies: Hezbollah and Hamas both are trained, armed and funded by the revolutionary guard. Its agents have attacked Israelis abroad from Argentina to Asia. Their leadership are apocalyptic Shia Twelvers that believe an apocalyptic event will herald in the Mahdi. Before you think this is somehow far-fetched note during the Iran – Iraq war, Iran sent its youth (children) and infirm into minefields, a significant amount of Muslims believe in the supernatural myth of martydom/72 virgins in Jannah/the coming of the Mahdi.
      Their president has called for the coming of the Mahdi at the UN, denies that homosexuals exist but hangs them until they rot, executes children and pregnant women and uses rape and torture as political tools.
      There is a matter of threatening another on numerous occasions, attacking the British and American embassies in Iran – the Iranian leadership are untrustworthy and brutal.
      “Iran world leader in child execution.”,7340,L-3920528,00.html

      All I see is the joke that is the UN and the International Community turning a blind eye, arming the worlds worst regimes and all for the Western/US/European greed for oil. If I recall the US is either one of the worlds biggest consumers of oil.

      This whole red herring of not having a war is a dishonest especially considering their proxies wage their wars.

      • ColinWright on September 10, 2012, 11:08 pm

        NCINA says…“Where is your moral compass? Apparently Iran is the biggest state sponsor of terrorism by proxies: Hezbollah and Hamas both are trained, armed and funded by the revolutionary guard. Its agents have attacked Israelis abroad from Argentina to Asia. Their leadership are apocalyptic Shia Twelvers that believe an apocalyptic event will herald in the Mahdi…”

        Well, where’s your moral compass? At Chantilla and Sabra, Israel was the sponsor of one of the more impressive massacres of woman and chilidren by proxie in recent times. Israel routinely conducts assassinations of Iranians and others abroad. Their leaders are Zionist and Jewish nutjobs who think the Torah is historical fact and that the rest of humanity exists solely to serve their Jewish masters…

        Of course, there are differences. Israel has one of the world’s larger nuclear arsenals. Iran has no nuclear weapons at all. The US sponsors and supports Israel. At least it’s not responsible for Iran. Israel is located on a land that happens to be the home of another people entirely — Iran is inarguably located in Iran.

        Iran has not mounted an aggressive war against a neighbor since the eighteen century. In the sixty years it has been in existence, Israel has attacked every single state it borders.. No other state in the last hundred years has done that — not even Nazi Germany or Communist Russia. Think about that.

        So again. Where’s your moral compass?

      • seanmcbride on September 11, 2012, 10:38 am

        ColinWright wrote:

        “Israel has one of the world’s larger nuclear arsenals.”

        And what do you think Israel would do with that large nuclear arsenal if its existence were threatened?

        Former Israeli prime minister Golda Meir shed some light on that issue in 1971:

        Alan Hart interviewed Golda Meir for the BBC’s Panorama programme in April 1971 and asked her “Prime Minister … You are saying that if ever Israel was in danger of being defeated on the battlefield, it would be prepared to take the region and even the whole world down with it?”. Hart continues that, “without the shortest of pauses for reflection, and in the gravel voice that could charm or intimidate American Presidents according to need, Golda replied ‘Yes, that’s exactly what I am saying'”.

      • Woody Tanaka on September 11, 2012, 10:03 am

        “Where is your moral compass?”

        LMAO. The fan of an ethno-religious apartheid state which has held half the people under its control for decades in a state of abject peonage, all because of a deluded belief that an ancient fairy gave Palestine to them, and which has invaded every one of its neighbors has the gall to ask anyone else about a “moral compass”???? Where is your shame?

  3. traintosiberia on September 8, 2012, 11:49 am

    WaPO has offices in foreign countries.They should demand that it register as a mouthpiece of a foreign country since it is carrying American flag for escape from scrutiny of falsification , engaging into chronic lying and dedicated to influencing public opinion for illegal wars on behalf of that foreign country by name Israel.

    I have seen a lot of news media from abroad that take the message from WaPo as gospel truth and as distilled pure American policy reached by American citizen after open democratic public debate .
    Obviously this perception play a role in the foreign policy making institutions of countries like Nigeria,India,Turkey,S Africa, Pakistan,Indonesia,and scores of other countries where English language enjoy an overwhelming access to public ad enjoy tremendous respect.

  4. David Doppler on September 8, 2012, 11:51 am

    Advocating against daylight is not new.

    Must . . . keep . . . daylight . . . OUT. Said Plato. Please just look at the shadows on the cave wall, and allow your philosopher king to explain them to you. DO NOT TURN AROUND TO LOOK FOR YOURSELF. Do not eat of fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden, the tree of knowledge of good and evil, or you will die.

    It is a fundamental part of the American system that you do not give Plato’s philosopher kings unchecked power to manipulate the populace for their own good. Because the power always gets abused! Nor to religious figures, because ditto.

    Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the WaPo editorial board, or certain members of it, and the others continuing with this fight, are striving to extinguish the Sun as it rises and its light reveals the truth about the abuse of Israeli power, in Palestine and in the US. What a mess!

    As Phil said, time for Obama to hit one out of the park, turn his wicked smarts, his cool temperament, and his measured rhetoric to following the truth through the wreckage, wherever it will lead us. This is how America rights itself.

    • Citizen on September 8, 2012, 4:48 pm

      @ David Doppler
      Are you mezrmerized by your own effect? Obama has not stood up and said he’s not responsible for the latest amendments to the Democratic Platorm, which Debbie “the vulgar blatant liar” attributed to him.

  5. traintosiberia on September 8, 2012, 12:09 pm

    WaPo is engaged in hate crime only on an international scale

  6. rws450 on September 8, 2012, 12:21 pm

    Wow. It just gets worse and worse.
    North of the border Canada just shut down the Iranian Embassy.
    Toronto Star has nice biting column suggesting that Bibi doubles as Canada’s Foreign Minister.–burman-what-has-prompted-canada-s-move-against-iran

    The floor vote at the DNC is confirmation that these policies of acquiescence to Israel are NOT popular. It took some gumption for 50% of the loyal Democratic delegates to loudly vote NO to their leadership’s amendment.

    We need more people to start loudly criticizing the Washington Post, Robert Siegel and other flaks for Israel. It’s great to have this discussion and education at MW but they need to hear it at WaPo, NPR, etc..

    • Citizen on September 8, 2012, 4:54 pm

      @ rws450
      You are not going to get MW insight from government typists posing as journalists. Don’t you realize the Pentagon Papers was an anomaly in US journalism? Conscription for cannon fodder in a voluntary war did the trick then. Don’t you recall the burning draft cards? We no longer have that problem. The 4th Estate no longer exists.

  7. traintosiberia on September 8, 2012, 1:06 pm

    Weren’t the wide voter fraud alleged against Putin’s election and against Ahmednezad’s ? It is s given in cases of African or Chinese or Turkmenistan that US (NPR and other offical “lefties”)would pontificate and exhale liberty-laden fumes ta these shows but wont come to watch with same eyebrows their own. Racism is the logical outcome of corruption at the top.

    • Ctwosides on September 8, 2012, 7:47 pm

      Someone in particular at WP and in our government particularly, need to be reminded of George Washingtons farewell address against ‘foreign entanglements’.

      Washington warned against the danger of foreign alliances. He warned neither to favor one nation too highly over another, and to not ally with others in foreign wars. WASHINGTON SAID “in regard to foreign nations, — in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. Europe has a set of primary interests, which to us have none, or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.

      The nation which indulges toward another an habitual hatred or an habitual fondness is in some degree a slave.

      It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others, which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill will, and a disposition to retaliate in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld; and it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation) facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country without odium, sometimes even with popularity, gilding with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.

      As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils! Such an attachment of a small or weak toward a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter. Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government, but that jealousy, to be useful, must be impartial, else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people to surrender their interests.

      The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial relations to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop.”

      Had our politicians followed this advise and held back the foreign entity’s overwelming Lobby AIPAC and all its accomplices my bet is that there would already have been peace between the Palestinians and Israeli’s and neither the US nor Israel would be as Isolated as we are in the Middle East.

  8. American on September 8, 2012, 3:45 pm

    Well this just shows once again how far gone the I-firsters are.
    The nerve of the US and Americans objecting to getting into a premptive war for a already rouge foreign client state. And all because we don’t care about Jews and the Jewish state. Just look at all that Arab land and zios only want part of it and just look at big rich US with that big military and why shouldn’t Israel have a right to use US against ME states they don’t like?
    Well, aren’t we all just the most selfish people you ever did hear of!
    Shame on us. (barf)

    • NCINA on September 9, 2012, 12:12 am

      The US has never fought a single war alongside Israel, at least not shoulder to shoulder with boots on the ground. Despite the US spending more in its military that all the other nations combined, other nations sons and daughters get maimed and killed for the US their interests never Israel.

      In fact the US along with the West has militarily intervened to save Muslim not Israeli lives: Balkans, Kuwait, Somalia, Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan. I spot a pattern when the US or West aren’t arming the worlds worst they are invading them.

      Not selfish – just hypocrites that really don’t have a clue – just look at the damage done in Iraq and what will inevitably happen in Afghanistan. Were the Iranian nuclear issue not so deadly serious, where real lives will be affected and in all probability Israelis be killed. I would love Iran to have a nuclear weapon, then see what will happen. Sunnis scrambling for nuclear weapons, proliferation, even more acts of belligerence, oil prices rocketing and a dirty bomb in a US/Western city.

  9. Carowhat on September 8, 2012, 4:03 pm

    I woulds sure like to see a chart sometime showing the benefits to Israel of a joint US-Israel attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities and then right next to it a parallel chart showing such a strike’s benefits (and disadvantages) to the United States.

    The only big benefit to the US that I see is that we won’t have to listen to congressmen and the media haranguing us anymore about throwing our ally under the bus. The big disadvantage of striking Iran is that it will put us in a decade long depression at the end of which we’ll so closely wedded to Israel the only thing left to do will be to send out the announcements and buy the wedding cake. We will of course invite the rest of the world to the ceremony but it won’t be a large affair –who would want to celebrate the union of two failed states boldly charging off together the wrong way.

  10. DICKERSON3870 on September 8, 2012, 6:47 pm

    RE: “Can Robert Siegel interrogate the American Jewish attachment to Zionism?” ~ Weiss

    ANSWER: On NPR (part of the mainstream media)? Not unless he’s meshugge (a/k/a meshugeh)! ! !

    SEE: “CNN and the Business of State-Sponsored TV News”, by Glenn Greenwald, The Guardian, 9/05/12

    [EXCERPT] . . . For her part, Amber Lyon insists that CNN journalists and producers complained relentlessly about the type of business-driven censorship she now vocally claims was prevalent at CNN. Back in 2004, the Guardian’s Chris McGreal reported on the network’s Middle East bureau:

    “CNN sources say the network has bowed to considerable pressure on its editors. Israeli officials boast that they now have only to call a number at the network’s headquarters in Atlanta to pull any story they do not

    Lyon insists that few are willing to speak out due to fear that they will immediately be viewed as a troublemaker and made radioactive to future news employers. Several former CNN employees echoed Lyon’s experiences and complaints, but nobody other than her would speak on the record. . .
    . . . As to why Lyon has decided to disregard careerist fears, despite still being only in her 20s, she said that she hopes her act of speaking out about what she witnessed inside CNNi will lead to other journalists to do the same:

    “I want to encourage mainstream journalists to speak up when they discover their companies are misleading the people, doing PR for corporations and governments and disguising it as journalism. Many journalists get into this business, for low pay and grueling hours, because they genuinely want to make a difference, expose injustice. But what’s the point if the elephant in the room is the conduct of own company, and you ignore it?”

    Revealingly, Lyon’s purest and perhaps bravest act of journalism became possible only once she had left CNN.

    SOURCE –

    • DICKERSON3870 on September 9, 2012, 5:34 am

      P.S. A LATE SUMMER NIGHT’S MUSICAL INTERLUDE sponsored by the makers of new Ziocaine Über-Xtreme® (It’ll knock you effing senseless!™), and especially dedicated to South Florida’s very own Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen:

      Well, it’s of a bold reporter whose story I will tell
      He went down to the Cuban land, the nearest place to hell
      He’d been there many times before, but now the law does say
      The only way to Cuba is with the CIA

      William Worthy isn’t worthy to enter our door
      Went down to Cuba, he’s not American anymore
      But somehow it is strange to hear the State Dep’t say
      You are living in the free world, in the free world you must stay

      Five thousand dollars or a five year sentence may well be
      For a man who had the nerve to think that travelin’ is free
      Oh why’d he waste his time to see a dictator’s reign
      When he could have seen democracy by travelin’ on to Spain? . . .

      …So, come all you good travelers and fellow-travelers, too
      Yes, and travel all around the world, see every country through
      I’d surely like to come along and see what may be new
      But my passport’s disappearing as I sing these words to you

      Well, there really is no need to travel to these evil lands
      Yes, and though the list grows larger you must try to understand
      Try hard not to be surprised if someday you should hear
      The whole world is off limits, visit Disneyland this year…

      • Phil Ochs: “Ballad of William Worthy” (From the 1964 album, “All The News That’s Fit To Sing”.) [VIDEO, 02:16] –

    • DICKERSON3870 on September 9, 2012, 5:55 pm

      Phil Ochs: There But for Fortune, 2010, NR 96 min.
      Fiercely devoted to championing peace and social justice, folk singer Phil Ochs rose to fame at the height of the 1960s protest movements, yet his incisive lyrics and resonant melodies remain relevant for audiences today. This film tells his story.
      Cast: Joan Baez, Arthur Gorson, Tom Hayden, Judy Henske, Christopher Hitchens, Jac Holzman, Michael Ochs, Sean Penn
      Director: Kenneth Bowser
      Netflix formats: DVD and streaming
      • Netfix listing –
      • Internet Movie Database –
      Phil Ochs: There But for Fortune (Documentary) trailer HD [VIDEO, 02:10] –
      ON YouTube: PBS American Masters – Phil Ochs: There but for Fortune (2011) [VIDEO, 1:23:08] –

  11. tear-stained uzi on September 8, 2012, 8:12 pm

    Just to narrowly focus on the question of efficacy: why would it be a better strategy for the US to give Iran a specific red line, rather than the Administration’s current stance of ambiguity? The (insane) threat of violence is still there, but the Iranians are left to worry about how far they can push the brinksmanship. Seems like a superior strategy to me.

    Not to mention, it’s just nuts to think that any US President in history would accept having his hands tied like this in the realm of foreign policy. Congress often tries to meddle and is routinely rebuffed. At least they are a co-equal branch of the US government; who the hell does Netanyahu think he is to demand the steering wheel?

    More important: why does the Washington Post, along with the rest of our useless media, not see anything outrageous about this?

    • annie on September 8, 2012, 8:31 pm

      who the hell does Netanyahu think he is to demand the steering wheel?

      the leader of the jewish people.

      • NCINA on September 8, 2012, 11:45 pm

        He’s the democratically elected Prime Minister of Israel not the Jewish people, half of which are in the diaspora.

      • annie on September 9, 2012, 2:50 pm

        He’s the democratically elected Prime Minister of Israel not the Jewish people, half of which are in the diaspora.

        i know what he is, the question was “who does he think he is?” or did you forget “Netanyahu’s demand that the Palestinians recognize Israel as a “Jewish state” and as “the national home of the Jewish people.””

        Who made Netanyahu the leader of the Jewish people?

      • seafoid on September 9, 2012, 4:20 pm

        The leader of the Jews who don’t ever want to move to Israel. Imagine having your credit card details sequestered by a sociopath who decides to spend your money on your behalf since he knows better. That’s Bibi, King of the Jews.

      • NCINA on September 9, 2012, 6:10 pm

        I haven’t forgotten, I really do wish against all hope that the Arabs do. As a Palestinian state for Palestinian people will be recognised. Why haven’t they done this?

        Lets not forget that Gaza is 100% free of Jews and as would a future Palestinian state be. A Jewish state is not free of Arabs with 20% of its population enjoying full citizenship and full rights.
        To be fair, in his “clarification” he said/meant “Israelis not Jews.” You can make your own mind up.

      • Woody Tanaka on September 10, 2012, 8:59 am

        “…full citizenship and full rights.”


      • Donald on September 10, 2012, 8:00 pm

        “Lets not forget that Gaza is 100% free of Jews and as would a future Palestinian state be. A Jewish state is not free of Arabs with 20% of its population enjoying full citizenship and full rights.”

        What an idiotic comment. Gaza is a giant refugee camp. There were Jewish settlers who of course had the benefits of living in an apartheid state until Sharon removed them. Let the Palestinians return inside the 67 lines, back to their homeland, and then you can complain about their lack of tolerance for Jewish settlers who come in at gunpoint.

        What amazes me about rightwing Zionists is that they practice apartheid and then blame their victims for not appreciating their presence. It’s some form of mental illness.

      • bilal a on September 9, 2012, 7:52 am

        I have begun to think of the Jewish community as victims in this farce, being used by the triad of multinational banks, arms dealers, and big oil to keep the gravy train of war in the Middle East going for another near generation. Like Chommsky’s argument in Manufacturing Consent, its not so much a top down conspiracy of zionist hawks, but merely institutional economics, you dont get the funding, backing, or coalition unless you have signalled that you can execute the triad agenda.

      • NCINA on September 9, 2012, 6:15 pm

        The FBI’s own hate crimes statistics put Jews as the ethno-religious group attacked the most, ten times more than Muslims for example. On another thread I posted and completely demolished the bank and media myth. The big oil is a new one for me.
        Look at the Arab/Muslim mainstream media and discourse regarding Jews and Israel MEMRI maybe a start.

      • ColinWright on September 10, 2012, 11:00 pm

        NCINA says: “…The FBI’s own hate crimes statistics put Jews as the ethno-religious group attacked the most, ten times more than Muslims for example…”

        There are lies, damned lies, and statistics. Shortly after I got here, I pointed out all the things wrong with this claim. Go to the beginning of my posts and read forward if you’re interested.

      • tear-stained uzi on September 9, 2012, 12:52 pm

        who the hell does Netanyahu think he is to demand the steering wheel? [me]

        the leader of the jewish people. — Annie

        Clearly, my outburst was silly, considering this is the guy who infamously said, “I know what America is. America is a thing you can move very easily, move it in the right direction. They won’t get in the way.” Obviously, he feels entitled to grab the wheel away from Obama and steer the US battleship right up the Strait of Hormuz — I guess I should have used /rhetorical tags. But even if Bibi thinks he’s King David reincarnate, it’s kind of irrelevant to my main question: Is a hard ‘red line’ actually a tougher stance than ambiguity with regard to Iran? I don’t think it is, but it seems to be accepted without question by our media, which — along with Hollywood — constantly pushes the narrative of Israelis being almost supernaturally badass when it comes to all-things-military. Thus Obama always faces pressure to “listen to the Israelis, they know more than anyone else in the world about how to deal with threats, blah blah blah…”

      • annie on September 9, 2012, 2:53 pm

        i knew what you meant tear, i just couldn’t help it. what chutzpa he’s got.

    • on September 9, 2012, 1:24 pm

      A country that has ‘allowed’ NPT ‘refusnik’ Israel to steal plutonium from its nuclear plants in flagrant violation of NPT (Also selling nuclear material to NPT ‘refusnik’ India), given Israel advanced ‘Krytons’ (Nuclear warhead igniters) to perfect their nukes, ‘given’ Israel nuclear capable Tomahawk and harpoon missiles, for a few cereal box tops, and then ‘kicked the Germans in the chins’ until they agreed to provide Israel (customized) Dolfin submarines (Real cheap at the expense of the German taxpayer’s expense) with 88 cm. torpedo tubes than can (now) convieniently handle the Tomahawk cruise missie).

  12. southernobserver on September 8, 2012, 9:18 pm

    It is hard to believe that the US will start or support such a truely immoral war for no obvious strategic reason.

    Everytime I think that, I am reminded of the single stupidest battle in recent history.
    After the Peace of Nicias the Athenian’s became convinced that they needed to retaliate for various incidents. They therefore dispatched “a massive expeditionary force to attack Syracuse in Sicily ; the attack failed disastrously, with the destruction of the entire force, in 413 BC”(from W-P). What this doesn’t mention is that lots of athenians thought that it was stupid before the attack, and the city’s administrators tried to discourage it by warning of the dangers and suggesting what they thought was an impossible cost…. The Athenian neocon/washington posts/’patriots’ of the time were having nothing of this, raised denounced the cautious, raised a huge loan to pay for a very large force and went ahead. As it eventuated sensible anti-neocons of the day would have been better to say nothing— the loss of a smaller force would have been less of a total disaster, wouldn’t have bled them to defenselessness.

  13. NickJOCW on September 8, 2012, 9:34 pm

    Remarks about Obama needing to grow a sack and attacks on his apparent absence of response to Netanyahu’s slights overlook the fact that the unhealthy influence Israel exercises over US policy is seeping out of the closet. It would not have been possible for Obama to have persuaded an otherwise preoccupied public of something his patience is allowing them to discover for themselves. Israeli-type influence really only succeeds if it operates behind the scenes. Netanyahu’s chutzpah is his Achilles heel and by the time Obama re-enters the White House it will be fully exposed for all to see and mock while Obama continues irreproachably innocent but with an extra dimension of public support at his back.

  14. ColinWright on September 9, 2012, 1:53 am

    “a clear public statement by Mr. Obama of a willingness to take military action if Iran crosses certain “red lines” in its nuclear program.”

    It would be a first: with the possible exception of the Spanish-American War, we’ve never undertaken military action on such frivolous grounds — and interestingly, never quite so far away. Iran is almost exactly on the opposite side of the planet from us.

    In particular, we have never attacked a nation solely because of a professed fear it was acquiring nuclear weapons (even Iraq had quite a few other boxes ticked). We didn’t attack Russia when it developed them, nor China, nor India, nor Israel, nor Pakistan, nor North Korea.

    But we are to attack Iran. Why? Is there some study showing bombing improves a nation’s attitude? Did we become more amenable to reason in consequence of Pearl Harbor? Perhaps 9/11 — that may be the example they have in mind. Obviously, bombing Iran is going to make her more conciliatory. It’s perfectly logical.

    ‘Red line’ my ass. The only ‘red line’ that should be drawn is one for Israel, and it should be drawn right about where she attacks Iran. (Actually, I’d draw it somewhere else entirely, but let’s just assume we’re merely trying to avoid a major disaster for ourselves and the world.)

    • on September 9, 2012, 7:39 pm

      OK, listen up – Here’s the deal. Israel turns all of its nukes and 20%+ plutonium to the NPT/IAEA brothers (Gasp, this is what eventually sunk Gaddafi!) and the Middle East is declared a nuclear free zone. The US guarantees the safety of all nations in this ‘ticking time bomb’ region. The Jews withdraw 100% from their so-called Judea and Samaria regions and all Arabs that had their lands stolen from them by the Zionist interlopers have their lands reurned to them or are paid current land values for what they lost. The Palestinians are given the right to return to ‘New Palestine’ only and the Jews agree to the placement of UN troops on the Palestinian/Israeli borders with each nation paying the cost the the peace-keepers equally. The ‘apartheidnik’ wall is removed within Palestine and surrounding Jerusalem. Jeruselm continues to be administered by the UN (as the Zionist ‘agreed to’ in 1948, as a condition for being admitted into the UN despite the Zionist demands that they ‘owned’ Jerusalem outright by virtue of the (so-called) facts presented in their ‘mythical’ Holy Books (Translated from the Greek by the early Herbrews that probably included some lies and half truths that tend to favor the Jews). The oil/gas resources within the three contigenous nations land and sea regions (Israel/Palestine and Lebanon) share the carbon resources based on the % of each nations area themselves and can sell/trade these resources among themselves, or commercially elsewhere, based on an agreed value formula including a resource depletion tax formula. The Golan Heights revert back to their owner Syria, and the Jews get out of the Shebba Farms that they confiscated and continue to occupy ‘illegally.’ To be continued……

      • ColinWright on September 10, 2012, 10:20 pm

        What’s wrong with Israel just withdrawing to its legal borders and actually abiding by the 1947 Partition Declaration it accepted in the first place?

        I realize 90% of the Jews in Israel would have to move elsewhere in consequence — but hey. That’s what happens when you receive stolen property. No you don’t get to keep it.

  15. ColinWright on September 9, 2012, 1:58 am

    “…It also creates the bizarre spectacle of senior U.S. military and diplomatic officials focusing their time and attention on trying to prevent an Israeli attack rather than an Iranian bomb…”

    Why is that a bizarre spectacle? It suggests that at least our leaders aren’t completely frigging insane.

    An Iranian bomb is undesirable. To allow Israel to bomb Iran with our implied consent would be the greatest foreign policy disaster in our history, bar none. I cannot think of anything that even comes close.

    What’s a bizarre spectacle is a major US paper egging the US on to a course of action that is obviously and necessarily grossly self-destructive. This makes Hearst and the Spanish American War look like responsible journalism.

    • on September 9, 2012, 12:39 pm

      So, if the UNITED SNAKES (US/Israel) want a nuclear free Middle East – why are they holding things up? Iran and the Arab League have brought this up ‘time-and time-again’ but the UNITED SNAKES seem to have a (((hearing)))) problem.

    • on September 9, 2012, 12:49 pm

      Pssst: “US Newspaper?!!!
      FYI: The US Jewish owned and operated (NY Times, WashPost, Wall Street Journal, AP, Reuters, FOX, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC (More on request) have been (((beating))) the drums of war for the Iraq, then Libyan, and now the Lebanon, Syrian and Iran aggressions – or haven’t you noticed? :)

Leave a Reply