Accepting the unacceptable

It's only fair to share...Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someoneShare on Google+
iran-nuclear-bomb-3.jpg
Last weekend the mullahs took a big step towards becoming a nuclear power as they powered the Bushehr nuclear reactor. 

 

Israel’s response? The Foreign Ministry published a statement proclaiming the move “totally unacceptable.”

 

So why did we accept the totally unacceptable?

 

When one asks senior officials about the Bushehr reactor and about Iran’s nuclear program more generally, their response invariably begins, “Well the Americans…” 

 

Far from accepting that Israel has a problem that it must deal with, Israel’s decision makers still argue that the US will discover – before it is too late – that it must act to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power in order to secure its own interests. 

 

As for Bushehr specifically, Israeli officials explain that it isn’t the main problem. The main danger stems from the uranium enrichment sites. And anyway, they explain, given the civilian character of the Bushehr reactor; the fact that it is under a full International Atomic Energy Agency inspections regime; and the fact that the Russians are supposed to take all the spent fuel rods to Russia and so prevent Iran from using them to produce weapons-grade plutonium, Israel lacked the international legitimacy to strike Bushehr to prevent it from being fuelled last weekend.

 

BEFORE GOING into the question of whether or not Israel’s decision makers were correct in deciding to opt out of attacking the Bushehr reactor to prevent it from being fuelled, it is worth considering where “the Americans” stand on Iran as it declares itself a nuclear power and tests new advanced weapons systems on a daily basis.

 

The answer to this question was provided in large part in an article in the National Interest by former Clinton Administration National Security Council member Bruce Riedel. Titled, “If Israel Attacks,” Riedel — who reportedly has close ties to the administration – asserts that an Israeli military strike against Iran will be a disaster for the US. In his view, US is better served by allowing Iran to become a nuclear power than by supporting an Israeli attack against Iran. 

 

He writes, “The United States needs to send a clear red light to Israel. There’s no option but to actively discourage an Israeli attack.”

 

Riedel explains that to induce Israel to accept the unacceptable specter of a nuclear armed mullocracy, the US should pay it off. Riedel recommends plying Israel’s leaders with F-22 Stealth bombers, nuclear submarines, a mutual defense treaty and perhaps even NATO membership. 

 

Riedel’s reason for deeming an Israeli strike unacceptable is his conviction that such a strike will be met by an Iranian counter-strike against US forces and interests in the Persian Gulf and Afghanistan. While there is no reason to doubt he is correct, Riedel studiously ignores the other certainty: A nuclear-armed Iran would threaten those same troops and interests far more. 

 

Riedel would have us believe that the Iranian regime will be a rational nuclear actor. That’s the regime that has outlawed music, stones women, and deploys terror proxies throughout the region and the world. That’s the same regime whose “supreme leader” just published a fatwa claiming he has the same religious stature as Muhammed
Riedel bases this view on the actions Iran took when it was weak. 

 

Since Iran didn’t place its American hostages on trial in 1980, it can be trusted with nuclear weapons in 2010. Since Iran didn’t go to war against the US in 1988 during the Kuwaiti tanker crisis, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad can be trusted with nuclear bombs in 2010. And so on and so forth.

 

Moreover, Riedel ignores what any casual newspaper reader now recognizes: Iran’s nuclear weapons program has spurred a regional nuclear arms race. Riedel imagines a bipolar nuclear Middle East with Israel on the one side and Iran on the other. He fails to notice that already today Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Jordan, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Sudan and Turkey have all initiated nuclear programs. And if Iran is allowed to go nuclear, these countries will beat a path to any number of nuclear bomb stores.

 

Some argue that a multipolar nuclear Middle East will adhere to the rules of mutual assured destruction. Assuming this is true, the fact remains that the violent Iranian response to an Israeli strike against its nuclear installations will look like a minor skirmish in comparison to the conventional wars that will break out in a Middle East in which everyone has the bomb.

 

And in truth, there is no reason to believe that a Middle East in which everyone has nuclear weapons is a Middle East which adheres to the rules of MAD. A recent Zogby/ University of Maryland poll of Arab public opinion taken for the Brookings Institute in US-allied Arab states Egypt, Lebanon, Morocco, Saudi Arabia and the UAE shows that the Arab world is populated by jihadists. 

 

As Herb London from the Hudson Institute pointed out in an analysis of the poll, nearly 70 percent of those polled said the leader they most admire is either a jihadist or a supporter of jihad. The most popular leaders were Turkish Prime Minister Recep Erdogan, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, Ahmadinejad, Hizbullah chieftain Hassan Nasrallah, Syrian President Bashar Assad and Al Qaida leader Osama Bin Laden. 

 

So if popular revolutions bring down any of the teetering despotic regimes now occupying the seats of power in the Arab world, they will likely be replaced by jihadists. Moreover, since an Iranian nuclear bomb would empower the most radical, destabilizing forces in pan-Arab society, the likelihood that a despot would resort to a nuclear strike on a Western or Israeli target in order to stay in power would similarly rise. 

 

All of this should not be beyond the grasp of an experienced strategic thinker like Riedel. And yet, obviously, it is. Moreover, as an alumnus of the Clinton administration, Riedel’s positions in general are more realistic than those of the Obama administration. As Israeli officials acknowledge, the Obama administration is only now coming to terms with the fact that its engagement policy towards Iran has failed. 

 

Moreover, throughout the US government, the White House is the most stubborn defender of the notion that the Iranian nuclear threat is not as serious a threat as the absence of a Palestinian state. That is, President Barack Obama himself is the most strident advocate of a US Middle East policy that ignores all the dangers the US faces in the region and turns American guns against the only country that doesn’t threaten any US interest.

 

And now, facing this state of affairs, Israeli leaders today still argue that issuing a Foreign Ministry communiqué declaring the fuelling of the Bushehr nuclear reactor “unacceptable,” and beginning worthless negotiations with Fatah leaders is a rational and sufficient Israeli policy. 

 

WHAT LIES behind this governmental fecklessness?

 

There are two possible explanations for the government’s behavior. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu may be motivated by operational concerns or he may be motivated by political concerns. 

 

On the operational level, the question guiding Israel’s leaders i
s when is the optimal time to attack? The fact that government sources say that it would have been diplomatically suicidal to attack before Bushehr became operational last weekend makes it clear that non-military considerations are the determining factor for Israel’s leadership. Yet what Riedel’s article and the clear positions of the Obama administration demonstrate is that there is no chance that non-military conditions will ever be optimal for Israel. Moreover, as Israel’s 1981 attack on Iraq’s nuclear reactor shows, Israel can achieve its strategic objectives even without US support for its operations. 

 

From a military perspective, it is clear that it would have been better to strike Iran’s nuclear installations before the Russians fuelled Bushehr. Any attack scenario from now on will have to either accept the prospect of nuclear fallout or accept leaving Bushehr intact. Indeed from a military perspective, the longer Israel waits to attack Iran, the harder it will become to accomplish the mission.

 

So unless Israel’s leaders are unaware of strategic realities, the only plausible explanation for Netanyahu’s decision to sit by idly as Israel’s military options were drastically diminished over the weekend is that he was moved by domestic political considerations.

 

And what might those political considerations be? Clearly he wasn’t concerned with a lack of public support. Consistent, multiyear polling data show that the public overwhelmingly supports the use of force to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power. 

 

Then there is the issue of Netanyahu’s coalition. It cannot be that Netanyahu believes that he can build a broader coalition to support an attack on Iran than he already has by bringing Kadima into his government. Kadima leader Tzipi Livni is not a great supporter of an Israeli attack on Iran. Livni views being liked by Obama more important than preventing Iran from becoming a nuclear state.

 

The prospect of a Kadima splinter party led by former defense minister Shaul Mofaz joining the coalition is also raised periodically. Yet experience to date indicates there is little chance of that happening. Mofaz apparently dislikes Netanyahu more than he dislikes the notion of facing a nuclear-armed Iran, (and a nuclear-armed Saudi Arabia and Egypt and etc., etc., etc.).

 

Only one possibility remains: Netanyahu must have opted to sit on his hands as Bushehr was powered up because of opposition he faces from within his government. There is only one person in Netanyahu’s coalition who has both the strategic dementia and the political power to force Netanyahu to accept the unacceptable. That person is Defense Minister Ehud Barak.

 

Barak’s strategic ineptitude is legendary. It was most recently on display in the failed naval commando takeover of the Turkish-Hamas terror ship Mavi Marmara. It was Barak’s idea to arm naval commandos with paintball guns and so guarantee that they would be attacked and forced to use lethal force to defend themselves. 

 

Barak’s ability to dictate government policy was most recently demonstrated in his obscene abuse of power in the appointment of the IDF’s next chief of staff. Regardless of whether the so-called “Galant” document which set out a plan to see Maj. General Yoav Galant appointed to replace outgoing IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi was forged or authentic, it is clear that its operative clauses were all being implemented by Barak’s own office for the past several months. So too, despite the fact that the document is still the subject of police investigation, Barak successfully strong-armed Netanyahu into agreeing to his lightning appointment of Galant.

 

Even if Galant is the best candidate for the position, it is clear that Barak did the general no favors by appointing him in this manner. He certainly humiliated and discredited the General Staff. 

 

Barak is the Obama administration’s favorite Israeli politician. While Netanyahu is shunned, Barak is feted in Washington nearly every month. And this makes sense. As the man directly responsible for Israel’s defense and with his stranglehold on the government, he alone has the wherewithal to enable the entire Middle East to go nuclear.

 

How’s that for totally unacceptable?

 

Originally published in The Jerusalem Post. 

 

It's only fair to share...Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someoneShare on Google+

22 Comments

  • Perfected Democrat 08/27/2010 at 3:56

    Mr. Barak’s career is mostly grounded in his reputation as a soldier, specifically bravery on the battle field; and which while admirable, is not more uncommon than many of his contemporaries. As they say, perhaps, it’s better to be lucky than good. Unfortunately, off the battlefield he has reflected an affinity for left-leaning, appeasement style p.c. international politics. Regretfully, one might credibly make this observation about his style, that he has sometimes demonstrated a politically grounded contempt for his own countrymen not unlike that of a kapo.

    Reply
  • naomir 08/27/2010 at 8:08

    Striking before the reactor was hot would have been the obvious solution. Of course there would have been condemnation from various parties, but is this something new. In the months since Barack Obama was swept into office the US has managed to show an uncommon brand of stupidity and ineptitude towards world affairs in general and a nuclear armed Iran in particular. The cold shoulder which Israel has been given on any number of occasions by the Obama administration should certainly have been a “hint” as to what direction the relationship between the two countries was heading. That Israel has chosen to ignore the obvious is obscene and inherently dangerous not just for Israeli Jews, but for Jews everywhere. Our true friends are few and we have only ourselves to depend on.

    Reply
  • TKT 08/27/2010 at 8:50

    Once again, Caroline is absolutely right on in her analysis! We had such high hopes for Mr. Netanyahu, and I suppose it is still possible that he may still do the right thing. He needs to realize that he must rise above all political considerations and directly confront this true existential threat. But even more than that, Israel needs to turn to the one true God. He will fight Israel’s enemies. He will win the victory. Both Mr. Netanyahu and Israel need to turn to God first. If they do, then they will lead many, many more to God. And that is what Israel is called by God to do!

    Reply
  • Ben 08/27/2010 at 9:00

    At the end of the day Netanyahu, not Barak, is suppose to be in charge of Israel. I do not understand why you have consistently given Netanyahu a pass in your columns. He is an abject failure concerning Israel’s foreign policy and security. Bibi is a poltican just like any other poltican, what counts is staying in power. This is demonstrated by the fact that he made his career as a one who advocated not to negiotate with terrorists. Once in power he negiotates with them and even discusses the return of the Golan to Syria.
    Another point concerning Israel’s security is that all Israeli leaders, since Olso, have assumed that they can comprise their borders because American presidents will always be there to defend Israel. As indicated by Obama, this is not true. Moreover, if Obama and his cronies pull off an October surprise or he manages to get re-elected in 2012 (god forid) then Israel is frankly screwed.
    If Israel can’t defend itself, no one else will.

    Reply
  • thedirtyJew 08/27/2010 at 9:08

    I’m just a dirty Jew who loves his anti-Semite friends which is why I love Bibi the anti-Semite who loves his anti-Semite friends like Obama who in turn loves his anti-Semite Arab friends. The whole Israeli government (not just Barak but down to the lowliest building inspector and IDF private) hates Jews and loves Arabs also. Isn’t love wonderful!

    Reply
  • wendy 08/27/2010 at 9:13

    Recall ‘Who’s Next’,written by the very great Tom Lehrer :
    ‘First we got the bomb and that was good,
    ’cause we love peace and motherhood……
    Who’s next?
    Egypt’s gonna get one too,
    Just to drop on you-know-who.’
    Or ‘We Will All Go Together When We Go’ :
    ‘When the air becomes uranious,
    We will all go simultaneous,
    yes we will all go together when we go.’
    Ahmadinejad is pushing us all towards an explosively nuclear future.

    Reply
  • Marcel 08/27/2010 at 9:33

    The small nation of Israel is in a vise being squeezed tighter and tighter by friends while her enemies watch with anticipation.
    Israel’s God is in control and allowing this squeezing of Israel into a corner for a reason.
    You have no where to go but to Him as you now understand the idol you trusted in is useless.
    Could the holy One of Israel not make it any clearer than with a punk Chicago community organizer now overseeing Israel’s planned demise ?
    Israel was in a hopless situation here as it is now but they had a much wiser leader who was not an MIT grad.
    “”So they rose early in the morning and went out into the Wilderness of Tekoa; and as they went out, Jehoshaphat stood and said, “Hear me, O Judah and you inhabitants of Jerusalem: Believe in the LORD your God, and you shall be established; believe His prophets, and you shall prosper.” And when he had consulted with the people, he appointed those who should sing to the LORD, and who should praise the beauty of holiness, as they went out before the army and were saying:
    “Praise the LORD,
    For His mercy endures forever.”
    Now when they began to sing and to praise, the LORD set ambushes against the people of Ammon, Moab, and Mount Seir, who had come against Judah; and they were defeated.For the people of Ammon and Moab stood up against the inhabitants of Mount Seir to utterly kill and destroy them. And when they had made an end of the inhabitants of Seir, they helped to destroy one another.
    So when Judah came to a place overlooking the wilderness, they looked toward the multitude; and there were their dead bodies, fallen on the earth. No one had escaped. “””

    2 Chronicles 20:20
    God’s way is so much better than the failed road ISRAEL has chosen to walk with the punk from Chicago.
    I am sure every Israeli can feel the unrelenting and painful pressure of this ‘friendly’ vise as it dawns on Israel that none of their plans are working and everything they held solid is falling apart.
    When quisling Netanyahu gets back from Washington Israel will feel even more PRESSURE with blood ozzing out when he begins implementing his Washington master’s painful concessions for Jew’s, final solution.
    (I respect Lieberman for staying home)
    The Oberkapo Jews are all in place with treacherous betrayer Netanyahu going into secret mode and Dennis Ross and Ehud Barak to compliment Amdinejad’s quicker approach to dealing with the Jewish problem in the Islamic only Middle East.
    If Obama can sway the Muslims away from Iran’s quick kill towards the Globalists slower Road Map approach where the naive Jews are happily on board the trains to Dante’s nirvana, then they assume they will rule as kings of the world with Islam in tow and Israel no more.
    Daily everyone of your ‘friends’ keep tightening the vise on Israel to gain points with their preferred partner,Islam.
    Do you think E.U. Foreign Secretary Catherine Ashton would ever dare berate Hamas in Gaza for their long held practice of summary executions without trial instead of always going after Israel for the least non issue ?
    Of course not.
    She knows it’s much easier to stack Jews like chordwood onto trains and get away with it.
    Attempting this approach with Muslims might endanger her scrawny little neck and like everyone else in the capitulating to Islam West she’s a coward.

    Reply
  • Anthony 08/27/2010 at 11:15

    Unlike the ideological Netanyahu with a hawk for a father, Barak is a realist and I would imagine so are the IDF generals. He knows very well that a military strike would not achieve anything. Those who say it will are delusional at best, dangerous at worst.

    Reply
  • Marc Handelsman, USA 08/27/2010 at 12:44

    When Iran has its first nuclear test, perhaps Israel and the US will get a healthy dose of reality. Undoubtedly, Prime Minister Netanyahu is under enormous pressure from the Obama Administration to not destroy Iran’s nuclear reactor. That might explain Israeli governmental fecklessness with handling the Iranian situation. The main reason President Obama is stopping Israel is due to fear of Iran’s reaction to an attack. No one knows how Iran would retaliate against an attack on its nuclear reactor. And the region will pay heavily for not destroying the Bushehr reactor.

    Reply
  • James Just 08/27/2010 at 13:04

    Ms Glick,
    It is a good possibility that…
    It is a state secret that Iran had already bought the bomb years ago so that all of this anti Iranian rhetoric is a cover for what they really know about Iranian bomb making capabilities.
    Bushehr is a ruse. Bait for an Israeli attack. Netanyahu called Ahmadinejad’s bluff on Bushehr by not falling for an attack on this Potemkin village.
    Israeli intelligence on Iran is very good.
    Any anonymous attack on Iran will come from the East.
    In the short term, the best way to proceed is to assassinate the Iranian leadership and sabotage there nuclear program.
    We are concerned about the Iranian flights from Syria to Venezuela.
    Any response to Hezbullah will prompt a simultaneous attack on Iranian targets.
    All of your papers are very good. Keep in mind that the Iranians read your blog also via European IPs.
    Shalom

    Reply
  • topcopy 08/27/2010 at 13:50

    Not so fast, Caroline. Barak is every bit the abject loser you say he is, but Bibi is still the PM, and with the stakes so high Netanyahu is obliged to read him the riot act and rein him in. In the end, if a clumsy oaf like Barak outmaneuvers Bibi, what does that say about him?

    Reply
  • Bill 08/27/2010 at 14:12

    Marcel: Half or most of Israelis worship the idol of human excellence, just as half or most of Americans do. That is what liberalism is: the reliance on human calculation to maintain a harmonious existence. Such reliance is doomed to fail, because human beings cannot be relied on, only the Lord can be relied on. The idol will always disappoint, and idolaters will pay a high price for their sins, even the ultimate price of total destruction and of being blotted out forever.
    I suggest that the Hellenizers who sought to remodel Israel as a citizen of the cosmopolitan Seleucid Empire and of the even wider cosmopolitan Mediterranean civilization are the precursors of today’s secular liberal globalists. The Maccabees refused to go along, and won many great victories. May we who oppose the secular liberal globalists be worthy of calling the Maccabees our precursors!

    Reply
  • Marcel 08/27/2010 at 15:49

    ‘I suggest that the Hellenizers who sought to remodel Israel as a citizen of the cosmopolitan Seleucid Empire and of the even wider cosmopolitan Mediterranean civilization are the precursors of today’s secular liberal globalists.’
    Bill,
    Same story different time.
    Self pride really makes people blind and stupid and they make the same mistakes as those who danced around the golden calf,celebrating what they they made with their own hands.
    I’m sure it was a much prettier and glitzy calf,more appealing to look at than raggedy Moshe and it didn’t talk back about obedience to God’s law.
    That’s why modern day Israel loves America so much,they can be as corrupt and perverted as the image they serve and bow to.
    When we see the God of Israel take away Israel’s props one after another as we saw with Turkey and then Obama’s Riedel offering to throw in more useless props to tempt the idol chasers it would be comical if it wasn’t so tragic.
    The proud hearts whose god is self are destined to never awaken from their doomed destiny and will always look at we macabees with disdain.
    This is why the Barak’s and Netanyahu’s (the left &the right) lead Israel on it’s present course to great destruction.
    God will get the attention of the no longer proud,no longer self worshiping survivors but most of them will be dead by then.

    Reply
  • Anonymous 08/27/2010 at 18:31

    The root of Israel’s problem, year after year, continues to be its socialism. Because of Israel’s socialism, Israel’s economy is not strong enough to ‘go it alone’ without needing Washington’s help. Therefore Israel must kowtow to Washington’s policies, no matter how absurd or pro-Islam they become (and they are becoming more so with each generation).
    Israel can free itself of Washington’s headlock by ridding itself of Marxist/socialist ideology so that its enterpreneurs are able to create a strong, independent and vibrant economy, so that Israel is not dependent on foreign aid.

    Reply
  • jaygetpaid 08/27/2010 at 23:29

    I have one problem with this assessment.
    Israeli F-18s. Do they have the range to carry out a strike on Iran? My understanding is that the pilots would have to bail out in a potentially hostile area after their fuel runs out.
    On the other hand, Israel is receiving a shipment of F-35s in 2012, which have the range to strike anywhere in Iran with impunity and return to refuel.
    Is waiting until 2012 a risk to strike Iran? Certainly. But does Israel currently have the resources do make this trike? Not from what I can see.
    Bailing out of expensive aircraft which Israel only has a limited number of, and leaving our pilots in areas where they could potentially be killed is highly dangerous, and potentially more costly than trying to squeeze just a little more time out of this. I’m firmly convinced that the sanctions won’t work, but that they have caused Iran enough pain to allow Israel more time.

    Reply
  • Bill K. 08/28/2010 at 0:36

    I know your preferred strategy for the looming war in the Mideast is for Israel to attack Iran first and deal with Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas later. Without a doubt this is the best strategy but it looks like the Israeli leadership does not have the foresight or the confidence to follow this course.
    A less straight-forward strategy is to start decimating Iran’s minions before dealing with this source and inspiration of all the bad actors in the region. Syria is the most wobbly of these bad actors and the easiest to dispose of . No elaborate pretext is necessary to invade Syria and depose Bashar al-Assad, a murderous dictator and active threat to Israel. A totalitarian state cannot claim a right to exist since the only purpose of a state is to protect the rights of its citizens. Similarly a free state has the right to depose a dictatorship, which is a threat to all. Just a statement of these facts should suffice.
    There might be an objection that Hezbollah and Hamas might start attacking Israel at this point but this is improbable because the terrorist mindset does not work that way. Terrorism thrives on weakness and shrivels in the face of strength and determination of its foes. A swift and unapologetic attack on Syria followed by elimination of the terrorist kingpin, Assad, would be a heavy blow to their morale. Israel could drive the point home by announcing that any attack on it by Hezbollah or Hamas would result in the same fate as Syria.
    Israel would then have Lebanon surrounded on land making it much harder for Iran to re-supply its Hezbollah henchmen. The sea blockade of Gaza could be extended to Lebanon further chocking off Hezbollah. Then Iran would essentially be standing by itself in any war with Israel. An added benefit of the conquest of Syria would be the ability to situate forward operating IAF bases in the far east of that country reducing the flight time of any attack on Iran.

    Reply
  • Walter 08/28/2010 at 1:14

    Many of the things which are happening in the world today seem almost surreal, bizarre, to me.
    e.g.
    Those who embrace and love falsehood prosper.
    While those who love truth are openly castigated, and maligned.
    Surreal!
    Our creator, the God of Israel, has drawn a ‘line in the sand’ in the world today.
    That line in this world, is between Israel and ISLAM.
    Those who align themselves with, or who appease ISLAM, are standing on the wrong side of that line in the sand.
    The God of Israel has blessed his servants with sight, so that they can choose what is right.
    Our God is wise.
    All of his judgements are righteous.
    But mankind’s pride is wicked, and blind,
    …and dumb!!
    +++
    Malachi 3:14
    Ye have said, It is vain to serve God: and what profit is it that we have kept his ordinance, and that we have walked mournfully before the LORD of hosts?
    15 And now we call the proud happy; yea, they that work wickedness are set up; yea, they that tempt God are even delivered.
    16 Then they that feared the LORD spake often one to another: and the LORD hearkened, and heard it, and a book of remembrance was written before him for them that feared the LORD, and that thought upon his name.
    17 And they shall be mine, saith the LORD of hosts, in that day when I make up my jewels; and I will spare them, as a man spareth his own son that serveth him.
    18 Then shall ye return, and discern between the righteous and the wicked, between him that serveth God and him that serveth him not.
    Psalms 28:3
    Draw me not away with the wicked, and with the workers of iniquity, which speak peace to their neighbours, but mischief is in their hearts.
    4 Give them according to their deeds, and according to the wickedness of their endeavours: give them after the work of their hands; render to them their desert.
    5 Because they regard not the works of the LORD,…
    Isaiah 41:8-14
    But thou, Israel, art my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham my friend…
    Isaiah 43:1-7
    But now thus saith the LORD that created thee, O Jacob, and he that formed thee, O Israel, Fear not: for I have redeemed thee, I have called thee by thy name; thou art mine…
    Isaiah 44:1-8
    Yet now hear, O Jacob my servant; and Israel, whom I have chosen:
    Thus saith the LORD that made thee, and formed thee from the womb, which will help thee; Fear not, O Jacob, my servant; and thou, Jesurun, whom I have chosen…
    Isaiah 54:4
    Fear not; for thou shalt not be ashamed: neither be thou confounded; for thou shalt not be put to shame: for thou shalt forget the shame of thy youth, and shalt not remember the reproach of thy widowhood any more.
    5 For thy Maker is thine husband; the LORD of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called.
    6 For the LORD hath called thee as a woman forsaken and grieved in spirit, and a wife of youth, when thou wast refused, saith thy God.
    7 For a small moment have I forsaken thee; but with great mercies will I gather thee.
    8 In a little wrath I hid my face from thee for a moment; but with everlasting kindness will I have mercy on thee, saith the LORD thy Redeemer.
    Psalms 146:8
    The LORD openeth the eyes of the blind: the LORD raiseth them that are bowed down: the LORD loveth the righteous:

    Reply
  • Terry, Eilat - Israel 08/28/2010 at 2:45

    So far, Netanyahu really sucks as PM. And, I’m tired of commenting on Ehud Barak.
    To say that I’m fed up with Israeli politics & politicians is an enormous understatement, it’s closer to nauseated.

    Reply
  • Ron Grandinetti 08/28/2010 at 8:00

    Caroline, first of all Bruce Riedel is all wet. (His conviction such a strike will be met by an Iranian counter-strike against US forces and interests in the Persian Gulf and Afghanistan.)
    Good point however, the US is capable of taking care of any counter-strike. (qualify that – the US has the capability, the leadership is in question)
    Having said that what about little Hitler Ahmadinejad and the mullahs threat to wipe Israel off the map? When another member of the free world is threatened it should a great concern for all it’s members.
    Iran should be put on notice the free world will not tolerate any strike against Israel and any strike would be met with a devastating blow.
    The Israeli government needs to get it’s act together and forget about appeasing the US government especially at a time when the leadership (use that word loosely)is questionable and the so called leader embraces Islam. Obama cannot be trusted and should not be trusted.
    Although a majority of Americans support Israel not much can be said of the so called community organizer incompetent president.
    Israel has to do what is best for Israel.

    Reply
  • Marcel 08/28/2010 at 9:41

    Any astute observer can see that while Obama and the West play checkers Israel’s and America’s enemies play Tournament Chess to win.
    Iran’s president warned a few years ago that they would not wait to be attacked and would strike pre-emptivly.
    I believe him !
    What many miss is that the US is the prime target here and not Israel.
    This conflaguration will not start like many assume it will. It’s going to comes as a major shock to everyone in the sleepy West.
    China and Russia will not sit this war out.
    Checkers player Obama will give the US Naval forces in the Persian Gulf the green light to interdict Iranian ships and Iran will respond with an attack that will make Pearl Harbor look like a school yard fight.
    In one hour all of our bases surrounding Iran will be gone as will our US Naval fleet,Carriers,destroyers ect.as well as the US Mainland.
    Israel will no longer be a dependant child waiting for US permission to move. Damascus will be no more and Lebanon will be reduced to rubble and the birthplace of the Islamic Movement will be neutralized in this coming war.
    I learned this from Tanakh and it’s never been wrong unlike we mere stumbling mortals.

    Reply
  • Albrecht Klein 08/29/2010 at 6:35

    The Mullahs will not sit around and watch as the Bushehr reactor is turned into rubble. An attack on Iran will set the whole Middle East ablaze. And, who knows, perhaps Binyamin Netanyahu and Avigdor Lieberman have already told the Muslim thugs that a non-conventional attack against Israel will result in a massive retaliation against all Islamic assets (Samson Option)? And this will definitively keep the Mullahs from attacking since they want the global Ummah to prevail.

    Reply
  • Walter 08/29/2010 at 20:20

    on August 28, 2010 12:36 AM
    Bill K. said,
    “I know your preferred strategy for the looming war in the Mideast is for Israel to attack Iran first and deal with Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas later….”
    +++
    The nations of this world [Europe, the US, etc] have already, or they are in the process of, abandoning Israel to the ‘tender mercies’ of the Jihadists of the region.
    All of the many policies of these ‘civilised’ nations, towards the state of Israel, are one policy, it is a policy of appeasing wicked ISLAM’s blood-lust, at the cost of the Jewish people, and at the cost of the state of Israel.
    All of the policies of these ‘civilised’ nations [towards Israel] amount to a ‘moral’ position of,
    “Let the devil take the hindmost.”
    i.e.
    ‘We will allow ISLAM to destroy the primary object ISLAM’s ire. We will allow the ISLAMIST’s to destroy Israel, and the Jewish people.’
    These very wicked, and very short-sighted, and very cowardly policies amount to,
    “Let us feed Israel to the crocodile [ISLAM]. And then maybe the crocodile will be satisfied/placated.”
    Google,
    All nations will turn against Israel
    I have no idea what [exactly] the God of Israel intends to do to these nations.
    But speaking purely as a flawed man, if i was Israel, upon any concerted military attack upon Israel, i would seek to punish these ‘civilised’ nations, for their treachery, and for their false friendship.
    How?
    Two birds for the price of one…
    De-tooth the ISLAMIC petrodollar monster.
    AND [also…],
    Punish those ‘civilised’ nations, where it will hurt them most [i.e. in their oil dependent economies].
    http://www.carolineglick.com/e/2010/05/netanyahu-obamas-newest-prop.php#comment-52983

    Reply

Leave a Comment