Author Topic: Iran, 2; Israel 0  (Read 1312 times)

Colossus_500

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3993
  • Psalm 139
Iran, 2; Israel 0
« on: July 27, 2007, 07:44:57 AM »
Iran, 2; Israel 0
By Caroline B. Glick

Iran has built webs of alliances with other nations, alliances that have significantly deepened since last summer's war. Time for America, Israel to wake up

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | Jafar Kiani was an anonymous Iranian prisoner until earlier in the month he became the first Iranian to be stoned to death since 2002.

Iran's decision to revert to domestic barbarism is just one aspect of the regime's strategy for terrorizing its people sufficiently to quell all pockets of resistance to its rule.

The regime's determination to prevent an internal rebellion is an integral part of its larger plan to cast aside all obstacles to its acquisition of nuclear weapons.

Iran already possesses what it needs to make nuclear bombs. What it needs is time. Last summer's war against Israel was timed to provide Iran with a respite from international pressure. Hizbullah's abduction of IDF reservists Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser took place the day before the leaders of the G-8 were scheduled to discuss Iran's nuclear program. By ordering the assault on Israel, Iran diverted their attention away from its nuclear program.

Ever since the war, the Olmert government has declared that the war split the Muslim world into two camps -- the moderates and the extremists. Operating on the basis of this perceived split, Israel has sought to build a coalition with the moderates in the hopes that such a coalition will block Iran from acquiring the bomb.

A year after the war, the time has come to make a renewed assessment of the situation. Are moderates blocking Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons? If not, what has transpired?

A good place to start the analysis is with an item that appeared on both Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's to-do list this week. Both leaders telephoned Turkish Prime Minister Recip Erdogan to congratulate him on his Islamist AKP party's electoral victory on Sunday.

Turkey is perceived as the paragon of Muslim moderation. Olmert, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and President Shimon Peres have all stated that Israeldoes not have a problem with AKP's Islamist character. Indeed, in a bow towards Turkish friendship, Olmert revealed last week that Turkey has been facilitating talks between Israel and Syria towards an Israeli surrender of the Golan Heights.

Yet Ankara's readiness to encourage Israel to hand the Golan Heights over to Iran's client state does not necessarily indicate that Turkey is Israel's friend. Indeed, since the AKP rose to power in 2002, it has distanced Turkeyfrom both Israel and the US while warming Turkish relations with Iran and Syria.

Starting with Turkey's refusal to participate or support the US-led overthrow of Saddam Hussein's regime, recent years have been marked by steadily increasing Turkish hostility. Two weeks ago, to Washington's dismay, Turkey signed a $3.5 billion gas deal with Iran.

As to Israel, Erdogan was the first leader to host Hamas terror masters after the jihadist movement won the Palestinian elections in January 2006. During last summer's war, Iran shipped arms to Hizbullah through Turkey. Turkey's leaders have repeatedly declared their support for Iran's right to develop its nuclear program.

Iran's courtship of Turkey is but one aspect of its foreign policy. Over the past several years, Iran has built webs of alliances with other states, alliances that have significantly deepened since last summer's war.

In the first circle, Iran has its clients -- Syria, Hizbullah, the Shiite, (and increasingly the Sunni), militias in Iraq, and the Palestinians. Just as these forces fought together last summer, so they will fight together in the future. Ahmadinejad's visit to Damascus last weekend was strikingly similar to meetings he held with his terror underlings before last summer's war.

In its second circle, Iran has cultivated strategic ties with countries in Latin America, which led by Venezuela, share its hatred for America. These ties serve three purposes. First, they provide Iran with a global deterrent against the US. Second, they provide Iran with ready support in diplomatic forums. Third, they build support for Iran among the "progressive" set in the US and Europe.

In Iran's third circle of alliances are countries like Russia, China and Egypt. While all these states publicly oppose Iran's acquisition of nuclear weapons, they effectively block the international community from taking effective action against Iran's nuclear program.

In the meantime, Israel's coalition of moderates has failed to materialize. The leaders of the sought for coalition, Saudi Arabia and Egypt refuse to take any action against Iran. Indeed, they effectively support Teheran. In February, Saudi King Abdullah feted Ahmadinejad during a state visit. The next month, by mediating the formation of the Hamas-Fatah government, Abdullah enabled Iran's Palestinian proxy to gain control of the Palestinian Authority. As for Egypt, it is using Iran's nuclear program as cover to advance its own nuclear weapons program.

Then there are the great powers and foremost among them Russia, France and the US. Any UN action against Iran must be agreed upon by all three. And there is little chance of that ever happening.

Russia is Iran's ally. Russia supplied Hizbullah and Syria with arms and intelligence during last summer's war. In the intervening year, Russia has sold advanced weapons systems to both Iran and Syria. Last weekend's report in the Arab media regarding Iranian financing of Syrian purchases of Russian jet fighters, tanks and missiles is part of this overall picture.

Israeli analysts scoffed at the report noting that the billion dollars Ahmadinejad pledged is insufficient to purchase the weapons he outlined. But those weapons will not all be going to Syria. Last April Iran and Syriasigned an agreement essentially merging their militaries. Syria's Defense Minister Mustafa Muhammad Najjar told reporters in Damascus, "We consider the capability of the Syrian defensive forces as our own." He added that Iran, "offers all of its defense capabilities to Syria."

While Russia is selling the weapons to Syria, a Russian military official said of the aircraft, "The Syrians will be getting the top line of Russian aircraft through financing by Iran and [will] share some or most of the platforms with the Iranian air force." Jane's Defense Monthly reported that at least ten of the artillery-missile systems will also be transferred to Iran.

Russia also acts as Teheran's diplomatic shill. During a summit in Teheran last month Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said, "We do not see any kind of threat from Iran." In a subsequent visit to Israel, Lavrov insisted that Russia's arms sales pose no threat to the Jewish state, and anyway, the only way for Israel to ensure its security is to surrender the Golan Heights to Syria.

But the Olmert government refuses to acknowledge that Russia has reinstated its Cold War hostility towards Israel. It vapidly praises President Vladimir Putin for his "positive role" in the region and continues to adhere to the line that Russia will agree to UN Security Council action against Iran.

Then there is France. Last summer France displayed open hostility towards Israel in its representation of the Lebanese government in which Hizbullah was then a member at the UN ceasefire talks. On the other hand, in 2005 France joined forces with the US to expel the Syrian military from Lebanonafter the assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri.

Israel hoped that with Nicholas Sarkozy's victory in the presidential race, France would take a more pro-Israel stance. Unfortunately, the opposite occurred. Sarkozy has warmed French ties with the Iranian-Syrian-Hizbullah axis. Sarkozy legitimized all three when he invited Hizbullah representatives to participate in talks he held with Lebanese factions outside of Paris this month.

Additionally, early this month France led ten EU member states in meddling in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The foreign ministers of these largely Mediterranean EU member states sent a letter to Quartet envoy Tony Blair, demanding, among other things, that Israel agree to the deployment of international forces in Judea and Samaria, and that Hamas be invited to participate in an international conference on the issue.

As France treats with Iran on Lebanon, the US follows a similar course of engaging the mullah on Iraq. After his meeting with his Iranian counterpart in Baghdad this week, US Ambassador Ryan Crocker announced the formation of a joint US-Iranian security committee which will discuss Sunni terrorism in Iraq.

Apparently in the interest of advancing America's "security cooperation" with Iran, the State Department refused to raise the issue of the five American citizens being held hostage in Iran at the meeting. And with the prospect of diplomatic "progress" with Iran on Iraq in the air, the UScertainly doesn't want to rock the boat by pursuing the issue of Iran's nuclear weapons program.

Indeed, Iran's carrot and stick approach to powers like the US and Franceform a fourth circle of ties. Iran has worked to neutralize threats from these countries by attacking their interests in other spheres: Lebanon, in the case of France, and Iraq, in the case of the US. Given both countries enthusiasm for "engagement," it seems that the mullahs have hit on the right approach. Israel has experienced some achievements regarding Iran over the past year. The UN Security Council did pass two sanctions resolutions against Iran. With the active lobbying of opposition leader Binyamin Netanyahu, many US public employee pension funds are moving to divest from companies that do business with Iran. And this week, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced that like his predecessor Tony Blair, he will not rule out the option of using military force to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

Yet despite these achievements, Iran has made steady progress with its nuclear program. Wednesday Ahmadinejad announced, "Iran will never abandon its peaceful [nuclear] work." Sunday, a senior Iranian official told The Independent that with almost 3,000 centrifuges operating at its nuclear facility at Natanz, "We have at the moment enough centrifuges to go to a bomb."

Back in Israel, this week Olmert made clear that he wishes to advance contacts with the Palestinians towards an Israeli withdrawal from Judea and Samaria. His advisors told reporters that Olmert is moved by his desire to get beyond his failure in last year's war and the criminal investigations into his shady business dealings. He wishes to be perceived as a statesman.

Of course if Olmert truly wishes to be seen as a statesman, then he shouldn't be concerning himself with Israeli withdrawals that will only strengthen Iran. He should change his strategic focus to Iran which threatens to wipe Israel off the map.

Despite his government's protestations to the contrary, there is no coalition of moderates to work with against Iran. There is no coalition at all. And time is not in Israel's favor.

If Olmert wishes to gain the public's support, and even admiration, he must quickly build and deploy a military option for destroying Iran's burgeoning ability to destroy the State of Israel.


Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
Re: Iran, 2; Israel 0
« Reply #1 on: July 27, 2007, 08:36:13 AM »
I'll see your post and raise you one:

Idiots on the March
 
by Charley Reese
Idiots in Israel, along with those American idiots in the punditocracy who can't see where they are going because their vision is blocked by Israeli backsides, are trying to pressure our idiots in the White House to commit an act of insanity.

That act of insanity is launching a military attack against Iran because the idiots and their followers believe, despite a total lack of evidence, that Iran is pursuing a nuclear bomb. If you think the Middle East is in turmoil now, just watch what happens if idiocy prevails.

Let's review a few facts. There is no evidence that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapon. Of course the Iranians put a lot of their nuclear facilities underground. After all, they saw the Israelis – in clear violation of international law and without any evidence that Iraq was building a bomb – attack and destroy a nuclear reactor in Baghdad without a peep from the U.S.

Given how the Israelis constantly rant against Iran, Iranians would have been fools not to put as much of it as possible underground.

Iran signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Israel refuses to sign it. Iran allowed international inspectors. Israel never has. Israel has nuclear weapons – and apparently a lot of them. Iran doesn't have any, not one. If you are worried about an Islamic nuke, I remind you that Pakistan already has them. A Hindu nuke? India has them.

So Israel, Pakistan, and India all have nuclear weapons, all refused to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and all are warmly held allies of the idiots in Washington.

Here's another fact to stack against the clear evidence of insanity on the Potomac. Suppose Iran is lying about peaceful uses and does build a bomb (even the Israelis say it will take until 2009). So what? The world is full of nuclear weapons. My whole life, since the 1950s, has been lived 30 minutes away from nuclear annihilation.

People, especially in the press, tend to get hysterical about nuclear weapons. A nuclear bomb is, after all, a bomb. It has, whatever its size, a limited burst radius. Fallout is a captive of the wind. There have been lots of nuclear detonations on the ground and in the atmosphere, counting the two we dropped on Japan, plus all the nuclear tests conducted by us, the Russians, the French, and whoever else. So far as I know, the people around the world are still producing normal babies, and no giant spiders or ants have appeared over the horizon.

Furthermore, having five or six nuclear weapons does not make you a threat against a country with 200 nukes (Israel), much less the U.S., which has more than 3,000 nukes.

So let these facts settle into your head. Iran says it seeks to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes, as it is legally entitled to do under the terms of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. There is no evidence to contradict that. Iran has said repeatedly that it has no desire to acquire a nuclear weapon. It has never – despite the propaganda based on a misquotation – ever threatened Israel or the United States, or, for that matter, anyone else.

So what's afoot? I'll tell you what I think. The neocons in the U.S. and their pet bully, Israel, intend to dominate the Middle East and its oil. That means any country not run by a servile suck-up (Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, etc.) must be weakened or destroyed.

We've pretty much destroyed Iraq and Lebanon, so that leaves Syria and Iran. I imagine the neocons plan on Israel taking out Syria while the U.S. carpet-bombs Iran. The neocons are not only idiots, they are evil. They show a complete disdain for peace, a callous disregard for human life, and utter contempt for the rule of law. If that ain't evil, the devil had better retire.
 http://www.antiwar.com/reese/?articleid=11282

 

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: Iran, 2; Israel 0
« Reply #2 on: July 27, 2007, 09:04:02 AM »
Decker, this guy is an idiot. I expect much more from my sparring partner on the Left. U linked to an anti war web site. Its like me linking to Rush...I expect more from my learned left leaning colleague.
L

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
Re: Iran, 2; Israel 0
« Reply #3 on: July 27, 2007, 09:08:14 AM »
Decker, this guy is an idiot. I expect much more from my sparring partner on the Left. U linked to an anti war web site. Its like me linking to Rush...I expect more from my learned left leaning colleague.
Antiwar.com is a collection of Libertarians and not left wingers.

Charley Reese, Justin Raimando, Paul Craig Roberts and Pat Buchanan can hardly be characterized as the "Left".

I think he's much closer to the truth than whoever the hell Caroline Glick is.

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
Re: Iran, 2; Israel 0
« Reply #4 on: July 27, 2007, 09:11:28 AM »
Why is he an idiot?

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: Iran, 2; Israel 0
« Reply #5 on: July 27, 2007, 09:38:39 AM »
Let's review a few facts. There is no evidence that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapon. Of course the Iranians put a lot of their nuclear facilities underground. After all, they saw the Israelis – in clear violation of international law and without any evidence that Iraq was building a bomb – attack and destroy a nuclear reactor in Baghdad without a peep from the U.S.

Um because he said they were. International Law...please stop. We have are Constitution. The only people who follow International law...um yeah well NOBODY. Or only when it happens to mesh with their own foreign policy.


Patrick J. Buchanan hates Israel. Some of the stuff he says is fine but he becomes unhinged on Israel. This guy further says that he has lived witha nuclear threat his entire life. Ok sure but not one based on a religious ideology rather then a political one. This is the basis of my entire argumnet Decker. the Stakes have changed. We are fighting a non ideological religious war now..kinda like most of the wars prior to our own American revolution. We are no longer fighting the political war of Red vs Blue. Thats over. These guys will use their bombs or allow other non states to use their bombs and technologies. They are not afraid to die or make others suffer. Even if the threat is overblown, are u willing to take that chance. Not on your life bud.
L

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
Re: Iran, 2; Israel 0
« Reply #6 on: July 27, 2007, 10:31:21 AM »
Let's review a few facts. There is no evidence that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapon. Of course the Iranians put a lot of their nuclear facilities underground. After all, they saw the Israelis – in clear violation of international law and without any evidence that Iraq was building a bomb – attack and destroy a nuclear reactor in Baghdad without a peep from the U.S.

Um because he said they were. International Law...please stop. We have are Constitution. The only people who follow International law...um yeah well NOBODY. Or only when it happens to mesh with their own foreign policy.


Patrick J. Buchanan hates Israel. Some of the stuff he says is fine but he becomes unhinged on Israel. This guy further says that he has lived witha nuclear threat his entire life. Ok sure but not one based on a religious ideology rather then a political one. This is the basis of my entire argumnet Decker. the Stakes have changed. We are fighting a non ideological religious war now..kinda like most of the wars prior to our own American revolution. We are no longer fighting the political war of Red vs Blue. Thats over. These guys will use their bombs or allow other non states to use their bombs and technologies. They are not afraid to die or make others suffer. Even if the threat is overblown, are u willing to take that chance. Not on your life bud.
The inefficacy of International law can arguably be laid at the feet of the US.  The US uses the UN when it needs something, such as the invasion of Iraq, and ignores it for other reasons--Israel's own noncompliance with nuclear disarmament/WMD inspections.  Tell the Nazis, Milosevic, Japanese that international law meant nothing.

Our Constitution is great but it has a marginal next to invisible application/guidance to international matters.  The efficacy of any legal framework is predicated on fidelity to the rule of law. 

As we have seen with the president, he made a mockery of the law by invading Iraq.  That diminishes the power and efficacy of the international legal framework.  Everyone suffers b/c the putative big boy on the block cannot play by the rules.

The system of International law: treaties, judicial holdings etc., is not a perfect system but it is the best we have for maintaining a legal framework in place of chaos or nihilism...which is what you seem to be alluding to as the course our world is on.

I disagree with your assessment that this is a religious war between an inherently violent and irrational opponent and us.  These middle eastern clowns have been using terrorist tactics for decades...ask the Israelis about living with terrorist attacks...both receiving and giving.

Osama Bin Laden is quite clear on why Al Qaeda is attacking the US--the US's meddling in middle eastern affairs. 

Seems rational to me.

Anyways, in my mind an attack on Iran would be the crowning achievement of lethal foolishness.  The IRaqi invasion already destabalized the area by putting the Shia in control of Iraq. 

Now the US is poised to attack Iran for the same reason it invaded Iraq.  The idea that if we don't attack Iran, they'll come after us and blow us up b/c we did nothing is nonsense.

If MAD (mutually assured destruction--a rational concept) can keep India and Pakistan at bay, I'm pretty sure Iran's sense of self preservation would nip in the bud any idea of attacking the US.

The notion of Iran attacking us is beyond ludicrous.

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: Iran, 2; Israel 0
« Reply #7 on: July 27, 2007, 10:52:25 AM »
Non nation states...Iran supports terrorism and with nuclear weapons on the table, its another possible system to harm the US. I don't think we will attack Iran directly. I think we'll do it the old fashion way, from within. AQ hates us because we garrisoned troops in SA. After we were invited by them to save their sorry asses from Saddam. He hates the Saudi regime so we're another supporter..etc etc. He hates our support of Israel. Throughout the whole post your blaming the US. I'm sorry about Milosevic, we backed the wrong guys during that "war". The Europeans didn't do anything until we joined in.
L

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
Re: Iran, 2; Israel 0
« Reply #8 on: July 27, 2007, 11:00:31 AM »
Non nation states...Iran supports terrorism and with nuclear weapons on the table, its another possible system to harm the US. I don't think we will attack Iran directly. I think we'll do it the old fashion way, from within. AQ hates us because we garrisoned troops in SA. After we were invited by them to save their sorry asses from Saddam. He hates the Saudi regime so we're another supporter..etc etc. He hates our support of Israel. Throughout the whole post your blaming the US. I'm sorry about Milosevic, we backed the wrong guys during that "war". The Europeans didn't do anything until we joined in.
I would agree with most of this.

I blame the US b/c I always look at myself before others in ascribing blame.  And the pattern of US inconsistency in its foreign affairs is blameworthy.  Does that justify an attack on us?  Not in my mind.

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: Iran, 2; Israel 0
« Reply #9 on: July 27, 2007, 11:26:07 AM »
And I find that a good thing but my only real point with this and the other threads, these guys will not stop until we're all glowing and I would hate to see us fall because we didn't wack a guy around abit or scare him with a dog. Better a"manmid" then a suitcase nuke in Deckers back yard.
L

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
Re: Iran, 2; Israel 0
« Reply #10 on: July 27, 2007, 11:48:01 AM »
And I find that a good thing but my only real point with this and the other threads, these guys will not stop until we're all glowing and I would hate to see us fall because we didn't wack a guy around abit or scare him with a dog. Better a"manmid" then a suitcase nuke in Deckers back yard.
I believe that sound police work will stop suitcase bombs from going off in my backyard.

It is one thing to game about worst possible scenarios, it is another to build policy around that 'sky is falling' notion.

I don't think this battle with terrorists can be won by military attrition.  I still think it's a police matter.

Have a great weekend HH.  If you have time off, enjoy it.  See you monday.

Al-Gebra

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5927
Re: Iran, 2; Israel 0
« Reply #11 on: July 27, 2007, 12:06:51 PM »

Olmert is an embarrassment. 

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: Iran, 2; Israel 0
« Reply #12 on: July 27, 2007, 12:11:54 PM »
You to Decker..and yes he's been a train wreck.
L