- 1
- 2
What Will Israel Do?
Sneh, like others, isn't conceding failure yet on the official Israeli and U.S. approach, which involves isolating Iran diplomatically and economically. A third U.N. Security Council resolution authorizing economic sanctions against Iran is expected to pass next year, but it is likely to be fairly hollow because of Russian and Chinese opposition. One reason for Bush's abruptly announced nine-day visit to the region in mid-January is to deal with the fallout from the NIE, which includes not only the possibility that Israel will act unilaterally but also that Bush's prized Annapolis peace process will stall. The Bush trip is, in part, an implicit concession to U.S. hawks that the NIE went too far in absolving Iran. It is also a conscious effort to reassure both Israel and the Arab states that Washington will stand up to Iran's increasing intrusiveness and hegemonic tendencies. A dominant conspiracy theory in Arab capitals in the wake of the NIE is that Washington is seeking to cut a deal with Tehran--one that would effectively allow it to keep its nascent uranium-enrichment capability--in exchange for Iranian help in stabilizing Iraq.
Bush may also reassure the Israelis and Arab allies that the NIE overstated things in letting Iran off the hook. In yet another briefing to angry congressmen Wednesday, Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell conceded that "we could have written parts of it more clearly," according to a senior congressman who was there. The ranking Republican member of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Rep. Peter Hoekstra, says he's calling for an independent commission to probe the report. "Most of the world looks at it and says it's an embarrassment to the United States because once again the U.S. intelligence community has dramatically changed its position," Hoekstra told NEWSWEEK. And it may well be that Washington must take back its words one more time to prevent the Israelis from acting on their own.
© 2007
- 1
- 2
Loading Menu
Member Comments
Posted By: new_york_loner @ 01/13/2008 10:11:38 AM
Comment: Mike Hirsh wrote, "The Israelis also know that the Arab states are terrified of an Iranian nuclear power, possibly to the point of looking the other way at another such strike."
How can Mike, or anyone else, reach that conclusion? Where's the hard evidence supporting that dangerous assumption? Justification for an Israeli strike on Iran is a shaky argument based on faulty or dubious premises, wishful thinking and pro-Israeli emotion.
We Americans have heard rosy, pre-war predictions before, from the same pro-war crowd. The Israel lobby helped push us into an ill-concieved war in Iraq.
Now, the Israel Lobby, through highly-silled shills like Mike Hirsh, is orchestrating American sympathy for any future, unilateral, Israeli aggression against Iran.
If Iran should respond to an Israeli airstrike or misslile attack, by launching a counter-attack on the Jewish State, this pro-Israel sympathy would grease the skids for US military action against Iran, as Israel would then be facing another "existential threat".
China and Russia would not sit back quietly while Uncle Sam delivers "shock and awe" destruction upon Iran. All hell could break loose quickly.
Under such dire circumstances, Israel might have the last word, by way of the Samson Option; the ensuing "Armageddon" would be a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Mike, someone needs to inform you, what's good for Israel is not always good for the USA, or for mankind. .
Posted By: Door to Perception @ 01/12/2008 1:47:45 PM
Comment: Also.... air attacks on Iran are not enough; history has proved this time and time again. Only a massive land invasion could accomplish the mission. ................... actually at this point in history we don't want Iran to go nuclear and be a dominant player because we see them as the enemy... but in fact history has shown us that we often make the wrong assessments. In the 70's we were supporting the Taliban against the Communists in Afghanistan when it turns out that the people that were closest to us (the West) were not the Taliban but the Communists. What a better place Afghanistan would be today if we had supported the Communists. And how much weaker the global Jihad movement would be!!! Similarly, in the long term the Iranians will prove to be better friends for the West than the Arabs. We should support friendship and mutual beneficial relationships between the West and Iran....
Posted By: Door to Perception @ 01/12/2008 1:42:36 PM
Comment: The NIE was a political document, drafted at the behest of the White House in order to let Bush back down from his hawkish rhetoric on Iran and his promise not to let them get the Bomb. Now he can leave office without launching a war and if the Iranians get nuclear weapons later it can be someone else's fault. Even his team of lunatics are rational enough to know that an attack on Iran by the USA would cause havoc in the Persian Gulf, the world and here at home., not to mention in Iraq. So they just don't have the stomach for it... thus they ordered a new NIE. I am surprised so few commentators point this out.