Panetta: Israel must bow to nuclear Iran, Islamized ME, paramount US security
We've been reading about the U.S. efforts to delay or prevent Israel defending itself agaist Iran, now we see more details emerging:
As to the secretary's argument that it would also be hard for attackers to reach Iran's nuclear installations because some of them (the centrifuge plant transferred to Fordo, near Qom) have already been moved underground, he failed to answer two key questions:
1. Why was Israel held back from carrying out a military operation when those installations were still on the surface and vulnerable?
2. By continuing to hold back Israel back, is he saying that Iran should be allowed to go all the way to manufacturing a nuclear bomb without military interference? Is the US defense secretary advising Israel to learn to live with a nuclear-armed Iran, even though its menace is constantly expanding?
Panetta did not supply an answer to either question. But he was a lot clearer on Iran's threat to American security when he said: "…any disruption of the free flow of commerce through the Persian Gulf is a very grave threat to all of us" and a redline for the US."
Was he saying that a nuclear-armed Iran was not a red line for America?
The defense secretary then offered the opinion that "sanctions and diplomatic pressure were working" to isolate Iran. DEBKAfile's Middle East sources emphasize that he would not find a single informed politician, general, intelligence official or economist in the region who agreed with him. Just the reverse: the region's leaders and international financial community report that the Islamic Republic has overcome sanctions with remarkable success and they have not slowed down its nuclear progress by a second.
In other words, it's just yet another lie.
Perhaps Panetta has not heard that Mahmoud Abbas stands by his year-long refusal to face Israel across any "damned tables" and only this week tried to manipulate the Middle East Quartet into forcing Israel to accept an indirect track.
Neither does he address the anti-Israel posture adopted by the rulers of Egypt, Turkey and Jordan to persuade their people of their affinity with the Islamist forces rising in the region, like the ultra-orthodox Salafis of Egypt.
Neither Israel, nor any of the mainstream Arab governments accept the Obama-Panetta proposition that time will magically temper the extremism of the Islamist regimes. They have before them the example of a former Democratic president, Jimmy Carter, who made the same argument 32 years ago for the West to dump the shah and welcome Khomeini's ayatollah regime.
Also see this related article:
Obama Support of "Arab Spring" - Clear Marxist Values Leading to Sharia Law
Sadly, Obama’s only “achievement,” the “Obama Doctrine” of indirect-intervention in other state’s affairs by funding indigenous rebellions is not just failed but threatens increased risk of regional conflict. Proof already exists in Egypt’s recent election where the Muslim Brotherhood have taken a large share of the recent election and now can demand shariah law.
Curiously, it is Marxism, not Islam, that stands to gain the most from such destructive chaos since Marx claimed that revolution was a precursor to the communist state. So no wonder Barrack delivers munitions and advisers to topple random governments as he believes the net result will always help his beloved socialism.
This essay examines this frightening development and asks if we really must go down this road of making the Middle East more Muslim law oriented and less Western sympathetic?
When Obama pretends that all revolution is good, he secretly invokes the spirit of communist revolution. Karl Marx taught in the Communist Manifesto that world revolution was inevitable, and that it would inevitably lead to higher human consciousness and towards and ideal economy and government. So any random Middle Eastern revolution, just like the Occupy Wall Street Marxists raging like adolescents, will still help add to the sum total of global chaos.
The Obama administration’s naïve and thoughtless leftism is also reminiscent of Jimmy Carter’s spectacular failure in auguring the Iranian Revolution and all the curses it birthed upon the world. Journalist Mike Evans describes this in Jimmy Carter: The Liberal Left and World Chaos: A Carter/Obama Plan That Will Not Work, which was detailed here: Great Highlights in Marxist “Leadership”: Or, When Change Turns Malignant.
Secretary of Defense Panetta shows how the Obama Administration is Selling out Israel...and U.S. Interests
In a major address on U S. Middle East policy to the Brookings Institution U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta gave us a clear picture of the Obama Administration’s view of the region. When taken along with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s recent speech on the same subject, we now know the following regarding Obama’s policy:
It is dangerously and absurdly wrong. This administration totally and completely, dangerously and disastrously for U.S. interests misunderstand the Middle East. They are 180 degrees off course, that is heading in the opposite direction of safety.
Despite the satisfactory state of relations on a purely military level, the Obama Administration is not a friend of Israel,
Having analyzed and studied the Middle East for almost four decades I say none of this lightly. And these conclusions arise simply from watching what the administration says and does.
In his speech, Panetta has bashed Israel based on a ridiculously false premise. Here it is:
“I understand the view that this is not the time to pursue peace, and that the Arab awakening further imperils the dream of a safe and secure, Jewish and democratic Israel. But I disagree with that view.” Nevertheless, Israel needs to take risks and particularly, “The problem right now is we can’t get them to the damn table, to at least sit down and begin to discuss their differences.”
Read the rest and file it under "Read it and Weep" category.
"Jew-hate stems from conflict"
US ambassador in Belgium provides controversial explanation for Muslim anti-Semitism
Growing global anti-Semitism is linked to Israel’s policy towards the Palestinians, the American ambassador to Belgium told stunned Jewish conference attendants in Brussels earlier this week.
A distinction should be made between traditional anti-Semitism, which should be condemned and Muslim hatred for Jews, which stems from the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, Gutman said. He also argued that an Israeli-Palestinian peace treaty will significantly diminish Muslim anti-Semitism.
Oh really? And how would he explain the invasion of Israel in 1948, when the nation was only a few hours old?
Another one for the "Read it and Weep" category.
U.S. Envoy's shocking statement on anti-Semitism
Who said, "A distinction should be made between traditional anti-Semitism, which should be condemned and Muslim hatred for Jews, which stems from the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinians?"
Was it a spokesperson for Hamas or the Muslim Brotherhood? Or perhaps the United Nations Human Rights Council made this statement in one of their infamous resolutions denouncing the state of Israel?
No, the speaker was the current United States Ambassador to Belgium, Howard Gutman. And our most esteemed Ambassador delivered this rancid jumble of hate to a stunned audience at a major Jewish conference on anti-Semitism organized by the European Jewish Union (EJU).
No one could make this up.
Just for the record, US ambassadors do not make any policy statements about Israel or anti- Semitism without each word being carefully vetted by all levels of the State Department. Yes, Madam Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, we know you approved this statement, as did the West Wing of the White House. To put it bluntly, this stinking pile of offal is the official policy of the government of the United States of America.
Obama Throwing Israel Under the Bus Again
How much more does the Obama administration need to do in order to convince leftist Jewish voters that Obama is hardly Israel's friend? I am, quite frankly, very tired of hearing my liberal Jewish friends -- in various states of denial -- insist that Obama's a really friendly fellow toward the Jewish State.
Reports the New York Times:
Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta spoke sternly on Friday to America's closest ally in the Middle East, telling Israel that it is partly responsible for its increasing isolation and that it now must take "bold action" -- diplomatic, not military - to mend ties with its Arab neighbors and settle previously intractable territorial disputes with the Palestinians.
What "bold action" is that, pray tell?
Asked specifically what Israel should do first, Mr. Panetta replied, "Get to the damn table" -- that is, return to negotiations.
Not only is Israel "partly" to blame for the attacks on its legitimacy, but it should "get to the damn table" at which the other side remains intractably absent due to unacceptable preconditions -- a situation created by Obama himself with his anti-Israel rants about settlements.
And if the other side were to come to that table, who would they be? Islamic Arabs whose faith and political charters unswervingly require the destruction of Israel and, for that matter, Jews in general.
IDF fears terror attack near Egyptian border
Tensions along the southern border remain high as IDF officials said Sunday they fear a terror attack near the Egyptian border.
Security forces have remained on high alert following August's terror attack, in which seven Israelis were killed and 31 others were wounded near a highway leading to Eilat. The IDF has deployed an unprecedented amount of troops to secure the area.
IDF Chief Benny Gantz toured the western side of the southern border after the terror attack, vowing the IDF will work with determination to foil any future attempts to harm Israel's southern residents.
Genesis 12:3 was intended for all time, all circumstances and was unconditional.
There is no reason that the U.S. should escape this warning.