Saturday, September 1, 2012

Israel bluff to strike Iran unilaterally called by the US ? So does Israel move forward anyway or they stuck in the mud ? I say the answer can be found at the bottom of the post....


http://www.debka.com/article/22331/If-Israel-attacks-Iran-US-Mid-East-bases-will-pay-dear-%E2%80%93-Nasrallah


If Israel attacks Iran, US Mid East bases will pay dear – Nasrallah

DEBKAfile Special Report September 4, 2012, 9:57 AM (GMT+02:00)
Cutting through the US-Israeli debate over where to put “red lines” for Iran, Hizballah leader Hassan Nasrallah said Monday night, Sept. 3 that Iran would hit US bases in the Middle East in response to any Israeli strike on its nuclear facilities, even if the Americans were not involved in the attack.
Earlier Monday, the New York Times reported on the debate in the White House over whether US President Barack Obama should declare “red lines” for Iran beyond which the US would act, in response to Israel’s complaint that he has been too vague about how far Iran will be allowed to go.
But even if Obama did set a clear red line now, the NYT admits its credibility would be questionable: “The US and its allies have allowed Iran to cross seven previous red lines in 18 years."
The statement by the top US soldier, Gen. Martin Dempsey, last Thursday that America did not “want to be complicit” in an Israeli attack on Iran was interpreted by the prime movers as meaning that US-Israeli discussions in the last two weeks on where to put the "red lines" were at an impasse.
In an attempt to contain the fallout from the Dempsey comment and put the dialogue back on track, the White House is sending CIA director David Petraeus to Jerusalem for more “red line” palaver with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak.
DEBKAfile, which first disclosed his mission Sunday, Sept. 2, voiced doubts about his chances of success. Both parties to the debate know that the sands on a nuclear Iran are running out faster than they can talk. Roughly by the end of this month or early October, Iran will have enough 20-percent enriched uranium for its first nuclear bomb, overtaking any “red lines” and making them irrelevant.
Feeling the approaching heat, Netanyahu called a special cabinet meeting for Tuesday, Sept. 4 with the participation of the heads of Israel’s clandestine services, Military Intelligence, the Mossad, the Shin Bet and the Foreign Office Research Division, to hear their annual report.

It is likely to go on all day with updates on the situation in Syria, Egypt and Jordan – all weighty topics. But the agenda will certainly be topped with a detailed rundown on the current state of Iran’s nuclear program.
After that rundown, the prime minister and defense minister will enter the final decision-making stage on war against Iran.
At this critical moment, wit calculated timing, Petraeus is due to land in Israel.
Although the opponents of Netanyahu and Barak are fond of painting them as irresponsible adventurers ready to gamble with Israeli lives, it is Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei who has now raised the stakes in this game of dare and slapped down the highest cards.
The red line he instructed the head of Iran’s Lebanese surrogate Hizballah to lay down was unambiguous and designed to leap over the range of steps the US was planning short of war to “forestall an Israeli attack, while forcing the Iranians to take more seriously negotiations…”. 
Nasrallah’s pitch took the scenario straight into stage one of the war to come: “If Israel targets Iran, America bears responsibility,” he told the Beirut-based Al Mayadeen TV Monday night.
“A decision has been taken in Tehran to respond and the response will be very great,” he said, citing “Iranian officials.”
Nasrallah carried a triple message from Tehran to Washington and Jerusalem:
1.  Iran believes an Israeli attack will take place before the US presidential election on Nov. 6;
2.  Tehran is drawing on a powerful deterrent: Lest anyone expected a low-key Iranian response to an attack on its nuclear facilities, the Hizballah leader put them right when he said, “the response will be very great” and “America bears responsibility.”
3. By putting Nasrallah out front as a leading Iranian spokesman, Khamenei signaled that Hizballah would take an active role in the coming conflict.
DEBKAfile: The chatter about “red lines” in the last few days has therefore had the effect of stirring the Iranians into preempting them by a single sharp stroke.


and the beat goes on....



http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4276276,00.html


'Iran must steer clear of US interests in Gulf'

Washington reportedly sends Tehran indirect message saying it will not back Israeli strike on nuclear facilities as long as Iran refrains from attacking American facilities in Persian Gulf
Shimon Shiffer
Published: 09.03.12, 07:37 / Israel News

The United States has indirectly informed Iran, via two European nations, that it would not back an Israeli strike against the country's nuclear facilities, as long as Tehran refrains from attacking American interests in the Persian Gulf, Yedioth Ahronoth reported Monday.


According to the report, Washington used covert back-channels in Europe to clarify that the US does not intend to back Israel in a strike that may spark a regional conflict.


In return, Washington reportedly expects Iran to steer clear of strategic American assets in the Persian Gulf, such as military bases and aircraft carriers.

Israeli officials reported an unprecedented low in the two nations' defense ties, which stems from the Obama administration's desire to warn Israel against mounting an uncoordinated attack on Iran.

The New York Times reported Monday that US President Barack Obama is promoting a series of steps meant to curb an Israeli offensive against Iran, while forcing the Islamic Republic to take the nuclear negotiations more seriously.


Iranian drill in Strait of Hormuz (Photo: MCT)

One of the steps considered is "an official declaration by Obama about what might bring about American military action, as well as covert activities that have been previously considered and rejected," the report said.

Several of Obama's top advisors believe that Jerusalem is seeking an unequivocal American statement regarding a US strike on Iran – should it actively pursue a nuclear bomb.

Israel hopes such a statement is made during Obama's address before the UN General Assembly on September 25.

Others in the White House said Israel is trying to drag the US into an unnecessary conflict in the Gulf.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said Monday that "There is absolutely no daylight between the United States and Israel when it comes to preventing Iran from getting a nuclear weapon."

Carney said that all options remain on the table for Iran. He said the "window for diplomacy remains open," adding that the diplomatic process remains the best way to deal with the Islamic Republic, though "that window will not remain open indefinitely."

Cyber war a go?

According to the New York Times, Washington has also sent Iran a back-channel deal suggesting they curb their nuclear ambitions, but Tehran rejected the deal, saying no agreement is possible sans lifting all West-imposed sanctions.

According to the report, the Obama administration is exploring the possibility of mounting a covert operation, as well as waging a "quiet" cyber war against Iran.

President Obama had previously rejected the notion, fearing such cyber assaults would wreak havoc on Iranian civilian life.

Later in September, the United States and more than 25 other nations will hold the largest-everminesweeping exercise in the Persian Gulf, in what military officials say is a demonstration of unity and a defensive step to prevent Iran from attempting to block oil exports through the Strait of Hormuz.

In fact, the United States and Iran have each announced what amounted to dueling defensive exercises to be conducted this fall, each intended to dissuade the other from attack.








http://www.debka.com/article/22327/US-CIA-chief-Petraeus-arrives-Monday-to-cool-Israeli-ire


US CIA chief Petraeus arrives Monday to cool Israeli ire

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report September 2, 2012, 7:27 PM (GMT+02:00)
CIA Chief David Petraeus to Turkey and Israel
CIA Chief David Petraeus to Turkey and Israel

President Barack Obama is sending CIA Director David Petraeus to Israel in a hurry Monday, Sept. 3, in an attempt to quench the flames of discord between Israel and his administration on the Iran issue. He will fly in from a visit to Ankara Sunday, where too he faces recriminations for US handling of the Syrian crisis.
Israel has a double grievance over Obama’s Iran policy: Not only does his administration spare Iran’s leaders any sense of military threat that might give them pause in their dash for a nuclear weapon, but US officials are actively preventing any Israel striking out in its own defense to dispel the dark shadow of a nuclear Iran.
Behind closed doors in Ankara Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan and President Abdullah Gul are preparing to vent their anger against the US administration for tying their hands against establishing safe havens in Syria for rebel operations against the Assad regime. The Turkish Air Force has been on standby for the last two months for this mission, along with the Saudi and UAE air forces. However, none are prepared to go forward without logistical backing from the US Air Force.
They blame Obama’s refusal to engage directly in the Syrian conflict for the escalating terrorist threats confronting Turkey from Assad’s open door to PKK (Kurdish Workers Party) bases in northern Syria and the Iraqi-Syrian-Turkish border triangle.  Turkey is also stuck with a swelling influx of Syrian refugees piling an unmanageable burden on its economy.
Israel does not expect anything useful to come out of the Petraeus visit – or even any alleviation of the bad feeling between Binyamin Netanyahu and Barack Obama. High-placed officials in Jerusalem were of the view that the CIA chief fits the US president’s bill at this time. His visit is a non-binding gesture of goodwill for Israel which does not require the White House or the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey to backtrack or apologize for his derogatory remarks about the IDF's capacity for taking Iran on. Another advantage is that any words passing between the CIA chief and Israeli leaders may be classified.
His visit to Jerusalem will therefore not stem the ill will prevailing between Jerusalem and Washington.
All the same, Prime Minister Netanyahu chose his words carefully Sunday to avoid fingering the US directly when he urged the international community to get tougher against Iran, saying that without a "clear red line," Tehran will not halt its nuclear program. He was addressing the weekly cabinet meeting in Jerusalem.



"I believe that the truth must be said, the international community [not the US] is not drawing a clear red line for Iran, and Iran does not see international determination to stop its nuclear program," Netanyahu said.
 "Until Iran sees this clear red line and this determination, it will not stop its advancement of the Iranian nuclear program. Iran must not have a nuclear weapon," he declared.
Earlier Sunday, DEBKAfile reported:  Slashed US military input shortens Israel's notice of Iranian missile launch.


and Israel steps up its rhetoric....


Slashed US military input shortens Israel’s notice of Iranian missile launch

DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis September 2, 2012, 9:28 AM (GMT+02:00)
US and Israeli defense chiefs far apart.
US and Israeli defense chiefs far apart.


Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak are silent in the face of the avalanche of bad news coming in from official Washington.
The Patriot anti-missile systems scheduled for what was to have been the biggest joint US-Israel anti-missile drill in October will remain packed in tarpaulin because they come without crews; even one – much less two - Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense warships may not be dispatched to Israeli waters; and the number of US servicemen sent over for the annual exercise is to be cut by more than two-thirds to 1,500.
This downgrade of US participation in an annual war exercise with Israel is more than striking. It adds up to the dismemberment by the Obama administration of the entire intricate strategy US and Israel have built over years for the deterrence - and interception if need be - of any Iranian/Hizballah/Syrian missile assault on Israel.
The inferences are cruel: The US defense or second-strike elements - which had been slotted into place by the military strategists of the two armies - will not be there. Their absence slashes the time available for Israel’s alarm-and-interception systems to spring into action - the moment the engines of Iranian ballistic missiles heading its way are fired - right down from the originally estimated 14 minutes' notice.
It also means that Barak’s estimate of 500 dead in the worst case of a war with Iran must go by the board.
Netanyahu and Barak have clearly been rendered speechless by the high-powered US military, diplomatic and personal onslaught on Israel and its government. Even the smooth-tongued Tzahi Hanegbi, just returned to the Likud fold, found no easy way of whitewashing the debacle. “Defense relations with the US are deeper than ever before,” he said unconvincingly in a radio interview Sunday morning, Sept. 2.
Hanegbi is in Netanyahu’s confidence. His words may signify the prime minister’s decision to bow under the onrush of Hurricane Obama. There is of course another way: He could demand a retraction from the White House of the damaging comments by Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey denigrating Israel’s military ability to seriously damage Iran’s nuclear program and his statement: “I don’t want to be complicit if they (Israel) choose to do it.”


This was a devastating detraction by America’s top soldier, who a week ago boasted he spoke regularly to Israel’s Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz, not only of Israel’s military deterrent ability but of the morality of its acting to preempt or delay a nuclear Iran.
(Collins dictionary: complicit: The fact of being an accomplice especially in a criminal act.”)
Yet US commander-in-chief, President Barack Obama and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta have chosen to let Dempsey’s words stand. The unavoidable inference is that they are complicit with Dempsey’s sentiments.
For a similarly brutal assault, the late prime minister, Mehahem Begin, reproved US Ambassador Samuel Lewis by retorting, “We are not a banana republic!” He sent his cabinet secretary Arieh Naor to recite his words in Hebrew and English to make sure they were fully understood in Washington.
By failing to follow his example, Netanyahu and Barak are bowing their heads before the Obama administration, a grave strategic error at the very moment when Israel needs to put its foot down, and one which augurs ill for the efficacy of their handling of the Iranian peril rising up just around the corner.








and......





http://original.antiwar.com/porter/2012/09/01/iaea-report-shows-iran-reduced-its-breakout-capacity/

( Despite the spin , the report from the IAEA does no support an attack on Iran.. )



IAEA Report Shows Iran Reduced Its Breakout Capacity
by , September 02, 2012
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report made public Thursday reveals that Iran has actually reduced the amount of 20-percent enriched uranium available for any possible “breakout” to weapons grade enrichment over the last three months rather than increasing it.
Contrary to the impression conveyed by most news media coverage, the report provides new evidence that Iran’s enrichment strategy is aimed at enhancing its bargaining position in negotiations with the United States rather than amassing such a breakout capability.
The reduction in the amount of 20-percent enriched uranium in the Iranian stockpile that could be used to enrich to weapons grade is the result of a major acceleration in the fabrication of fuel plates for the Tehran Research Reactor, which needs 20-percent enriched uranium to produce medical isotopes.
That higher level enriched uranium has been the main focus of U.S. diplomatic demands on Iran ever since 2009, on the ground that it represents the greatest threat of an Iranian move to obtain a nuclear weapon capability.
When 20-percent uranium is used to make fuel plates, however, it is very difficult to convert it back to a form that can enriched to weapons grade levels.
When data in the Aug. 30 IAEA report on the “inventory” of 20-percent enriched uranium is collated with comparable data in the May 25 IAEA report, it shows that Iran is further from having a breakout capability than it was three months earlier.
The data in the two reports indicate that Iran increased the total production of 20-percent enriched uranium from 143 kg in May 2012 to 189.4 kg in mid-August. But the total stockpile of 20-percent enriched uranium that could be more easily enriched to weapons grade – and which has been the focus of U.S. diplomatic demands on Iran ever since 2009 – fell from 101 kg to 91.4 kg during the quarter.
The reduction in the stockpile available for weapons grade enrichment was the result of the conversion of 53.3 kg of 20-percent enriched uranium into fuel plates – compared with only 43 kg in the previous five months.
Iran was thus creating fuel plates for its medical reactor faster than it was enriching uranium to a 20-percent level.
But although that reduction of the stockpile of enriched uranium of greatest concern to the United States was the real significance of the new report, it was not conveyed by the headlines and leads in news media coverage. Those stories focused instead on the fact that production of 20-percent enriched uranium had increased, and that the number of centrifuges at the underground facility at Fordow had doubled.
“Nobody has put out the story that their stockpile is shrinking,” said Joe Cirincione, president of the Ploughshares Fund and a leading independent specialist on nuclear weapons policy, in an interview with IPS.
David Sanger and William Broad of the New York Times asserted in an Aug. 30 story that Iran had “doubled the number of centrifuges installed” at Fordow and had “cleansed” the site where the IAEA believed there had been nuclear weapons development work. The story made no reference to fuel plates or the effective stockpile of 20-percent enriched uranium.
A second story by Sanger and Jodi Rudoren on the same day, datelined Jerusalem, was even more alarmist and inaccurate. It declared that the nuclear programme was “speeding up” and that Iran was “close to crossing what Israel has said is its red line: the capacity to produce nuclear weapons in a location invulnerable to Israeli attack.”
Reuters and AP stories also focused on the doubling of centrifuges as the main message in the IAEA report, and Reuters also said Iran “seems to be struggling to develop more efficient nuclear technology that would shorten the time it would need for any atom bomb bid”.
The Washington Post headline said that Iran was “speeding up” uranium enrichment, and the lead said Iran had “substantially increased the production of a more enriched form of uranium in recent months”. But in the second paragraph, it added, somewhat cryptically, that Iran “appeared to take steps that would make it harder to use its uranium stockpile to make nuclear bombs”.
Only a few paragraphs later was it made clear that the lead was misleading, because the IAEA had found that Iran had “converted much of the new material to metal form for use in a nuclear research reactor.” It even quoted an unnamed Barack Obama administration officials said it could not be “further enriched to weapons-grade material….”
In fact the IAEA data showed that it had converted all of the uranium enriched to 20 percent during the quarter to fuel plates, and had converted some of the production from previous quarters as well.
The media reports of a doubling of the number of centrifuges at the underground facility at Fordow were also misleading. When the information is examined more carefully, it actually provides further evidence that Iran is not striving to amass the higher level uranium needed for a breakout capability but is maneuvering to prepare for a later negotiated settlement.
Although the IAEA report shows that the number of centrifuges in place in Fordow has increased from 696 to 2,140 over the past six months, it also makes it clear that the number of centrifuges actually operating has not changed during that period.
The reason for that striking anomaly in the deployment at Fordow does not appear to be technical problems with the centrifuges. The 1,444 centrifuges that are not operating were never even connected by pipes, as the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) observed in its Aug. 30 commentary on the report.
The noncommittal character of the deployment of centrifuges at Fordow suggests that Iran has not decided whether those 1,444 centrifuges are to be committed to 3.5-percent enrichment or to 20-percent enrichment.
The Obama administration appears to understand that this uncertainty about the purpose of the centrifuges is aimed at strengthening Iran’s diplomatic hand in future negotiations. “They have been very strategic about it,” a senior U.S. official told the New York Times just before the report was made public. “They are creating tremendous capacity, but they are not using it.”
The official added, “That gives them leverage, but they think it also stops short of creating the pretext for an attack.”
Cirincione agrees with that senior official’s analysis. “The Iranians are excellent chess players. They are moving their pieces very carefully,” he said. “They are continuing to enhance the value of their bargaining chips.”
The implication of the IAEA report, Cirincione believes, is that Iran is still maneuvering to position itself for a more advantageous agreement in future negotiations. “If you were the Iranians, why would you negotiate right now?” asked Cirincione. “You would want to wait for a better deal.”
In previous rounds of negotiations with Iran in 2012, the United States demanded an end to all 20-percent enrichment and even the closure of the Fordow facility but offered no alleviation of the harsh financial sanctions now being imposed Inter Press Service on Iran.

and....

http://www.timesofisrael.com/iran-to-hold-massive-air-defense-drill-in-october/





Iran to hold massive air defense drill in October

Maneuver, including army, air force, and Revolutionary Guards, to coincide with timetable of a much-speculated possible Israeli strike

 September 1, 2012, 5:10 pm 37

Iran's Revolutionary Guard on parade (photo credit: YouTube image capture)
Iran's Revolutionary Guard on parade (photo credit: YouTube image capture)






Iran will hold a massive air defense drill in October incorporating aerial and ground forces, Iranian air defense commander Brigadier General Farzad Esmaili announced on Saturday.

Esmaili said that the maneuver will include all of the Iranian army’s air defense systems, as well as Iranian air force fighter jets, and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, Iranian state news agency Press TV reported.
According to Press TV, “one of the initiatives in the drill will be… preparing the air defense personnel for the management of crisis.”
Reuters quoted Esmaili telling Iranian newspaper Hamshahri on Friday, ”Today our systems are prepared in a serious way for modern air threats, such that the performance of the systems compared to the previous profile has improved.”
The announcement of Iran’s air defense drill comes amid rising tensions between Iran and the West over its unsanctioned nuclear program.
The scheduling of the military drill, the second major exercise in two months, coincides with the speculated timetable of a possible Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities before the US presidential elections in November.
The announcement also came a day after Time reported that an American-Israeli military drill scheduled for next month was scaled back by Washington. The Austere Challenge 12 exercise, which is also to be held in October, was to feature thousands of soldiers and advanced anti-missile defense systems and simulate simultaneous fire from Iran and Syria. It is going ahead as planned, but on a smaller scale.
and...











http://www.debka.com/article/22324/US-disowns-Israel-over-Iran-strike-No-weapons-or-military-backup


US disowns Israel over Iran strike: No weapons or military backup

DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis September 1, 2012, 10:04 AM (GMT+02:00)
Putin gave Obama more time
Putin gave Obama more time

US Gen. Martin Dempsey’s assertion Thursday, Aug. 30 that the US would not be “complicit” in an Israel strike against Iran, together with the drastic reduction in the scale of next month’s joint US-Israeli war game disclosed by TIME, add up to a blunt message from US President Barack Obama to Israel: You are on your own! See how you manage without special US weapons and US military backup, including a shield against missile counter-attack, if you decide to defy us and go through with a military operation against Iran.
Instead of the 5,000 US troops originally assigned for Austere Challenge 12, the annual joint exercise, the Pentagon will send only 1,200 to 1,500 service members. The missile interception systems at the core of the joint exercise will be reduced in number and potency: Patriot anti-missiles will come without crews and maybe one instead of two Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense warships, according to the magazine.

DEBKAfile’s military sources: The Obama administration has put Israel on harsh notice that an attack on Iran to disrupt or delay its nuclear armament will be refused US missile backup - both in the course of the operation and to cover Israel’s back in the event of a counter-strike widening into a general Middle East conflict. The Netanyahu government will bear full and exclusive responsibility for the consequences of attacking Iran.

Obama, who has repeatedly pledged his commitment to Israeli security, is the first American president to cut Israeli adrift against a major threat to its security explicitly posed by Iran. 

The US president has put his campaign for reelection next month at great albeit calculated risk. His rival Mitt Romney will not doubt follow up on the charges he made during his acceptance speech to the Republican convention Thursday that Obama threw “allies like Israel under the bus” and failed utterly to stop Iran’s centrifuges spinning.

Obama may find the Jewish vote and campaign contributions fading. For Romney an incumbent president  throwing Israel to the wolves against the ayatollahs is a dream come true.
Binyamin Netanyahu and his defense minister Ehud Barak must bear some of the onus for one of the most damaging ruptures US-Israel relations have ever faced - as will be discussed later. However, the prime cause must be sought elsewhere.
In the last month, Obama has undergone a change of face: The top US soldier and ambassador Dan Shapiro were told to start treating Israel like a pest and telling its leaders that the administration is fed to the teeth with their clamor for action on Iran.

This change did not come out of the blue. DEBKAfile’s Washington and Moscow sources report it evolved from three events:
1. During this month, President Vladimir Putin severed Russia’s military ties with Iran and Syria as DEBKAfile reported earlier: Obama reciprocated by cutting Israel down to size. Moscow informed Tehran and Damascus that there would be no more Russian arms supplies after the delivery of the last items in the pipeline. Putin therefore left both Iran and Syria high and dry amid war dangers in return for Obama cutting Israel off from advance military hardware at a time of peril.
The Russian and American leaders thus put in place the first bricks of an accord for resolving their disputes over a nuclear Iran and the Syrian crisis by the device of slashing the military capacity of Iran, Israel and Syria.
The Russian president took another step as a gesture to Obama: He pulled Russian warships out of the Syrian base of Tartus and the eastern Mediterranean, leaving only a floating dry dock.
In return, he counted on Washington forcing Israel to abandon any plans to strike Iran.
2.  But this exercise in symmetrical reciprocity ran into a major snag: Obama found a tough nut in Jerusalem: Binyamin Netanyahu held out for a pledge of US military action against Iran as his price for holding back. Despite the massive pressure Obama threw at the Israeli government, both through the highest ranking US political and military channels and by mobilizing the government’s most vocal opponents and anti-war circles at home, Netanyahu and Barak did not budge.  
They understood, despite Obama’s concealment, that the secret US-Russian deal would in fact preserve Iran’s nuclear program at a point at which Iran’s leaders could have a weapon assembled and unsheathed at any moment.
The also realized that as long as Israel’s military option against Iran was alive, the Obama-Putin deal was stuck, because both Iran’s Ali Khamenei and Syria’s Bashar Assad would likewise refuse to fall into line.

When Romney said he would give America’s friends “more loyalty” and Putin “a little less flexibility and more backbone,” he was referring to President Obama’s request from Putin on June 18, at the G20 conference in Mexico, for more time against his promise to the Russian leader of “more flexibility” later.
To keep his deal with Putin in motion, the US president will have to tighten his squeeze on Israel’s leaders to forego an attack on Iran.
3. The Netanyahu government, for its part, committed three tactical errors:

One: They dragged out the dialogue on Iran with the US administration for far too long - three years or more – and come away for it empty-handed. If their purpose was to persuade the United States to carry the can against Iran, as many Israelis believed, they failed.  No Israeli leader has the right to procrastinate to this extent on action affecting its fundamental security, if not existence. Netanyahu fell into the trap of crying wolf by shouting year after year that Iran must be stopped – and doing nothing.Two:  Israel’s deterrent capacity, already sapped by inaction, was further eroded by US General Martin Dempsey’s assertions that Israel lacks the capacity to destroy the Iranian nuclear program.


Three:  They failed to act expeditiously to prevent the political opposition using a campaign against an attack on Iran as a stratagem for bringing the government down.
It has been four weeks since the former Mossad director Ephraim Halevi said that if he was an Iranian, he would be worried in the next twelve weeks.
That was on Aug. 2.
Thursday, Aug. 30, Halevi said: “It is important for Israel’s military threat to be credible.”

He was throwing down the gauntlet for Netanyahu and Barak to show they were serious about striking Iran – or else back down completely.
His timeline gives them another eight weeks to show their mettle. During that time, they will be under heavy bombardment from Washington.  





and.......

http://news.antiwar.com/2012/08/31/israeli-vice-pm-us-undermining-push-for-iran-war/


Israeli Vice PM: US ‘Undermining’ Push for Iran War

Officials Slam Gen. Dempsey for Opposition to Attack

by Jason Ditz, August 31, 2012


Israeli officials are, as is so often the case these days, furious at the US for what they say is an attempt to undermine their push for a war against Iran, with a number of officials taking shots at Gen. Martin Dempsey for yesterday saying he did not want the US “complicit” in such an attack.
The term “complicit” enraged a number of officials, who say that the word has “criminal connotations,” while Vice Premier Moshe Ya’alon bashed the US, accusing them of “undermining” the repeated Israeli threats to attack.
Ya’alon said he believed the US comments, which on occasion are less than enthusiastic endorsement for the attack on Iran, are “in part responsible” for Iran believing Israel’s threats are not credible, and also condemned UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon for visiting Iran to attend the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) summit in Tehran.
Israeli analysts predicted Dempsey’s comments might encourage Israel to attack unilaterally, by convincing them that the Obama Administration is unlikely to follow through on its own repeated threats to attack Iran.




and...

http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=283353


'PM tells US 'time has run out' on Iran diplomacy'

By JPOST.COM STAFF
08/31/2012 10:30

Source tells 'Yediot Aharonot' that Netanyahu initiates shouting match with US Ambassador Shapiro on Obama's Iran policy.

PM Netanyahu at defense budget cabinet meetingPHOTO: GPO / AMOS BEN-GERSHOM
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu got into a diplomatic shouting match with US Ambassador Dan Shapiro over US President Barack Obama's handling of Iran's nuclear program, saying "time has run out" for diplomacy, Yediot Aharonot cited a source as saying on Friday.
According to the report, which The Jerusalem Post could not independently verify, the showdown took place as Netanyahu met with Shapiro and Republican Congressman Mike Rogers, who visited Israel earlier in the week.








A horse and many other animals struggle to survive the aftermath of Hurricane Isaac
Saturday, September 01, 2012 8:44 AM








No comments:

Post a Comment