Obama administration's head in the sand on Iran
It is now obvious to just about everyone outside the Obama administration that effective sanctions against Iran are not on the horizon, and even if they were it is doubtful that there is sufficient time left for them to work. What could happen next? Danielle Pletka explains that Obama's treatment of Israel and Binyamin Netanyahu is not inspiring Arab confidence in America's leadership. The implications of this ostrich-like behavior are grave. Some Gulf states (including, some say, Qatar, which hosts American forces and equipment) have begun to openly propitiate the Tehran regime, anticipating its regional dominance once it is armed with nuclear weapons. Others, not reassured by Clinton drop-bys and ineffectual back-patting, have begun to explore their own nuclear option. Repeated rumors that Saudi Arabia is negotiating to buy an off-the-shelf Pakistani nuclear weapon should not be ignored.What could go wrong?
What of Israel? The mess of U.S.-Israel relations has ironically only bolstered the fears of Arab governments that the current U.S. administration is a feckless ally. If the U.S. won’t stand by Israel, by whom will it stand? Conversely, our adversaries view both the distancing from Israel and the debacle of Iran policy as evidence of American retreat. All the ingredients of a regional powder keg are in place.
Finally, there is the military option. Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu left Washington last week befuddled by Mr. Obama’s intentions on Iran. Should Israel decide to attack Iran, the shock waves will not leave the U.S. unscathed. Of course, Mr. Obama could decide that we must take action. But no one, Iran included, believes he will take action.
And so, as the failure of Mr. Obama’s Iran policy becomes manifest to all but the president, we drift toward war. The only questions remaining, one Washington politico tells me, are who starts it, and how it ends.
posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 5:30 AM
3 Comments:
Israel will have to take care of itself. If Netanyahu thought America was serious about taking on Iran, that illusion has been dispelled.
The only question left is when Israel will act to terminate the Iranian nuclear threat.
Carl, have you seen this STRATFOR piece on an Iran-US deal?
I also know from friends in the US military that Iran controls a lot more of what goes on in Iraq than most people know. (And that's the main reason violence/deaths are down in Iraq -- because Iran has backed off in return for some US concessions).
While Bush started the 'war on terror' in Afghanistan and Iraq, it's really not so limited geographically. Frankly, we're reaching the root of the issue -- the whole of Islamic fundamentals versus the Judeo-Christian West.
To win in Iraq means winning in Iran means winning against all of Islam. Obama *certainly* is not going to take the fight that far, so he has no other choice but to back out of this. Unfortunately that means weakening alliances with Israel and others in the process.
I used to think an Israeli strike on Iran would be needed to prevent nuclear proliferation. Now I view an Israeli strike on Iran as *the only* act that can save the US from our horrible foreign policy. Maybe it won't even save us, but it might slow Obama down long enough for voters to have a chance to respond before it's too late.
..if it's not too late already.
Well said!
For the most complete coverage of the Iran / Israel conflict on the net check out:
http://warsclerotic.wordpress.com
Post a Comment
<< Home