Posts Tagged ‘iran’

…when you get news like this:

This is the first time a conference for all of Israel’s Heads of Missions has been held. The idea is to facilitate direct dialogue with the country’s leaders, mutual updates on major diplomatic issues, and a discussion of action plans to deal with the challenges awaiting the State of Israel in the international arena in the coming year, including the Iranian threat.

Robert Stacy is pretty sure it’s on:

That which is unprecedented is never routine and seldom insignificant. If the current unrest in Iran doesn’t overthrow the Ahmadinejad regime . . . Well, put it this way: If you’re the night watchman at an Iranian nuclear facility, make sure you don’t miss a payment on your insurance premiums.

I can’t find a peep about it on Israellycool, I would have thought this would be of interest there.

Meanwhile Meryl Yourish thinks differently:

My take: It is to unify the message that Israel wants out there. Benjamin Netanyahu is the most PR-savvy Prime Minister Israel has had since Golda Meir.

Watch for the ambassadors to come back with a unified message on Israeli issues.

As for an attack on Iran: Seriously? Do you really think that Israel would recall all of her ambassadors on the eve of an attack on Iran and tell them it was going to happen? Because, gee, that’s the first thing I’d do if I were going to launch a surprise attack—tell a whole lot more people about it so they can leak it to the press.

I think it’s a win win no matter what. What we as bloggers think doesn’t matter, it’s what Iran the US and Europe will think. It could be more of a feint. Either way this is designed to provoke a reaction.

Various nations will almost certainly read things into this and make moves based upon it, these moves may aid Israel’s intelligence.

If Iran sees this as a prelude to an attack how will they respond? Will they redeploy security that is now being used to stop the growing protests? Will they attempt to move scientists and materials vital to their program? If so will they be exposed to attack or perhaps will they become detected due to movement?

Even if Israel was not planning an immediate strike a general time frame can be disseminated from such a meeting. No matter the strike is dated, this meeting will allow a coordinated message to be sent out by the various ambassadors when the time comes, if there is any kind of time frame for an attack key info can be disseminated in person, no diplomatic pouch, no electronic message to intercept etc.

No matter what, I have no doubt that Israel will act. The Jewish state is not going to allow another Shoah in the hopes that the rest of the world will like them better. Since there is no chance that America is going to act and since Europe has no power TO act even if it wants to it falls to Israel.

Logically the outcome is not in doubt, Israel has the best security force, the most efficient military for it’s size, superior intelligence and only American troops have better technology, and more direct experience in combat.

Historically the outcome is even less in doubt as the history of the Jewish state is the history of continued success.

From a Biblical viewpoint of course the outcome has no doubt provided Moses terms from the closing chapters of Deuteronomy have been met.

The real wildcard are the protests. Iran’s as a nation’s best bet to prevent an attack by Israel is the success of the protest movement. Ideally this is the best result for the entire world and would be in the best long term interests for Israel. In fact If I’m Israel I’m putting more effort into aiding the success of these protests than planning for air strikes. Such a success would break the back of Iranian puppets in Syria, Lebanon and in Hamas.

Could that be the “strike” that Israel is planning?

… on his blog tonight lgf officially jumps the shark.

Just for fun lets take a look at how long it’s been since Charles hit Hugo Chavez. The last hit is April of this year. Ol’ Hugo hasn’t done one odd thing since then, no sir.

Now lets do the same search for Sarah Palin. Take a look at the hits (to be fair there are some defenses there too) but make the comparison.

Nope Charles hasn’t changed, not one bit and we on the right are just delusional to say so.

I predict that not only will Charles become a darling of the left, but he will at some time before or when her books comes out he will be invited on MSNBC to talk about the “White Supremacist” connection to the governor. I personally would be shocked if MSNBC doesn’t pick this up sometime before the week is out.

Take care Charles. Good luck convincing your new friends that Israel is worth defending, Afghanistan is a war worth fighting, the Mohammad Cartoons are worth printing and Iran shouldn’t have the bomb.

I would have thrown in the religion of peace stuff too but for some reason you haven’t used that term since April 6th. In fact you used the term only 3 times this year so far. In 2008 it was 36 times. In 2007 it was 165 times.

Has radical Islam become proportionately less violent, have they decided to treat women better or stop killing gays or are not preaching holy war or the death of people like Ayaan Hirsi Ali? Or is there another reason? Rather than speculate as others have, I’m asking directly.

WHY?

…and I agree with Ron Radosh’s article from Pajamas Media that said:

So is there any media source one can listen to on TV that is not part of the either-or mindset? Fortunately, if you get up early, there is Joe Scarborough on Morning Joe each day 6-9 am East Coast Time. He and his guests of different persuasions discuss things rationally, without screaming at each other, and in a mature and serious way. They have the kind of conversations you would have yourself with friends, probing those you disagree with and trying to reach them with arguments.

but c’mon guys! I just watched Andrea Mitchel (shudder) paint the Iran stuff as if the Administration is just getting this information and is now acting on it. Please:

One might also conclude that, since Obama says he has known about the Iranian deception at least since inauguration and possibly even during the campaign, therefore the One Himself was also lying to the American people and playing us for saps; he knew the Iranians were cheats and liars, but he told us we could trust them to honor agreements and tell the truth.

But one would be wrong… for the Obama administration (and its liberal allies) instead see the entire incident as adding to the luster of the president’s foreign-policy acumen.

Even worse Andrea sounds like Alexander Cockburn:

In reality the public disclosure of something the US knew about years ago ­ knowledge it shared with its prime Nato allies and Israel ­ changes nothing. The consensus of US intelligence remains that there is no hard evidence that Iran is actively seeking to manufacture nuclear weapons. Iran has agreed to an inspection of the plant at some appropriate point.

At least unlike Cockburn (the $10,000 man) they don’t blame Israel and even Mika is in favor of dropping the word allegedly from the building nukes.

But please, you guys are too smart to subscribe to Andrew Sullivan’s cunning plan theory.

And lets put the poll here too:

Apparently Andrea will be the first vote in favor.

Update: And don’t even get me started on the Polanski stuff, they are not covering themselves with glory over there today and the Washington post is covering themselves with even less.

Even if you give him every benefit of the doubt on the actual initial crime. He RAN.

Update 2: That’s gotta hurt.

Baldrick Hussein Obama

Posted: September 27, 2009 by datechguy in opinion/news
Tags: , , , ,

Andrew Sullivan is convinced that the events of this week involving Iran are all part of a cunning plan:

Is this weakness or is it a different avenue to strength? Politics is always about timing and context. Seeing Obama’s moves without taking into account the Bush-Cheney inheritance is to wear ideological blinkers. Obama’s promise was and is a rebranding of America (which was the primary reason I supported him). If you are an unchastened neocon you see no need to rebrand after Guantanamo, Iraq, Bagram and Abu Ghraib. But if you are capable of absorbing complicated reality, you realise that such a rebranding is essential if America is to dig itself out of the Bush-Cheney ditch and advance its interests by defter means than raw violence and occupation.

It takes a special kind of faith to actually believe this stuff, he clearly has more faith in president Obama than in well his actual faith.

But is Andrew actually smarter than the rest of us? He sure thinks so. But I leave it to you:

Update: Villainous Company reminds us that Andrew had to be persuaded that General McChrystal’s plans were cunning at all.