US tells Israelis it won't join their war

[bemildred]

Edit: what I see here is very divided opinions about Iran, in "the West".

WASHINGTON - Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) General Martin Dempsey told Israeli leaders on January 20 that the United States would not participate in a war against Iran begun by Israel without prior agreement from Washington, according to accounts from well-placed senior military officers.

Dempsey's warning, conveyed to both Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak, represents the strongest move yet by President Barack Obama to deter an Israeli attack and ensure that the US is not caught up in a regional conflagration with Iran.

But the Israeli government remains defiant about maintaining its freedom of action to make war on Iran, and it is counting on the influence of right-wing extremist views in US politics to bring pressure to bear on Obama to fall into line with a possible Israeli attack during the election campaign this autumn.

Obama still appears reluctant to break publicly and explicitly with Israel over its threat of military aggression against Iran, even in the absence of evidence Iran has decided to build a nuclear weapon.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/NB03Ak02.html

[Owlet]

1. I can't think of anything more likely to cost Obama the election

than being pressured into a war with Iran.

But the Israeli government remains defiant about maintaining its freedom of action to make war on Iran, and it is counting on the influence of right-wing extremist views in US politics to bring pressure to bear on Obama to fall into line with a possible Israeli attack during the election campaign this autumn.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

20. Try "not coming in on Israel's side in a war between Israel and Iran".

If Israel does attack Iran, then quite apart from the worry that Obama might intervene, I think we'd need to worry that his not doing so would put the Republicans in the White House.

[Owlet]

22. Looks like it's a done deal

Obama Administration: U.S. Would ‘Come to Israel’s Defense’ If Iran Attacked It

"David Ignatius published an alarming story in today’s Washington Post, in which he quotes Leon Panetta predicting an Israeli attack on Iran in “April, May or June.”  Buried deeper within the article is an even more chilling passage:

'Administration officials caution that Tehran shouldn’t misunderstand: The United States has a 60-year commitment to Israeli security, and if Israel’s population centers were hit, the United States could feel obligated to come to Israel’s defense.'

In the context of the article, which portrays an Israeli first strike against Iran, we can only explain this statement as announcing to Iran that if it counter-strikes against Israel that the U.S. will join in the war against it.  That would help explain why the U.S. is amassing a massive amount of firepower in the Gulf including perhaps a record three carrier task forces preparing for God knows what mischief.
I can’t say clearly enough that what the U.S. has signaled in Ignatius’ report is that if Iran is attacked, it may not strike back against its attacker.  If it does, the U.S. will rain down hellfire and damnation on it.  This is frightening beyond measure.  I’ve never known the U.S. to lay down such a principle which virtually assures our joining in a war against Iran.  Israeli policymakers will be delighted to read these words.  Hawks like Bibi, Barak and Bogie Yaalon (from whom, more later) will be sharpening their spears and pruning hooks, not to mention their Jericho IIs and U.S.-supplied bunker busters."

Since this will probably result in World War III, we'll be under martial law elections will no doubt be cancelled, so we won't have to agonize over voting or not. I'm only half about this.

http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2012/02/02/obama-administration-says-u-s-would-come-to-israels-defense-if-iran-attacked-it/

[bemildred]

2. Israeli Army Chief Says Nation Needs to Build Up Military to Strike Iran

Israeli Army Chief of Staff Lieutenant-General Benny Gantz said his country must build up its military capabilities and be prepared to strike if economic sanctions fail to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

Israel must be “willing to deploy” its military assets because Iran may be within a year of gaining nuclear weapons capability, Gantz said yesterday.

Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency wrapped up a round of talks this week aimed at resolving Western suspicions that Iran is seeking to develop nuclear-bomb capability, and officials said they planned further discussions.

“There is no doubt that Iran is striving for a bomb,” Gantz said in an address to the annual Herzliya Conference at the Interdisciplinary Center academic campus north of Tel Aviv. Its activities “must be disrupted,” he said.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-01/israel-must-be-ready-to-hit-iran-if-sanctions-fail-gantz-says.html

[Jefferson23]

4. How much crazier can they be, I don't know any longer.

Israel Vice PM: Military strike can hit all of Iran's nuclear facilities

Speaking at Herzliya Conference, Moshe Ya’alon calls the possibility of a nuclear Iran a 'nightmare to the free world,' says explosion at Iranian missile base targeted missile system that would have threatened the U.S.

All of Iran's nuclear faculties are vulnerable to a military strike, Vice Prime Minister and Strategic Affairs Minister Moshe Ya’alon said on Thursday, calling the potential of a nuclear Iran a "nightmare to the free world."

At the closing day of the Herzliya Conference, Ya’alon referred to the many tools at the international community's disposal that could serve to slow down or stop Iran's advancement toward nuclear weapons capability: international pressure, economic sanctions, support of Iranian opposition, and military actions.

Speaking of the possibility of a military strike of Iran's nuclear facilities, the vice PM said that "the West has the ability to strike, but as long as Iran isn't convinced that there's a determination to follow through with it, they'll continue with their manipulations."

"The Iranians believe that a determination isn’t still there, both in regards to military action and in regards to sanctions," Ya'alon said, adding that "any facility protected by humans can be infiltrated by humans. It's possible to strike all Iran's facilities, and I say that out of my experience as IDF chief of staff."

in full: http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/israel-vice-pm-military-strike-can-hit-all-of-iran-s-nuclear-facilities-1.410626

[bemildred]

7. I guess the only real answer is to de-nuclearize the Middle East.

Or even the whole world, then everybody would be safe.
(I don't know if that is sarcasm or not, could go either way.)

[Jefferson23]

8. I am struck by the risk taking, politically.

I have already commented on how truly
insane an endeavor this would be for Israel to pursue...I stand by that.

What confounds me is the risk Israel appears to be taking with US politics. Even with
an election looming here, this seems to take the cake in the balls department. It is
one thing to beat a war drum, nothing unusual about that, but I can't ignore what
Panetta and now others are stating, implying and otherwise. Yet Israel's government
seems to be banking on political equity that even my cynicism about them, evidently
has underscored.

[bemildred]

9. Oh I quite agree.

This is nuts. There are three theories I can think of:

1.) They really intend to attack Iran: nuts.
2.) They are trying to pressure Iran WRT the inspections and negotiations (crazy guy strategy): dangerous, won't work.
3.) They are trying to influence US elections: nuts.

I figure #2 is what US is "thinking", but we are dissembling about it, and in any case it won't work because Iran is not really isolated, in fact it has lots of friends. The friends don't want Iran to get nukes either, but they don't think a pre-emptive war is the right answer.

[Jefferson23]

13. All true imo. The threat from Iran hits the MSM tonight via former police commissioner

Bill Bratton helps beat the war drum:

It's not whether they have the capability, that is a foregone conclusion...it is really about
decision making. If Ayatollah decides to activate the program they'll be ready to go in a
year...blah blah blah...can make 4 bombs currently.

With all that's going on..if I were still a police chief in the US, Los Angelos in particular
or New York, I would be ramping up our activity, watching for potential activity in my city.

Then brings up July 18, 1994...he is concerned.

[bemildred]

18. Bratton is a tool.

Stalling reform is the one thing LAPD does really well. Protecting the public and preventing crime, not so much.

[Jefferson23]

23. Is it me, or doesn't he seem like a bottom of the barrel tool?

I mean, a police commissioner? Who the hell would care what he thought?

If Israel does not acquire better assistance than this guy, perhaps Obama's
push back may start to sink in...likely false hope on my part.

[bemildred]

26. Actually, in LA police terms, he's an improvement.

He was brought in to implement reform, but has proved to be a timid soul, mainly about PR; but the scale of police violence and corruption is less (I think), so I give him some credit for that, he does not seem particularly venal.

Bill Bratton Casually Reveals To Cenk Uygur That LAPD Coordinated With The CIA

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bill-bratton-casually-reveals-to-cenk-uygur-that-lapd-coordinated-with-the-cia/

[Jefferson23]

27. Interesting bomb. I was referring to his political clout, or lack there of as I see him.

If Israel needs more cheerleaders, he seemed to me to not have an impressive position
in which to persuade anyone who was not already supportive of a strike. I should
have been more clear about that bottom of the barrel reference.

[bemildred]

28. Like I said, a timid fellow.

So that would be right. Edit: he had some cred in the honeymoon phase, but that's long gone; and then there is the whole Occupy LA embroglio, in which the entire upper part of city government went out of their way to beshit themselves in public.

Oakland PD has a seriously pissed off judge on their hands too. It's a California thing.

Judge: Oakland Police in "serious violation" of court order

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_19863456

[Jefferson23]

29. Thanks for that bemildred.

We could use more pissed off judges throughout the US too.

[bemildred]

10. I suppose I should add 4.) Trying to influence Israeli politics.

Which would be normal, sort of, a periodic occurrence, but makes a lot of other people think you are nuts.

[tabatha]

3. That is what I have been repeating.

The US does not want a war with Iran.

If it did, it would have happened under Bush.

[ellisonz]

16. +1

Ain't gonna happen. Too many interests against it.

[Jefferson23]

5. Panetta lets stand report that Israel may attack Iran by June

Washington Post opinion columnist says U.S. Defense Secretary believes there is 'strong likelihood' that Israel will attack Iran in coming months; Panetta refuses to dispute report.

By The Associated Press and Haaretz

U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta won't dispute a report that he believes Israel may attack Iran this spring in an attempt to set back the Islamic republic's nuclear program.

Panetta was asked by reporters to comment on a Washington Post opinion column by David Ignatius that said Panetta believes there is a "strong likelihood" that Israel will attack in April, May or June. Ignatius did not say who told him this.

Asked whether he disputes the report, Panetta said, "No, I'm just not commenting."

He added, "What I think and what I view, I consider that to be an area that belongs to me and nobody else."

He noted that Israel has stated publicly that it is considering military action against Iran. He said the U.S. has "indicated our concerns."

In the Washington Post piece, Ignatius writes, "Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu doesn’t want to leave the fate of Israel dependent on American action, which would be triggered by intelligence that Iran is building a bomb, which it hasn’t done yet."

"Panetta believes there is a strong likelihood that Israel will strike Iran in April, May or June — before Iran enters what Israelis described as a “zone of immunity” to commence building a nuclear bomb," Ignatius writes.

remainder: http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/panetta-lets-stand-report-that-israel-may-attack-iran-by-june-1.410680

[Jefferson23]

6. Iran working on missile that could reach the US, warns Israel

ran is working on a missile that could travel 6,000 miles, and reach the US, says Israel's vice prime minister. A mysterious explosion killed 17 on Nov. 12 at the military base in Iran where Israel says the missile is being developed.

By Jeffrey Heller, Reuters / February 2, 2012

Jerusalem

Israel said on Thursday Iran had been working on developing a missile capable of striking the United States at a military base rocked by a deadly explosion three months ago.

The blast on Nov. 12 killed 17 Iranian troops, including an officer regarded as the architect of Iran's missile defenses. Iran said at the time the explosion at the facility, 45 km (28 miles) from Tehran, was an accident and occurred during research on weapons that could strike Israel.

Vice Prime Minister Moshe Yaalon, addressing Israel's annual Herzliya security conference, challenged the Iranian account that the weapons project was focused on targeting Israel, and implied Iran was seeking to extend its strike range fourfold.

IN PICTURES: Iran's military might

He said the base was a research and development facility where Iran "was preparing to produce or develop a missile with a range of 10,000 km (6,000 miles) ... aimed at the 'Great Satan', the United States of America, and not us".

Yaalon, who is also minister of strategic affairs, gave no other details nor relate his remarks to the cause of the explosion.

Analysts currently estimate the longest range of an Iranian missile to be about 2,400 km, capable of reaching Israel and Europe. Israeli leaders are keen to persuade any allies who do not share their assessment of the risk posed by Iran that a nuclear-armed Islamic Republic would also threaten the West.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Latest-News-Wires/2012/0202/Iran-working-on-missile-that-could-reach-the-US-warns-Israel

[azurnoir]

12. Lets rachet up some fear in the US

apparently Israels appetite for war is bigger than its stomach for consequences

[Jefferson23]

14. Bigger than their desire for a peace settlement. n/t

[azurnoir]

11. If Israel wishes to start a war with Iran

so be it that is a concern for the Israeli people however if the US is expected to send US troops and even more money ie send US lives and dollars to assist a war of aggression on Israels part then that becomes another matter entirely

[Behind the Aegis]

15. I actually believe this when they say it.

I don't think the US would intervene if anything happens to Israel. I see this for what it reall is, more dick-waving, chicken-little crap (from both right and left) and it is tiresome. I am not sure who is rooting for war more, the right or the left.

[ellisonz]

17. When in doubt if to go right or left...

...go straight up the middle.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

19. Wish I could be confident of this.

But not backing up Israel in a war on Iran in an election year? I think that would cost a hell of a lot of votes, and I'm not sure Obama would do it.

[bemildred]

21. Me too.

I really don't know. Ten years ago, I would have been very skeptical. Now, it might be so, it' s quite possible you'd pick up more votes than you would lose. Most interesting election since the 70s, IMHO, coming up.

[davidpdx]

31. I feel the same way Don

If Israel attacked Obama would have two choices: 1) Stay out of it or 2) Back up Israel. Both are going to burn him hard. If he stays out of it he's attacked by Republicans as being anti-Israeli and pro-Iranian (whether it's true or not we know they would stoop that low to level those charges) and a weak president on defense. If he backed up Israel, we'd be in yet another bloody war, played by a country that calls us an ally, Obama's base would be dissatisfied as they supported getting out of Iraq and Afghanistan, and last but not least it could trigger WWIII if the Russians or Chinese entered the war.

Either way we'd be fucked.

[Jefferson23]

24. U.S. anxiety grows over possible Israeli plans on Iran

European and U.S. diplomats say Obama administration worried about Israeli leaders' provocative public comments on Iran's nuclear program.

By Reuters

The Obama administration is increasingly anxious about Israeli leaders' provocative public comments on Iran's nuclear program but does not have hard proof that it will strike Iran in the next few months, U.S. and European officials said.

The U.S. uncertainty and lack of information about Israel's plans on Iran were behind an alarming assessment of the situation reportedly voiced by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, the officials said.

David Ignatius, a Washington Post columnist who specializes in intelligence matters, reported that Panetta believed there was a "strong likelihood" that Israel would attack Iran's nuclear program within the next six months - as early as April, Ignatius wrote.

Three U.S. officials who follow the issue said their understanding was that the United States did not have concrete intelligence suggesting an attack by Israel on Iran in that time frame was likely or actively being prepared.

in full: http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/u-s-anxiety-grows-over-possible-israeli-plans-on-iran-1.410950

[Jefferson23]

25. Fear and loathing in the American Gulf

February 3, 2012

By Pepe Escobar

Persian Gulf? Khaleej-e-Fars? Forget it; time to call it the American Gulf - to the delight of the vultures, jackals and hyenas of war, Israeli and Anglo-American. The House of Saud wouldn't be too displeased either.

So much for the Pentagon's "pivoting" strategy from the Middle East to East Asia - recently announced by United States President Barack Obama. The confrontation against China starts in Southwest Asia - in the American Gulf; and goes way beyond Washington cheerleading the hardcore Sunni sectarian killers of Jundallah in Iran's Sistan-Balochistan province, Israeli Mossad agents posing as US Central Intelligence Agency operatives, serial assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists, computer viruses, and ludicrous accusations of Tehran helping al-Qaeda and vice-versa.

MOP it all up
Time to review the evidence. In roughly one month, no less than three US aircraft carriers and their strike groups will be sloshing around the American Gulf, the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea; the USS Abraham Lincoln, USS Carl Vinson and USS Enterprise, plus good ol' French nuclear-powered aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle. And yet one more Pacific-based US aircraft carrier can be swiftly dispatched.

Apart from this naval hajj of US aircraft carrier groups, the 40-year-old USS Ponce is being retrofitted into a special ops amphibious hub - to be dispatched to the American Gulf.

The Pentagon's CENTCOM is fast upgrading the 14,000-kilogram Orwellian bunker-buster monster known as Massive Ordinance Penetrator (MOP), theoretically capable of taking out Iran's underground nuclear installations.

A certain Bipartisan Policy Center's National Security Project - one of those myriad revolving doors in Washington mixing politicians and military-complex types - wants to give Israel some 200 additional MOPs and three KC-135 aerial refueling tankers to "increase the credibility of a military strike" against Iran.

DEBKA-Net is a digital front for Israeli propaganda/disinformation - so it's essentially untrustworthy. But its latest bombast deserves scrutiny. DEBKA is peddling that the Pentagon is in fast and furious mode in two strategic islands; the paradisiacal Socotra, 380 kilometers southeast of Yemen (where the Pentagon has been building a giant base since 2010); and Camp Justice in Masirah, 70 km south of the Strait of Hormuz, in Oman.

Socotra thus joins key American Gulf nodes of the US Empire of Bases such as Jebel Ali and al-Dahfra in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), al-Udeid in Qatar and Arifjan in Kuwait. It's crucial to keep in mind the extra 15,000 US troops deployed to Kuwait only a few weeks ago. The Pentagon, predictably, is thunderously mum about the build up in both Socotra and Masirah, and Yemeni and Omani officials are not talking.

in full: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/NB03Ak04.html

[Violet_Crumble]

32. Pfft. They've got to be more diplomatic in the way they ask...

I'd just sent them this. It's designed to get anyone listening wanting to kick some arse seeing as how it's from the Best Soundtrack Of All Time Bar The Sound Of Music...

[jimmie]

33. The Hand-Wringing is nauseating

" we don't want to upset the Arab street"
" it could start a war"
" hey, Israel has nukes"

Yes let's avoid the hard truths..

Ama-nut job has stated his desire for a "world without Israel"

Iran had lied repeatedly about it's nuclear intentions and finally the feckless IAEA had to admit the real intentions of Iran .

Any other country under these circumstances would be expected to protect itself .. But Israel is supposed to sit back and risk .

We heard the same " we're all doomed" handwringing before and after Israel took out the nuke factories in Syria and Iraq .

Saudi Arabia , Jordan and a host of other countries are shitting at the thought of Iran getting a nuke and are quietly encouraging Israel to take them out. Of course expect the usual crocodile tears after the fact.

And while iran may not use nukes, it's BFF Hezbollah would love to launch one south of where it lives.