As many commentators have observed, even some frustrated neoconservative writers, the release of the latest National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) has effectively precluded the US from making a first strike against Iran over Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons program.
However, while the NIE has effectively precluded the US from making the first strike, it has also achieved two other important and related potential consequences. One is that it has also now removed any lingering doubts that Russia or China may have had about not supporting any further UN sanctions against Iran while, at the same time, and because of that lack of support in the UN from the Russians and the Chinese, has placed the onus on a first strike against Iran on Israel who now seem more determined than ever to take on the task.
But it is not a task the Israelis would take on lightly. They are acutely aware that, unlike their attack on the Iraqi nuclear facility at Osirak in 1981, any attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities will require substantial help and support from the US. There is no doubt that any planning for such a raid by the Israelis will need to include US collusion and, once the initial strike by the Israelis has been made, Israel will need to rely on overt and direct US military support to prevent any counter-attack probability by the Iranians.
Clearly, the latest NIE has been deliberately released in order to allow Israel to plan on the basis that Israel will make the initial strike while the US provide all support instantly after the first strike has been made. In other words, the NIE has created a fait accompli for Israel to have no option, if it so decides, but to make the first strike. The only alternative is for Iran to be left alone since neither Russia or China are likely to support further sanctions against Iran in the light of the NIE.
One should bear in mind that Iran’s so-called nuclear weapons program is merely a casus belli to promote Israel and the US administrations real aim which is regime change in Iran.
In the end the NIE has changed nothing in terms of the endgame for both the US and Israel who want regime change in Iran. What it has done, in fact, is simply made it easier for Israel to take the decision to do the job. There is no more procrastination.
The world is a step closer to possible disaster.
AUSTRALIANS AT WAR
THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY is a compelling factual history of neoconservatism and its influence on US Foreign Policy in the Middle East during the first decade of the twenty-first century. Click on image above for details.
9 comments:
But it is not a task the Israelis would take on likely.
I think you mean 'lightly'.
You're right, I do!
Thanks.
And what do you think of Obadiah Shoher's arguments against the peace process ( samsonblinded.org/blog/we-need-a-respite-from-peace.htm )?
I’m afraid, Alex, that I don’t think much of it at all. It’s racist and smacks of pseudo God given elitism which has no place in the twenty-first century world. The current ‘peace process’ is a farce; it is propaganda designed to placate and give non-existent hope to people so that the power elites who have ulterior motives can have more time to think about their next move toward accumulating more power.
The real peace process will not begin until both sides realise that the only answer for all of the people, the Palestinians AND the Israelis, is to live in peace as equals together within a single binational state.
"is to live in peace as equals together within a single binational state"
Perhaps you actually mean onestate? That land has Jews, Muslims, and Christians - the latter are usually ignored in any calculation.
Yes - The children of Abraham sharing the land of Canaan - the only just solution to this festering blot on humanity.
You may also be interested in this essay: "The endless trail of red herrings" at humanbeingsfirst.org that coherently also makes the above case by dispelling many of the myths constructed by some of our foremost intellectuals.
Thanks.
Zahir
Project Humanbeingsfirst.org
G'day Damian,
I know this question *must'a* been asked a squillion times before, but I know of no 'good' answer; given that good people vastly outnumber the bad, why do these good people tolerate the utter badness of USrael? At the time of the run-up to Iraq I knew vastly less of 'ForPol' issues than I do now, but the so-called experts have been up to speed all along. We, the anti-wars felt strongly that the then proposed invasion of Iraq was wrong, now we've seen the aftermath, and our feelings are confirmed into knowing. Sooo, why did Germany then France flip to favour the US? *Are they corrupt?* Why is it that seemingly only Russia and China now oppose USrael?
The USrael regimes are, in many respects, indistinguishable from the 3rd Reich, in aims and actions.
I've said it literally hundreds of times, they are mass-murdering for spoil. It's simply ghastly.
I tear my hair; why are 'the goodies' as good as silent?
Or, is the world simply mad?
Zahir, one state would be the ideal but I wonder if not the Palestinian and the Israeli people need first to be able to walk in the same direction before heading off together at a leisurely trot in absolute unison.
As always Phil, it’s not so much that France and Germany have changed their minds; it’s the governments of France and Germany that have changed their minds. The people of both these nations I believe remain true to the values of those basic tenets of right and wrong as I believe the peoples the world over do. It is unfortunate that occasionally those very virtues of the good people all over the world, values which include tolerance and understanding, are exploited by governments whose only values seem to be based on greed, arrogance and hypocrisy.
So we just sit back and let the Islamofascist threat of Iran grow?
No thanks - I am all for Israel or The US taking that regime out and replacing it with democracy - or screw that, don't worry about politics and just turn the whole place into glass :-D LOL! ROFLMAO!
G'day Damian,
thanks for the explanation re: the F & D regimes, an explanation with which I can concur. Nevertheless, I will be checking with some friends in one of the mentioned countries during the next 30 days or so...
For the 'benefit' of Mr Silverstein, I have learned that neither the US nor Israel is properly democratic (as the UK and Aus also are not), since the elementary requirements of a democracy, namely a) an aware and educated electorate, b) full and fair information flows and c) a valid choice of candidates (in lieu of comprehensive referendum system vis-à-vis all important matters, i.e. war) - are all noted by their almost complete absence in those countries. Further, that the Israel Lobby, not itself representative, has a strangle-hold on USrael policy.
This means that whatever country is declared enemy, ascribing the descriptor fascist is a non sequitur, and Islamo-anything is laughable in the context of the massively continuous violations of "Thou shall not kill!" by the US and Israeli regimes (not to mention lying, thieving etc.).
Sooo (long story short), although Mr Silverstein may amuse himself with thoughts of nuking Iran, presumably in the quest for a Greater Israel for him and his ilk, or the enabling of further possibilities for oil-theft by the US kleptocracy, he should know that we the moral people of the world are watching, and have noted that the US and Israeli regimes have adopted pretty-well in full the modus operandi of the 3rd Reich.
Post a Comment