If Netanyahu calls for an early election in Israel, as seems very likely, it would probably take place in February or March of next year – just weeks after the inauguration of the next President of the US.
Given that Netanyahu would be taking a punt about being able to win the next Israeli election, one can assume that he would at least like to achieve his goal of creating a Greater Israel by destroying Hezbollah and Hamas and Israel’s arch nemesis, Iran, before leaving office. This would mean pushing for support for an attack against Iran from the US just as soon as the US elections are over. Netanyahu would not risk assuming he was going to win the next Israeli election before demanding the US support an attack against Iran. He knows that it will be an all or nothing war for him and he is hardly going to risk everything on winning an election before going for his dream prize.
Netanyahu’s window of opportunity opens on 7 November 2012 and closes just days before the next Israeli election next February or March 2013. If Romney wins the US presidential elections then Netanyahu can be assured of Romney’s support. If Obama wins then, being a second term President with nothing to lose and his military already in place in the Gulf, Netanyahu might just get the support he needs.
3 comments:
Damian,
Mate, I find your analysis always helpful in this matter of Iran's nuclear programme and the Daleks hounding them.
I have two questions for you;
1. Could you list the arguments against an Iranian nuclear weapon programme so that others can clearly see unambiguously and perhaps 'pull their finger out' and press their leaders against a war?
2. I note your early 2013 possibility, but what contribution (if any) would the U.S economic situation have a effect at that time especially as the budget 'sequestration' is due to come into effect with concomitant effects on the Daleks blessed 'defence budget'?.
Its been widely suggested that programmes may be cancelled (hopefully the accursed F-35 fighter, so we in Australia won't have to be lumbered with it), ships and other equipment retired etc, which would diminish the Deleks capacity for a new war
(especially against one as tough and protracted as Iran).
Thanks for any thoughts on these questions.
Nylon Shirt
G'day NS. Sorry for the late response.
I guess the main question one needs to ask is simply; why? Why would Iran, a nation that hasn't invaded anyone nor has any territorial claims against its neighbours want to have a nuclear weapon? Iran is a large country that can not easily be invaded. It has nothing to fear from its neighbours. Even Saddam's interest in Iran that sparked the horrific war between the two nations, was only over some minor territorial dispute. While the dispute was minor, the cost to both sides was mamouth. I suppose it could be argued that if Iran had had a nuclear weapon then it would have deterred Saddam from attacking them. But that was then and today there are no such perils for Iran - except for Israel, which brings us full circle.
Israel's sole reason for wanting Iran out of the way is because of Iran's support for Hezbollah, an organisation that stands in the way of Israel's dream of a Greater Israel.
As for the second question; I doubt the US economic situation would be considered by either a Romney or Obama administration after the elections. Such isues are only up front at the moment because they are the issues the American people are interested in as they approach the elections. In the months leading up to any election, the candidates are only interested in what the electorate want. The candidates will promice them whatever they want but, once the election's are over, it's business as usual - and war is generally good business in the US.
Israel's sole reason for wanting Iran out of the way is because of Iran's support for Hezbollah, an organisation that stands in the way of Israel's dream of a Greater Israel.
I think the main reason is the questioning of Iran of the HolyHoax, if eventually the truth comes out the Zionist are finished tthe world will savagely turn against them yet again.
Post a Comment