≡ Menu

Israel to Demand Guarantee Obama Will Attack Iran

Bibi and barack

Bibi and Barack: ‘I’m your puppet.’ (Amos Biderman)

Israel in recent days has become a Hall of Mirrors in which wherever members of the war camp look in the media, they see an infinite regress of leaks and self-serving articles which promote the war narrative. There are about eight main talking points for war and Haaretz features two or three articles every day focussing on one point or another. Some of the articles are directly attributed to Ehud Barak, some contain arguments so clearly close to his own that you know he was the anonymous source.

*  *

Pull the string and I’ll wink at you
I’m your puppet
I’ll do funny things if you want me to
I’m your puppet
Oh, I’m yours to have and…you’ve got full control
Of your puppet

…I’ll have it snap your fingers and I’ll turn you some flips
I’m your puppet,
Oh darlin’
Listen, your every wish is my command
All you gotta do is wiggle your little hand
I’m your puppet…

Now comes even more an even deluded than normal set of declarations (Hebrew) concerning relations with the U.S. regarding Iran. The new thinking is that if the U.S. will publicly commit to a military attack against Iran in a speech to the next UN General Assembly meeting in the fall (which just so happens to fall on the eve of Yom Kippur), then Israel won’t attack Iran before the November election:

Bibi Netanyahu and Ehud Barak expect Barak Obama to declare that the U.S. would take military actions to stop Iran’s nuclear program at the UN General Assembly fall session or any other public forum before that date. This presidential commitment would prevent an Israeli attack before the November elections. Though neither the foreign ministry or prime minister’s offices would confirm this, other sources say preliminary efforts have begun with U.S. ambassador to the UN Susan Rice, who is extremely close to Obama, to coordinate such developments.

…According to a senior official in Jerusalem, if Obama does say the words Israel expects to hear, this would be a decisive contribution toward restoring Israel’s level of trust in the U.S.

It appears that Israel has had a major accident and a severe case of amnesia. Instead of being a small country in the Middle East, Israel (or its leaders) appear to believe they are Obama’s Brain . All they have to do is propose action in Israel’s interest and it’s Obama’s obligation to assent. Or in another metaphor, Obama is a mere robot and Bibi is Dr. Frankenstein his creator and programmer. That appears to be something close to the relationship Sheldon Adelson has with Mitt Romney, so I suppose it isn’t too far-fetched that Bibi believes he could enjoy the same control of Obama.

Israel is demanding something incredible: that the President of the United States should go before the UN General Assembly to essentially declare war on a member state from a UN podium. That in itself is a violation of the UN charter. Not that Israel has ever paid much attention to such niceties.

I suppose too, Israel has never heard of the term blackmail, because that’s what it’s proposing in case Obama refuses to issue such a declaration of intent to attack. It would never cross the mind of such narcissists as the prime minister and defense minister–that threatening the president of the most powerful nation on earth, if he doesn’t do what Israel wants then Israel will do something the U.S. doesn’t want–is not a nice thing.

But never fear, Israel will be sympathetic and flexible about such a declaration, which it would prefer to hear now. It understands that Obama may wish to wait till just before the elections to make it and not be prepared to do so today. That would be quite satisfactory for Israel’s sake.

There is one reason and one reason alone that Israel has taken leave of its senses in such a fashion: Obama has treated Israel like it’s a piece of fragile porcelain that could be broken with any more than the most delicate touch. Instead of bellowing his objection to war against Iran, he whispers in Bibi’s ear. This has led no less a figure than Haaretz’s managing editor, Aluf Benn, to infer that Obama really has no problem with an Iran attack. If he did, Benn reasons, Obama would speak in tones previous presidents have managed to muster when they disagreed with Israel including Carter, the first President Bush and Clinton among them. Obama has determined that only kid gloves will do for the Israelis, who in turn interpret kid gloves as carte blanche for doing and saying whatever they like in the region.

Barack Obama is personally and directly responsible for the mess that has become the Middle East. He is equally responsible for the next war, whether it’s in Iran, Syria, Lebanon or Gaza. In the Middle East, inaction can be as devastating as bad action.

{ 14 comments… add one }
  • tarak Kauff August 14, 2012, 7:12 PM

    “Barack Obama (a war criminal among other things) is personally and directly responsible for the mess that has become the Middle East. He is equally responsible for the next war, whether it’s in Iran, Syria, Lebanon or Gaza. In the Middle East, inaction can be as devastating as bad action.”
    There are others and there is a nasty history of U.S. interference in the Middle East but the above statement is absolutely true. Notice I took the liberty of adding something in parens. BTW, the Zionist use of blackmail goes back a ways. It’s not a new phenomena. American Zionists used it quite sucessfully with Harry Truman*.

    *Truman helped establish Israel (actually was the critical element in arm-twisting countries to vote for partition which was contrary to the UN Charter of self determination for native people). Zionist propaganda claimed that this support was because of deeply held beliefs in that cause (Jews were persecuted so need a country of their own). But facts are otherwise.

    Truman himself admitted in a private cabinet meeting that he is doing it for money and votes. And here is a relevant quote from a senior member of the State Department during the Truman era:

    “when the election was coming up in 1946 in New York, the group of New York Jews called upon Mr. Truman. [Alan Taylor, op. cit. p.93] Emmanuel Cellar was the head of this committee. Rabbi Steven Wise and several others were in it. They called upon Mr. Truman and said, “We have just been talking with Mr. Thomas Dewey. He is willing to come out and declare for a Jewish state, and we are going to turn our money and urge the Jews to vote for him unless you beat him to it.” Then Emmanuel Cellar pounded upon Mr. Truman’s desk and said, “And if you don’t come out for a Jewish state we’ll run you out of town.” This, I’m sure, is the threat that Mr. Truman refers to in his book, saying, “The extreme Zionists threatened me.” They were Emmanuel Cellar, Rabbi Steven Wise, etc. These are not the extreme Zionists, these are just the run of the mill Zionists. What Mr. Truman did was to cave in to these threats that they would support Mr. Dewey. In that way he got the Jewish money and the Jewish vote. His decision was not made from the point of view of what was going to result in the Middle East, but what was going on in the United States.”

    • Richard Silverstein August 15, 2012, 12:23 AM

      Do NOT put quotes around statements of mine if you are going to interpolate statements I did not make nor intend. Then it’s not a quotation but your own statement.

      This comment is entirely off topic. If you post such an off topic comment again you will be moderated.

  • lally August 14, 2012, 7:43 PM

    Richard, there’s supposed to be a Channel 10 report claiming Obama will commit to attacking a recalcitrant Iran by June 2013 if they don’t cave. Could this be the administration’s UN Trust Me! cookie?

    I’m having a difficult time wrapping my head around Obama or Rice making such an announcement before the Gerneral Assembly, but these are outrageous times.

  • John Shreffler August 15, 2012, 5:06 AM

    I fear that Obama wants the Israelis to attack before the election. If they do, the Iranians will almost certainly attack US installations or ships. provoking a severe US military response. Obama needs to be seen as acting in response to an unprovoked attack not only for reasons of domestic politics but also because the the US military doesn’t want war with Iran for an assortment of sound military reasons. That notwithstanding, the US military is ready and the type of response they have planned is one that they can pull off. That would short term ensure Obama’s reelection, as it plays to his Commander In Chief role, shifting the campaign away from the economy.

    • Fred Plester August 15, 2012, 11:24 AM

      Iran needs only a tiny bit of selective restraint in order to win prevail.
      Responding to whatever Israel does, without attacking anyone other than Israel.

  • mikael August 15, 2012, 3:41 PM

    The domestic issue is dimmed down but I belive its crusial, but the politicallife of Net/Bar is at risk. The option left for both is war, as The USA, they both are cornered by them selfs into a retoric thats has almoust no backing internationaly

    The economic downfall, is hitting Israel, and the leaders are starting to be isloated, even inside Israel, for the first time in my days on the Net, highranking Israelis is infact warning us, that I belve is true. The consequenses for Israel can be grim, what ever the outcome of the War will be, their isolation wil just escelate. Even more and harder sactions and more negative PR. And that in line with a global financial downfall, the future dont look good. But a war will devastate what ever left of credibility and suport, and drag Israel down into the finnacial abyss.

    They are indeed the people of Israels biggest threat, and I have also warned against a sivil war, the polarization inside Israel will eventualy lead to a confrontation, the ultra orthodoks against the rest.

    It does not look good, for Israel, driven down by their own leaders, like the USA, and the people will pay the prize for their wargames. As always, time and time again.


  • opep August 15, 2012, 5:08 PM

    Not much more outrageous than Colin Powell’s despicable charade in 2003 at the UN. If the sociopaths d.b.a ‘perennial victims’ snap their fingers, Obum will bark like a trained seal, as always.

    • But note the difference August 16, 2012, 10:28 PM

      “Not much more outrageous than Colin Powell’s despicable charade in 2003 at the UN.”

      Oh, it would be MUCH more outrageous.

      Powell was giving his presentation before the Security Council in an attempt to secure a UN Security Council Resolution authorizing the use of force i.e. he was attempting to claim that there was already a Clear And Present Danger faced by the entire world and therefore the Security Council had a duty to respond.

      But making Obama stand up before the UN General Assembly (which, of course, is not tasked with handling “threats to the peace”) and mouth some variation of Iran Will Do As I Tell It To Or I Will Smite It is an altogether different scenario.

      Or, put another way: it could be argued (weakly, I admit) that what Powell did was compatible with Article 51 of the UN Charter. But this proposal would see Obama in clear violation of Article 2(4) of that same Charter.

  • Davey August 15, 2012, 6:51 PM

    Is there no end to the badgering of the US by Israel? Israel discusses launching an attack on a sovereign state every day. Iran would be justified in adopting preventive war, the Bush doctrine, and attacking Israel at any point. Such an attack may be preferable to living under the threat of an attack, reinforced every day. As for Israeli extortion, it is an old sad story, used over and over and over. Obama is no mensch, for sure, and he will not save his presidency by responding meekly to these bullies. Yet, he thinks he is preserving some of the Jewish vote by treading softly and will prevail in November. It is a fatal miscalculation and we may be left a president named “Mitt” who has $100 million in his IRA, just for starters!

  • dickerson3870 August 16, 2012, 12:12 AM

    RE: The hilarious Amos Biderman sketch/cartoon, “Bibi and Barack: ‘I’m your puppet.’”

    MY COMMENT: Bibi and Barack make such a wonderful combo. Much like Salt-n-Pepa! ! ! Sara Netanyahu must be absolutely “pea green with envy” (as Scarlett O’Hara might have said).

    P.S. Bibi looks so–o–o–o–o suave and debonair with his David Niven-like pencil mustache!

    • Richard Silverstein August 16, 2012, 12:54 AM

      It’s meant as a parody of the film The Artist, which had just won an Oscar at the time the cartoon was published.

  • ernie August 16, 2012, 7:08 AM

    If Israel attacks Iran,
    Americans stand back and watch.
    Don’t get involved.

  • Olaf Brescia August 16, 2012, 10:05 PM

    Never mind the Israeli Jericho-series ballistic missile deterrent.

    Iranian F-4E Phantoms participated in the first (the first) successful attack on the Iraqi nuclear reactor, on 30-Sept 1980.

    This was followed eight (8) months later (later) by Israeli jets on 06-Jun 1981.

    The Iranians did not target the main reactor (hitting other key buildings at the site) because of radiation release concerns.

    The jet-stream over Iraq and Iran travels in a westerly-to-easterly direction.

    This was erroneously viewed by western intelligence at the time – as the as Iranians “missing” the actual reactor target.


    This successful Iranian deep-strike on the Iraqi nuclear facility has been all but forgotten by Western analysts and the Western defense press.

    Another reason to remain wary of Israeli and American neoconservative assertions of “acceptable risk(s)” in a strike or war with Iran.

    While both Iran and the United States will claim victory – a confrontation with Iran will result in the US-Navy being on the receiving end of – effectively the entire Iranian arsenal.

    Scenes will greet the public not seen since the Falklands War of 1982.

    Causing hand-over-mouth covering a gasp of shock and disbelief.

    The bulk of US-Navy battle groups, listing and on fire in the Persian Gulf…

    …indeed a sad and poignant post-mortem to Imperial recklessness and the short American century.

  • Not Gonna Happen August 16, 2012, 10:16 PM

    “Bibi Netanyahu and Ehud Barak expect Barak Obama to declare that the U.S. would take military actions to stop Iran’s nuclear program at the UN General Assembly fall session or any other public forum before that date.”

    No US President will make such a declaration before the UN General Assembly.

    Such a declaration would be a clear and unambiguous violation of Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, and would ensure that any attack would be a “war of aggression” and, therefore, a crime against humanity.

    Q: What Administration would ever countenance the idea that the President of the United States would stand up and PUBLICALLY commit himself to going down in history as a war criminal?

    The USA does many things that are gross violations of international humanitarian law, but one thing it never, ever does is “out themselves” over it, and that Netanyahu thinks he can convince this President to do so shows how deluded he is.

Leave a Comment