Israel; Obama’s Red-Headed Step Child
In the past couple of days, more has come to light with Obama’s stance, or lack there of, for support of Israel, compared to the rest of the Middle East and in particular, Iran and Palestine.
The Obama administration, namely Rahm Emanuel, also holds similar beliefs, which may strike some as odd, due to the fact that Rahm is Jewish. However, Rahm insisted on Monday that the only way to thwart Iran’s nuclear threat and resolve relations with the Middle East would come to fruition through Palestinian-Israeli talks.
Israeli TV stations had reported Monday night that Emanuel had actually linked the two matters, saying that the efforts to stop Iran hinged on peace talks with the Palestinians. The remarks were reportedly made in a closed-door meeting previous day with 300 major AIPAC donors on Sunday.
Last month, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned Israel that it risks losing Arab support for combating threats from Iran if it rejects peace negotiations with the Palestinians.
Clinton said Arab nations had conditioned helping Israel counter Iran on Jerusalem’s commitment to the peace process.
Meanwhile, in an interview with the Jerusalem Post on Sunday, former US House speaker Newt Gingrich blasted the Obama administration for setting itself on a collision course with Israel and endangering the Jewish state.
He called US President Barack Obama’s program of engagement with Iran a “fantasy,” and his Middle East policies “very dangerous for Israel.” He summed up Obama’s approach as “the clearest adoption of weakness since Jimmy Carter.”
And Newt is right, we should have learned our lesson after Carter, but we didn’t. One could then argue that we should have learned it after Clinton tried this same peace treaty mumbo-jumbo between Palestine and Israel. (The Oslo Accord in 1993 and the Wye River Memorandum). Later we came to find out that Yasir Arafat spoke out of both sides of his mouth and eventually was caught speaking at PLO and Hamas engagements/rallies. (But by then he had already received the Nobel Peace Prize)
If liberals are so adamant about the United States staying out of the business of other nations (their biggest qualm for the last 8 years was Iraq and forcing democracy) then why is forcing a treaty, peace, or a recognized state on a nation ok?
What causes those that are so progressive to think that Iran and other nations, that have continuously ranted and raved about the Jews and Israel, would ever want peace? Middle Eastern history has a very large Nazi influence and therefore, they have called for the extermination of Jews, and the West. There is something seriously wrong with a situation in which people cannot call a spade a spade and see the threat that is in front of their very eyes.
Take for example the latest; Ahmadinejad went on another tirade about Israel yesterday:
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad slammed Zionism as “occupation” and “aggression” Tuesday as he delivered his latest diatribe against the Jewish state on a visit to key Middle East ally Syria.
Zionism is merely the recognition of the Jewish state based on biblical times. The state of Israel was promised to the Jews before WWII and before others in the Middle East occupied the region. Israelis do not try to force themselves onto other nations by attempting to conquer the rest of the Middle East or enforce their religion on others – that’s the main difference and the reason why Ahmadinejad cannot be taken seriously.
“The Zionist occupiers are destructive microbes, because Zionism itself is occupation, aggression, the use of assassination and annihilation,” he told a joint news conference with President Bashar al-Assad in the Syrian capital.
“Zionism was created to threaten us. To support the Palestinian resistance is a humanitarian and popular obligation,” Ahmadinejad said in remarks in Farsi that were translated into Arabic.
“Syria and Iran are united in supporting the Palestinian resistance.”
The Iranian president’s comments came barely two weeks after he sparked a European walkout from a UN anti-racism conference in Geneva by equating Zionism with racism.
This intolerance does not help the cause in the Middle East and it only raises more eyebrows from the majority of the public who do not define themselves as progressive or liberal. This is not the way to show you are ready for peace. Even if some peace accord was met, it would be hard for me to believe that Iran and others would not continue to hold their “thousand” year grudge against Israel and have the same anti-Semitic sentiments.
Ahmadinejad asked why it was the Islamist Hamas movement which controls Gaza that is blacklisted by the European Union and the United States, and not Israel after its devastating offensive against the territory at the turn of the year.
“They’ve attacked Gaza, killing people in their own land and massacring women and children… and yet it’s the Palestinians they accuse of terrorism,” he complained.
Maybe because Israel didn’t initiate attacks? Maybe they retaliated in a more powerful way to stop the thousands of missiles from entering their country and endangering their citizens? Hamas sent over 3,000 missiles into Israeli airspace over the course of last year.
Israelis have also evacuated the Gaza strip and it is Palestinians that use their own for propaganda purposes reporting deaths in the region and accuse Israelis of those crimes. The main difference between Hamas and the Palestinians and the Israelis is that Israelis do not use women and children as shields, they use themselves to shield their women and children – I respect that more than the prior.
The United States “has put pressure on Syria and Iran, but it needs us and wants to develop relations,” he said.
The scariest statement by Ahmadinejad is the following:
“Circumstances are changing rapidly in our favour. We are on the road to victory.”
That should give you the chills!
The appeasement and call for universal nuclear disarmament is another alarming policy change on the horizon. This step to disarm would include Israel’s nukes, which would cause an inevitable disaster, leaving Israel completely vulnerable to any and all attacks on their soil by countries like Iran who are not a party to the United Nations or any other international treaties.
President Obama’s efforts to curb the spread of nuclear weapons threaten to expose and derail a 40-year-old secret U.S. agreement to shield Israel’s nuclear weapons from international scrutiny, former and current U.S. and Israeli officials and nuclear specialists say.
The issue will likely come to a head when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu meets with Mr. Obama on May 18 in Washington. Mr. Netanyahu is expected to seek assurances from Mr. Obama that he will uphold the U.S. commitment and will not trade Israeli nuclear concessions for Iranian ones.
Assistant Secretary of State Rose Gottemoeller, speaking Tuesday at a U.N. meeting on the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), said Israel should join the treaty, which would require Israel to declare and relinquish its nuclear arsenal.
“Universaladherence to the NPT itself, including by India, Israel, Pakistan and North Korea, … remains a fundamental objective of the United States,” Ms. Gottemoeller told the meeting, according to Reuters.
She declined to say, however, whether the Obama administration would press Israel to join the treaty.
A senior White House official said the administration considered the nuclear programs of Israel and Iran to be unrelated “apples and oranges.”
Apples and oranges? The weapons programs may be different as far as quality and caliber, but if you continue to let Iran build up its nuclear facilities, centrifuges, and uranium/plutonium supplies, it will be sure to catch up – especially whilst Israel is vulnerable and doesn’t have the weaponry to defend itself anymore.
AIPAC, the strongest pro-Israeli lobby in the nation and on Capitol Hill, is on the case and working to fight the urgent push from the Obama administration to create a Palestinian state.
US congressional leaders and the most powerful pro-Israel lobby group in the US are attempting to forestall a significant shift in the White House’s Middle East policy.
The move comes amid growing signs that the US president, Barack Obama, intends to press for urgent efforts to be made towards the creation of a Palestinian state.
The Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, is visiting Washington later this month amid growing expectations that Obama is preparing to take a tougher line over Israel’s reluctance to actively seek a two-state solution to its conflict with the Palestinians.
It will be the first time that Netanyahu and Obama have met since both were elected.
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (Aipac) this week sent hundreds of lobbyists to urge members of Congress to sign a letter to Obama.
The letter, written by two House of Representatives leaders, calls for Israel to be allowed to set the pace of negotiations.
I would agree, that the pace of negotiations for an international issue be set by the countries involved, not the United States.
Maybe the issue here is that too many progressives have gotten the jihad hip-hop bug. I hear it’s hard to ignore!/sarc.
Russia Launches Missile and a Missile Arsenal that is 80% New by 2016
Russia successfully test-fired a Topol intercontinental ballistic missile on Friday as part of checks needed to extend its service life for up to 22 years, Russian media reported.
The Topol was fired from the Plesetsk cosmodrome, nestled among the forests of northern Russia, and successfully hit the test site on Russia’s Pacific peninsula of Kamchatka, 6,000 km (3,700 miles) to the east.
Russia plans on spending as much, if not more, money on defense, with or without an economic crisis. The Topol group of missiles has been around since 1985 and are said to be designed to pierce anti-missile defense systems such as the shield being proposed in Poland.
Russia’s missile arsenal, based on their current defense spending, will be 80% new by 2016.
Meanwhile, our President has cut missile defense in the upcoming defense budget. Although it appears that the defense budget has increased by 4% it’s not the overall increase, it’s where the cuts took place and on what programs. Our military supplies for specific integral projects will be cut and we will be behind the times compared to other countries – we will be left in a situation much like Carter and Clinton after they were done cutting defense programs.
New rockets will by 2016 account for at least 80% of the strategic missile forces in Russia as it replaces its Soviet-era arsenal with new nuclear-capable missiles, the military said Friday.
“Plans for the development of the Russian strategic rocket forces through 2016 foresee a decrease in quantity and a transformation in quality at the same time, ” Nikolai Solovstov, the commander of Russia’s strategic missile forces, told reporters.
“Rocket systems with an extended shelf life will account for roughly 20%, while new rocket systems for at least 80% of the forces,” said Colonel-General Solovtsov, quoted by the Russian news agencies.
In December, he announced that Russia would by 2020 replace its Soviet-era arsenal with new nuclear-capable intercontinental missiles capable of overcoming anti-missile defense measures by enemy states.
The costly overhaul of the missile forces comes as Russia is locked in a bitter dispute with the U.S. over its plans to install anti-missile defense facilities in central Europe.
Russia has urged Barack Obama to drop the plans, which were devised by his predecessor George W. Bush but the new U.S. president has said he would move forward with the missile defense shield.
I thought that Obama was Medved’s new comrade? Apparently, the fawning media was over exaggerating the success of Obama’s introduction to the international stage – what’s new though right? Many of us who read into things a little more and search for news all over the place knew that it was nothing near a success.
I also thought that Obama was going to implement “change” from the Bush era, however, he is doing many similar things that Bush did. Bush may have had some Intel in regards to Russia, China, etc.? What do you think?
Solovtsov added it was important for Russia to continue to upgrade its strategic missiles to ensure stability in the world.
“Quality enhancement of the components of Russia’s strategic nuclear forces will be required to maintain the necessary balance of forces in solving the task of nuclear containment,” he said.
Stability and nuclear containment could be code words for trying to become more of a world power and it’s my assumption that Russia has wanted to become a world superpower again, ever since it lost that title a couple decades ago.
In the last few days we have learned that both the Chicoms and Russia have been working overtime to plant hidden malware in the US electrical grid and that they have also been working with Iran, North Korea, Venezuela and Cuba (since former and current communist country do have a kindred spirit).
The Russians actually have more than just a small number of intercontinental missiles – many of which have multiple targeted warheads – as well as many nuclear missiles situated on submarines cruising the oceans.
It is still questionable to know at this time, whether or not statements out of Russia or any other country for that matter can be trusted, on what they pronounce to own as weapons. And without having inside information in the missile community of the defense industry, it is difficult to gather whether or not we have advanced enough systems to counter these types of weapons. I do know that we still outspend our counterparts for missiles and air defense, but as we have seen in cases of war, sometimes the most primitive of weapons and warfare are the toughest to defeat.
We have anti-missile systems, based in Alaska, and other places in the United States,(that obama is now in the process of cutting funding for or in some circumstances just keeping funding flat). These anti-missile systems and counter measures are designed to at best to intercept (there are 3 stages of missile interception) a small handful of missiles that North Korea or Iran might one day possess and choose to launch, or Russia and China who may and probably do, already have these types of weapons.
It’s no wonder why I felt that Sarah Palin, even as a VP, could have out done Obama on foreign policy and national defense. She is the commander in chief of the only National Guard that is on duty 24/7 and contains our best anti-missile systems. With recent news of the North Korean rocket launch Sarah Palin has been incredibly outspoken on the issue of missile defense spending and has written letters to Obama which we have also posted on here.
7,000 Centrifuges For Iran (The Non Threat)
Iran’s atomic chief Gholam Reza Aghazadeh on Thursday declared the Islamic republic has installed around 7,000 centrifuges at its Natanz uranium enrichment facility.
But, we should have unilateral talks at the table with Iran, especially after Russia’s statement that they are no threat to us, and after China was caught funneling nuclear material to them through New York banks, and our own intel that says they have the material to build weapons… Can’t wait for this to play out. Let’s see if proposing to send Iran Unicorns and Kittens will make him change his mind – he may get all Hopey-Changey on us!
North Korea Makes New Threat
North Korea warned the U.N. Security Council on Tuesday it would take “strong steps” if the 15-nation body took any action in response to the launch. On Wednesday, the Communist-ruled country gathered its top party and military officials for a celebration of the launch broadcast on its state TV and monitored in Seoul.
The reclusive state has threatened to boycott six-nation nuclear disarmament talks and restart a plant that makes bomb-grade plutonium. It also warned on Wednesday of military action if anyone tried to retrieve debris from the rocket.
U.S. and South Korean military officials said the missile, known as the Taepodong-2, crashed into the Pacific Ocean and that no satellite was deployed during its 3,200 km (2,000 mile) flight over Japan, as Pyongyang has said.
Analysts said North Korea went ahead with the launch knowing it would not suffer serious repercussions, while its leader, Kim Jong-il, would see an enormous boost at home for the defiant act.
Espionage: China and Russia, Iran is No Threat
The spies came from China, Russia and other countries, these officials said, and were believed to be on a mission to navigate the U.S. electrical system and its controls. The intruders haven’t sought to damage the power grid or other key infrastructure, but officials warned they could try during a crisis or war.
“The Chinese have attempted to map our infrastructure, such as the electrical grid,” said a senior intelligence official. “So have the Russians.”
The espionage appeared pervasive across the U.S. and doesn’t target a particular company or region, said a former Department of Homeland Security official. “There are intrusions, and they are growing,” the former official said, referring to electrical systems. “There were a lot last year.”
Many of the intrusions were detected not by the companies in charge of the infrastructure but by U.S. intelligence agencies, officials said. Intelligence officials worry about cyber attackers taking control of electrical facilities, a nuclear power plant or financial networks via the Internet.
Authorities investigating the intrusions have found software tools left behind that could be used to destroy infrastructure components, the senior intelligence official said. He added, “If we go to war with them, they will try to turn them on.”
Officials said water, sewage and other infrastructure systems also were at risk.
Officials cautioned that the motivation of the cyberspies wasn’t well understood, and they don’t see an immediate danger. China, for example, has little incentive to disrupt the U.S. economy because it relies on American consumers and holds U.S. government debt.
Russian and Chinese officials have denied any wrongdoing. “These are pure speculations,” said Yevgeniy Khorishko, a spokesman at the Russian Embassy. “Russia has nothing to do with the cyberattacks on the U.S. infrastructure, or on any infrastructure in any other country in the world.”
A spokesman for the Chinese Embassy in Washington, Wang Baodong, said the Chinese government “resolutely oppose[s] any crime, including hacking, that destroys the Internet or computer network” and has laws barring the practice. China was ready to cooperate with other countries to counter such attacks, he said, and added that “some people overseas with Cold War mentality are indulged in fabricating the sheer lies of the so-called cyberspies in China.”
I find it interesting that there is a lot of talk around Congress in regards to a larger, reconstructed power grid. GE is banking on a new contract, and as many of us know, GE was a big backer of Barack Obama and owns NBC. I also come from a defense family and work in the defense industry, and have some knowledge in regards to the grid. Put it this way – the grid is not that large – it could easily be taken out by some shots.
Officials have also stated that they do not believe that China and Russia are working together on this. But if this cyberattack story is true, I find it ironic that in recent months China and Russia appear to be backing one another on various things. China and Russia both agreed to the Global Currency, both have stated that they would use their veto vote if North Korea suffered any new sanctions and both have been tied to selling nuclear materials to Iran and other “hostile” countries. The most recent event involved China utilizing New York banks to funnel money and arms to Iran.
This also comes as no surprise to hear Russia stating that Iran is no threat to the United States. I find that difficult to believe and I cannot take what Russia or China says as fact.
Iran poses no threat to the United States, Russia said Tuesday, rebuffing a key argument of President Barack Obama on whether to go ahead with a European missile shield bitterly opposed by Moscow.
The Obama administration says it is reviewing the shield project, studying whether it is militarily justified and cost effective.
But Sergei Kislyak, the Russian ambassador to the United States, said that the Iran threat was a myth.
“I don’t see any threat to the United States coming from Iran anytime soon,” Kislyak told a conference of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
It seems pretty clear to me that Russia has a stake or two in this game so they would of course say Iran is no threat. First of all Russia sells items to Iran and secondly, Russia also opposes the missile shield promised by Bush to be built in Poland.
