Posted on 07/04/2008 2:17:17 AM PDT by Schnucki
The recent leaks to the U.S. news media (New York Times and ABC News) have created a wrong impression and sent a false message that an Israeli attack on Iran is imminent. Far from the truth. No decision to attack Iran has been made in Israel. Certainly no date has been fixed. Israel will decide, if at all, to disrupt Iran's nuclear program only as a last resort after international diplomacy fails. More importantly, such a decision will be taken only after serious consultation with the American administration. Coordinating its actions with America is the key factor in all Israeli crucial decisions. This has been the Israeli practice since 1967. Israel launched its combat campaigns since then only after realizing or understanding that the U.S. either sanctions the military operation or has no objection to it or turn a blind eye. These were the cases in June 1967, in June 1982 and in July 2006. In two other cases Israel didn't respond as it had wished, fearing that the U.S. would be against it. In October 1973, the Israeli cabinet, led by Golda Meir and Moshe Dayan, decided against a preemptory strike against Egypt and Syria. For the same reason, In January 1991 Israel didn't respond to the launching of 40 Iraqi Scud missiles against its urban centers. The George H. W. Bush administration said to Israel: don't do it. So Israel didn't do it. If the U.S. doesn't approve an Israeli military operation, Israel will not attack Iran. Full stop.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsweek.washingtonpost.com ...
Well, this MUST be the last word on this if Newsweek says it. After all they’re the source that broke the story about the KORAN desecration that started those riots and killed so many people and...oh wait...
Melman calling the Bush administration “weak” is either intentionally misleading (to further mask US/Israeli plans on Iran), or it’s plain stupid.
The Bush admin may have trouble defending its overall success, but it definitely is not weak.
Ask al-Qaeda. Ask the insurgents in Iraq. (Which, by the way, Mr. Melman, is totally beneficial to Israel.) US forces have virtually cleared Iraq of organized insurgency, and by the toughest house-to-house fighting, and not by fire-bombing the countryside, which would have been much cheaper in US lives, time, cost, etc.
After writing this, I conclude that Melman is being disengenous to try to make his point, which equals LAMENESS.
The taking down of this little "axis" will be Bush's greatest legacy, IMHO. People are just now realizing this, but it will happen over time.
One day after our election then hit them.
I can find no instance where Israel sought and obtained prior US approval before hitting the Osirak reactor (being built by France) in Iraq. Likewise, no one in Washington has admitted that the administration was privy to and approved the recent Israel attack on the Syrian nuclear site.
Historically, Israel has often moved without US approval and at times even against US wishes. This argument is deeply flawed.
I agree!! (..glad you liked the ‘toon!)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.