Replies

In today’s edition of Time, there was an interesting analysis of the potential problems of an Israeli strike on Iran. It was co-written by Aaron Klein, the Jerusalem bureau chief of World Net Daily. For those who've not been following Aaron, he has great insight in the Middle East being one of the few journalists that routinely interviews top level terrorists as well as high ranking officials throughout the region. For now, I'm going to analyze just a few of the provocative statements within the article.

One top Israeli military planner privy to Israel's discussions with the U.S. on Iran, "We were under the illusion during Bush's last visit that he was much more determined to order a military action." No longer.

According to this statement, it appears a strike was definitely being planned, and suddenly it's been taken off the table by the Americans.

Last week's U-turn, in which the Bush Administration sent a high-ranking State Department official to join the European delegation meeting Iran's top nuclear negotiator...so dismayed were the Israelis by the latest U.S. moves, one military source told TIME, that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert wrote to Bush complaining that Israel should have been forewarned about the White House's abrupt change of course towards Iran.

When I first read this change of action by the Bush administration, it led me to believe that the U.S. wanted to at least show it's willingness to negotiate with Iran...so if there was a future strike on Iran...the President could say, we exhausted every means possible before this tough decision was made. Now the question is: Are the Israelis are playing the game with the Americans? Or were they were truly blind sided?

A top former officer from Mossad, the Israeli equivalent of the CIA, told TIME that Israel is mindful that an air strike on Iran would jolt the U.S. presidential election — probably rebounding badly on Republican contender Senator John McCain. Sources say that Israel sees a narrow "window of opportunity" for military action opening up between November and the swearing-in of the new American president next January. "No Israel leader wants to be blamed for destroying the Republican chances," says the former Mossad officer. Source: Time

For quite some time, I've been wondering how Olmert continues to stay in power with so many scandals that surround him?

Why doesn't Benjamin Netanyahu attack Olmert when he's so vulnerable? Could it be that Netanyahu's connections inside the military, being the former PM, are informing him of a pending strike on Iran? If this were the case -- then it makes sense why Bibi is reluctant. Nobody in Israel wants to be in the midst of a transition government when a major military action is being taken -- especially one that has the potential to explode into WWIII -- no matter how weak Olmert is. Could this be the reason he's not assailing Olmert and trying to take down the coalition government?

I'll be carefully watching the return of Israeli Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi from Washington. When he returns and IF the coalition government falls apart within the next two weeks -- this would be an indicator of a postponement of any military action. The dissolution of the Israeli government now, would allow a stronger government to be formed. The new elections would likely take place during November and rising to power would be either: Benjamin Netanyahu, Ehud Barak, or Tzipi Livni.

If the collapse of the Israeli government were to occur now, then it would lead me to believe a potential Israeli attack on Iran has changed from late this summer to the narrow window of opportunity between November and January.

However, the problem remains -- when will the nuclear reactor start in Bushehr? I still consider this to be the deadline of an Israeli strike.

Until next time...

Worthy News