Why Israel Has Moral Authority (CIA "sell-out")

Tammy Bruce ^ | June 7, 2006 | Tammy Bruce

[radar101]

When it comes to dealing with genocide, bad guys and fascists, and we don't. Past deals like this highlight the sort of moral abdication our generation should reject as madness.

Determined to win the Cold War, the CIA kept quiet about the whereabouts of Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann in the 1950s for fear he might expose undercover anti-communist efforts in West Germany, according to documents released Tuesday.

The 27,000 pages released by the National Archives are among the largest post-World War II declassifications by the CIA. They offer a window into the shadowy world of U.S. intelligence — and the efforts to use former Nazi war criminals as spies, sometimes to detrimental effect.

History shows us that bedding the devil for short-term benefits (Nazis for communism, Saddam for Iran, etc) will eventually exact a horrific toll.

I thought we were done with the sort of appeasement we gave North Korea and its tyrant Kim Jong-Il by the Clinton administration. Jimmy Carter and Madeline Albright, in all their mindless incompetence, believed that despot in that if we gave him things, like a nuclear reactor, he'd stop his nuclear research and all would be peaceful on Earth. Instead, we now have a North Korean madman with his bloody paws controlling several nuclear weapons.

And it hasn't stopped. Here is our current effort to seduce the twin devils (instead of the preferred Tammy Strategy of killing the enemy) of Madman Ahmadinejad and the Mad Mullahs of Iran, proving we're still willing to slop ourselves giddily with the muck produced by President Bush's Axis of Evil (Yes, yes, they're Evil and Frightening, but if we give them the technology to make The Bomb, maybe the rest of the world will like us!).

And this at a time when we know exactly what the human cost is for a look and a wink

All the more reason why Israel is the only country in the world capable of dealing with the genocidal fascists ensconced in Iran (and frankly elsewhere in the Middle East. Can you say Saudi Arabia?). And it's not because of technology or location or intelligence--it's because Israelis love Israel and the Free World more than it fears being called names.

Steve Schippert at ThreatsWatch has additional analysis of this new offer to Iran, which he appropriately terms "surreal," especially the unreported element of taking military action against Iran off the table.

At this rate, we might as well save Radical Islamists the trouble and blow ourselves up. With all this in mind, Shelby Steele's book "White Guilt" has never been a more important read. Please read this previous post of mine, "White Guilt and Being Delicate with the Enemy," highlighting an op/ed piece from Steele which summarizes his thesis about how white guilt keeps us from being able to deal with our enemy as an actual enemy and why our "leadership" thinks less of survival than with what the backward world thinks of us.

So when it comes to saving the world--Israel, you're up.

[radar101]

http://inbrief.threatswatch.org/2006/06/iran-sees-positive-signs-as-mi/

The outright removal of military strikes as a potential consequence for Iran’s continued belligerence is without doubt chief among the ‘positive steps’ from the Iranian perspective. Reportedly, the deal not only rules out military action, but also seeks to terminate some existing sanctions - including the resumption of pare parts supplies for Iran’s military air fleet - in place for sponsoring global terrorism, not nuclear belligerence. Coupled with Russian and Chinese continued opposition to any new UN sanctions as a potential penalty for Iran, there is not much leverage left for the West to negotiate with. The West has negotiated itself into a state of unthinkably inert weakness with regard to applying pressure on the regime to cease their nuclear weapons program

[monkeyshine]

I agree, but Israel can shout it from the rooftops it won't make a bit of difference. I'm afraid Israel can't strike Iran effectively, resulting in a big mess. Either NATO has to see it as a threat, the UNSC has to see it as a threat, or the US has to lead another coalition against the wishes of Russia and/or China and/or some of Europe.

But if we took the thread of attack off the table, then we look very weak in their eyes and that will only embolden them. They would happily talk with us forever while they continued to build the bomb if we don't keep the threat of attack alive.

Iran is already a menace - they are orchestrating insurgency in Iraq and threatening shipping lanes to drive the price of oil up. Maybe they will do something overtly stupid, like sinking an oil tanker or sending troops into Iraq, thus justifying an attack.