Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Israel Tells the U.S. It Will Retaliate if Attacked by Iraq
The New York Times ^ | 9/21/2002 | Michael R. Gordon

Posted on 09/21/2002 3:02:55 PM PDT by ex-Texan

Israel Tells the U.S. It Will Retaliate if Attacked by Iraq

By MICHAEL R. GORDON

JERUSALEM, Sept. 21 — Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has informed the Bush administration that he plans to strike back if Iraq attacks Israel, according to Israeli and Western officials.

Mr. Sharon's statements, made privately to senior American officials in recent weeks, represent a major shift in Israeli thinking since the 1991 Persian Gulf war, when 39 Iraqi Scud missiles struck without any Israeli response.

Advertisement

The prime minister's position reflects a widespread belief among Israeli politicians and generals that Arab leaders perceived Israel's restraint in 1991 as weakness. Throughout his military and political career, Mr. Sharon has always held that any attack on Israel must be promptly and powerfully punished.

"I don't think there is a scenario in which Israel will get hit and not strike back," a senior Western official said. "I think the evolving strategy will be commensurate response."

Mr. Sharon's position has significant implications for the Pentagon, which fears that an Israeli entry would stir up Arab public opinion and make it harder for the Pentagon to maintain cooperation from the Arab states where Washington hopes to base American forces

Read Rest of Article

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government
KEYWORDS: israel; willretaliate
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 281-285 next last
To: bonesmccoy
I believe that same claim was made by Hitler's troops in the invasion of Poland!

There's a big difference between being attacked and claiming to be attacked, especialy when the claim is based on an incident where your side played both parts.

201 posted on 09/22/2002 1:02:06 PM PDT by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: bonesmccoy
a nation has the right of self-defense...if israel is attacked by iraq israel has the right to defend itself...
202 posted on 09/22/2002 1:07:16 PM PDT by Bill Davis FR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: bonesmccoy
Poland did not attack Germany though that incident was staged by the SD the "German soldier" who was shot was in fact some guy taken from a concentration camp and put in a Wehrmarct uniform. The Arabs by their savagery have justified any Nazieque methods of reprisal neccasary to deter them from attacks on the civilized world not that the Israelis have ever resorted to these.
203 posted on 09/22/2002 2:09:03 PM PDT by weikel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: Norvokov
I resent being thought of as an Israeli 1ster BUT self defense is the most basic right and Israeli should not be told to give it up because the Arab countries who( excluding possibly Jordan and Bahrain) are all our enemies anyway don't like it.
204 posted on 09/22/2002 2:13:16 PM PDT by weikel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: Joseph_CutlerUSA
The way you were arguing, it sounded like you were more interested in sending our military transponder codes to other nations than protecting those codes. N'est pas?
205 posted on 09/22/2002 3:01:44 PM PDT by bonesmccoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
Rather than posting several different responses, let me put it all into one statement.

Regarding the Chinese PLA, I wasn't discussing transportation of forces. We were discussing simply the general attributes of various military forces. If the PLA walked into any adjacent nation, including Japan, the force would occupy successfully. Certainly Taiwan is at major risk at this point and the presence of front load shipping in Shanghai should show it.

About Arafat, although you may feel that Arafat is so important as to require our CentComm, I disagree. If Arafat is a simple criminal, as you suggest, then our FBI should handle this matter and DOJ should seek to extradite him. If he is tied to such crimes, can you explain why extradition has not occurred under codes for criminal conspiracy?

About Mideast leadership selection, the impact of religious cultural beliefs on the structure of government is obvious. This is as much true in Europe or America as in the MidEast. My point was that the existing regimes in the mideast have no historical legacy greater than 90 years.

I continue to contend that the Israeli's should let the United States solve this crisis. Israel's interests are secondary to the United States interests. For this reason, Israel should stop requesting our military transponder codes. IDF does not equate to the US DOD. They are separate and distinct forces for good reason. IDF needs to let the US handle things at this point. If IDF interjects itself while our units are operating, the US forces should be informed to fire on any units not with us. Because frankly, if our guys are spending time trying to figure out if the other unit is IDF or arab, we're wasting time that can kill our guys. IDF needs to stay out of our theatre (just like the US always stays out of the IDF theatres).

Plus, from a strictly strategic standpoint, why mix forces? IDF is capable of handling itself and the US can certainly outclass any opponents in the Middle East. Divide the strengths and use the strategically in order to advance the end game (creation of a long-term peace around Israel).

Regarding your view of Wahabi Islam, your view is inconsistent with my experience. Most of the muslims I have met do not espouse the views you suggest. I hear more Jews and Christians attempting to characterize Muslims than vice versa. I have not heard any American muslims preaching to kill Jews or Christians. Do you have evidence of such preaching in Mosques in the US?

About military spending, you should clarify that it was the Clinton Administration who structured our national defense planning for the last 10 years. We are only beginning to see the Bush Administration changes taking effect.

206 posted on 09/22/2002 3:21:28 PM PDT by bonesmccoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: Bill Davis FR
Bill,

I recognize that right. However, when we are acting in such a manner to neutralize the threat, it is not in Israel's interest to move their IDF into juxtaposition with our operations. There are military and political arguments against this suggestion by Israel.

Please see the rest of the thread. Thanks.

207 posted on 09/22/2002 3:22:57 PM PDT by bonesmccoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: weikel
Some ethnic groups in the US can point fingers at LIBERAL DEMOCRATS who performed ethnic cleansing on those ethnic groups. Yet, those ethnic groups have forgiven and moved on. Is there a reason the Israeli's haven't learned the lessons of the Talmud/Torah better? At some point, where does the violent eye-for-eye mentality end? Nuclear weapons?

I feel that if Israel and the Arab world are going to be this reckless, we should remove ourselves from the situation and allow the two groups to settle it on their own... and WITHOUT dragging our families into the middle of their squabble.

If it were not for the strategic importance of the oil in that region, we would not worry about this regional instability.

The US gov't needs to develop other sources of oil since the Mideast nations are unable to address problems in a more constructive fashion.

208 posted on 09/22/2002 3:26:42 PM PDT by bonesmccoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: bonesmccoy
I'd rather not be involved either but since we are involved telling the Israelis not to defend themselves is ludicrous.
209 posted on 09/22/2002 3:28:54 PM PDT by weikel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

Comment #210 Removed by Moderator

To: weikel
Ludicrous??? We're not saying anything publicly. I'm sure we have to be saying things privately though. IDF's entry while we are attempting to build a coalition is REALLY ludicrous. We're covering Sharon's backside on this one. If he goes ballistic now, he'll shoot us in the foot too. The Israeli gov't needs to get ready for a defensive mission while we go offensive. What is so difficult to understand about that?

We appear to be doing the offensive ops...not IDF. So, IDF should DEFEND and not go offensive and duplicate our planning.

211 posted on 09/22/2002 4:01:09 PM PDT by bonesmccoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies]

To: Joseph_CutlerUSA
Book 'em Dan-O!


212 posted on 09/22/2002 4:02:27 PM PDT by bonesmccoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 210 | View Replies]

To: bonesmccoy
Coalitions are BS just land an army and kill everybody the Arabs would not be able to resist that.
213 posted on 09/22/2002 4:02:52 PM PDT by weikel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies]

To: weikel
well there's a long lasting solution... carcasses and corpses... a winning combo for armageddon! (not!)
214 posted on 09/22/2002 4:05:21 PM PDT by bonesmccoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies]

Comment #215 Removed by Moderator

To: bonesmccoy
At the very least all Islamic clergy outside of the state controlled moderate group in Turkey needs to be executed. They are like communism's political commisars. My solution to Islamic terror is basically kill their entire ruling class and then rewrite the Koran but we're not serious about protecting America from a jihadi suitcase nuke or EMP blast so that won't ever happen.
216 posted on 09/22/2002 4:11:33 PM PDT by weikel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

Comment #217 Removed by Moderator

To: Joseph_CutlerUSA
so far pal, you haven't addressed any of the central issues in this thread. You've been trying for two days to describe why Americans should permit Israeli control of our foreign policy objectives. So far, you've not convinced me one iota of your reasoning.

At this point, after years of hearing the whining coming from the mideast, Israel is making the American people shoulder a burden that the Israeli's should have resolved years ago.

So, yes, I am suggesting that Israel follow our lead. If they don't like it, well... then they should have solved the problem before. They didn't and we have to... so the matter is closed.

Israel has lost it's leadership in the mideast.

We have arrived and we will settle it without Israel's interests being primary. Israel's interests will certainly be addressed, but it will be AFTER we secure US interests FIRST.

Got a problem with that?

218 posted on 09/22/2002 4:21:43 PM PDT by bonesmccoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies]

To: weikel
We are serious about protecting America from a threat.

Suitcase nukes were invented by Communists in Russia and if any found their way to militant islamic extremists, they pose a threat. That is all the more reason for the US to put our national interests ahead of Israel's.

While you make reasonable arguments for the right of a nation to defend herself, you have utterly failed to present any cogent diplomatic reason to permit Israel that opportunity.

This war is about securing energy supplies for the US population first, securing safety for the Mideast populations second.

If Israel goes out and massacres a bunch of arabs, how does that contribute to a longer term stability in the mideast?

End of my two days of posting on this thread... thank you for the opportunity to present this doctrine here.

Washington said to put our interests first... and 200 years later, the man is still correct!

DIRECT QUOTATION FROM FAREWELL ADDRESS OF GEORGE WASHINGTON, FIRST PRESIDENT OF THESE UNITED STATES

As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils 7 Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy to be useful must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.

The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop. Europe has a set of primary interests which to us have none; or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves by artificial ties in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.

Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to pursue a different course. If we remain one people under an efficient government. the period is not far off when we may defy material injury from external annoyance; when we may take such an attitude as will cause the neutrality we may at any time resolve upon to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions upon us, will not lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war, as our interest, guided by justice, shall counsel.

Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor or caprice?

It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements. I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private affairs, that honesty is always the best policy. I repeat it, therefore, let those engagements be observed in their genuine sense. But, in my opinion, it is unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them.

Taking care always to keep ourselves by suitable establishments on a respectable defensive posture, we may safely trust to temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies.

Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations, are recommended by policy, humanity, and interest. But even our commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand; neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences; consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing (with powers so disposed, in order to give trade a stable course, to define the rights of our merchants, and to enable the government to support them) conventional rules of intercourse, the best that present circumstances and mutual opinion will permit, but temporary, and liable to be from time to time abandoned or varied, as experience and circumstances shall dictate; constantly keeping in view that it is folly in one nation to look for disinterested favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of its independence for whatever it may accept under that character; that, by such acceptance, it may place itself in the condition of having given equivalents for nominal favors, and yet of being reproached with ingratitude for not giving more. There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an illusion, which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard.

219 posted on 09/22/2002 4:36:19 PM PDT by bonesmccoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies]

To: bonesmccoy
If Israel goes out and massacres a bunch of arabs, how does that contribute to a longer term stability in the mideast

Because the more Arabs Israel kills the less there are around to commit terrorist acts.

220 posted on 09/22/2002 4:38:58 PM PDT by weikel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 281-285 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson