I am a Patriotic American

Unless you are an idiot liberal, you would agree that the roll out of making Obamacare a viable national health plan was a calamitous disaster. Ari Bussel wonders if Obama is incapable of the successful management of his signature piece of legislation, how can he be trusted to make the world safer by being the prime mover behind negotiating nuclear peace with Iran so that we can give the psycho-Mullahs sanction relief to the tune of SEVEN BILLION DOLLARS?

JRH 11/26/13

Please Support SlantRight 2.0

**********************************

I am a Patriotic American

By Ari Bussel

Sent: 11/25/2013 12:54 AM

Ultimately, only diplomacy can bring about a durable solution to the challenge posed by Iran’s nuclear program.  As President and Commander-in-Chief, I will do what is necessary to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.  But I have a profound responsibility to try to resolve our differences peacefully, rather than rush towards conflict.

Today, we have a real opportunity to achieve a comprehensive, peaceful settlement, and I believe we must test it.  President Obama

What was achieved last night in Geneva is not an historic agreement; it is an historic mistake.  Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu

I am a patriotic American.  Whenever I see our flag, my heart springs to attention, and I am filled with pride and joy.  Very little can unnerve me enough to shake my solid belief in this great country of ours.

On Saturday, the 23^rd of November 2013, Bloomberg’s top headline read:  “Iran Agrees to Deal With Powers to Curb Nuclear Work.”  It was subtitled “Iran to Reap $7 Billion in Sanctions Relief Under Accord.”  CNN’s top headline:  “Deal Limits Iran’s Nuclear Program,” and Fox’s:  “Deal Struck:  World powers reach agreement with Iran on nuke program.”

Everyone was focused on Iran, except the White House website that still showed the heading “Working with Both Parties to Keep the Economy Moving Forward.”  The latest e-mail blast I received from the White House – part of the White House American Jewish Outreach Update – is from earlier this month, boasting a statement by President Obama on the 75^th Anniversary of Kristallnacht and a speech by the President at Dallas Temple on the Affordable Care Act.

[The White House website was later to change with “breaking news:  President Obama’s Statement on Iran, the United States – together with close allies and partners – has taken an important first step toward a comprehensive solution that addresses concerns with the Islamic Republic of Iran’s nuclear program.”]

The President’s top priority always enjoys the full backing of the most sophisticated PR and outreach machine this great country of ours has ever witnessed.  Iran, apparently, is more a nuisance than the top priority.  At least that is how it seems from the attention afforded to it by the White House, resembling a disgusting task that needs to be carried out; an afterthought.

Clearly, the President is not very much interested in Iran, or its threat to the USA.  All that was necessary was an agreement, so that the Iranian “issue” can be put on the backburner. 

There are much more urgent issues we face, such as the President’s historical legacy – Obamacare.  (The program, at the moment, is still suffering from “technical glitches” despite an investment of hundreds of millions of dollars in a website that does not work properly, not to mention a faulty architecture that will eventually bring its collapse and finger pointing at the Republicans and members of the Tea Party:  “It is all their fault!”)

Three more years from this November until the next Presidential election, and at the moment, the President is very focused:  Obamacare!  (It is not even a true concern to reform the healthcare system, just maintaining a legacy and not admitting a mess of colossal proportions already so clearly evident.)

Why should anyone worry?  Iran is far away and has repeatedly stated – contrary to all appearances and its abundance of oil as an energy source – that its nuclear program is solely for peaceful purposes.  The Sanctions this Administration has put in place have been most effective, successful in causing remorse among the Iranian leadership and a reversal of course.  It all works.

Iran will say whatever the West wants to hear, while continuing to do exactly what it wants: accelerating development of its military nuclear program.

Indeed, given all the Administration under the current Commander-in-Chief achieved, we are witnessing “Peace in Our Lifetime.”  Let us focus on what is really important:  Higher health insurance costs; mass cancellations of policies for millions who were, until very recently, insured; hospitals and doctors pulling out of networks and Medicare recipients hurting due to cuts.  All this “noise” has to be dealt with quickly, lest it detract from the crowning achievement of Obama.

A negotiated peaceful end to all this unpleasantness with Iran!  Thirty-five years from the ascent of Khomeini to power and the establishment of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and finally a Peace Laureate manages to bring an end to decades of open hostilities.  Truly, I am in awe of the massive achievements by one person.  Would I be amiss admitting the Messiah is finally appearing before our very eyes, revealing himself to the world?

Some feel that President Obama just “threw Israel under the bus,” but I say differently:  The President of the United States of America is not entrusted with protecting Israel.  Israel is a sovereign nation, and knows how and when to protect itself.  (If it does not, well, then it – and it alone – will suffer the consequences.)  Israel must not expect, and definitely cannot plan, for America to do its bidding.

The President – glossy and glory speeches notwithstanding – never intended to do anything of substance against Iran.  Similarly, he never had any real intention of standing in the way of Syria’s Assad and the latter’s slaughter of hundreds of thousands of his own people. The world stood silent.  Why bother?

The President “showed determination and force” against an ally – Egypt’s President Mubarak – ushering in the Muslim Brotherhood’s ascent to power and control of the largest Arab country in the world.  The President ordered direct attacks in Libya, against a leader who repented and was working with us, the late Kaddafi.  (Where was the same determination and use of force and resources when our Ambassador and others of his protective detail were murdered?)

And Israel.  Again, Israel.  That is a difficult thorn indeed, only because of the all-powerful Jewish Lobby, AIPAC, that controls DC (please refer to a book about the Jewish Lobby and some statements by the Jews who truly care about America and are part of J Street), and all these rich Jews who support the Democratic Party.  For them, and because of them, we have to pretend. 

What a great conclusion:  The Jews are at fault for the President having to take a tough stand against Iran!  Not Israel, but those super-wealthy, super-powerful Jews right here in America.  If it were not for them, life would have been so much easier, a negotiated surrender could have been achieved ages ago.

Forget about Iran.  They do not know what they are doing.  They use idle threats, not really intent on doing anything with their nuclear power.  In fact, they have every right, exactly like Israel, to have a full-fledged nuclear program. 

Why should Israel have an arsenal it can use at a moment’s notice, and Iran be precluded?  What’s fair is fair!  Besides, there are enough crazies in Israel, not less dangerous to the world and to world peace!  (If Netanyahu didn’t possess so much clout with Congress, the President would put him exactly where he should be and declare him the real obstacle to peace in our lifetime, peace in the Middle East and the return of the Palestinians to their homeland and eternal capital of Al Quds.)

The President of the United States has to “make-believe” he is proactive so the Iranian “issue” can be set aside.  There are much more urgent things to which he must attend.  Thanksgiving is just around the corner, then Christmas and New Year.  What trips are planned?  Have thousands of members of the Entourage teams been invited to these all-expense-paid trips?  How about just a relaxing get-away using Air Force One to Martha’s Vineyard (too cold already), Hawaii, India or Africa?  Welcome to Beverly Hills!  You can enjoy a moment of rest with peaceful and protected shopping on Rodeo Drive!

There are endless parties to attend, a family and a Royal Dog.  Alas, the President is also the Commander in Chief, and there are still thousands of Americans around the world (time to get back home!).  Just recently we saw a disaster in the Philippines, and there, too, Israel was first.  First to respond and so effectively so.  The first baby to be delivered was called Israel and millions of hits (five million by the last count) were generated around the reports of the Israeli Consul General in the West Coast.  Those damn Jews!  First at everything!  They even managed to steal the glory from the President sending our military force and full might to extend a helping hand.

The Presidential Calendar is full!  Five days in Geneva have been overwhelming, truly exhausting even for a seasoned politician like our Secretary of State.  Time to get back home.  The days to Thanksgiving and Black Friday are drawing closer; let us stop wasting time on Iran.  Declare an agreement.  State the historic significance of our achievements, ease and eliminate the sanctions and let’s focus on what is really important.

Our allies in the Middle East and throughout the world are shocked.  Even France (usually characterized by their rush to surrender at the face of even the slightest hiccup) decided to take a different stand.

Our “allies in the Middle East” have long awakened to a new frightening reality, one in which the USA cannot be trusted.  Saudi Arabia sees something that our President does not, so it messes things up for him, for his plan for a peaceful holiday season.  Perhaps they simply do not understand the peaceful intentions of Iran and Iran’s right to achieve nuclear dominance (for “peaceful purposes” and nothing else).

A new coalition of the frightened is being formed.  Israel, France, Saudi Arabia, other countries in the Gulf.  Is anyone surprised that the fanatic Prime Minister of Israel is heading it, stirring trouble in peaceful and otherwise calm waters?

In fact, anyone with a bit of common sense and understanding of reality, and anyone who knows how to read what the Iranians are saying and analyze what is actually taking place in Iran, would conclude that the US-of-A has gone mad.  Apparently a previous history lesson – “Peace in our Lifetime!” – has been forgotten (or never learned at all).

If I, a patriotic American, did not believe Saturday night’s speech by President Obama, imagine what others, particularly Iran, countries throughout the Arab World and Israel, made of it.

I, at least, have given my President the full benefit of the doubt.

I would stand and defend our country to my last breath, and although I am registered with the Selective Service, we have not had a draft in recent memory.  I am just afraid my Commander in Chief has brought us a step closer to the beginning of World War III, willing to sacrifice whatever is needed, similar to the offering of Czechoslovakia in 1938.

_________________________________

Ari Bussel and Norma Zager collaborate both in writing and on the air in a point-counter-point discussion of all things Israel-related.

Zager and Bussel are based in Los Angeles.  Zager is an award winning investigative journalist, journalism professor and author.  Bussel is a foreign correspondent in Israel.

Together, they have dedicated the past decade to promoting Israel.

© Israel Monitor, November 2013

First Published November 23, 2013

Contact:  bussel@me.com

The limits of American power

Caroline Glick is a Jewish gal that has been born, raised and educated in the USA. She moved to Israel to further her education and has been involved with the political process in Israel. I believe she holds a dual citizenship with Israel and America.

I mention this about Glick because the link to her essay that showed up in my inbox are her musings about the ramifications of the U.S. elections on November 6, Iran’s looming nuclear weapon production, Israel’s ability to attack Iranian nuke sites and America’s support or lack thereof in backing an Israeli attack on Iranian nuke sites.

Of question for those who don’t follow international geopolitics has to ask - why is Israel interested in destroying Iran’s nuclear weapons capability? The reason is Iran has threatened Israel’s existence since the Mullah revolution in 1979 and especially since the Administration Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as President. Ahmadinejad has been rattling the Iranian military sword against Israel’s existence in ever increasing ways.

So prepare to get your thinking cap on and to muse with Caroline Glick about the USA, Iran and Israel.

JRH 10/26/12

Please Support SlantRight 2.0 With Your Contribution.

***************************

The limits of American power

By Caroline Glick

October 26, 2012, 9:24 AM

CarolineGlick.com

Monday's US presidential debate on foreign policy came and went. And we are none the wiser for it.

Not surprisingly, at the height of the campaign season, neither US President Barack Obama nor his Republican challenger Gov. Mitt Romney was interested in revealing his plans for the next four years.

But from what was said, we can be fairly certain that a second Obama term will involve no departure from his foreign policy in his current term in office.

As far as Iran and its nuclear weapons program is concerned, that policy has involved a combination of occasional tough talk and a relentless attempt to appease the mullahs. While Obama denied The New York Times report from last weekend that he has agreed to carry out new bilateral negotiations with Iran after the US presidential elections, his administration has acknowledged that it would be happy to have such talks if they can be arranged.

As for Romney, his statements of support for tougher sanctions, including moving to indict Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for the crime of incitement of genocide were certainly welcome.

But they were also rather out of date, given the lateness of the hour.

If there was ever much to recommend it, the "sanction Iran into abandoning its nuclear weapons" policy is no longer a relevant option. The timetables are too short.

On the other hand, Romney's identification of Iran as the gravest national security threat facing the US made clear that he understands the severity of the threat posed by Iran's nuclear weapons program.

And consequently, if Romney defeats Obama on November 6, it is likely that on January 21, 2013, the US will adopt a different policy towards Iran.

The question for Israel now is whether any of this matters. If Romney is elected and adopts a new policy towards Iran, what if any operational significance will this policy shift have for Israel?

The short answer is very little.

To understand why this is the case we need to consider two issues: The time it would take for a new US policy to be implemented; and the time Iran requires to become a nuclear power.

In the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, jihadist attacks on the US, then-president George W. Bush faced no internal opposition to overthrowing the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. The US military and intelligence arms all supported the operation. Congress supported the operation. The American public supported the operation. The UN supported the mission.

And still, it took the US four weeks to plan and launch Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan on October 7, 2001. That is, under optimal conditions, the US needed nearly a month to respond to the largest foreign attack on the US mainland since the War of 1812.

Then of course there was Operation Iraqi Freedom which officially began on March 20, 2003, with the US-British ground invasion of Iraq from Kuwait.

Bush and his advisers began seriously considering overthrowing Saddam Hussein's regime in the spring of 2002. They met with resistance from the US military. They met with a modicum of political opposition in Congress, and more serious opposition in the media. Moreover, they met with harsh opposition from France and Russia and other key players at the UN and in the international community. So, too, they met with harsh opposition from senior UN officials.

It took the administration until November 2002 to get the UN Security Council to pass Resolution 1441 which found Iraq in material breach of the cease-fire that ended the 1991 Gulf War. The US and Britain began prepositioning ground forces and war materiel in Kuwait ahead of a ground invasion that month. It took more than four months for the Americans and the British to complete the forward deployment of their forces in Kuwait.

During those long months, other parties, unsympathetic to the US, Britain and their aims had ample opportunity to make their own preparations to deny the US and Britain the ability to win the war quickly and easily and so avoid the insurgency that ensued in the absence of a clear victory. So, too, the four months the US required to ready for war enabled Iran to plan and begin executing its plan to suck the US into a prolonged proxy war with its surrogates from al-Qaida and Hezbollah protégés.

A CLEAR Anglo-American victory would have involved the location, presentation and destruction of Saddam's weapons of mass destruction. And this Saddam denied them. By the time US ground forces finally arrived, despite massive telltale signs that such weapons had been in Iraq until very recently, no smoking gun was found.

In the long lead up to the US invasion, then-prime minister Ariel Sharon warned that satellite data indicated that Iraq was transporting its chemical weapons arsenal to Syria. Sharon's warnings fell on deaf ears. So, too, a report by a Syrian journalist that WMD had been transferred to Syria was ignored.

According to a detailed report by Ryan Mauro at PJMedia.com from June 2010, after the fall of Saddam's regime, the Iraq Survey Group, charged with assessing the status of Iraq's WMD arsenal, received numerous credible reports that the chemical weapons had been sent to Syria before the invasion.

The stream of reports about the pre-invasion transfer of Iraq's WMD to Syria have continued to intermittently surface since the outbreak of the Syrian civil war last year.

In short, at a minimum, the time the US required to mount its operation in Iraq enabled Saddam to prepare the conditions to deny America the ability to achieve a clear victory.

THIS BRINGS us to Iran. In the event that Romney is elected to the presidency, upon entering office he would face a military leadership led by Gen. Martin Dempsey that has for four years sought to minimize the danger that Iran's nuclear weapons program poses to the US. Dempsey has personally employed language to indicate that he believes an Israeli preemptive strike against Iran's nuclear weapons sites would be an illegal act of aggression.

Romney would face intelligence, diplomatic and military establishments that at a minimum have been complicit in massive leaks of Israeli strike options against Iran and that have so far failed to present credible military options for a US strike against Iran's uranium enrichment sites and other nuclear installations.

He would face a hostile media establishment that firmly and enthusiastically supports Obama's policy of relentless appeasement and has sought to discredit as a warmonger and a racist every politician who has tried to make the case that Iran's nuclear weapons program constitutes an unacceptable threat to US national security.

Then, too, Romney would face a wounded Democratic base, controlled by politicians who have refused to cooperate with Republicans since 2004.

And he would face an electorate that has never heard a cogent case for military action against Iran. (Although, with the goodwill with which the American public usually greets its new presidents, this last difficulty would likely be the least of his worries.)

At the UN, Romney would face the same gridlock faced by his two predecessors on Iran. Russia and China would block UN Security Council action against the mullocarcy.

AS FOR the Arab world, whereas when Obama came into office in 2009, the Sunni Arab world was united in its opposition to a nuclear-armed Iran, today Muslim Brotherhood-ruled Egypt favors Iran more than it favors the US. Arguably only Saudi Arabia would actively support an assault on Iran's nuclear weapons sites. All the other US allies have either switched sides, or like Jordan, Kuwait and Bahrain are too weak to offer any open assistance or political support. For its part, Iraq is already acting as Iran's satrapy, allowing Iran to transfer weapons to Bashar Assad's henchmen through its territory.

All of this means that as was the case in Iraq, it would likely take until at least the summer of 2013, if not the fall, before a Romney administration would be in a position to take any military action against Iran's nuclear installations.

And it isn't only US military campaigns that take a long time to organize. It also takes a long time for US administrations to change arm sales policies.

For instance, if a hypothetical Romney administration wished to supply Israel with certain weapons systems that would make an Israeli strike against Iran's nuclear installations more successful, it could take months for such deals to be concluded, approved by Congress, and then executed.

This then brings us to the question of where will Iran's nuclear weapons program likely stand by next summer?

In his speech before the UN General Assembly last month, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said that by next spring or at the latest next summer Iran will have reached the final stage of uranium enrichment and will be able to acquire sufficient quantities of bomb-grade uranium for a nuclear weapon within a few months or even a few weeks.

Netanyahu said that the last opportunity to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons will be before it reaches the final stage of uranium enrichment - that is, by the spring. At that point, a hypothetical Romney administration will have been in office for mere months. A new national security leadership will just be coming into its own.

It is extremely difficult to imagine that a new US administration would be capable of launching a preemptive attack against Iran's nuclear installations at such an early point in its tenure in office.

Indeed, it is hard to see how such a new administration would be able to offer Israel any material support for an Israeli strike against Iran's nuclear installations by next spring.

So this leaves us with Israel. Over the past several weeks, there has been a spate of reports indicating that Israel's military and intelligence establishments forced Netanyahu to take a step back from rhetorical brinksmanship on Iran. Our commanders are reportedly dead set against attacking Iran without US support and still insist that Israel can and must trust the Americans to take action to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

There is great plausibility to these reports for a number of reasons. The intelligence and military brass have for years suffered from psychological dependence of the US and believe that Israel's most important strategic interest is to ensure US support for the country. Then, too, in the event that an Israeli strike takes place against the backdrop of a larger military confrontation with Iran's proxies in Syria, Lebanon and Gaza, Israel would likely require rapid resupply of arms to ensure its ability to fend off its enemies.

But when we consider the political realities of the US - in the event that Obama is reelected or in the event that Romney takes the White House - it is clear that Israel will remain the only party with the means - such as they are - and the will to strike Iran's nuclear installations.

Israel is the only country that can prevent this genocidal regime with regional and global ambitions from acquiring the means to carry out its goals.

Originally published in The Jerusalem Post,

_____________________________________

© 2012 Caroline Glick

About Caroline Glick:

I grew up in Chicago's ultra-liberal, anti-American and anti-Israel stronghold of Hyde Park. Hyde Park's newest famous resident is Barack Obama. He fits right into a neighborhood I couldn't wait to leave.

I made aliyah to Israel in 1991, two weeks after receiving my BA in Political Science from Beir Zeit on the Hudson -- otherwise known as Columbia University. I joined the Israel Defense Forces that summer and served as an officer for five and a half years.

From 1994-1996, as an IDF captain, I served as Coordinator of Negotiations with the PLO in the office of the Coordinator of Government Activities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. In this capacity I was a core member of Israel’s negotiating team with the Palestinians.

After leaving the IDF at the end of 1996, I worked as the assistant to the Director General of the Israel Antiquities Authority.

I then returned to geo-politics serving as Assistant Foreign Policy Advisor to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu in 1997-1998.

From 1998-2000 I went back to the US where I received a Master's in Public Policy from Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government in June 2000. Although I spent most of my free time hiking in New England, it did not escape my attention that the vast majority of the faculty at the Kennedy School were not particularly fond of America -- or of Israel.

In the summer of 2000 I returned to Israel and began … READ THE REST