Cruisin' For A Bruisin'

[Lord Jim]

That zany cut up Mahmoud Ahmadinejad decides to yell "please come bomb me" again...

Iran's Ahmadinejad says no place for Israel in new Middle East

DUBAI (Reuters) - Many thousands of Iranians shouted "Death to America, death to Israel" during state-organized protests on Friday and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told them there was no place for the Jewish state in a future Middle East.

Iran, penalized by tough Western sanctions, faces the threat of an Israeli or U.S. military strike on its disputed nuclear facilities. With popular uprisings reshaping the region, the Islamic Republic is also trying to prevent the overthrow of its closest Arab ally, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

"You want a new Middle East? We do too, but in the new Middle East ... there will be no trace of the American presence and the Zionists," Ahmadinejad told worshippers at Tehran University in an event broadcast live on state television.

The Iranian leader, whose own authority is under challenge from hardliners as well as reformers, was restating Tehran's familiar goals as the Middle East undergoes a very different upheaval from the 1979 Islamic revolution that toppled the U.S.-backed Shah and brought Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini to power.

"Saving the existence of the Zionist regime (Israel) is a joint commitment by most arrogant Western governments," Ahmadinejad said in a speech to mark the annual Al-Quds (Jerusalem) Day decreed by Khomeini and held on the last Friday of the Muslim holy fasting month of Ramadan.

He called for Muslim unity to foil Western support for Israel, which he described as a "cancerous tumor" for its occupation of Palestinian land.

http://news.yahoo.com/irans-ahmadinejad ... 01279.html

[dgs49]

Jimmy, your spelling in atroshus! Two mis-spelled words in the title alone (even ignoring the dropped 'g's)!

I wonder what ass-holes like M.A. would talk about if they didn't have Israel.

The more interesting question hereabouts is how his rhetoric and that in Israel might be leading up to some sort of an October Surprise - what that might be, and how it would play out.

[Lord Jim]

I'll fix it Davey...

I've got a bad head cold and I'm runnin' a fever....

[dales]

Well Jim, look at it this way.

If your nose runs and your feet smell.............................................you're buit upside down.

btw: the world will be a better place once "Iran's Hitler" is roasted either via US ICBM or an Israeli precision air strike.

[Sue U]

Ahmadinejad is not solely responsible for making inflammatory statements and ratcheting up the tension. It appears the Israeli government is very much stoking the flames in an apparent run-up to war.

But any such solo Israeli action would be terribly ill-advised. If it results in a shooting war, which seems likely, Iran could wear Israel down through a prolonged war of attrition, simply lobbing a few missiles a day. The disruption to Israeli civil and economic life would be catastrophic. Not to mention the fact that as the situation in both Syria and Southern Lebanon continue to deteriorate as a result of the Syrian civil war, additional fronts may be opened.

It seems to me that Netanyahu is using the American election as leverage to obtain greater security and military commitments from the US, particularly with respect to Iran, and ginning up the threat of war now will put pressure on both Obama and Romney to stake out more aggressive positions against Tehran.

[Lord Jim]

It seems to me that Netanyahu is using the American election as leverage to obtain greater security and military commitments from the US, particularly with respect to Iran, and ginning up the threat of war now will put pressure on both Obama and Romney to stake out more aggressive positions against Tehran.

That's entirely possible, the problem is there are so many factors that we, (the public) don't know...

We don't know, for example, to what extent the assassination of key Iranian nuclear scientists, and the use of computer virus attacks has set back the Iranian nuclear program, (I'd like to think that those ops have set it back at least several years... but we really don't know)

There are, however, a couple of things we do know:

We know that it is absolutely unacceptable to the United States and most major Western Powers (as a matter of repeatedly stated policy) for the current Iranian regime to be permitted to develop a nuclear weapon....

And we also know that quite understandably the Israelis, given their proximity to the threat (regardless of which political party or individual is in power) are likely to have a shorter trip wire for when they believe that threat threshold has been crossed than we would...

[Sue U]

Says it all:

Netanyahu's dangerous demagoguery on Iran
Iranian nuclear weapons are a threat to Israel - but its leaders' demagoguery is just as dangerous.

Haaretz Editorial | Aug.12, 2012 | 2:38 AM | 3

The decision on an Israeli military operation against Iranian nuclear targets is supposed to be made by a small group of ministers whose number has changed throughout this government's tenure - seven, eight, nine and now eight again. The decision requires the approval of the Ministerial Committee on Security Affairs and perhaps the consent of the entire government as well, all according to the interpretation of the clause in the Basic Law on the Government, which deals with the declaration of war.

The producers of the operation, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak, have been unable to pass the first hurdle of attaining a majority in favor of their position among the eight senior ministers, the octet. Perhaps this is because professionals in the defense establishment object to their claims. Not being able to move ahead with a frontal campaign, Netanyahu and Barak have moved to outflank the octet. Instead of the small number of eight, they have gone to the large number of seven - seven million Israeli citizens (including more than a million Arabs ), over whom two dangers hang: Iranian nuclear weapons, and a war resulting from an operation against those weapons, with the uncertain public unable to decide which danger is more serious.

In their campaign to enlist the public, through the media, Netanyahu and Barak are trying to generate a wave of sympathy for their position, so that they can bring hesitant ministers to their side and claim, in answer to critics at home and abroad, that the Barak-Netanyahu line reflects the will of the people.

The goal might be democratic, but the method is demagogic. There is no real difference of opinion between the public and its leadership when it comes to determination not to live in the shadow of Iranian nuclear weapons as long as the regime in Iran is extremist and openly seeks Israel's destruction. The question is not "acquiescence or war," but rather whether all other means have been exhausted, leaving no choice but to attack soon, on the eve of U.S. presidential elections.

This and only this is the core of the debate now. The information Barak and Netanyahu are releasing, either themselves or through transparent proxies, is confusing the issue. Iran will not attain nuclear weapons in the coming year, and while taking action against it might be imperative in the future, it is not an urgent necessity. Netanyahu has talked for years about 1938 but was proven wrong; 1939 has not yet come.

Iranian nuclear weapons are dangerous for Israel. Demagoguery is just as dangerous.

http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/netanyah ... n-1.457521

[Gob]

What we do know is that the Jewish lobby in the US has the government by the nuts, and any action by Iran against Israel would automatically mean that the US would be first to strike attack back.

[dales]

Same with the UK.

[Lord Jim]

It seems to me that Netanyahu is using the American election as leverage to obtain greater security and military commitments from the US, particularly with respect to Iran,

The domestic US political impact of an Israeli strike against Iran prior to the November election is very difficult to calculate...and Netanyahu is a wily enough political operator, with enough understanding of US political dynamics, to know this...

While it's perfectly obvious that Netanyahu and Obama can't stand each other personally, Bibi has to know that an action like that, while it would undoubtedly bring the US in to support Israel, could create at least a short term "rally-round-the-President" affect to help Obama's re-election chances just as easily as it could undermine his re-election with another body blow the US economy and $5.00 a gallon gas prices....

If the aftermath of an Israeli attack against Iran were to put Obama in the position of Defender Of the West, keeping The Straits of Hormuz open, acting to protect ourselves and our allies, with all the drama this would entail, it could completely drown out the gloomy domestic economic narrative and assure Obama's re-election....

[Gob]

Same with the UK.

Not so.

[dales]

If the US launches an attack against Iran, the UK will be there.

Count on it, mate!

[Gob]

Ah sorry, dales, I thought you were saying that the UK has as big a Jewish lobby as the US, which is not so.

If your point was "If the US launches an attack against Iran, the UK will be there," then I concur.

[dales]

I was purposely obtuse the yank your chain.

(yannow, wouldn't it be a blast if you and your mates, LJ and I and our mates got together for a kegger?)

[Gob]

It sure would!!

[dales]

Hawaii?


Is that midway between our Pacific coast an OZ?

[rubato]

A shame we don't have Reagan to kiss Iranian ass and sell them advanced weapons again. He really knew what selling out to the highest bidder meant.



yrs,
rubato

[dales]

Oh, lighten up.