Jerusalem now satisfied that Washington has the military option in mind if Iran strays, USA Today quotes U.S. chief of staff.
Israel and the United States have reached a closer understanding on the Iranian issue: the two nations agree about the potential threat to the region and what to do about it, U.S. Chief of Staff Martin Dempsey said on his plane ride home Tuesday, according to USA Today.
Tensions that arose between Washington and Jerusalem after Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon accused the U.S. of global feebleness have abated after the minister apologized. On Sunday afternoon Dempsey met with the Israeli chief of staff, Benny Gantz. Both generals made a point of remarking on the two nations’ working relationship, and on Tuesday Dempsey drove home the point that the sides have grown closer regarding the Iranian nuclear program as well.
Despite past differences, he now believes Jerusalem is “satisfied that we have the capability to use a military option if the Iranians choose to stray off the diplomatic path,” said Dempsey, according to USA Today. Moreover, Jerusalem is now more confident that if needed, the Americans will resort to military action, the top soldier said.
Frustration over Iran had been one of the reasons Ya’alon lashed out at Washington and switched to advocate unilateral Israeli action against Iran’s nuclear program. He later apologized for his words.
During his two-day visit to Israel Dempsey met with a number of military officials and political leaders and discussed the possibility of Israel and various Gulf nations cooperating on security issues.
Asked on Monday as to whether Ya’alon’s castigation of America had hurt ties, Gantz said: “There is no doubt that the relationship is as solid as ever.” Dempsey, for his part, said that one of the things he valued most about the relationship was its candor. “The world is complicated enough without our speaking in parables to each other,” the American general said. Today he augmented that with the assurance that the two nations are more in harmony over the Iranian issue as well.
yamit82 Said:
I read it and completely disagree. In fact obama is beginning to become overt about supplying the syrian rebels AND through Saudi arabia
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/179019#.UzyVRfldWa8
I believe that Benghazi threw a spanner into the works(hearings are still going on today), and the schedule, in that obama had to back away from any connection between AQ jihadis and his admin. Benghazi shone the light on his collaboration with Saudi, Turkey and Jordan to arm and train Sunni Jihadis(MB and AQ). As he is a peace president approaching a midterm election and his party is in need of votes Obama needed to kill benghazi, which could lead to impeachment and even rehashing false flag operations. He needed to kill any connection with jihadis in Syria and since the chem attacks in syria were murky he envisioned getting entwined in being exposed helping the head choppers and that they might be found to have done the attacks. I think the same is true regarding Sisi and not appearing to be supporting a military coup against the democratically elected MB Morsi. The saudis were able to take up the slack while he backed off plus it helped sisis popularity. I think the 9 mos peace talks were originally to coincide with the Iran situation but everything got delayed as a result of his backing out overtly. Since then he has been encouraging the Israeli GCC alliance approach and probably does not want to be drawn into any Iran war before the mid term, or at all if he can get Israel and the GCC to do it themselves or get a deal with iran and russia. The manpads appear to be an indication that he is returning to aid the syrian rebels but in a legal and overt manner(leaving the covert stuff mainly to the GCC and possibly israel). I expect that when Sisi is elected “democratically” that he will return overtly to the Sisi gov. One of his global approaches is that other nations and alliances take more responsibility to police the world and the USA less. The Libya situation reflected that and his pushing this GCC Israel security alliance appears to be part of it.
The one thing Langfan said of interest was the concept that the arab Leagues position on the talks were designed to allow Abbas to walk away or not come to agreement at this time.
It makes no sense that Abbas would want to have millions of pals return to the west bank and probably wants any excuse to kick the can down the road while showing some gains to his street as the can is kicked. I believe the prisoner releases are the indication that the can was pre agreed to be kicked down the road. I would think the GCC agree with that scenario so that the Israel pal issue does not take attention while they continue to recruit sunni jihadis in their war against iran and its proxies. I think Israel is on board with this strategy. Pal refusals, coupled with terrorist releases along with continued talks and extensions enables the drama to continue while maintaining the status quo. I see more releases, some partial settlement freezes and possibly even some of C near to a dense pal population center. They have been talking about giving a part of C for a couple of years and they beleive it would restrict pal growth close to existing centers rather than in greater C.
I think that the original schedule envisioned more active participation in Syria by the US but Benghazi set it back and then the gas attacks possibly being the work of the GCC jihadis spooked him and he was afraid of a rehash of Benghazi. Obama does not want the US embroiled in a war or scandal until after the midterm if at all. If it is done he wants Israel to do it with the GCC. If syria is fragmented and others hold the border with israel this will make any claim on golan more difficult by syria. Plus, it is conceivable that GCC directed jihadis would continue to be instructed not to attack Israel or even raise that issue; this is what has been happening already.
Generally speaking I do not buy the narrative and drama that all those players who assembled armed and trained the jihadis in syria have suddenly abandoned their project and are at odds with each other(Turkey, Saudi, US, Qatar). I think that is a sham, a red herring.
yamit82 Said:
BINGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I can’t believe this about the Obama administration. It’s just talk. You have a president who’s allergic to the idea of the use of force. When the time comes, they won’t even be able to pull him off the golf course, he’ll be in the ladies room hiding in a toilet stall–behind the toilet. They’ll never find him. Although Valerie Jarrett will know where he is the whole time. She’ll probably be the one who goes in, comes back out and tells the secret service, “No, he’s not in here.”
The Secret Service, afraid of more bad publicity, will do the politically correct thing and not send a male agent in to look for him. Can you imagine the headlines,front page of the Washington Post and Huffingto Post, “male secret service agent goes into ladies locker room! Head of secret service says it’s rogue agent not part of a pattern. We’re not peeping at undressed women!”
@ yamit82:
Must Read:Obama’s Kiss of Death to Saudi Arabia
Saudi Arabia and Israel can connect the dots in Obama’s statements.
Bert Said:
Dempsey claims Israel satisfied the US will use military option against Iran. DEBKAfile: Israel doesn’t say this
It may be likely (it is still hard to believe). I used to rule out such option under the current US Administration. The Administration knows that the Sunni Arabs are very angry about its closeness to Iran (their arch enemy – Shiites). In order to appease them and also to get some credit (if it believes that others could be successful without its involvement), it may be likely for US to use its military option in cooperation with Israel and GCC. The likelihood for US use of its military option at this stage is less than 20%. A new development could change its current stand.
@ Bert:
That my I admire Putin, you know exactly where he stands.
History shows that in the crunch America will always betray Israel despite all the official promises. No matter what Dempsey says Obama remains the greatest danger to Israel and is not to be trusted. Remember that there is NO red line to measure Obama on Iran except for generalizations that only he interprets. Israel must prepare to be betrayed and to go it alone.