US sends Israel smart bombs to match Syrian missiles for Hizballah
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report May 9, 2010, 9:22 PM (GMT+02:00)
The United States recently renewed supplies to the Israeli Air Force of GBU-28 Hard Target Penetrators and GBU-39 Small Diameter Bombs, as well as Attack Munitions (LDJAM) for more accurate targeting of bombs, debkafile’s military sources report. In Moscow, Israeli president Shimon Peres said to Russian president Dmitry Medvedev Sunday, May 9, that Syria has only one object in arming the Lebanese Hizballah with missiles and that is warmongering.
That same day, US defense sources, normally chary of releasing information about US arms supplies to Israel, reported that Washington had released substantial quantities of smart bombs to different types to Israel, most of them suitable for striking Hizballah fortifications in Lebanon and Hamas tunnels in the Gaza Strip.
They fall into three categories:
1. The 2,268 kilo (5,000 pound), laser-guided Bomb Unit GBU-28 (nicknamed “Deep Throat”) Hard Target Penetrator which can burrow 31 meters into earth or 6.2 meters into reinforced concrete. They can penetrate the stronger Hizballah installations or be used on Iranian nuclear weapons or missile installations, if so decided.
2. The Small Diameter 113 kilo GBU for IAF F-15I fighter-bombers, to be followed by the supplies for F-16I planes, which can be used against simpler installations, like the arms-smuggling tunnels dug by Hamas between Egypt and the Gaza Strip and Hizballah’s field fortifications.
They are small enough for fighter-bombers to carry in larger numbers, but they have a 5-8 meter margin of error with no more than a 50:50 chance of hitting the target.
3. However, the Laser-Guided Joint Direct Attack Munitions (LJDAM), also on the list of arms supplies to the Israeli Air Force, directs smart bombs more accurately. Developed jointly by Boeing Integrated Defense Systems and Israel’s Elbit Systems, LJDAM improves the accuracy of bombs fired from a maximum distance of 28 kilometers in most weathers.
debkafile’s Washington sources report that the Obama administration decided to release this data to dispel rumors of a US arms embargo against Israel, especially of items that would enable Israel to attack Iran’s nuclear installations. The GBU-28 “Deep Throat” has that capability and is one of those items.
US defense sources declined to comment on the debkafile report of March 28, according to which President Barak Obama halted the delivery of advanced, high-precision bunker-buster Joint Direct Attack Munition-JDAM bombs to Israel on March 28, after Vice President Joe Biden ended his visit to Jerusalem. These bombs were already en route to Israel when they were diverted instead to the US base of Diego Garcia, thereby initiating an arms embargo designed to prevent an Israeli strike against Iran.
To read that article, click here.
Ted, I was replying to you, thinking my reply would link up the way replies do at pajamasmedia:
Ted asked: May 14, 2010 at 5:32 am
@ Ted Belman:
Maybe, but, as I sift through the disconnected dots, I think the Obami might suddenly realize that Hezbollah in Lebanon is actually far more central “to U.S. vital security interests in combating terrorism, preventing an Iranian nuclear weapon, and stability in the Middle East” than apartments for Haredi in Ramat Shlomo. The sudden U.S. flip-flop on Iron Dome is another clue. They can not be totally blind to what Turkey and Russia are up to with Syria, and what Syria has accomplished in Lebanon through Hezbollah. Ok, they CAN be totally blind, but SecDef Gates is not.
Nice try to have a serious dialogue, Ted! “The end for America in the Middle East?” By Michael Young on Thursday, May 13, 2010 got a LOT of echo yesterday.
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&categ_id=5&article_id=114786#axzz0nl3W3wtL
Give us a break. We are reloading programs and resetting them. In time it will settle down. In the meantime don’t post the same thing twice.
One more thing. If you want to refer people to an article, please link to it. Don’t reprint the entire article.
Clinton’s second term:
http://meria.idc.ac.il/journal/1999/issue1/freedman.pdf
Clinton had achieved several
important things as a result of the Wye
Agreement. First, by demonstrating that he
was still a leader with international
influence, he helped dispel the weakened
image of the American presidency caused by
the Monica Lewinsky affair. Second, by
getting the peace process back on track, he
demonstrated to the Arabs that the U.S. was
not following a double standard vis-a-vis
Iraq and Israel. Indeed, in the subsequent
confrontation with Iraq in mid-November
1998, this development was to help the U.S.
isolate Iraq in much of the Arab world.
Third, Clinton’s political position vis-a-vis
Netanyahu was strengthened. The Israeli
Prime Minister’s unwise raising of the
Jonathan Pollard affair in the latter stage of
the negotiations alienated some of
Netanyahu’s Republican supporters.
Netanyahu suffered a second political blow
as a result of Republican losses in the House
of Representatives in the U.S. mid-term
elections that took place less than two weeks
after the Wye summit, and which were
widely seen as a repudiation of Republican
efforts to impeach Clinton. The speaker of
the U.S. House of Representatives, Newt
Gingrich, perhaps Netanyahu’s closest ally
in the Republican-dominated Congress, was
forced to resign as a result of the Republican
defeat (Gingrich had predicted gains of 35-
40 Republican seats), to be replaced (albeit
only temporarily due to his own sex scandal)
by Robert Livingston, who was considerably
more cool to Israel.(18) While the House of
Representatives in a highly partisan
impeachment process, went on to vote two
articles of impeachment against Clinton, the
President’s standing in American public
opinion polls soared, and the impeachment
vote did not serve to weaken him politically.
Whether Clinton could use his restored
political position to bring added pressure on
Netanyahu to move the peace process forward.
http://www.jstor.org/pss/40209573
BLASTS FROM THE PASTS
Falwell, Baptists pledge to resist Israeli settlement pullout: Netanyahu meets with Christian religious leaders during D.C. visit
American Atheists, AA News, #379
23 January 1998
In the midst of complex peace negotiations involving a long-awaited Israeli troop withdrawal from certain areas of the west bank, American fundamentalists—led by Jerry Falwell and key members of the Southern Baptist Convention—have vowed to prevent any plan for restricting or dismantling the controversial Jewish housing settlements on Palestinian land which have become a flash point of contention.
Two meetings earlier this week between President Clinton and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu produced what the White House described as “positive hopes” for a settlement. Peace talks between the Israeli government, presently run by a Likud-religious political coalition, and the Palestinian Authority of Yasir Arafat have been stalled for over a year. Netanyahu and Likud have resisted any peace deals which would trade land for an agreement; and Mr. Netanyahu wants more action from Arafat’s regime in curbing Islamic terrorist groups, which have stepped up their bombing campaign against Israeli targets.
U.S. negotiators want Israel to pull back from approximately 10% of the West Bank land which they presently occupy.
Enter Jerry Falwell
But the White House is frustrated that talks with Netanyahu are taking place against the background of religious right involvement by American groups. On Monday, Netanyahu hunkered down in meetings with Jerry Falwell, a key evangelical political figure and founder of the now-defunct Moral Majority movement. Falwell claimed that he was withdrawing from politics several years ago, and instead would concentrate on “saving souls for Jesus.” But in recent months, Falwell seems to have reentered the political arena, having formed a political action committee. He promised Netanyahu that churches would mobilize American evangelicals.to oppose any more land transfers to the Palestinians.
“There are about 200,000 evangelical pastors in America,” Falwell told the New York Times, “and we’re asking them all through e-mail, faxes, letters, telephone to go into their pulpits and use their influence in support of the state of Israel and the prime minister.”
The Times noted that Netanyahu’s meeting with Falwell and other religious leaders had “angered President Clinton.” The paper noted a second political motivation for Falwell, who “has used his television program to sell a widely discredited videotape that accuses the president of peddling drugs and being involved in the death of Vincent Foster, the former White House deputy counsel who committed suicide.”
American Jews who have supported Israel—but not always the Netanyahu government—were distressed at the prime minister’s meeting with the controversial Falwell. Abraham Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League described the gathering as “crude” and “curious,” and noted that evangelical groups throughout the country have been targeting the White House as part of their social agenda on issues such as school prayer, voucher plans and abortion.
Others at the private meeting included Morris Chapman and Richard Lee of the Southern Baptist Convention, and John Hagee, an apocalyptic “signs and wonders” evangelist from Texas. Jewish and Christian conservatives then rallied at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, at an event staged by Voices United for Israel, a group which has tried to mobilize religious groups to oppose any compromise with the Palestinians, including giving up territories.
A Problematic Relationship
While many American fundamentalists and evangelical groups support Israel, Jews—especially those who are secular—remain wary and skeptical of the enthusiasm displayed by religious leaders like Falwell. Some see the Voices United group as supporting a particular religious bias in Israeli politics. One Rabbi who had worked with other organizations seeking to open dialogue between Jews and Christians, said that he resigned from the Voice United organization because it reflected a partisan political stand which was “anti- Rabin, pro-Likud.” That statement referred to the government of former Labor Party Prime Minister Yitzak Rabin, who was assassinated by a religious fundamentalist. In May, 1996, Netanyahu defeated Labor candidate and incumbent Shimon Peres in a hotly-contested race which many saw as crucial to the direction of Israeli society and foreign policy. Netanyahu had to strike deals with extreme religious orthodox groups which quickly gained control of key government ministries; and since the election, Israel has been divided over the question of secularism and how much power the orthodox should wield. There has also been a shift in the tenuous peace process, and some have suggested that Netanyahu hard-line position has lessened the chances for a lasting settlement between Israel and its Palestinian neighbors.
Even more problematic, though, is the relationship between Israel and elements of the American fundamentalist and evangelical community. Much of the religious right enthusiasm for Israel is based not on secular political notions, but a perception that the creation of the Jewish state in 1949 open a final chapter in Biblical prophecy; and some American evangelicals saw Netanyahu’s razor-thin election victory in 1992 as part of a larger, divine plan for the Second Coming of Christ.
The Los Angeles Times (June 8, 1996) noted, “Evangelical beliefs include an end-time theological scenario in which the return of the Jewish people to the land of Israel is a prelude to the final battle between the forces of good and evil at Armageddon—the Greek name for a valley in northern Israel — and Jesus’ return to Earth.” Religious right leader expressing approval of the Netanyahu victory and who saw it as an event laden with eschatological significance were Ed McAteer of the Religious Roundtable, and Pat Robertson of the Christian Coalition. Robertson has branded the policies of former Prime Minister Shimon Peres as “national suicide,” and praised Netanyahu. “He wants defensible borders. He wants the integrity of Israel.” Robertson has also declared that the Israeli capture of Jerusalem during the 1967 war “was a fulfillment of the prophecy that said the times of the Gentiles would be over…”
A Blow Against Stability and Peace ?
It is hard to filter out the redolent religious aspects of the Israeli- Palestinian debate, but that might be necessary if any binding peace accord is to be crafted. Most secular Israelis and Palestinians are “under siege” in their respective camps from militant, religious groups. Mr. Arafat must contend with armed groups like the Hamas movement, which seek to “drive Israel into the sea” and establish a Muslim theocracy—something which, at least at the present time, most Palestinians probably would not support. The failure of the peace process, however, has energized extreme Islamists, who have positioned themselves as opponents to Arafat’s corrupt and increasingly ineffective Palestinian Authority.
In Israel, secularism is also under siege. Orthodox Jews have mobilized around a host of “culture war” issues such as maintaining the Sabbath, rights for women, even the extent of archeological activity throughout the country. Secular groups like the Meretz Party have confronted the militants, who have tried to shut down traffic, restaurants and entertainment during the “holy” period.
Ted It’s almost impossible to comment when almost every comment either disappears or is held for moderation. all you need do I think is tell you filter to accept my comments.
How about releasing and retrieving my last 5-6 comments!!!!!
@ ayn reagan:
yamit82 Said:
Been there done that !!!
http://www.anusha.com/falwell.htm
Netanyahu, who met with the evangelical leaders in Washington on Monday, is tapping a vein of support among evangelical Christians at a time when Israel is under pressure from both the Clinton administration and some American Jewish groups to break an impasse in the peace efforts.
Order Monica’s Story
But in courting conservative Christians on this trip, Netanyahu has apparently angered President Clinton, who was said to be outraged to hear that Netanyahu had met privately with Falwell.
Falwell has used his television program to sell a widely discredited videotape that accuses the president of peddling drugs and being involved in the death of Vincent Foster, the former White House deputy counsel who committed suicide.
Asked about Clinton’s reaction at a news conference Tuesday, the White House spokesman, Mike McCurry, said, “It would be sufficient to say that the prime minister is probably aware of concerns that the president might have on some aspects of that.”
Some leaders of American Jewish organizations were also dismayed at Netanyahu’s courtship of evangelical Christians because evangelicals and Jews tend to be on opposite sides in the debates over school prayer, vouchers for private and parochial schools and abortion. At the same time, evangelical Christians who interpret the Bible literally regard Israel as a land given by God to the Jews.
Abraham Foxman, executive director the Anti-Defamation League, called Netanyahu’s meeting with Falwell “crude” and “curious,” because the evangelical groups have been leading campaigns against Clinton, the prime minister’s host. Foxman said he found Netanyahu’s meeting “insensitive behavior.”
For Israel to court conservative evangelicals is “tricky, very tricky,” said David Harris, executive director of the American Jewish Committee. “Israel needs support from a broad range of the American public, this community included, but if it’s inordinately focused on this community alone, it’s going to raise some questions.”
The Israeli government and evangelical Christians may appear to be strange bedfellows, but they are old ones. Regardless of party affiliation, prime ministers from Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir, both Likud leaders, to Yitzhak Rabin, of Labor, have broken bread with evangelical Christians vocal in their support for the Jewish state.
In the book of Genesis, often cited by evangelicals as the basis for their loyalty to Israel, God promises to bless the nations that bless the Jews, and curse the nations that curse the Jews.
“On the issue of Israel, there is no one stronger than evangelicals,” said an Israeli official who has helped to plan Netanyahu’s visit this week to the United States.
Some evangelicals read certain Bible passages to mean that an “ingathering” of Jews to Israel is a prerequisite to an apocalyptic war that will usher in the second coming of Christ. But some Jewish leaders who have been active in reaching out to evangelicals said Tuesday that they have rarely heard evangelicals mention that factor mention as a reason for supporting Israel.
@ ayn reagan:
ayn reagan Said:
Blasts from the past!!
Falwell, Baptists pledge to resist Israeli settlement pullout: Netanyahu meets with Christian religious leaders during D.C. visit
Ted another post just disappeared was not marked for anything just vanished when I pressed post comment
January 21, 1998
Falwell Offers to Mobilize Churches to Oppose Israeli Pullback
By LAURIE GOODSTEIN
The Rev. Jerry Falwell said Tuesday that he and several leaders of the Southern Baptist Convention had told Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel that they would mobilize evangelical churches to oppose steps to give up any more territory to the Palestinians.
To get out the word on Israel, Falwell said, “There are about 200,000 evangelical pastors in America, and we’re asking them all through e-mail, faxes, letters, telephone, to go into their pulpits and use their influence in support of the state of Israel and the prime minister.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
In the midst of complex peace negotiations involving a long-awaited Israeli troop withdrawal from certain areas of the west bank, American fundamentalists—led by Jerry Falwell and key members of the Southern Baptist Convention—have vowed to prevent any plan for restricting or dismantling the controversial Jewish housing settlements on Palestinian land which have become a flash point of contention.
Two meetings earlier this week between President Clinton and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu produced what the White House described as “positive hopes” for a settlement. Peace talks between the Israeli government, presently run by a Likud-religious political coalition, and the Palestinian Authority of Yasir Arafat have been stalled for over a year. Netanyahu and Likud have resisted any peace deals which would trade land for an agreement; and Mr. Netanyahu wants more action from Arafat’s regime in curbing Islamic terrorist groups, which have stepped up their bombing campaign against Israeli targets.
U.S. negotiators want Israel to pull back from approximately 10% of the West Bank land which they presently occupy.
Enter Jerry Falwell
But the White House is frustrated that talks with Netanyahu are taking place against the background of religious right involvement by American groups. On Monday, Netanyahu hunkered down in meetings with Jerry Falwell, a key evangelical political figure and founder of the now-defunct Moral Majority movement. Falwell claimed that he was withdrawing from politics several years ago, and instead would concentrate on “saving souls for Jesus.” But in recent months, Falwell seems to have reentered the political arena, having formed a political action committee. He promised Netanyahu that churches would mobilize American evangelicals.to oppose any more land transfers to the Palestinians.
“There are about 200,000 evangelical pastors in America,” Falwell told the New York Times, “and we’re asking them all through e-mail, faxes, letters, telephone to go into their pulpits and use their influence in support of the state of Israel and the prime minister.”
The Times noted that Netanyahu’s meeting with Falwell and other religious leaders had “angered President Clinton.” The paper noted a second political motivation for Falwell, who “has used his television program to sell a widely discredited videotape that accuses the president of peddling drugs and being involved in the death of Vincent Foster, the former White House deputy counsel who committed suicide.”
American Jews who have supported Israel—but not always the Netanyahu government—were distressed at the prime minister’s meeting with the controversial Falwell. Abraham Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League described the gathering as “crude” and “curious,” and noted that evangelical groups throughout the country have been targeting the White House as part of their social agenda on issues such as school prayer, voucher plans and abortion.
Others at the private meeting included Morris Chapman and Richard Lee of the Southern Baptist Convention, and John Hagee, an apocalyptic “signs and wonders” evangelist from Texas. Jewish and Christian conservatives then rallied at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, at an event staged by Voices United for Israel, a group which has tried to mobilize religious groups to oppose any compromise with the Palestinians, including giving up territories.
A Problematic Relationship ayn reagan Said:
@ ayn reagan:
Could it be that the release of these munitions has anything to do with Bibi caving on Jerusalem construction.?
@ yamit82:
However, in this day and age, our current “President” bows to a number of world leaders…
I imagine President Roosevelt is forever spinning in his grave with disgust…
Barak is increasingly indistinguishable from Peres, who has always undercut Israel to ingratiate himself to the world.
Since Obama is playing favorites, so should Netanyahu.
He could start by inviting McConnell and Boehner to Israel, and then go on and on about how they are true friends because they appreciate the urgency of the Iranian threat.
Of course, the more effective approach would be an October Surprise, in which Netanyahu creates a crisis in Israeli-American relations right before the election.
Quid.
Pro.
Quo.
Obama Wants to Give Barak $205 Million for Disputed Iron Dome
by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu
U.S. President Barack Obama said he will ask Congress to approve $205 million for the controversial Iron Dome anti-missile system that at least one expert has called a “scam.” The president’s move comes shortly after the return of Barak from a warm welcome in Washington and repeated hints at weakening the Likud’s dominance in the coalition.
The Iron Dome system is touted to be able to stop rockets from Gaza and Lebanon, but by all accounts, it cannot intercept primitive and short-range Kassam rockets that explode within two miles of firing and within 20 seconds of detection.
The missile program has faced budgetary obstacles in Israel, and the timing of the Pentagon announcement of President Obama’s request follows by several days Barak’s increasingly aggressive suggestions that the Netanyahu government needs to be widened.
White House officials have denied that President Obama has been trying to undermine Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and cause his coalition to collapse in favor of Kadima leader Tzipi Livni.
Three weeks ago, President Obama’s and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s extremely warm reception for Barak, with media profile, was in sharp contrast to the chilly greeting he gave Prime Minister Netanyahu less than two months ago. In an unusual diversion from protocol, the president did not host the Prime Minister for a lunch or dinner, did not hold a press conference and did not provide the media with opportunities for photographs.
Since Barak’s return, he has frankly stated at least twice that widening the coalition would help advance the process for creating a new country headed by the Palestinian Authority, a high priority issue for President Obama.
American aid of $205 million for the Iron Dome missiles program would be a political coup for Barak, whose Labor party has only 13 seats in the coalition.
The Iron Dome system has passed several successful tests this year, but it has not been a high priority item for the IDF. Missile tests have proven they are effective against Katyusha rockets, and Barak has boasted the system “will allow the IDF to fulfill its obligation to protect Israel in the best way that it can.”
However, he has made no mention of the system’s inability to defend Gaza Belt residents against Kassam rockets. Backing him is the commander of the Israel Air Force’s northern air defense division, who recently said, “We cannot promise 100 percent hermetic defense, but what we can promise is that after years of rocket fire against Gaza-belt communities, there will now be an effective solution.”
Tel Aviv University professor and military analyst Reuven Pedatzur disagrees. He has harshly criticized the Iron Dome as being overly expensive and under-effective. “Considering the fact that each Iron Dome missile costs about $100,000 and each Kassam $5, all the Palestinians would need to do is build and launch a ton of rockets and hit our pocketbook,” he recently stated at a conference organized to campaign against faulty defense systems.
Prof. Pedatzur labeled the Iron Dome a “scam” and explained, “The flight-time of a Kassam rocket to Sderot is 14 seconds, while the time the Iron Dome needs to identify a target and fire is something like 15 seconds. This means it can’t defend against anything fired from fewer than five kilometers; but it probably couldn’t defend against anything fired from 15 kilometers, either.”
The Iron Dome is being built by Rafael Advanced Defense System, who chief executive officer Yedidia Yaari and chairman Ilan Biran are long-time and close acquaintances of Barak. (IsraelNationalNews.com)
.the Roosevelts went down the river to Cairo, where the ex-President addressed the Egyptian students. These were the backbone of the so-called Nationalist Party, which aimed at driving out the British and had killed the Prime Minister a month before. They warned Roosevelt that if he dared to touch on this subject he, too, would be assassinated. But such threats did not move him then or ever. Roosevelt reproved them point-blank for killing Boutros Pasha, and told them that a party which sought freedom must show its capacity for living by law and order, before it could expect to deserve freedom.
~~~~~
Before he reached Italy on his way back, he had invitations from most of the sovereigns of Europe to visit them, and universities and learned bodies requested him to address them. At Rome, as guest of King Victor Emanuel II, he received ovations of the exuberant and throbbing kind, which only the Italians can give. But here also occurred what might have been, but for his common sense and courage, a hitch in his triumphal progress. The intriguers of the Vatican, always on the alert to edify the Roman Catholics in the United States, thought they saw a chance to exalt themselves and humble the Protestants by stipulating that Colonel Roosevelt, who had accepted an invitation to call upon the Pope, should not visit any Protestant organization while he was in that city. Some time before, Vice-President Fairbanks had incensed Cardinal Merry del Val, the Papal Secretary, and his group, by remarks at the Methodist College in Rome. Here was a dazzling opportunity for not only getting even, but for coming out victorious. If the Vatican schemers could force Colonel Roosevelt, who, at the moment, was the greatest figure in the world, to obey their orders, they might exult in the sight of all the nations. Should he balk, he would draw down upon himself a hostile Catholic vote at home. Probably the good-natured Pope himself understood little about the intrigue and took little part in it, for Pius X was rather a kindly and a genuinely pious pontiff. But Cardinal Merry del Val, apt pupil of the Jesuits, made an egregious blunder if he expected to catch Theodore Roosevelt in a Papal trap. The Rector of the American Catholic College in Rome wrote: “‘The Holy Father will be delighted to grant audience to Mr. Roosevelt on April 5th, and hopes nothing will arise to prevent it, such as the much-regretted incident which made the reception of Mr. Fairbanks impossible.’ Roosevelt replied to our Ambassador as follows: ‘On the other hand, I in my turn must decline to have any stipulations made or submit to any conditions which in any way limit my freedom of conduct.’ To this the Vatican replied. through our Ambassador: ‘In view of the circumstances for which neither His Holiness nor Mr. Roosevelt is responsible, an audience could not occur except on the understanding expressed in the former message.’”
Ex-President Roosevelt did not, by calling upon the Pope, furnish Cardinal Merry del Val with cause to gloat. A good while afterward in talking over the matter with me, Roosevelt dismissed it with “No self-respecting American could allow his actions or his going and coming to be dictated to him by any Pope or King.” That, to him, was so self-evident a fact that it required no discussion; and the American people, including probably a large majority of Roman Catholics, agreed with him.”
Public security turns funny
Public Security Minister declared that the police will tear down illegal Arab structures in East Jerusalem very soon.
Liar, liar… Everyone knows he won’t demolish more than a few, if any, Arab buildings there, a drop in the sea of thousands Arab houses which Israeli Supreme Court condemned to demolition over gross violations of building codes.
Car terrorism continues
Truck with an Arab driver hit passenger bus on the road to Haifa, causing massive casualties.
Russia condemns Iranian sanctions
Russian FM rudely criticized American attempts to institute unilateral sanctions against Iran despite lack of consensus in the UNSC.
The sanctions cannot prevent Iranian nuclearization, but China and other countries significantly reduced their imports of Iranian oil, which further strains the embattled Iranian economy.
I agree. But, sometimes they put out factual information first. Mossad or connections to Mossad? Maybe.
I still want to see the weapons actually arrive in Israel.
Convincing confirmation would consist of the IDF dropping a bunker buster on Yossi Beilin.
@ ayn reagan:
@ RandyTexas:
Be wary of Debka, they are not the most reliable source. Some have said they are even a Mossad organ for disinformation?
Look around to see if there is any other reliable? corroboration to their report.
Obama wishes to avoid conflict altogether—that is, military conflict. He proposes to destroy Israel by ‘peace’, not war. Obama, in his mind, is probably irritated that his Muslim comrades don’t realize that he has a ‘superior’ way to destroy Israel other than by using force which has failed every time. Although, as a matter of course, when Israel has conceded in negotiations and national security is compromised, war will come regardless.
If war comes sooner rather than later, it may be on a smaller scale—like what we saw in Lebanon, but worse–as a means to pressure international powers to force their will upon the Jewish State. With the economy in the tank, world powers would see a middle-East conflict as global threat that had to be settled immediately. Israel’s security would be a very small concern in comparison to stopping the war for global stabilization. So, if Muslims start a war they know they cannot win militarily, it may be that they have a political motive. The U.N. will play right into their hands.
On the other hand, Ayn has a good point in that, Obama must realize a militarized conflict is brewing to Israel’s north. It would be a political disaster if it were set off before the US elections were to take place. The global impact from the uncertainty of war, along with high fuel prices, would be a death knell his party’s chances in November.
A-HA!
So there was a boycott.
But now we have some election year goodies being distributed.
Okay.
Fine.
Two can play that game…a game that is called “Let’s Stop Peeing On The Jews (But Just For A Little While).
Since Obama is apparently eager to avoid conflict until after the election, this is the time to demand absolutely everything that the IDF could possibly want.
And throw a world class tantrum (think “John McEnroe) if it is not forthcoming.
Because after the election, Israel immediately returns to being BO’s urinal.