"Netanyahu is hinting that in his Washington visit, he received Obama's tacit approval for an Israeli attack against Iran – under the guise of opposition. Obama will speak out against it but act for it, just as the past U.S. administrations speak against the settlements in the territories but allow their expansion. And in this manner Netanyahu summarized the visit: "I presented before my hosts the examples that I just noted before you, and I believe that the first objective that I presented – to fortify the recognition of Israel's right to defend itself – I think that objective has been achieved."
This morning, the editor-in-chief of the Israel Hayom newspaper, Amos Regev, published on his front page an enthusiastic op-ed in support of a war against Iran. Regev writes what Netanyahu cannot say in his speeches: that we cannot rely on Obama – who wasn't even a mechanic in the armored corps - but only on ourselves. "Difficult, daring, but possible," Regev promised. We need not be alarmed by the Iranian response: the arrow would take down the Shahab missiles, and Hezbollah and Hamas would hesitate about entering a war. The damage would be reminiscent of the Iraqi scuds in the 1991 Gulf War - unpleasant, but definitely not too bad. The analysts are weak, but the soldiers and the residents of the Home Front have motivation. So onward, to battle!" Aluf Ben in Haaretz
There seem to be two views of this post Bibi in Washington situation.
- On the one hand the prevailing view (which I support) is that Bibi left Washington with nothing but vague promises and an overweening case of spiritual pride, firm in the belief that the American untermenschen can be pushed into compliance with anything he wants to do.
- On the other hand, a rumor level rumor has reached me that the Israelis are pushing a story that the US is presently engaged in transferring to Israel equipment needed for the coming death ride of the flying supermen. (Catch the reference? )
Which is it? Does anyone actually know anything abot this? pl