« National Journal Blog 8 November 2010 | Main | Today's Washington Post »

09 November 2010

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Jake

Note to you Colonel....

http://www.katu.com/news/national/106965343.html

WTF Over?

batondor

Pat,

You strike at the heart of my despair because I cannot disagree with your observation in any meaningful way...

... except to say that I (and I think you) would agree with Avnery that this is "no joke" (read his piece) and is also a tragic error for Israel, too!

"Almost all the experts believe that the unlimited American support for Israel is the main cause for the Islamic anti-American wave. Most of them do not speak about this openly, because fear of the Israeli lobby pervades the entire American political establishment. But even the most terrifying lobby cannot withstand, in the long run, the inexorable logic of national interests.

THERE IS something crazy in this situation: our government [Israel] is rushing light-heartedly towards a clash with the only remaining ally we have in the world. No realistic alternative can be detected on the horizon."

http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/avnery/1289050375

I was tempted to argue that you should have noted the title of the NY Times article - "Obama, in Indonesia, Criticizes Israel on Housing" - but that will be lost in the fog of opportunistic critics who will say that he did it to pander to a Muslim nation.

I, for one, would be more encouraged if the President would say it before the Knesset...


Dick Durata

The paragraph you quote seems to have been scrubbed. It shows in a Google news search, but not in the linked article.

walrus

The Israelis are not stupid. They know that AIPAC has a "use by" date that is very fast approaching, at which time America will no longer have the slightest interest in the Middle East and will have to focus on what really matters: China, India and it's own parlous domestic economy.

That time is right now. America has been warned by China, Germany and God knows who else, not to print another $600 billion in "Quantitative easing". The dollar is depreciating against all major currencies and debtors have just drawn a line in the sand.

Increasing attention must be paid to the needs and wants of ordinary Americans in the coming year. An Israeli stimulated attack on Iran at a time of national distress, whose proximate cause is the machinations of (Jewish) Wall Street, is likely to provoke an anti - Semitic backlash.

Bibi is grabbing what he can from the blazing store. Remember, possession is Nine Tenths of the law, or as the Israeli playbook puts it: "In a negotiated solution, nobody should have to leave their home." Go figure.

Retired (once-Serving)Patriot

Nothing like greenlighting, eh? Then again, never discount the power of a once uttered talking point like "unbreakable." At heart, speechwriters are lazy.

I suspect comments like this will soon cause Moscow to "reconsider" its stance on advanced SAM (S-300) system sales to Iran, especially if the lame-ducks in the Senate fail to ratify the new START Treaty. The Bear really does not want another war on its periphery - especially one that ignites more muslim anger in Central Asia.

RP

Bart

Headline currently at the on-line New York Times:

"Netanyahu Sharply Insists on Building in Jerusalem"

Funny, but there is no "Post a Comment" accompanying this article.

samuelburke

Shazam Col, i am loving the emotion you show for your country.

now what about the rest of the sheep?

Patrick Lang

samuelburke

I am the sheepdog, not a sheep. pl

Patrick Lang

SP, CWZ et all

I have been looking at present Pakistan delivery capabilities. They have four Il-78 tankers with two more on order. These are probe and drogue, so they are no good with the F-16s, but the PAF has other, Chinese made fighters that are actually their preferred nuclear delivery aircraft. With a hi-lo-hi mission profile penetration to TA and Haifa is a possibility. Any survivors could land in an Arab country. The PAF also has other more advanced nuclear bomber capable fighters in joint development with China.

Then there is the Shaheen II two stage IRBM with a ranges of 2500-3000 km. People seem to think they have nuke warheads for their fifteen missiles. (China help) They have Transporter Erector Launchers (TEL) fitted to these. From western Pakistan Baluchistan they range Israel and with Chinese help they seem to have final stage precision guidance and anti-missile capability.

IMO the strategic balance is already unfavorable to Israel.

http://www.strategycenter.net/research/pubID.47/pub_detail.asp


What say? pl

Fred

Col,

I'm sure they would have learned the lessons of 'Desert One' should they decide on using some other re-fueling method. Not to mention a banana boat to Haifa.

eakens

the link is incorrect; I believe you were pointing to this one

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/09/world/middleeast/09mideast.html?ref=asia

Patrick Lang

Fred

Takes a while. Another Rube Goldberg thing that appeals to me as a "Greenie" would be to load the thing on a C-130 along with a lot of fuel bladders and a pump. you could come in hi-lo-lo and roll the thing off the ramp after you popped up. pl

Retired (once-Serving)Patriot

COL,

I'd say you make very keen observations. ShaheenII has no other use than strategic. One must wonder though about the present state of play vis-a-vis Iran-Pakistan relations? Clearly, unrest in the Baluchi Tribelands benefits neither country... but is the unrest within the Iranian side of the border instigated at Pakistan's order (or acquiescence)?

As to Pakistan's defending the umma from the jewish state, I don't know that there are good public sources that tell the score. One must also consider if China has any say over Pakistan's reactions in the event Israel makes the attack. China depends on the plucky East Mediterranean nation to help its own R&D efforts... they may not be keen on such a drastic solution. (Then again, I've felt for a while now that the wire holding that cork is held in Beijing and not Washington.) One must also consider the strong possibility that Pakistan's (Saudi-financed?) nuclear achievement was designed not only to defend against that other populist muslim state (India) but to protect the umma at large. (And how sure are we that those Saudi IRBMs never received the special warheads that they were originally designed to deliver? Yes, I know of the claims from Beijing and Riyadh, but still...)

As for capability, I believe you are spot-on. And, as they further say, the real question is in the intent.

(And let's not discount Iran's own retaliatory capability. Although not nuclear armed, the thoughts of ShahabIIIs and Sejjils falling into TA, Haifa and maybe even Jerusalem itself must cause concern. 'Cause in my estimation, there's no way the US bought ArrowII is capable against these threats.)

RP

CWZ

I don't know anything about this stuff (I was a SIGINT weenie, not a flyboy), but I'll see what's "cooking on the big board" ala our hero Buck Turgidson.

Patrick Lang

RSP

My basic point is that the Israelis are lousy strategic analysts. pl

Jackie

Gentlemen,
Are you all trying to figure out other countries capabilities in case Israel attached Iran? And, if so, it doesn't look like Israel will be "greeted with flowers".
Just trying to make sure I'm up to speed.

Retired (once-Serving)Patriot

@Col,

No disagreement from my end on that point!

RP

Fred

Col.

I agree, the slow boat to the mushroom cloud is probably not the first choice, but you can't defend against everything. The C130 idea sure works, kind of like the extra fuel Billy Mitchel had on those B 25's? Thirty seconds over Tel Aviv? Wonder how that would play in Bollywood (or Pakistan's version?)

confusedponderer

One word on that: Nibelungentreue.

It certainly didn't do Imperial Germany any good to be drawn into Hungaro Austria's troubles in the Balkans and their rivalry with Russia.

Likewise, Russia's support to Serbia under the banner of Panslavism emboldened and inspired Serbs into, shall we say reckless, policies?

confusedponderer
My basic point is that the Israelis are lousy strategic analysts. pl
Mr. Lang, you are apparently not alone in this.

Prof. Bulliet travelled to Israel recently and returned appalled about the sorry state of Israeli Iran studies.

Columbia history professor Richard Bulliet spent three weeks in Israel last spring, he told a packed room at an ominously named event — “War With Iran?” — hosted by the university’s Middle East Institute. “Iran was always coming up as an ‘existential threat,’” he said.

Bulliet was in Israel evaluating the country’s Middle East programs. He seemed disconcerted by what he found: There was very little study of this so-called “existential threat.” The designation was not backed by any rigorous academic examination of the country on the receiving end of the accusation.

“To my recollection,” he said, “there were five professors in Israel who were… specialists on Iran.”

Five is an awfully low number for a country with a robust university system that churns out research and, more importantly, whose work informs its (as well as, occasionally, the U.S.’s) policy structures, something Bulliet acknowledged.

“I have a very low regard for the quality of inputs that go into [policy thinking in Israel],” he said.

Hannah K. O'Luthon

This is off topic, but perhaps merits a thread: Ray McGovern's jeremiad with regard to G. W. Bush's written and open admission of having authorized water-boarding:

http://www.consortiumnews.com/Print/2010/110710a.html


Sidney O. Smith III

According to Grant Smith, records declassified on 10.21.10 indicate that an “Israeli False Flag Attack on U.S. Motivated 1963 Senate Investigations”. (G. Smith is referring to the Lavon Affair).

http://tinyurl.com/24eku6y

walrus

Confusedponderer:

"It certainly didn't do Imperial Germany any good to be drawn into Hungaro Austria's troubles in the Balkans and their rivalry with Russia.

Likewise, Russia's support to Serbia under the banner of Panslavism emboldened and inspired Serbs into, shall we say reckless, policies?"

1. Germany didn't get "drawn in" to Austrias troubles. They encouraged Austria, giving them the so called "blank check" acknowledging that world war could be an outcome of Austrias aggression and promising Germany's full support, including going to war itself.

2. Panslavism is unfortunately alive and well. Russia made it quite clear that it was not pleased by European intervention in the Kosovo war. My understanding is that American intervention was necessary before the Europeans would act.


To state the bleedin' obvious. There are Kaiser Wilhelms in Israel who think war with Iran right now would be a good thing and Washington has effectively given Israel a blank check.

J

Colonel,

Maybe what he Arab world needs is a LOA2 to gel them together once more like LOA1 did, and instead of the Turks like last time, their spear this time will be pointed at the bully Israel state. Sadly, I don't seem to see any LOA2 waiting in the wings. I would think the Turks might want to join in on a new LOA2 Arab initiative, Oui?

confusedponderer

walrus,
poor wording on my part. You're right. Imperial Germany was indeed an eager and willing participant.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

September 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30      
Blog powered by Typepad