"Recently, Obama called Netanyahu asking for clarifications regarding [a possible] attack [against Iran]. According to the Sunday Times report, the conversation was strained, and the Prime Minister explained his position, insisting that he would refuse to share details with the White House, should such an attack be launched. According to the report, the differences between the two sides increased further in the wake of Dempsey's meeting with Defence Minister Ehud Barak at the weekend." Maariv
---------------------
I am told that the discussions were unpleasant except for the IDF Orchestra and Chorus performing at the garden party. Been there, done that. In the case of my delegation the performance was not Sinatra show tunes. It was "Eine Kleine Nachtmusik" and a selection of German Romantic Period "tunes." I guess they got the "Lang" thing wrong.
Dempsey told them again that if they "go" without our agreement, they are on their own. pl
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4179929,00.html
Posted by: mj | 24 January 2012 at 08:11 AM
I don't think there's any way in hell what Dempsey said, will transpire. If Israel initiates without an agreement, I do not believe for a minute the U.S. will stay hands off. There's too much at stake....too many vested interests, and too many global ramifications to just sit by and watch two ideologically entrenched regimes duke it out without influencing events. I believe Israel is the bad cop here, in this game of good cop/bad cop with Iran. For propaganda purposes, it's made to seem that there's a disconnect and a divide. It's made to seem to that the U.S. (the good cop in this play) is doing everything in its power to restrain Israel (the bad cop) from beating the perp to a pulp. In fact, the good cop and bad cop want the same thing by whatever means necessary.
I have also heard through the grapevine that the Falafel was not up to snuff....too garlicky for Dempsey's liking. It gave him acid reflux and he already takes Prilosec.
Since Sinatra has been mentioned, it's only fitting that we play this song....because it's fitting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqmtCrgpeik
Posted by: Morocco Bama | 24 January 2012 at 09:10 AM
The more I see of General Dempsey, the more I like. A quiet, professional American officer. I hope he's more George C. Marshall than Petreus.
Posted by: Matthew | 24 January 2012 at 09:39 AM
Ok as usual I'm ignorant about a main fact.
I've just read here somewhere that 12 hours was enough, or is thought to be enough time by someone to stop/blunt/interfere with an Israeli attack on Iran.
The inference is that the Israelis don't agree, but that more time might suffice.
My forgotten commentator mooted that 12 hours was enough, and that if Obama did not stop an attack with that knowledge made public, political hay could be made out of that to one effect or another. Ditto if he stopped it, or I suppose, tried to stop it and failed.
Can anyone tell us:
Politics aside, could the U.S. stop an Israeli strike on 12 hours notice? 24 hours?
Posted by: Charles I | 24 January 2012 at 10:41 AM
Why do we still give 'our best ally' $3Billion+ per year when this is how they treat us?
Posted by: Fred | 24 January 2012 at 10:58 AM
Col.
There's something odd about this story. The Sunday Times article cited has no link and I can't find one anywhere else, nor does the original come up on Google News. The story certainly sounds plausible but it's odd not to have an original. Information ops?
Posted by: JohnShreffler | 24 January 2012 at 11:11 AM
Charles I
I believe the Israelis implied that Obama could stop their attack in 12 hours. I don't know how he could do that.
You sent a Sasquatch picture. Ah Ha! I knew you were hiding them. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 24 January 2012 at 11:47 AM
Is this the Sunday "New York Times", or the London "Sunday Times," a Murdoch neo-con rag with a long history (like other Murdoch British titles) of running dodgy Zionist propaganda pieces which are later picked up by American news organizations as "fact."
Posted by: johnf | 24 January 2012 at 11:49 AM
i've always been very curious about the august bi-partisan trip to israel by 81 congressmen -- sponsored by the american israel education foundation... what country has the allegiance of these members, i wonder...
Posted by: linda | 24 January 2012 at 11:52 AM
John
It is in the Sunday Time but one has to subscribe and since I don't want to pay to Murdoch , this is what i saw:
-----------
Israel refuses to give US early notice of strike on Iran
* The Sunday Times
* Published: 22 January 2012
* Middle East
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (L) listens as U.S. President Barack Obama speaks in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington May 18, 2009. Obama voiced support for creation of a Palestinian state in talks on Monday with Netanyahu, who held back from endorsing the main cornerstone of Washington’s Mideast policy. (Larry Downing)
Israel has warned America’s top general that...breakdown of trust between the two allies over Israel’s response to Iranian ambitions to...wrote last week on the Ynet website that “Israel and the US are on a head-on collision...
It seems that it is written by Uzi Manhami who is well -known ( together with his co-author) to be the mouthpiece of Bibi as far as spreading rumours and fear is concerned :
http://www.medialens.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=section&layout=blog&id=1&Itemid=50
OR from wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_bioweapon
In November 1998, The Sunday Times reported that Israel was attempting to build an "ethno-bomb" containing a biological agent that could specifically target genetic traits present amongst Arab populations.[4] Wired News also reported the story,[5][6] as did Foreign Report.[7]
The article was quickly denounced as a hoax. Microbiologists and geneticists were skeptical towards the scientific plausibility of such a biological agent.[8] The New York Post, describing the claims as "blood libel", reported that the likely source for the story was a work of science fiction by Israeli academic Doron Stanitsky. Stanitsky had sent his completely fictional work about such a weapon to Israeli newspapers two years before. The article also noted the views of genetic researchers who claimed the idea as "wholly fantastical", still others admit that the weapon was theoretically possible.[9]
A planned second installment of the article never appeared, and no sources were ever identified. Neither of the authors of the Sunday Times story, Uzi Mahnaimi and Marie Colvin, have spoken publicly on the matter.
____
Just Google their names and you will have an eye-opener !!!!
Posted by: The beaver | 24 January 2012 at 12:17 PM
If Iran is attacked by Israel, I wonder just how much damage to Israel proper will be inflicted by Iranian "fellow travellers" both within Israel and on its immediate borders in retaliation??
Posted by: r whitman | 24 January 2012 at 01:08 PM
Israel's finance minister, one Yuval Steinitz, was on "Morning Joe" this a.m. saying that Israel's economy is currently booming with a growth rate of 5% this year. And yet, as you point out, the American taxpayer antes up $3,000,000,000 a year for them.
Posted by: Mike Martin, Yorktown, VA | 24 January 2012 at 02:41 PM
I don't see how we could stop them at all, to be honest. Besides, we provided them w/ bunker buster precision guided bombs, as the Guardian (and other sources) reported last September:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/julian-borger-global-security-blog/2011/sep/27/iran-nuclear-weapons
Posted by: Mike Martin, Yorktown, VA | 24 January 2012 at 02:48 PM
Perhaps it is time to tell Israel to put up or shut up. We have already discussed on previous threads that they don't have the technical ability to pull this off.
The major gain they will acheive is to add the enmity of China to their current list. And China said they would retailate if oil spikes causing them economic harm.
Posted by: Thomas | 24 January 2012 at 02:53 PM
Hard to believe Israel would go alone if it can't effectively stop Iran's progress. But maybe the timing would be to their benefit. Say the weekend before the US Presidential election? And of course, coordinated PR with Obama's opposition.
Another delicate operation...
Posted by: greg0 | 24 January 2012 at 02:55 PM
Ah, as I suspected an Info Ops. Manhami is a tool:
http://www.yourish.com/2007/06/17/3306
Seems he's one of Bibi's outlets, as you say. Thanks. This story just got a lot less plausible. It sure smelled funny.
Posted by: JohnShreffler | 24 January 2012 at 03:18 PM
The Rupert Murdoch owned Sunday Times often serves as an outlet for pieces placed by Mossad. Don't know what the objective would be in this case but the pieces, which are always impossible to check out, generally replay Israeli talking points or float information that is fabricated.
Posted by: Phil Giraldi | 24 January 2012 at 04:16 PM
Since Israel is all about creating 'facts on the ground' and forcing everybody else to react, I like this as a pre-emptive maneuver, since it now puts some 'daylight' between us and them.
Posted by: Roy G. | 24 January 2012 at 05:09 PM
Even our diplomats have to kiss the ring. See http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/envoy/obama-un-envoy-susan-rice-moves-shore-domestic-183228618.html
To paraphrase Norma Desmond, America is still big. It's the public servants that got small.
Posted by: Matthew | 24 January 2012 at 05:56 PM
And here we're about to shell out more...
U.S. to grant three-year extension of loan guarantees to Israel
Current balance of loan guarantees Israel can take is $3.8 billion; global credit agencies view the gurantees as a 'safety net' for the Israeli economy.
And to think they're the considered the most 'Militarized Nation' in the World...!
Posted by: CTuttle | 24 January 2012 at 07:25 PM
Matthew
Rumours on H street ( World Bank), Hillary Clinton may be heading there (to replace Zoellick, 5 yr term will be over by June 2012 -appointed by GW Bush in 2007 to replace Wolfy). Close contender according to some in the WH : Larry Summers which would be a no no there, especially amongst the G77 countries ( well let's dump P-5 nuclear waste there) and the gent feminine staffers.
Posted by: The Beaver | 24 January 2012 at 09:11 PM
I think you are wrong. There are too many "powers that be" who recognize that a war with Iran IS NOT in the US interests.
RC
Posted by: Robert C. | 24 January 2012 at 10:29 PM
I dimly hoped you had trapdoors inside their trapdoors that Pollard & ilk didn't know about inside all the stuff you give them but I've since learned power and knowledge is meaningless without leadership. . .
Hmmm its like the political fallout from bullshit and spin alone could be touched off just at the right time like a Political EMP, one frequency-tuned to Obama a la the erstwhile genetic bioweapon.
Over and above the actual attack I mean. Heck, in BOHICA i just turned the plot 180 so the attack is just the pretext for the story. Diabolical.
Sorta like Mitt's taxes. Guy's a role model and a target all at once to the very wags who set up the preferred investment income taxation er, system.
Its so nice and quiet up in the Shire, lotta
loose clothing, garden, no cell, no watch, ideal Sasquatch habitat. But sorry, had to burn the actual hidden pictures, those are just declassified outtakes.
Like a busy family reunion there in ch. 1. Felt the embrace of family & cohorts then Snap! No Exit! Brought me up short it did.
Eek.
Posted by: Charles I | 24 January 2012 at 10:55 PM
Charles I
I am into the whole Sasquatch thing. I love TV programs in which fat old men with stubble and nifty six foot woman biologists walk around in the woods at night making Bigfoot screams and banging pieces of wood on tree trunks. "Do you hear that?" one says. "It's on the hill side." He then charges up the hill. Some of the people here will testify that sound and light carry a long way at night. Sooo, the chance that any of thse people will ever see a "Squatch" who is not rolling on the ground laughing is slim Seriously, I would go look for them on Vancouver Island. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 25 January 2012 at 12:39 AM
Imo, Hillary is the 'kinder, gentler' Margaret Thatcher. She only looks good compared to the competition, but she's a stone neoliberal fascist.
Posted by: Roy G. | 25 January 2012 at 01:12 AM