WarSclerotic

Chances of Iran strike receding, U.S. officials say – Chico Enterprise Record.

WASHINGTON — After a winter of alarm over the possibility that a military conflict over the Iranian nuclear program might be imminent, U.S. officials and outside analysts now believe that the chances of war in the near future have significantly decreased.

They cite a series of factors that, for now, argue against a conflict. The threat of tighter economic sanctions has prompted the Iranians to try more flexible tactics in their dealings with the United States and other powers, while the revival of direct negotiations has tempered the most inflammatory talk on all sides.

A growing divide in Israel between political leaders and military and intelligence officials over the wisdom of attacking Iran has begun to surface. And the White House appears determined to prevent any confrontation that could disrupt world oil markets in an election year.

“I do think the temperature has cooled,” an Obama administration official said.

At the same time, no one is discounting the possibility that the current optimism could fade. “While there isn’t an agreement between the U.S. and Israel on how much time, there is an agreement that there is some time to give diplomacy a chance,” said Dennis B. Ross, who previously handled Iran policy for the Obama administration.

“So I think right now you have a focus on the negotiations,” he added. “It doesn’t mean the threat of using force goes away, but it lies behind the diplomacy.”

The talks two weeks ago in Istanbul between Iran and the U.S. and other world powers were something of a turning point in the current American thinking about Iran. In the days leading up to the talks, there had been little optimism in Washington, but Iranian negotiators appeared more flexible and open to resolving the crisis than expected, even though no agreement was reached other than to talk again in Baghdad next month. U.S. officials believe the looming threat of tighter economic sanctions to take effect on July 1 convinced the Iranians to take the negotiations more seriously, and that in turn has reduced the threat of war.

“There is a combination of factors coming on line, including the talks and the sanctions, and so now I think people realize it has to be given time to play out,” said one administration official, who, like the other official, spoke without attribution in order to discuss sensitive matters. “We are in a period now where the combination of diplomacy and pressure is giving us a window.”

In a television appearance Wednesday, Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said, “I have confidence that there is a way forward.”

Senior Iranian leaders have sought to portray the Istanbul round of negotiations as successful, which might be a sign, U.S. officials and outside analysts said, that the Iranian government is preparing the public for a deal with the West that could be portrayed as a win for Iran.

At the same time in Israel, the conservative government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been rocked by a series of public comments from current and former Israeli military and intelligence officials questioning the wisdom of attacking Iran.

The latest comments came from Yuval Diskin, the former chief of Shin Bet, Israel’s domestic security service, who on Friday said Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak should not be trusted to determine policy on Iran. He said the judgments of both men have been clouded by “messianic feelings.” Diskin, who was chief of Shin Bet until last year, said an attack against Iran might cause it to speed up its nuclear program.

Just days before, Israel’s army chief of staff suggested in an interview with the Israeli newspaper Haaretz that the Iranian nuclear threat was not quite as imminent as Netanyahu has portrayed it. In his comments, Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz suggested that he agreed with the U.S. intelligence assessments that Iran has not yet decided whether to build a nuclear bomb.

Iran “is going step by step to the place where it will be able to decide whether to manufacture a nuclear bomb. It hasn’t yet decided whether to go the extra mile,” Gantz told Haaretz. He also suggested that the crisis would not necessarily come to a head this year. He said, “Clearly, the more the Iranians progress, the worse the situation is. This is a critical year, but not necessarily ‘go, no-go.'”

The divide within the Israeli establishment is significant because Israel has been threatening to launch a unilateral strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities if the U.S. is unwilling to do so. The United States has feared that if Israel were to do so, the U.S. could get dragged into the fight, which could result in a widening war in the region.

The crisis atmosphere seemed most pronounced in March, when Netanyahu visited Washington. Obama, fearful of antagonizing American Jewish voters during an election year, tried to strike a balance, appearing supportive of Israel but still stopping short of endorsing military action anytime soon. He said at the time that he “had Israel’s back,” and strongly suggested that the U.S. would take military action to prevent Iran from ever acquiring a nuclear bomb.

Obama made it clear that he would not be willing to pursue a policy of “containment” on Iran, in which the U.S. would accept an Iranian nuclear weapon while seeking to prevent a further nuclear arms race in the Middle East.

Abandoning containment as a policy option was the result of an intense debate within the administration and moved the U.S. a bit closer to the Israeli position. It was considered by the White House to be the biggest reward they were willing to give Netanyahu during his visit. Yet Obama also made it clear that he believes now is the time to give diplomacy a chance.

But some analysts warned that the Iran crisis could heat up again if there was not much progress at the Baghdad talks.

via DEBKAfile, Political Analysis, Espionage, Terrorism, Security.

DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis April 29, 2012, 10:20 PM (GMT+02:00)

Will Netanyahu face an election before Obama?

Binyamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak are facing another of the periodic opposition campaigns to unseat them – this time by pressure for an early election a year before its October, 2013 date. New faces have joined the opposition lineup. They are focused on challenging the current government’s credentials for leading an Israeli attack to preempt a nuclear Iran. These two goals are interchangeable. However, before the campaign peaks, debkafile’s analysts report it has begun to backfire.
The newcomer to the anti-government ranks is the party registered Sunday, April 29, by ex-broadcaster Yair Lapid as “Yesh Atid” (There is a Future). His potential partners are former Shin Bet director Yuval Diskin, former Mossad chief Meir Dagan, former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and former chief of staff Gaby Ashkenazi. They are all casting about for a political base, together or apart, from which to tip over the current government.  Incumbent President Shimon Peres cheers them on from the wings.
Diskin’s assault on Netanyahu and Barak as not to be trusted to lead a war and guided by “messianic” feelings was launched Friday, April 27, directly after Independence Day celebrations, at the same time as two leading opposition parties, Labor and Kadima, set the stage for an early election to stem the right-of-center government’s constant gains in opinion polls.

The ex-Shin Bet chief sounded the drum for them all by his assault on Netanyahu’s competence for leading any wars, least of all, a major conflict against Iran. Captions suddenly blossomed in foreign publications on the lines of “Israel’s Generals in Revolt,” implying that Israel’s security establishment was solidly against an attack on Iran.

This is far from the truth. The vocal opponents are a group of disaffected ex-security officials. There are questions about why they did not resign on the grounds of the views they are now voicing instead of fighting to have their tours of duty extended.
Now they are casting out lines for careers in politics.
Ehud Olmert, one of the Yesh Atid founding fathers and a member of its inner leadership, set the new party’s security agenda in New York Sunday with this comment:  “I think that fundamentally, Israelis believe that a nuclear Iran imperils their existence. That is not in dispute. Nor that we must do everything it takes to defend ourselves against this peril. The question is what should be done, who should do it and when. My answer is this: It is being done and continues to be done by the international community led by the United States.”

With this agenda, Olmert sought to place the question of an Israeli solo attack on Iran versus reliance on US President Barack Obama front and center of the election campaign to come.
He appeared to be drawing on Diskin’s words, that the Israeli public is “stupid” or “ignorant,” leading to his belief that the Israeli voter would swallow a straight black-and-white choice between the “good guys” and the “bad guys.’
The good guys would be Barak Obama and his advisers, who have worked so hard to hold Israel back from a military offensive against Iran, and the baddies are Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defense Minister Barak who are making trouble for the US president.

On April 26, Chief of Staff, Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz tried to fracture this distorted picture: He reported that other armies stand alongside Israel ready to attack Iran and prevent its acquisition of a nuclear weapon.

He did not name those armies, but debkafile’s military sources disclosed he was referring to the United States.

In their drive to discredit Netanyahu and Barak, President Peres, Olmert, Dagan, Diskin and Ashkenazi failed to take note of Gen. Gantz’s words or what they portended – namely: In the past week, the United States has brought forward its operational preparations for an attack on Iran.
Instead, in Jerusalem, Israel’s opposition parties gathered for the push to corner Netanyahu into announcing an early election.
They got their wish sooner than they expected.
The prime minister, after turning the situation over for 48 hours, assented. He figured that the key weapon adopted by his rivals to knock him over was not in fact in their hands but in his: It is up to him and him alone to decide whether to attack Iran. In fact, if an election was forced on his government, he could defeat their scheme by bringing the attack forward.
So the impression of Netanyahu and Barak fighting with their backs to the wall against a body of generals is totally misleading.

Their opponents are beginning to realize that their anti-government offensive has missed its mark and may well blow up in their faces. The pressure for an election may therefore dissipate in the coming days – or not. That too is up to Netanyahu. He may decide that a successful operation against Iran would assure him of an election victory and wipe out his rivals. For now, he’s got his foes guessing.
President Obama was far from happy with the exes’ anti-government maneuvers because he realized that they offered Prime Minister Netanyahu his strongest incentive yet for bringing forward an attack on Iran, an eventuality which the US president had made every effort to prevent before he himself faces the American voter in November.

Report: Hackers target Iran’s science ministry – Israel News, Ynetnews.

Senior official tells reformist newspaper cyber attack ‘under control.’ MP says reported deployment of stealth fighters in UAE ‘part of US-Israel plot’

Dudi Cohen, AP

Hackers have attacked the computers of Iran’s ministry of science, a reformist newspaper in the Islamic Republic reported on Sunday. A senior official told the paper that there was no known damage and that the “situation was under control.”

A source within the ministry told the “Sharq” newspaper that it is possible that the sites were hacked due to the fact that the ministry has joint projects with the defense ministry and that the “hackers intended to hack into the main servers to get information and cause damage.”

Iran’s Oil Ministry announced recently that is has formed a crisis center to deal with the recent cyber attack on the country’s oil export facilities.

According to Iranian media, over 50 of Tehran’s top technical experts have been ordered to report to the ministry and assist in the “cyber battle.”

The cyber attack, which has been ongoing throughout April, peaked last week, when it took down several key computer systems in the Oil Ministry and corrupted the data stored on them in its entirety.

A virus was first detected inside the control systems of Kharg Island, which handles the vast majority of Iran’s crude oil exports.

Iran’s deputy oil minister said authorities have yet to determine whether the attack originated from inside Iran or abroad.

Meanwhile, a prominent Iranian lawmaker said the reported basing of America’s most sophisticated stealth jet fighters in the United Arab Emirates is a US-Israel plot to create regional instability.

Kazem Jalali was reacting to media reports of the recent deployment of F-22 Raptors at the UAE’s Al Dafra Air Base, which has long hosted US warplanes.

The deployment was first reported in the journal Aviation Week, but US and UAE officials have not publicly commented.

Jalali was quoted by the semiofficial ISNA news agency Sunday.

Tehran and Washington are at odds over Iran’s nuclear program. The US and Israel say Iran is seeking nuclear weapons, a charge Tehran denies. The two countries have not ruled out military action against Iranian facilities.

Israeli Spook Revolt is Politics as Usual « Commentary Magazine.

Jonathan S. Tobin | @tobincommentary 04.29.2012

The international press is doing its best to hype critical remarks about Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu uttered by Yuval Diskin, the retired head of the Shin Bet security service, into a sign the government is in trouble. Diskin, a respected figure who retired last year, is the latest veteran spook to express his disdain for Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak and their stance on the nuclear threat from Iran. That there is a debate in the highest intelligence circles about what the best strategy for dealing with Iran has never been a secret. But what Diskin’s comments and other attacks on Netanyahu from former Mossad chief Meir Dagan reflect is not so much a revolt of the experts against the politicians but a standard trope of Israeli politics in which those who are frustrated about the fact that their ideas have not won the support of the Israeli public seek to overturn the verdict of democracy by appealing to the press and international opinion. It is no more likely to succeed now than in the past.

Though foreign news outlets treated Diskin’s remarks as a huge story that can be spun as part of a negative trend for Netanyahu, even the left-wing press in Israel is skeptical about that. Haaretz’s Yossi Verter noted that the personal nature of Diskin’s rant against Netanyahu and Barak at what he termed a “gathering of defense establishment pensioners” undermined their credibility. Unlike the foreign press, most Israelis are aware that Dagan’s animus against Netanyahu and Barak stems from the fact that he was fired from his post. That Diskin was passed over to replace Dagan may also explain his hard feelings. Moreover, the utter lack of public support for alternatives to Netanyahu or his policies makes farcical the claim in today’s New York Times that there is an “avalanche” of criticism about his stand on Iran.

It’s important to reiterate that the disagreements in Israel about Iran policy are not about the nature of the threat or even whether anything should be done about it as is often claimed by those seeking to downplay the issue. The question is about the timing of an attack, with Netanyahu’s critics claiming he is wrong to push for one now.

But this is an entirely false issue. It is highly unlikely that Israel would attack Iran while the U.S. is negotiating with it even if Netanyahu rightly suspects the current P5+1 talks are an Iranian ruse. The attacks on Netanyahu are merely a way for disgruntled former employees to vent their spleen at the prime minister’s political success and to try and hurt his standing abroad.

The animus against Netanyahu and his center-right government from the defense establishment and the government bureaucracy as well as most of the country’s traditional media outlets is well-known. Their frustration about his survival in power is compounded by the fact that he appears to be set for a cakewalk in the next elections which, incredibly, some opposition parties are pushing to be advanced from their scheduled date next year. As journalist Amir Mizroch writes, Dagan and Diskin — two men with axes to grind against the prime minister – may be “smelling elections in the air.”

Although the Dagan and Diskin affairs are in a sense unprecedented, because until now Israeli defense and security officials have not misbehaved in this manner, what is going on is just Israeli politics as usual. If these men and those Israeli and foreign journalists who are trying to make this into a major story are frustrated and angry now, just imagine how they’ll feel after Netanyahu is re-elected

Iran hopes nuclear dispute will be settled at Baghdad meeting – Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News.

Foreign Minister calls previous round of talks a “beginning for ending the nuclear dispute,’ expresses hope for further progress in May 23 meeting between Iran and six world powers.

By DPA

Iran on Sunday expressed hope that the dispute over its controversial nuclear program would be settled at a May meeting with six world powers in Baghdad.

Foreign Minister Ali-Akbar Salehi told a press conference in Tehran, “[The April nuclear meeting in] Istanbul was the beginning for ending the nuclear dispute and we hope to put a total end to the case in the … future,” according to the ISNA news agency.

	Iranian Foreign Minister Salehi addresses UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, Feb. 27, 2012.
	Photo by: AP

“If one step ahead was taken in Istanbul, we will certainly take several steps ahead in Baghdad,” he said.

The next round of nuclear talks between Iran and six world powers – Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States – is to be held May 23 in Iraq.

Salehi said a two-day meeting with International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) officials in Vienna on May 14 was aimed at finding “a framework for future cooperation based on the standpoints of both sides.”

He gave no further details and said “no pre-mature predictions” should be made before the Baghdad talks end.

The two sides have described the Istanbul talks as positive and constructive, but have not disclosed any details.

The Los Angeles Times reported Saturday that President Barack Obama’s administration would consider allowing Iran to enrich uranium to 5 per cent if Tehran agrees to inspections, oversight and other international demands.

Iran’s ambassador to Russia, Reza Sajadi, said Thursday that Iran might accept snap inspections by United Nations nuclear experts by rejoining the IAEA additional protocol, but had certain conditions.

In 2005, Iran withdrew from the additional protocol, which provides for intrusive on-the-spot inspections by the IAEA, after the election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Observers believe Iran would ratify the additional protocol again and commit to more IAEA inspections if, at the Baghdad meeting, there is an acknowledgment of Iran’s nuclear rights and sanctions against it are lifted.

Israel keeping Iran off guard?.

Statements about nuclear program in conflict

WASHINGTON – Comments made by Israeli military Chief of Staff Binyamin “Benny” Gantz in recent days that he doubts Iran has decided to build a nuclear bomb on the surface may appear to be at serious odds with the thinking of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in which case the Israeli military chief would be expected to resign within a week, according to a report in Joseph Farah’s G2 Bulletin.

Unless Gantz planned for an early retirement, his comments had to be approved by political authorities, which suggests his public statement may be part of an Israeli strategy to keep Iran off guard on exact Israeli intentions of whether to attack its nuclear facilities – or not.

The public disagreement on its face may appear to show a serious difference between the military and political leaders, but sources believe it may be a calculated effort to keep Iran guessing what Israel will do. Gantz suggested that as long as Israel threatens to attack Iran will decide not to develop nuclear weapons.

In a recent interview with the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, Gantz said that he did not believe that Iran had made a decision to build nuclear weapons, despite having a nuclear development program.

Iran is going “step by step to the place where it will be able to decide whether to manufacture a nuclear bomb,” Gantz said. “It hasn’t yet decided whether to go the extra mile.”

Gantz added that Iran would build a nuclear bomb if it thought there would not be a military consequence but had not made that final decision because of the prospect of a military attack on its facilities.

Gantz tempered that assessment by saying that the further Iran progresses with its nuclear program, the “worse the situation is. This is a critical year, but not necessarily ‘go, no-go,’” Gantz said. “The problem doesn’t necessarily stop on December 21, 2012.

“We’re in a period when something must happen – either Iran takes its nuclear program to a civilian footing only or the world, perhaps we too, will have to do something,” Gantz added. “We’re closer to the end of the discussions than the middle.”

The Israeli military chief’s comments mirror those of U.S. military officials who similarly have determined that Iran hasn’t decided yet to develop a nuclear weapon as part of its nuclear development efforts.

In the view of some regional observers, Gantz appears to be distancing himself from Netanyahu, who, sources say, gets his perspective from the ideology of the Islamic republic, “arguing that its religious foundations trump rational calculation,” according to the open intelligence company Stratfor.

In public statements, Netanyahu is of the belief that Iran is on a path to make nuclear weapons, using its nuclear development program as a cover for such an undertaking. He further believes that unless those nuclear facilities are destroyed, and soon, Iran will have reached the point of enriching weapons-grade uranium to construct a nuclear bomb.

For Israel, sources point out, any attack on Iran would be a major military undertaking. In addition, the element of surprise most likely would be gone, since the intelligence services of Iran and such friends as Russia and China are watching developments very closely and would provide militarily useful information.

Go-it-alone outlook now shapes Israel’s security policy – ivpressonline.com.

Its get-tough approach with the Palestinians, and now with Iran, is lauded by some. Others warn that Israel’s foreign policy will come back to haunt it.

By Edmund Sanders, Los Angeles Times

3:44 PM PDT, April 28, 2012

Israeli creativity, madness, or chaos? | Jerusalem Post – Blogs.

“Meir Dagan has been described as “hard-charging” and “stops at nothing.” For more than eight years, Dagan made full use of those qualities as chief of Mossad, Israel’s intelligence agency, where he focused on keeping Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. When that job ended, Dagan did something unheard of for an ex-Mossad chief: he spoke out publicly, voicing opposition to Israel launching preemptive airstrikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities anytime soon. Dagan believes the Iranian regime is a rational one and even its president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad – who has called for Israel to be annihilated – acts in a somewhat rational way when it comes to Iran’s nuclear ambitions.”

“Israel’s military chief said he does not believe Iran will decide to build an atomic bomb and called its leaders “very rational“.”

“Referring to the leaders as “our two messiahs,” a likely reference to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak, Diskin said “they are not fit to hold the steering-wheel of power. I have no faith in the current leadership in Israel and its ability to conduct a war.”

Regarding their handling of the Iranian nuclear issue, Diskin said the leadership “presents a false view to the public on the Iranian bomb, as though acting against Iran would prevent a nuclear bomb. But attacking Iran will encourage them to develop a bomb all the faster.””

“The chances that, at this pressure level, Iran will respond to international demands to irreversibly stop its program seem low. I would be happy to be proven wrong.”

“(Sanctions) better work soon. (They) are certainly taking a bite out of the Iranian economy, (but) they haven’t rolled back the Iranian program — or even stopped it — by one iota . . .I hope that changes, but so far, I can tell you, the centrifuges are spinning . . . they were spinning before the talks began recently with Iran, they were spinning during the talks, they’re spinning as we speak.”

Iran threatens American east coast – Israel News, Ynetnews.

Iranian Navy capable of deploying vessels near US shores, senior commander says; another official says Tehran has ability to disable American aircraft carries

Ynet

Iran’s Navy has the ability to deploy its vessels three miles off the US east coast, a high-ranking Iranian Navy commander was quoted as saying by the Fars news agency.

“Our naval forces are so powerful that we have a presence in all the waters of the world and, if needed, we can move to within three miles of New York,” Revolutionary Guards Navy Commander Rear Admiral Ali Fadavi was quoted as saying during a speech to students at the University of Yazd earlier this week.

The admiral was speaking on the anniversary the failed 1980 US attempt to rescue American hostages held captive in the US embassy in Tehran.

Iranian vessel during drill (Photo: MCT)

Fadavi said dominance in the Persian Gulf is “the only tool for the Americans to rule the world,” charging that this prompts the US to “confront any other power that threatens their status.”

Meanwhile, Revolutionary Guards Aerospace Commander Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh said Iranwas capable of crippling or disabling US aircraft carriers, Fars said.

“First, sinking an aircraft carrier is not a complicated task,” Hajizadeh said. “Second, an aircraft carrier is equipped with so many advanced, delicate, and sensitive devices … that it could be incapacitated by even the smallest explosion.”

Earlier, Fox News reported that the US military has deployed several F-22 fighter jets to an allied base less than 200 miles (320 km) from Iran.

According to the report, the US Air Force strongly denied ordering the deployment s a show of force against Iran, or that it is in some way related to a potential strike on the Islamic Republic’s nuclear facilities. It claimed the measure is part of routine activity and “security cooperation with regional partners.”

I’m tired of reading the opinions of know-it-all pundits…

The truth is NOBODY KNOWS ANYTHING ! 

It’s all just opinion; some educated some ignorant.

I know that the readers of this site are as educated as anyone can be who is not privy to classified information.  As such, I am curious to know what conclusions you all may have come to. 

I’ll leave the poll up as the headline story on the site for the week it will be active.  Thank you all in advance for your participation.

– JW

The comments on this post so far are interesting enough for me to add them to the post itself.  I encourage all to voice their thoughts.  – JW

_______________________________________

12 Comments on “Your opinion ?”

1. Renbe Says:

   April 29, 2012 at 4:14 AM eWhere is the option : “Neither Israel nor the US will attack Iran, because a) it’s against International Law, b) the costs will be too high and c) It won’t achieve anything

   Reply
   • Luis Says:

     April 29, 2012 at 9:55 AM eWe had seen that movie already, Renbe, dear, our little friend. It was a nice time, in the ‘ 38 , and the great powers decided to let the friendly Hitler to have his way and so it did. Dont worry, this time the jews wont be an easy prey. A…and dont forget to deliver my best regards to our common little friend , Ahmad, the great jews lover and big fan of the state of Israel. Isnt he naughty ?

     Reply
     • Renbe Says:

       April 29, 2012 at 8:39 PM eUtter nonsense. There is no comparison possible between 2012 and 70+ years ago. Iran didn’t invade any country and has no intentions to do so either. Yuval Diskin was right, a sane voice in a sea of madness
   • endgame Says:

     April 29, 2012 at 5:41 PM ethat is the most ridicules statement i have ever read,do you really think that we would move all that military hardware as a bluff,what is above is the truth,written by someone with some serious in depth inside information well,the fact they have stuck there neck out to leak whats really going on puts them in grave danger and the know it they risk all for Israel,God bless him

     Reply
2. MCJ Says:

   April 29, 2012 at 8:09 PM eWhile In route to Iran drop one on the Dome of the Rock !! Now thats how you send a clear signal !! As for the people of the USA, we stand with you.

   Reply
3. dontneedaname Says:

   April 29, 2012 at 9:30 PM eenjoy ur blog about israel-iran issues…keep the updates coming.

   Reply
4. Louisiana Steve Says:

   April 30, 2012 at 3:34 PM eJW, I have to admit. I voted “I just can’t figure” because I just can’t figure. Nothing would surprise me, unless they do the ‘right’ thing and stop Iran now.

   Reply
5. Luis Says:

   April 30, 2012 at 5:49 PM eRenbe, you really don’t get it, do you ? Iran rhetoric is a nazi one and their Leader promised to wipe the jewish state off map. You must tell us quickly what history books do you read to be sure you are writing from the same planet.

   Reply
   • Renbe Says:

     April 30, 2012 at 10:05 PM eIf you believe in fairy tales and propaganda, sure. But recently even an Israeli minister finally admitted that Iran (Ahmadinedjad) never actually said “Iran” would wipe Israel off the map. Nazi Germany wanted to expand its territory, Iran doesn’t, so there is no comparison with Iran. In any case, there is not going to be an attack on Iran, Not by the US, and surely not by Israel, sorry. Iran will make some minor concessions and the US will acknowledge Iran’s right to peaceful nuclear research, including enrichment.

     Reply
6. Norm Says:

   April 30, 2012 at 5:52 PM eI think that President Obama, desperately seeking to avoid a war with Iran prior to the election in November has made a secret under the table understanding with Iran. That Iran could quietly continue its nuclear work up to actually putting together a bomb; that Iran would put out nice peaceful press releases; and the United States will not attack. If Obama is reelected, then Iran will show off its weapons and Obama’s policy will be that Israel must live with a nuclearized Iran….under a policy of mutually assured destruction.

   Reply
   • Renbe Says:

     April 30, 2012 at 10:11 PM eYou are right up and until Iran producing a nuclear device. Firstly it is virtually impossible to produce one secretly, and secondly, if there is no threat (from Israel/US) there is no reason to build one. The whole world, minus Israel, (with the exception of some former heads of Mossad and Generals) is at the moment in agreement that any attack on Iran will not solve anything, and would in fact, only make matters worse. So, please rest assured, there is not going to be any attack, and Iran will not build a nuclear device.