WarSclerotic

On Iran, a Full Range of Obama Failures « Commentary Magazine.

Seth Mandel

The news from Israel over the weekend has left no doubt that President Obama’s failure on Iran has been one of both words and deeds.

Not only did Obama refuse to speak publicly against the regime at the most opportune moments, but his administration has also trotted out high-level appointees to undermine the credibility of a Western threat to use force if sanctions and diplomacy continue to fail. (Gen. Martin Dempsey may or may not have been speaking for the administration, but Leon Panetta most certainly does.)

Those are the words; unfortunately, the deeds match them. Obama has consistently sought first to prevent, then delay, then weaken tough sanctions against Iran. At times, the president has even faced down a united Senate to oppose sanctions. At the UN, we once could count on help from Turkey on international sanctions; in the age of Obama, the international coalition on this issue continues to fray. And then there was this weekend’s announcement that the U.S. dramatically scaled down joint military exercises scheduled for this fall, and is withholding certain military assistance (once the Obama administration’s claimed trump card when criticized over U.S.-Israeli relations). Message received, say the Israelis:

The White House at the weekend reiterated its commitment to Israel’s security, but this drew a withering response from the Israeli source: “It’s hard to explain the gulf between the White House’s comments about the commitment to Israel’s security and the comments made by the US chief of staff,” the official said. “What matters are not words but deeds.”

An Israeli military source and a political analyst were more direct when speaking to Time, the publication that first broke the story:

“Basically what the Americans are saying is, ‘We don’t trust you,’” a senior Israeli military official tells TIME….

In the current political context, the U.S. logic is transparent, says Israeli analyst Efraim Inbar. “I think they don’t want to insinuate that they are preparing something together with the Israelis against Iran – that’s the message,” says Inbar, director of the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies at Bar-Ilan University. “Trust? We don’t trust them. They don’t trust us. All these liberal notions! Even a liberal president like Obama knows better.”

Even Obama knows better than to develop trust between allies—such a post-modern presidency! The irony is, telling Israel they’re on their own only makes a strike more likely. If the U.S. made a convincing case that the Obama administration will take care of Iran no matter what it entails—even, yes, a military strike—then the American timeline would predominate. But if the Obama administration spends its time trying to wash its hands of the whole thing, then the decision rests solely on Israel’s shoulders. And the if the decision is Israel’s, then so are the timelines and the judgments used to determine the course of action.

Additionally, the American decision to scale down military assistance considered vital to Israel’s defenses in the event of a post-attack flare-up in the region sends a message to Iran as well. And that message is not one of a united Western front, nor is it that the Iranian regime’s time to drop its quest for the bomb is running out. The Obama administration has made clear it does not necessarily stand by agreements made between previous American administrations and Israel. But going back on its own word tells America’s allies that they cannot factor in Obama’s support when planning ahead.

If the president thinks this will lead to order, not chaos, he is not much a student of history. And if he thinks this will lead to peace, not war, his lesson may come at the expense of those who possess the knowledge he lacks, but who lack the power he possesses.

U.S. Is Weighing New Curbs on Iran in Nod to Israel – NYTimes.com.

By DAVID E. SANGER and ERIC SCHMITT

¶ WASHINGTON — With Israel openly debating whether to strike at Iran’s nuclear facilities in the coming months, the Obama administration is moving ahead with a range of steps short of war that it hopes will forestall an Israeli attack, while forcing the Iranians to take more seriously negotiations that are all but stalemated.

¶ Already planned are naval exercises and new antimissile systems in the Persian Gulf, and a more forceful clamping down on Iranian oil revenue. The administration is also considering new declarations by President Obama about what might bring about American military action, as well as covert activities that have been previously considered and rejected.

¶ Later this month the United States and more than 25 other nations will hold the largest-ever minesweeping exercise in the Persian Gulf, in what military officials say is a demonstration of unity and a defensive step to prevent Iran from attempting to block oil exports through the Strait of Hormuz. In fact, the United States and Iran have each announced what amounted to dueling defensive exercises to be conducted this fall, each intended to dissuade the other from attack.

¶ The administration is also racing to complete, in the next several months, a new radar system in Qatar that would combine with radars already in place in Israel and Turkey to form a broad arc of antimissile coverage, according to military officials. The message to Iran would be that even if it developed a nuclear weapon and mounted it atop its growing fleet of missiles, it could be countered by antimissile systems.

¶ The question of how explicit Mr. Obama’s warnings to Iran should be is still a subject of internal debate, closely tied to election-year politics. Some of Mr. Obama’s advisers have argued that Israel needs a stronger public assurance that he is willing to take military action, well before Iran actually acquired a weapon. But other senior officials have argued that Israel is trying to corner Mr. Obama into a military commitment that he does not yet need to make.

¶ On Sunday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appeared to criticize Mr. Obama for being too vague about how far Iran can go. “The international community is not setting Iran a clear red line, and Iran does not see international determination to stop its nuclear project,” he told his cabinet. “Until Iran sees a clear red line and such determination, it will not stop the progress of its nuclear project — and Iran must not be allowed to have nuclear weapons.”

¶ None of the steps being taken by the Obama administration addresses the most immediate goal of the United States and its allies: Slowing Iran’s nuclear development. So inside the American and Israeli intelligence agencies, there is continuing debate about possible successors to “Olympic Games,” the covert cyberoperation, begun in the Bush administration and accelerated under Mr. Obama, that infected Iran’s nuclear centrifuges and, for a while, sent them spinning out of control. An error in the computer code alerted Iran to the attack in 2010, and since then many of the country’s nuclear sites have been modified to defend against such attacks, according to experts familiar with the effort.

¶ All of these options are designed to buy time — to offer Israeli officials a credible alternative to a military strike that would almost certainly trigger an Iranian reaction and, the White House and Pentagon fear, could unleash a new conflict in the Middle East. While Mr. Obama’s national security team has been very closed-mouthed about the tense discussions with Mr. Netanyahu, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, gave voice to the concerns in London on Thursday.

¶ General Dempsey repeated the familiar American position that an Israeli attack would “clearly delay but probably not destroy Iran’s nuclear program.”

¶ But then he went beyond any warning that Mr. Obama has given to Israel in public, saying that the international coalition of countries applying sanctions against Iran “could be undone” if the country was attacked “prematurely.” He added: “I don’t want to be accused of trying to influence, nor do I want to be complicit if they choose to do it.”

¶ United States intelligence officials have said they have no evidence that Iran’s top leaders have decided to take the final steps toward a weapon. Iran’s intentions remain unclear, intelligence officials say.

¶ Last week, the International Atomic Energy Agency reported an increase in the number of centrifuges that Iran has installed in an underground enrichment plant that is largely invulnerable to Israeli attack, but also indicated that Iran has converted some of its most highly enriched fuel to a form that would be difficult to use in a weapon.

¶ The administration has already quietly proposed a “stop the clock” agreement to get Iran to halt production of the fuel that is closest to bomb-grade — and to ship it out of the country, according to diplomats from several countries involved in the discussions. But Iranian officials have rejected those calls, insisting on a lifting of all sanctions, and there has been no talk of a broader, more permanent deal.

¶ Mitt Romney, Mr. Obama’s Republican challenger, has taken a harder line, saying he would never agree to allow Iran to enrich uranium at any level — a restriction even many Republicans, including some of Mr. Romney’s advisers, say there is virtually no chance Iran will accept, since it has a legal right to peaceful enrichment.

¶ One option the administration has already approved is the military exercise, scheduled for Sept. 16-27, in which the United States and its allies will practice detecting and destroying mines with ships, helicopters and robotic underwater drones. The ships will stay out of the narrow Strait of Hormuz, to avoid direct interaction with Iran’s navy.

¶ In advance of the exercise, the United States Navy earlier this summer doubled the number of minesweepers in the region, to eight vessels. The deployments are part of a larger series of military reinforcements into the Persian Gulf in recent months, all described by the United States as defensive.

¶ That is also the explanation for the American efforts to create a regional missile defense system across the Gulf to protect cities, oil refineries, pipelines and military bases from an Iranian attack. The latest element is a high-resolution missile defense radar in Qatar, meant to stress that Iran’s Arab neighbors are as concerned about Tehran’s abilities as is Israel.

¶ Military specialists said offensive military options, including strikes against Iran’s refineries and power grid, could also be telegraphed to the Iranians.

¶ “The United States does not have to threaten preventive strikes,” Anthony H. Cordesman, a longtime military analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, wrote in a recent paper, “Iran: Preventing War by Making It Credible.” “It simply has to make its capabilities clear in terms of a wide range of possible scenarios.”

¶ But there is concern among American strategists that Iran could interpret these actions as encirclement, and that the actions could encourage those elements in the country that want to move faster to a nuclear “capability,” if not a weapon itself. Even one of the options that many Democrats and Republicans advocate to shake Iran — to help topple President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, Iran’s only real friend in the region — could have the same effect.

¶ Inside the Obama White House, there has also been debate about whether Mr. Obama needs to reshape his negotiating strategy around clear “red lines” for Iran — steps beyond which the United States would not allow the country to go. Earlier this year Mr. Obama said he believed that the United States and its allies could not simply accept a nuclear Iran, largely because of the high risk that other Arab states would seek weapons.

¶ Even if Mr. Obama set a clear “red line” now, its credibility may be questionable. According to a tally by Graham Allison, the Harvard expert on nuclear conflict, the United States and its allies have allowed Iran to cross seven previous “red lines” over 18 years with few consequences. That leaves one other option that officials are loath to discuss: new covert action.

¶ The “Olympic Games” attack on Iran’s centrifuges was chosen over another approach that the Bush administration explored: going after electrical grids feeding the nuclear operations. But Mr. Obama has rejected any attacks that could risk affecting nearby towns or facilities and thus harm ordinary Iranians. Other plans considered in the past, and now reportedly back under consideration, focus on other targets in the nuclear process, from making raw fuel to facilities involved in missile work. One missile plant blew up last year, and Israeli sabotage was suspected, but never proven. American officials say the United States was not involved.

¶ One other proposal circulating in Washington, advocated by some former senior national security officials, is a “clandestine” military strike, akin to the one Israel launched against Syria’s nuclear reactor in 2007. It took weeks for it to become clear that site had been hit by Israeli jets, and perhaps because the strike was never officially acknowledged by Israel, and because its success was so embarrassing to Syria, there was no retaliation.

¶

Iran timing is only point of contention between Israel and US, says vice prime minister | The Times of Israel.

Silvan Shalom avoids comment on report that Washington asked Tehran to leave US out of war

Silvan Shalom (photo credit: Kobi Gideon/Flash90)

The only issue on which Israel and the US do not see eye to eye when it comes to preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons is the timetable, Vice Prime Minister Silvan Shalom said Monday. “There is absolutely no disagreement about the need.”

“The US has operated all across the world in order to thwart a nuclear Iran,” said Shalom in an interview to Army Radio, noting the US’s efforts to toughen sanctions alongside Russia, China, India and the European countries. “We believe in sanctions too, but think they can be even more crippling than they are now.”

Shalom spoke in light of a report in Yedioth Ahronoth stating that senior Washington officials sent messages to Iran, through diplomats from two European states, asking Iran to refrain from attacking US targets in the region in the event that Israel decided to launch a unilateral strike. The vice prime minister said he could not address the veracity of the report, but pointed to an article in The New York Times that said the Obama Administration is considering a declaration of American “red lines” on Iran’s nuclear development, as proof of the warm ties and common cause of the two countries.

“The security relations between the two countries are as intimate as can be. They are based on trust and joint interests,” Shalom said.

Monday’s report came amid widespread debate over the level of coordination between Israel and the US on halting Iran’s nuclear program. Despite assurances by US Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro on Sunday that the relationship is as good as ever, ties appear to be strained over the issue.

While Israel has warned that the Iranians are quickly approaching a potential weapons capability and that the use of force must be seriously considered, the US says sanctions and international diplomacy must be given more time to work.

Highlighting the disagreement between the two countries on the use of force were reports of a scaling-down of joint US-Israel missile defense exercises in October, and public comments by the Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey, who said last Thursday that he did not want to be “complicit” in an Israeli attack on Iran.

On Sunday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu hinted at criticism of the US position on Iran, telling ministers at the weekly Cabinet meeting that the international community has failed to send a clear message to Iran regarding its nuclear program. Netanyahu said that while international sanctions have harmed Tehran, they haven’t done “anything to stall the progress of the nuclear program.”

On Saturday, former minister Tzachi Hanegbi said the United States is not determined to halt Iran from getting a bomb and last week’s IAEA report, which indicated that Iran has expanded its capacity for uranium enrichment, granted Israel even more legitimacy to strike Iran on its own.

Israel Hayom | Diplomacy has failed.

Israel Hayom | Futile to rely on the international community.

Obama Sells Out Israel!.

As the evidence of Obama’s favoritism for the Muslim world mounts, seemingly on a daily basis, one can be excused for thinking that Obama would hold the door open for a Muslim takeover of the United States.

My first President was FDR.  We have had some great presidents and one or two lousy presidents since—but Obama takes the cake as the absolute worst president the United States had had since its inception.  Hands down, Obama is far and away the worst of the worst.

He is just as bad as the leader of the “free world.”  In fact, rumor has it the “free world” is looking for a new leader.  And who could blame it?

I have come to believe, over the past nearly four years, that Obama is a “closet Muslim.”  Frankly, I’m surprised we don’t have someone atop the Washington monument calling out the “adhan,” the Muslim call to prayer, at the prescribed times each day for Obama and his followers.  I am equally surprised Obama has not issued an Executive Order instructing the building a minaret on the West Wing of the White House.

Just as the “Obama Love Fest” (The Democratic Nation Convention) is about to open where the weak of mind and spine will, no doubt, swoon in the aisles at the very mention of their Messiah’s name, comes word that Obama has abandoned Israel, the closest friend America has in the Middle East, to the Mad Mullahs of Iran.

So what has happened now? A massive scale back of US participation is a joint US/Israel military exercise scheduled for October.  There were to have been 5,000 US troops involved.  That has been cut to as low as 1200.  There were to have been two Aegis electronic warships involved.  Now it is doubtful if either ship will be sent. Patriot anti-missile batteries will be sent—but no crews to man them.

The US has an advanced radar installation out in the Negev Desert so strong it can see a softball thrown in the air from a thousand miles away.  It can give Israel as much as seven minutes additional warning to get their people under cover.  It would also allow Israel’s anti-missile batteries additional time to locate and shoot down incoming Iranian missiles.

Without that additional warning time, more Israelis will die from enemy missiles.  The fault for their deaths can be laid at the feet of the US President—Barack HUSSEIN Obama.

Regardless of how the President and the Pentagon refer to this “scale back” it amounts to one thing—abandonment of Israel to her enemies.

From Debkafile we learn the following:

“This downgrade of US participation in an annual war exercise with Israel is more than striking. It adds up to the dismemberment by the Obama administration of the entire intricate strategy US and Israel have built over years for the deterrence – and interception if need be – of any Iranian/Hizballah/Syrian missile assault on Israel.”

Debkafile goes on to say this:  “The inferences are cruel: The US defense or second-strike elements – which had been slotted into place by the military strategists of the two armies – will not be there. Their absence slashes the time available for Israel’s alarm-and-interception systems to spring into action – the moment the engines of Iranian ballistic missiles heading its way are fired – right down from the originally estimated 14 minutes’ notice.

It also means that Barak’s estimate of 500 dead in the worst case of a war with Iran must go by the board.”

One must question why Obama is protecting Iran?  It is clear that Obama does not want Israel to attack Iran.  It is ALSO clear that Obama is intent on allowing Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon, which, of course, means—so will the Islamofascist terrorists the world over.  Is Obama, himself, preparing for the appearance of the “Hidden (or twelfth) Imam?”

Clearly, there are but two explanations for Obama’s actions here.  Either the US has (somehow) become—overnight—a second rate military power without the means to participate in the joint military exercise with Israel, or Obama has thrown Israel to the wolves.

I’d like to establish a few things here:  I am not a Jew.  Though a Christian, I am not an evangelical Christian.  I am not a bible scholar, nor a minister of The Gospel, though I did serve as a lay minister for a while.  I have a fair grasp of the scriptures through years and years of formal and informal study.

Now, having said that, allow me to point out that there is a clear warning, directly from God, dating from the establishment of the Hebrew people, that God would bless those who blessed them and curse those who cursed them.  (Genesis 12:3—“And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.)

I realize to those who do not believe in God, this doesn’t mean a thing.  But, I’d also suggest they might want to check the recent history of Israel’s enemies since 1948.  That ought to give doubters “pause,” as they say.

Now here’s the thing:  America has suffered since Obama, obviously no friend of Israel, was sworn in as President.  You can argue that America was in trouble BEFORE Obama was sworn in.  Yes, you can.  But is unarguable that America’s downward spiral became far more distinct and far deeper and the decline swifter than before. And—the decline continues.

To me, it is clear.  When America rids itself of its current leader, Obama,  and elects a leader who supports (blesses) Israel, America will stop its decline and climb back up to its former place of prominence among the nations of the world.  It is just as clear that as long as Obama remains President of the United States, things will only get worse for America. If you think it’s bad now, you ain’t seen nothing yet!

The America people support Israel.  It is our leader who does not.  It is up to us, the people, to rid this nation of the insult to Israel in the White House.  But it MUST be done by the people of America at the ballot box November 6th.

Meridor: No break with US, Iran … JPost – Iranian Threat – News.

Obama’s Israel policy has failed – Right Turn – The Washington Post.

Report: Iranian drill aims to explore S-300 alternatives – Israel News, Ynetnews.

Iranian strategic expert says air force exercise planned for October will see Tehran test its new air defense system

Dudi Cohen

Amir Mousavi, head of Tehran’s Center Of Strategic Research, said that Iran will also test its new drone during next month’s exercise.

His statement has not been corroborated by any official Iranian source.

In an interview with Iran’s Arabic-language TV station Al-Alam Mousavi said that “Russia has so far refrained from supplying Iran with S-300 missiles, but Iran will fill that void with domestically-produced advanced defense systems, in order to deal with possible attacks.”

Back in 2011, Tehran announced that following the failed S-300 negotiations with Russia, it will pursue the development of its own long-range air defense system, dubbed “Bavar 373.”

Iran blamed the West for torpedoing the deal with Russia.

Bavar 373 is considered a highly sophisticated air defense system, which could seriously impeded the West’s ability to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Mousavi stressed that “This exercise doesn’t pose a threat to any country in the region. These kinds of drills are defensive in nature and are meant to simulate an aerial assault on Iran. Every country has the right to protect its interests.”

Mousavi stressed that “This exercise doesn’t pose a threat to any country in the region. These kinds of drills are defensive in nature and are meant to simulate an aerial assault on Iran. Every country has the right to protect its interests.”

On Sunday, Iran’s Deputy Defense Minister Mohammad Eslami said that Tehran’s defense industries were equipping combat drones with missile systems.

According to the report, this will be Iran’s first long-range unmanned combat air vehicle and it can bomb targets at high speed and has a range of 1,000 kilometers.

We don’t support Israeli attack, US tells Iran – Globes.

US-Israeli relations have hit an unprecedented low point: Hebrew daily “Yediot Ahronot” reported today that, a few days ago, top Obama administration officials sent a message to the Iranian government via two European governments, stating that the US would not support Israel if it decided to unilaterally and without coordination attack Iranian nuclear installations.

“Yediot Ahronot” says that the US sent the confidential message to Iran in order to prevent an Iranian attack on US installations in the Persian Gulf, where the US has stationed aircraft carriers and has several military bases, which could face a real risk in the event of an Israeli attack.

The report follows remarks last night by US Vice President Joseph Biden during a campaign stop in Pennsylvania. He criticized Republication presidential candidate Mitt Romney for seeking a war against Iran over its nuclear program. Biden said that if Romney was elected, preferring confrontational over cooperation.

At the start of yesterday’s cabinet meeting, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said, “The international community is not setting Iran a clear red line and Iran does not see international determination to stop its nuclear project. Until Iran sees a clear red line and such determination, it will not stop the progress of its nuclear project and Iran must not be allowed to have nuclear weapons.”