WarSclerotic

Rudaw in English….The Happening: Latest News and Multimedia about Kurdistan, Iraq and the World – Should the Kurds Support Israel’s Attack on Iran?.

Every now and then, it is said that Israeli fighter planes will use Kurdistan’s airspace to reach Iran. This is a serious matter. It incriminates the Kurdish people. It automatically makes Kurdistan an Israeli ally. But Kurdistan is not an independent state. It does not have its sovereign airspace. Kurdistan doesn’t have an air force either, to join the Israeli attack.

It is a semi-autonomous region whose main goal is to maintain its own security and avoid any act that may endanger its hard-won political and economic stability.

The region has already received enough accusations of having relations with Israel. So I don’t think Kurdish leaders will do anything that will prove what the Arab world has been accusing them of for years.

If Israel decides to attack Iran, it will do so regardless of what the world thinks. Israel doesn’t need anyone’s permission or support — certainly not that of the Kurds — to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities. All they need is to be sure that Iran is building a nuclear bomb.

The idea of an Israeli attack is not new. Israel has been working on it for a long time. It is said that they already have nuclear submarines lurking beneath the Persian Gulf, under Iran’s very nose.

One of Israel’s closest allies is the tiny state of Azerbaijan on Iran’s northern border. The two small countries enjoy very strong relations and it is likely that Israeli jets will take off from Azerbaijan to bomb sensitive Iranian sites.

But even without Azerbaijan or the Persian Gulf, Israel will, without a doubt, ignore any country’s airspace in order to reach its targets. To them the threat of a nuclear Iran and the survival of the Jewish state is more important than violating someone else’s airspace.

For now, an attack on Iran or the talk of it seems to have been put on hold until after the American presidential elections. But what should the Kurds do if this attack happens? They have no support to offer, and they have no means to prevent it.

What they can do is to hope that it will be a quick and decisive attack. Israel will do it for its own sake, but the outcome will serve the Kurds, too.

Around 7 million Kurds live in Iran and they will always be there. They will always struggle for their freedom and their rights. They have to deal with the government in Tehran either through arms or through negotiations. But it is difficult to negotiate with a nuclear power.

A nuclear bomb will give Iran impunity. Behind a nuclear bomb, Iran will bully the region even more than it is doing today. The Kurds hope that the international community will take their case more seriously, but if Iran goes nuclear, even that little hope will be dashed.

The nature of the regimes in Iran, Syria and Iraq is dictatorial and unfortunately Kurds know from experience how brutally those regimes use their weapons. So we should hope that none of our neighbors ever develop a nuclear bomb, not just Iran. And not only our immediate neighbors — we should in fact hope that no country in the Middle East, as far away as Yemen and Sudan, ever becomes a nuclear power.

They might never drop an atomic bomb on Kurds, but since we live right in the middle of them, since we have ambitions for an independent state and are often described as separatists, agents of the west, and infidels, we shouldn’t want these countries to have more than AK-47 Kalashnikovs. Even Kalashnikovs might be too much, given the mentality of these regimes.

Dictatorial states do not deserve nuclear bombs. In France, Britain, America or Israel, a nuclear bomb is a national weapon. Presidents and prime ministers come and go in a democratic process. But any regime in the Middle East will treat a nuclear bomb like a family possession.

If Bashar al-Assad was a nuclear power, the world wouldn’t be treating him with such a carefree attitude and would ask him to step down. With a demoralized army and rusty tanks he still defies the world. He threatens to use chemical weapons in the final showdown. So imagine what he would do if he had an atomic bomb. He would cling to it to ensure his clan would rule Syria for a thousand years. But in Operation Orchard in 2007, Israel attacked and destroyed Syria’s nuclear reactor and took care of that for everyone else.

If Saddam Hussein had a nuclear bomb, he and his sons and grandsons would have ruled Iraq for god knows how many years. With an army of hungry soldiers who didn’t even have money for a bus ticket to go home on leave, he harassed and threatened the entire region for three decades. Imagine what he would have done if he had a nuclear weapon. For sure his genocide campaigns would have continued to the last Kurdish child and the world wouldn’t dare to raise a finger.

But thankfully, in Operation Babylon in June 1981, Israeli F-16s destroyed Iraq’s nuclear reactors outside Baghdad and nipped Saddam’s diabolical dreams in the bud.

Because of those Israeli attacks, Syria is weaker today, and it is easy to set conditions for the regime in Damascus. The Israeli attack of 1981 made it impossible for Saddam Hussein’s family to rule Iraq forever.

Therefore, a successful attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities will only make it easier for the Kurds and the international community to deal with Tehran in the future. 

Israel’s Arrow-3 missile-killer nears test – Military & Aerospace Electronics.

Amid growing fears Israeli leaders are preparing a pre-emptive attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, defense sources say the Arrow-3 interceptor, seen as Israel’s ace in the hole against Tehran’s ballistic missiles, is close to its first flight test.

The two-stage missile being developed by state-owned Israel Aerospace Industries and the Boeing Co. of the United States will be Israel’s main line of defense against Iran’s growing arsenal of immediate-range Shehab-3 missiles and the more advanced Sejjil-2 weapons under development.

The upcoming test-firing, delayed for about a year, will take place against a backdrop of growing threats of retaliation by Tehran if Israel, or even the United States currently locked in its own confrontation with Iran in the Persian Gulf, attacks the Islamic Republic.

The Arrow-3, the most advanced component of a multilayered missile defense shield the Israelis are building, will take place “soon,” says Itzhak Kaya, who heads the Arrow program.

This will be the first test of all the Arrow-3 systems. Subsystems have already been tested.

The second stage has its own propulsion unit that enables it to maneuver toward its target. It can reach twice the altitude of Arrow-2.

The Pentagon, which provides much of the funding for the joint program and has been seeking to persuade U.S. legislators that it’s worth Congress investing taxpayers’ money in the project, says Arrow-3 will be able to provide four times the coverage of Arrow-2.

Kaya disclosed that recent testing involved simulated interceptions to evaluate Arrow-3’s detection capabilities.

The new variant operates with an advanced version of the EL/M-2080 Green Pine solid-state, phased array radar system manufactured for Arrow by Elta Electronic Industries of Ashdod, a subsidiary of IAI’s Electronic Group.

“A successful identification of the attacking missile by the Arrow System increases the chances and certainty of an interception,” Kaya said.

Neither of the first two Arrow variants has been used on combat and there have been concerns about its ability to counter a heavy salvo of Shehab or Sejjil missiles.

Uzi Rubin, considered one of the pre-eminent missile system analysts in the Middle East, recently said Arrow could cope with any missile fired by the Iranians.

“I can’t say that every incoming will be known down,” he told Israel Army Radio. “There isn’t 100 percent protection and not everything is a success.

“But for every single missile coming from Iran there’s a single Arrow missile capable of intercepting it one for one.”

Rubin, a former air force brigadier general, was head of Israel’s Missile Defense Organization in 1991-99 and oversaw development of the Arrow series.

“Iran has between 300 and 400 Shehab-3 missiles it can fire at Israel,” he said.

He also disclosed that Iran’s aerospace industries manufacturing the Shehab, a program controlled by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, has significantly improved the missile’s accuracy from “a marked target that could cover a few kilometers to just a few hundred meters.”

That would make the Iranian missiles a much greater threat to Israeli airbases and military installations, as well as the national infrastructure, than previously thought.

The latest variant of the high-altitude, long-range Arrow is designed to intercept incoming ballistic missiles in space outside the Earth’s atmosphere in the final phase of their trajectory and destroy them on impact.

The Arrow-2, the version operationally deployed by the Jewish state, is built to tackle hostile missiles at lower altitudes within the atmosphere by exploding near them.

The first Arrow missiles were deployed in 2000. There are at least two batteries operational, one in northern Israel and the other outside of the coastal Palmachim air force base south of Tel Aviv where most of the program’s test flights have been conducted.

Arrow-2 will remain as a secondary line of defense, with two other systems designed to counter shorter-range missiles and rockets closer to the ground.

The Iron Dome system, developed to intercept projectiles with a range 5-40 miles, has been in action against Palestinian Grad and Qassem rockets since March 2011 and is reported to have a kill rate of around 75 percent.

It’s built by Rafael Advanced Defense Systems, which is also developing the David’s Sling system to counter missiles with a range of up to 130 miles. It’s not expected to be deployed for another 18 months.

ABQJournal Online » Obama’s Mideast Policy a Complete, Utter Failure.

The American Spectator : The War to Come.

By George H. Wittman on 9.18.12 @ 6:09AM

It may be shocking to some, but the Commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) was correct when he said a few days ago that Israel can not survive a nuclear weapon attack. He didn’t add, but it is certainly true, that these need only be lower yield devices. A brief study of the industrial topography and demography of Israel shows that a minimal number (3-4) well targeted nuclear weapons would leave Israel inoperable as a modern state.

President Obama clearly has been provided with adequate technical intelligence to inform him of the details involved. Iran already has adequate delivery systems as outlined by Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta last February when he referred to the effective operational state of the Shahab-3 and the medium range ballistic missile, Ashura, as being able to hit Israel and Eastern Europe. The White House knows that Israel is in danger of obliteration if Iran is allowed to launch even a modest attack on Israel. So far the American presidential response appears to be, “Iran knows the U.S. will respond appropriately, and that is adequate deterrence.”

The theoretical punitive response by Washington would be too late to save the continued existence of Israel. While the threatened U.S. counterattack might destroy Iranian nuclear development facilities, in order to have a serious lasting impact the economic base of Iran would have to be destroyed. Its oil production and distribution facilities would have to be targeted for demolition. Such an action defines the term “counter-productive ” if the international importance of Persian oil resources are taken into consideration. And, of course, Israel would be in ashes.

To be specific about Iran’s current nuclear weapon capability, one need only refer to the recent report of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA): “Iran… has produced 418 pounds of 20% enriched uranium.” This uranium could be converted to weapons grade product before the end of this year. This is an increase over the 321 pounds of similar grade uranium reported available in May 2012. More importantly, the IAEA reported a doubling of the enrichment centrifuges since May, bringing the total to 2,140 at the advanced nuclear facility a Fordo, a deep buried mountain site outside the ancient city of Qom.

Fifty-five pounds of 90% enriched uranium is considered necessary to construct one nuclear explosive device. Taking 20% enrichment up to 90% weapons grade has been referred to as not difficult and solely dependent on processing time. With the increased number of centrifuges in operation reported by the IAEA, the calculation has been made that it would have take no more than a few months for the Iranians to accomplish this. Prime Minister Netanyahu has said that the Iranians will have launch-capable nuclear missiles in 6-7 months.

It is generally accepted in defense circles — and reported earlier in this column — that the Iranians already have the short-term capability of constructing several “Hiroshima” implosion bombs. The issue at hand is the ability to construct smaller, higher yield devices capable of being placed on, and detonated from, the existing medium-range Iranian missiles. The IGRC already have enough of these appropriately-ranged and target-guided missiles to simultaneously hit all of Israel’s scientific and production centers as well as its various deep bunkered military installations.

Pentagon sources have indicated it’s not difficult technically to calculate how quickly Iranian scientists and technicians could handcraft the needed marriage of high-weaponized explosive product and the guided missile-connected delivery system. This information is well known by all existing nuclear-armed countries. This is why the intensity level of anxiety on the international scene has risen so sharply in the past few months.

The only mystery still extant is how this nearly open secret has been so successfully kept from publication. The reason is that such information is tantamount to pulling the trigger on a holocaust that Iran is not yet prepared to create — even on Israel. And against which the Israelis are not yet fully ready to defend. The problem that the Israel Defense Command and PM Netanyahu face is whether they can fully destroy Iran’s offensive capability aimed at Israel and/or effectively defend against the expected Iranian counter-thrust to an Israeli preemptive attack. One thing is certain: Israel can not and will not depend on the current American administration to assist in Israel’s initial attack.

Considerable emphasis has been placed on the White House’s desire for Israel to wait until after the American presidential election before taking any offensive action. A new logic has been introduced by events in many Moslem capitals following the original riots in Cairo and the assault on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi. If anything, the Obama Administration has hardened its position against Israeli military action against Iran. In turn, however, the Israeli choices have been reduced as Tehran now has the chance to exploit the anti-American/anti-Israel political support engendered by the wave of “holy war” spirit contained in the widespread radical Islamic demonstrations and attacks.

In brief, the Iranians do not fear the potential of an Israeli counterstrike. There is consequently nothing but Tehran’s own current technical limitations to restrain the initiation of a Persian first strike nuclear attack on Israel’s key centers. Bibi Netanyahu knows this and so do his military strategists. As soon as Israel has the wherewithal to effect an initial strike wiping out Iranian nuclear weapon-launching capability, the strategic instinct would have to be to do it as soon as they can. The question is: When can Israel be sure it can destroy all of Iran’s nuclear launch assets?

Obama’s Security Breach In Libya Is Ignored By American Media « CBS DC.

As the liberal American press and ultra-liberal bloggers inundate the Internet and newsprints with criticisms of what Mitt Romney, the GOP presidential challenger to President Barack Obama, said about Obama during the Libyan attacks and murders, throngs of foreign press and few American outlets tell the real story involved with the White House’s role in the incidents that we now know could have been prevented.

After the American media grabbed and held the pro-Obama headlines against Romney’s comments and took Obama’s “Romney shoots first and aims second” quote to iconic proportions, the rest of the world is reporting that the Obama administration knew about the planned-attack on the Benghazi, Libya Embassy where four Americans, including United States Ambassador Christopher Steven was murdered.

That strong allegation needs to be “the story”, not the political-trouncing of Mitt Romney, a man who has nothing to do with the White House, the U.S. Embassy, or the deadly and non-deadly attacks on our United States Embassy’s around the world. “The story” obviously involves the White House and the president within – Barack Obama – not the Massachusetts challenger.

The reporters and bloggers who have made Mitt Romney the story – instead of the attacked-United States Embassy, the innocent Americans who were attacked, and the White House with its president in abstention as he continually treks the campaign trail regardless of the duties left behind in Washington, D.C. – are guilty of letting another American tragedy remain buried.

All attention must be given to the more-than-strong suggestions that the Libyan attack didn’t “just happen” to have happened on September 11 – the commemorative day of the September 11, 2001 attacks on New York City – but were planned well-in-advance.

While the movie trailer of “Innocence of Muslims” may have added fuel to the venom’s fire regarding the protests throughout the Middle East, the murderous attack on the U.S. Embassy and its American occupants in Benghazi, Libya was no accident – simply orchestrated by a few who had no plan or memory of 9/11.

Reports from a number of knowledgeable sources are being widely-circulated regarding the United States State Department’s having received knowledge of the attack in Benghazi as early as September 9 – two days before the four Americans were killed. That’s “the story”. There were also similar reports that the attack in Cairo was revealed prior to its occurrence. The knowledgeable sources report that no warning was given to persons in the U.S. Embassies in Cairo or Benghazi after the State Department was warned. In Libya, there were approximately 30 people in the main consulate building who could have been warned but weren’t.

Additionally, Wanis el-Sharef, Libya’s deputy interior minister, told the Associated Press that the heavily armed militants “used” a protest of an anti-Islam film as a “cover” in their deadly attack on the U.S. Embassy while screaming “God is great!”

Yet, American reporters and bloggers waste their printed space writing about their belief that Mitt Romney stepped on Obama’s toes with a political misspeak.

So what!

That is no reason to ignore – or totally replace – “the story”. And anyone who doesn’t realize that has no business reporting or blogging whatsoever. Save the “OMG, a politician dissed another politician” for a slow news day. And the way things are going in this country, there is no clear sign of a slow news day coming anytime soon. There’s a story here, and it’s being ignored by people who wouldn’t challenge President Barack Obama and his White House if their lives depended on it. And, ironically, their lives may depend on reporting “the story” instead of their worthless “Romney piece”. It’s absolutely maddening and totally ludicrous that they are ignoring “the international story”.

If for no other reason, in the name, honor, and memory of United States Ambassador Christopher Steven, information management officer Sean Smith, private security guard and former Navy SEAL Glen Doherty, and security personnel Glen Doherty, allow “the true story” to be told.

About Scott Paulson

Scott Paulson writes political news and commentary for CBS Local and Examiner.com and teaches English at a community college in the Chicago area. The views and opinions expressed in this post are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of CBS Local.

Iran claims its nuclear facilities could now survive enemy ‘missile attacks and raids’ | The Times of Israel.

Tehran’s nuclear chief blames IAEA for explosion last month at Fordo underground enrichment facility, slams Israel’s nuclear arsenal

Fereydoun Abbasi, head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, delivers a speech at an IAEA conference in Vienna on Monday (photo credit: AP/Ronald Zak)

VIENNA — Iran’s nuclear chief said Monday that “terrorists and saboteurs” might have infiltrated the International Atomic Energy Agency in an effort to derail his nation’s atomic program. He also said his country’s nuclear facilities could now survive enemy attack.

In an unprecedentedly harsh attack on the integrity of the UN organization and its probe of allegations that Tehran is striving to make nuclear arms, Fereydoun Abbasi spoke of a recent explosion at a particularly sensitive Iranian enrichment facility.

“Terrorists and saboteurs might have intruded the agency and might be making decisions covertly,” Abbasi said, in a speech to an IAEA conference in Vienna. Citing what he said was an example of sabotage last month at an underground enrichment plant, he said IAEA inspectors arrived to inspect it shortly after power lines were blown up.

Abbasi said that the explosion had caused the power supply to the Fordo facility to stop. ”Does this visit (by IAEA inspectors) have any connection to that detonation?” he asked.

Abbasi’s comments were the first mention of the alleged sabotage attack. He did not elaborate on the damage caused. Iran has repeatedly accused the US and Israel of trying to sabotage its nuclear program, by killing scientists, sending viruses into its computer systems and other actions.

The enrichment facility at Fordo, about 70 kilometers (40 miles) south of Tehran, is of particular concern to Israel because it is buried deep into a mountainside to protect it from attack.

Abbasi also attacked Israel’s nuclear program in his comments to the IAEA’s 155-nation general conference, saying that “the Zionist regime’s nuclear weapons constitute a threat to international peace and security.”

He denied that the Islamic Republic was seeking to develop a nuclear bomb, saying that “to liberate Palestine from the hands of the Zionist occupiers, there is no need to use nuclear weapons. The solution is democracy and holding a referendum among the original inhabitants of Palestine.”

Iran has often warned that any Israeli attack on its nuclear facilities would trigger a devastating response, and on Monday Abbasi suggested that even such a strike would not succeed in slowing down his country’s nuclear program. He said without elaboration that experts have “devised certain ways through which nuclear facilities remain intact under missile attacks and raids.”

Abbasi rebuked the United States at the meeting, reflecting Iran’s determination to continue defying international pressure aimed at curbing its nuclear program and nudging it toward cooperation with the IAEA inspection.

The unyielding speech underlined concerns raised by Israeli leaders who say that both diplomatic efforts and economic penalties have failed to move Iran. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been urging the US administration to set “red lines” that, if crossed by Iran, would trigger US-led military action.

In the past week, Netanyahu has urged President Barack Obama and other world leaders to state clearly at what point Iran would face a military attack. But Obama and his top aides, who repeatedly say all options remain on the table, have pointed to shared US-Israeli intelligence that suggests Iran hasn’t decided yet whether to build a bomb despite pursuing the technology. They argue that, were Iran to begin speeding toward a bomb, there would still be time for action beyond toughened sanctions already in place.

Speaking at a press conference in Berlin on Monday, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said that Tehran “poses a threat not just to Israel but to the whole world.”

Despite her strong criticism of Iran, she also said political solutions “have not been exhausted” when it comes to negotiations over Tehran’s nuclear advances, and urged the international community to continue down the avenue of diplomacy and dialogue.

Tehran denies seeking nuclear arms, and Abbasi, an Iranian vice president whom the agency suspects may have been involved in nuclear weapons research, again insisted on Monday that his country’s nuclear program is aimed only at making reactor fuel and doing medical research.

“The Islamic Republic of Iran … has always opposed and will always denounce the manufacture and use of weapons of mass destruction,” he said.

Tehran has long dismissed suspicions that it may re-engineer its uranium enrichment program from making reactor fuel to produce nuclear warheads and says accusations that it has worked secretly on nuclear arms are based on fabricated US and Israeli intelligence. It also frequently accuses the IAEA of anti-Iran bias in its push to ensure that all of Tehran’s nuclear activities are peaceful. But Abbasi’s comments Monday were the harshest attack to date on the agency itself.

Abbasi said that anti-Iran elements are helped by the agency, even when it reports what it sees “truthfully and with absolute honesty,” because “this information is easily accessible to saboteurs and terrorists through IAEA reports.”

However, Iran now can “ward off threats by targeting … cyber-attacks, industrial sabotage and use of explosives,” he said, without elaborating.

Abbasi said US pressure on Iran is the equivalent of an attack on all developing nations’ nuclear rights. He called US-led sanctions on Iran’s oil exports and financial transactions “the ugly face of colonization and modern slavery.”

“A state which has used nuclear weapons is not eligible to be present at the Board of Governors,” he said, questioning the right of the United States to sit on the 35-nation IAEA board that makes agency policy.

Meanwhile, statements critical of Iran on Monday were voiced in more traditional terms similar to that heard at previous IAEA meetings.

US Energy Secretary Stephen Chu accused Tehran of continuing “a decade-long pattern of evasion regarding questions over the nature of its nuclear program, including those related to possible military dimensions of its nuclear activities.”

A European Union statement warned of “deep concerns about possible military dimensions” to Iran’s nuclear program.

IAEA head Yukiya Amano said Monday that the independent body would hold further talks with nuclear talks with Iran “despite the lack of progress so far,” in an effort to clarify its concerns about the regime’s illicit atomic program.

Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili met with Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu Sunday, and he was to meet EU Foreign Policy chief Catherine Ashton on Tuesday as the IAEA talks continue.

Iran’s foreign minister: Israel can’t attack against us, and it knows it | The Times of Israel.

Salehi dismisses Jerusalem’s threats against Tehran as ‘empty,’ calls for restored relations with Egypt

Iranian Foreign Minister Akbar Ali Salehi (photo credit: CC-BY Parmida76, Flickr)

Iran’s Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi said Tuesday that Israel is not going to attack Iran because, if it could, it would have geared up to do so quietly rather than publicly discussing it.

“Israel can’t carry out an attack against such a big country [like Iran], and it knows that,” Salehi said. He called Israeli warnings about a possible strike “empty.”

He made the comments during his first interview on Egyptian national TV, Israel Radio reported.

Salehi also said his country’s neighbor, Azerbaijan, would not assist Israel in carrying out any attack on Iran. Israel and the Caspian country signed a weapons deal worth over $1.6 billion in February. It included drones, anti-aircraft weapons and missile defense systems.

The foreign minister used the interview to reiterate that Iran wants to normalize relations with Egypt. He said it was waiting for an official response to its proposal to reestablish diplomatic ties, severed in 1980 after the Islamic revolution.

Also on Tuesday, the IAEA said it would be ready for more talks with Iran soon. The head of the UN nuclear watchdog, Yukiya Amano, said that international meetings with Iran should take place despite the previous lack of progress, and that IAEA inspectors still seek to gain access to the country’s nuclear sites.

The head of Iran’s nuclear program Fereydoon Abbasi-Davani criticized the IAEA for a second day in succession on Tuesday, reiterating the accusation that members of the group were behind electrical outages at Iran’s underground uranium enrichment site in Fordo last month. On Monday, in acknowledging that an explosion occurred at Fordo last month, he noted that inspectors arrived soon after, accused the IAEA of being compromised by “terrorists and saboteurs,” and claimed some countries had too much sway in the organization.

On Monday, Abbasi suggested that even if Israel or the US did strike at Iran’s nuclear sites, this would not slow his country’s nuclear program. He said without elaboration that experts have “devised certain ways through which nuclear facilities remain intact under missile attacks and raids.”

EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton and Iran’s top nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili were set to meet in Istanbul later Tuesday. The meeting is unofficial and part of an effort to restart stalled negotiations over Tehran’s atomic program.

The last round of talks between Iran and the P5+1 powers — the UN Security Council members Russian, China, France, the US, and the UK, plus Germany — was held in July but ended with no progress after Tehran refused to grant international inspectors access to key nuclear sites.

Cyber clues tie US to Middle East comput… JPost – International.

IAEA dodges Iranian ‘terrorism’ … JPost – Iranian Threat – News.

Richard Cohen: The price of Obama’s leading from behind – The Washington Post.

By Richard Cohen, Tuesday, September 18, 2:20 AM