WarSclerotic

It’s war! And Bam’s bidding to boot Bibi – NYPOST.com.

President Obama has ap parently adopted regime change as a goal — but his target is Israel.

He’s plainly out to unseat (or at least change) the government of Prime Minister Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu.

The latest move came yesterday, when Obama upped the pressure by canceling special envoy George Mitchell’s planned Jerusalem trip.

It all started with last week’s mess — when Vice President Joe Biden, in Israel, was hit by the surprise announcement of new Israeli construction in a disputed north Jerusalem neighborhood.

Since the Obama team has always sought to freeze all settlement growth, Biden felt blind-sided. The rest of his visit was consumed by Israeli damage control.

Netanyahu apologized, telling Biden the surprise was the work of a low-level official and promising to overhaul procedures to prevent any repeat.

Biden seemed mollified: As he left on Friday, he said he accepted Netanyahu’s apologies, and even praised the prime minister’s commitment to peace.

But top Obama officials soon showed they were ready to elevate the Israeli “slap in the face” into a major crisis between the two countries.

Later on Friday, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton read Bibi the riot act over the phone for 43 minutes — spelling out several conditions and concessions to the Palestinians.

In an apparent contradiction of Biden’s parting remarks in Israel, she yesterday described these actions as necessary for Israel to show its “commitment to peace.”

Among those terms: a complete cessation of construction in any disputed Jerusalem neighborhood — a concession no Israeli prime minister can make and remain in power.

If the Obama team had any interest in balancing its approach here, it would be making some stink over a Palestinian “slap in the face” that occurred during Biden’s visit to the region: the dedication of a public square in a Ramallah suburb to the memory of a female “martyr” who killed one American and 37 Israelis, including 12 children. But there has been no protest over this incitement to violence.

Meanwhile, Palestinian negotiators yesterday refused to commit to joining US-led “proximity talks” with Israel. And rioting in eastern Jerusalem turned violent. Many are calling for a third intifada.

Israeli critics of Netanyahu have used the crisis to attack the prime minister’s policies.

That heartens those Obama advisers who believe that no Arab-Israeli progress is possible until Netanyahu is unseated — or at least until he replaces his right-wing coalition partners with the dovish opposition leader, Tzipi Livni.

What now? Watch the moves at next week’s annual gathering of the America-Israel Public Affairs Committee:

* Bibi may offer some concessions along the lines suggested by Clinton. For now, though, he’s sticking to his guns.

* Biden may snub Netanyahu: The two agreed last week to a dinner in Washington to publicly bury the hatchet. If the veep cancels, it will signal that Obama isn’t appeased.

* In her AIPAC speech, Clinton will speak of America’s “unshakable” commitment to Israel’s security. But will she have a paragraph or two about Netanyahu’s commitment to peace, or hint at “disagreements among friends”?

Obama has fought Netanyahu from the start. In the first year of that conflict, Bibi’s poll numbers in Israel have climbed steadily, as Obama’s support in America has waned (albeit for other reasons). And US prestige has fallen across the Mideast.

Meanwhile, any hope of uniting the region to face the real danger — Iran’s rush to join the “nuclear club” — seems lost in the process.

The American Spectator : Blame Israel First.

So let’s see if I have this right.

The Israeli government announces plan to build 1,600 housing units in East Jerusalem and the Obama Administration springs into action sparing no effort to turn Israel into public enemy number one.

While still in Israel, Vice President Joe Biden said, “I condemn the decision by the government of Israel to advance planning for new housing units in East Jerusalem. We must build an atmosphere to support negotiations, not complicate them.”

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton read Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu the riot act over the phone. State Department representative P.J. Crowley, speaking on behalf of Mrs. Clinton, described the announcement as “a deeply negative signal about Israel’s approach to the bilateral relationship.” Crowley went on to say that Israel “needed to demonstrate not just through words but through specific actions that they are committed to this relationship and to the peace process.”

Committed to this relationship? Did Bibi take Hillary out to the movies only to ask her to go Dutch? As if that wasn’t enough, Clinton subsequently told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell that the Israeli government’s announcement was “an insult to the United States.” To White House Senior Advisor David Axelrod, the proposal to build new housing in East Jerusalem wasn’t merely an insult. Axelrod told Tom Brokaw on NBC’s Meet the Press this past Sunday, “This was an affront, it was an insult but most importantly it undermined this very fragile effort to bring peace to that region.”

Amazing as it would seem, by all appearances the Obama Administration is angrier at Israel for building houses for Jews than it is at Iran for building a nuclear weapon intended to kill Jews. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is undoubtedly grinning from ear to ear. And why shouldn’t he? When he and the Mullahs crushed the streets protests after last year’s fraudulent Iranian elections; President Obama proclaimed it wasn’t America’s place to meddle.

Meanwhile, Israel doesn’t need to fire a single shot. It doesn’t even need to break ground. All Israel had to do was to merely announce plans to build new housing in East Jerusalem and the full force of the Vice President, the Secretary of State and the President’s top advisor came crashing down on the Jewish state like stone. All with President Obama’s blessing.

The Obama Administration (with Secretary Clinton taking the lead) is now apparently demanding that Israel not only cancel the housing project in Ramat Shlomo but has apparently made additional demands. They include Israel making a “substantial gesture” towards the Palestinians. This “substantial gesture” could mean the release of Palestinian prisoners, the lifting of roadblocks and/or transferring a greater portion of the West Bank to Palestinian control. Secretary Clinton is further demanding that any future negotiations with the Palestinians, even indirect ones, discuss matters such as Jewish settlements and the status of Jerusalem. Given that the Obama Administration has asked so much of Israel it begs this question. What has it asked of the Palestinian Authority?

Not much and if it has it certainly hasn’t done so publicly. After Vice President Biden’s visit with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian Authority saw fit to dedicate a town square to Dalal Mughrabi. So who is Dalal Mughrabi?

On March 11, 1978, Mughrabi and eleven others under her command hijacked a bus traveling on Israel’s Coastal Highway near Tel Aviv and claimed the lives of 37 Israeli civilians including 12 children. An American photographer named Gail Rubin was also killed by Mughrabi’s forces prior to the hijacking.

Fatah claimed responsibility for the attack and exactly 32 years later it was the Fatah led Palestinian Authority which saw fit to honor Mughrabi for her actions. General Adnan Damiri, chief of the Palestinian Authority’s National Political Guidance Headquarters, addressed the gathering and stated, “This is part of our heritage that led to the peace process and agreements. There are not enough squares for all the martyrs we have.” Tayeb Abd Al-Rahim, a top spokesman for President Abbas, said Mughrabi and her accomplices “all went to Paradise as they turned their blood into a bridge over which we pass on the way to our freedom, independence and national liberation from the burden of the occupation.” The Palestinian Authority has in the past named schools and soccer tournaments after Mughrabi. Her actions have also been celebrated on Palestinian Authority state television.

To this day, it remains the deadliest terrorist attack on Israeli soil. For the Palestinian Authority to honor her would be akin to the Taliban in Afghanistan honoring Khalid Sheikh Mohammed for the attacks of September 11, 2001. Yet no condemnation of the Palestinian Authority was forthcoming from Vice President Biden. Secretary of State Clinton didn’t declare an honor bestowed upon a terrorist responsible for the murder of an American civilian to be an insult to the United States. Where, I ask, is the Hillary Clinton that stood side by side with Palestinian Media Watch to condemn the incitement of hatred and violence against Jews in Palestinian school textbooks? For his part, David Axelrod could not be moved to call the glorification of Mughrabi an affront, let alone an insult.

Apparently, honoring a person who murdered Israeli civilians in cold blood doesn’t complicate an atmosphere to support negotiations nor does it undermine the fragile effort to bring peace to the Middle East. Evidently, honoring a person who committed an act of terrorism doesn’t send a deeply negative signal about the Palestinian Authority’s approach to its bilateral relationship with the United States. A public condemnation of the Palestinian Authority for honoring Mughrabi would have been the honorable thing to do. Sadly, when it comes to holding the Palestinian Authority to account, there is no such honor within the Obama Administration.

Report: U.S. positioning ‘bunker-busters’ for possible Iran strike – Haaretz – Israel News.

		U.S. Air Force F-15s. (Getty Images)

The United States is transporting 387 “bunker-buster” bombs to its air base on the island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean as part of preparations for a possible strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities, according to a report in Scotland’s Sunday Herald.

The U.S. government signed a contract in January with Superior Maritime Services to transport 10 ammunition containers to Diego Garcia from Concord, California. The shipment includes 195 smart, guided Blu-110 bombs and 192 Blu-117 2,000lb bombs.

Both types of bombs could be used against reinforced or underground facilities.

Neither the United States nor Israel have ruled out military action if diplomacy fails to resolve the long-running row over Iran’s disputed nuclear ambitions.

Contract details for the shipment were posted on an international tenders’ website by the U.S. Navy.

“They are gearing up totally for the destruction of Iran,” Dan Plesch, director of the Center for International Studies and Diplomacy at the University of London, told the Herald. “U.S. bombers are ready today to destroy 10,000 targets in Iran in a few hours.”

Plesch is the co-author of a recent study on U.S. preparations for an attack on Iran.

The final decision on whether to launch an attack would be in the hands of U.S. President Barack Obama. Obama may decide it would be better for the U.S. to strike instead of Israel, Plesch said.

“The U.S. is not publicizing the scale of these preparations to deter Iran, tending to make confrontation more likely,” he added. “The U.S….is using its forces as part of an overall strategy of shaping Iran’s actions.”

Diego Garcia is a British territory about 1,000 miles south of India and Sri Lanka. It is used as a U.S. military base as part of an agreement reached in 1971.

In the past, the British Defense Ministry has said that the U.S. would need permission to use Diego Garcia for offensive action. It has already been used in operations against Iraq during the 1991 and 2003 Gulf wars.

The U.S. Department of Defense did not respond to a request for a comment from the Sunday Herald

Ben Shapiro : Obama Wags the Dog with the Obama Intifada – Townhall.com.

President Obama’s health care plan is swirling the drain. Americans don’t like it — the latest Rasmussen poll has just 43 percent of Americans in favor, with 53 percent opposed — and that dislike has the Obama administration suggesting that polls don’t actually mirror the will of the American people. “They’re waiting for us to act,” Obama told a crowd in Ohio on Monday. “They don’t want us reading polls. They want us to look and see what is the best thing for America.” This is paternalism of the highest order — he knows what’s better for us than we do ourselves.

So, what’s a failed president to do?

How about distract the American public by throwing an ally under the bus and starting a war in the Middle East?

When President Clinton was unhappy about the burgeoning Lewinsky scandal, he wagged the dog by hurling missiles at targets in Afghanistan and Sudan. At least those were legitimate targets.

When President Obama is unhappy about his inability to convince Americans to nationalize health care, he incentivizes Palestinian Arabs to violent uprising.

Supposedly, the latest Obama administration anti-Israel campaign is a response to the Israeli government’s decision to green light 1,600 new housing units for Jews in East Jerusalem. Don’t believe it for a second. East Jerusalem is sovereign Israeli territory, and Israel has built housing for Jews there for the better part of four decades. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly stated that construction in Jerusalem would not stop. There is nothing new here that should have shocked the Obama administration.

Yet not only did this decision supposedly shock the Obama administration, it also led virtually the entire Obama cabinet to speak out against Israel. Joe Biden, who was in Israel when the decision was made by Israel, ripped Israel for undermining “trust” — whatever that means in a situation where one side’s trust entails denying the existence of the other side. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the United States was “insulted” by Israel’s decision, a vomitricious statement that arrogantly assumes that Israel’s construction policies must be geared toward pleasing the Obama administration. George Mitchell, the simpering “special envoy for Middle East peace,” cancelled a trip to Israel to show his displeasure.

Make no mistake — the timing of the latest Obama-Israel spat is purposeful on the Obama administration’s part. This response was far too well-rehearsed for it to have been triggered by something equivalent to a Housing and Urban Development dispute in the United States. You would think that Biden, the presiding officer of the Senate, would be useful during a health care debate. You would think that Obama could send Mitchell or Hillary or someone remotely qualified on Middle Eastern politics. But that’s not what Obama wanted. Obama sent Biden to Israel on March 8, even as the House and Senate looked for a way to ram through the health care bill, because he wanted Biden’s visit to trigger headlines.

And trigger headlines it did. Obama has been pressing Israel since his inauguration to concede to Palestinian Arab terrorists; he even sent his Jewish “Benedict Arnold” Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee annual conference last year to inform Jews that if they didn’t appease Palestinian Arab terrorists, the Obama administration would allow Iran to go nuclear. The Obama administration’s anti-Israel ire is nothing new.

What is new is the level of the Obama administration’s rhetoric, which has brought American-Israeli relations to the lowest point since 1956. Even as the Obama administration condemned Israel for supposedly stalling the Orwellian “peace process,” Palestinian Arabs were rioting in a Hamas-sponsored “day of rage” to protest the reopening of a Jerusalem synagogue ripped down by Arabs in 1948. The synagogue is located in the Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem, sovereign Israeli territory by any estimation. Yet we have not heard a peep from the Obama administration about the Arab riots over their wish to establish Judenrein in Jewish Jerusalem proper.

On Tuesday, hundreds of Arabs throughout Jerusalem burned tires and threw rocks at border guards. An Israeli policeman was shot in East Jerusalem. What do we hear from the Obama administration? Silence. This is the Obama Intifada. It is he who has suggested that the Palestinian Arabs have legitimate grievances, that Israel is the victimizer, and that the United States will stand aside and allow violent atrocities by Arabs to go forward without comment. He wants this Intifada, and he’s got it.

The Obama Intifada will serve a dual purpose: it will knock health care off the front pages, and it will provide a “crisis” for Obama to solve. If a few Jews get killed, Obama doesn’t truly care. What’s a few eggs if you’re frying up a socialized health care omelet? What’s a few Jews if you can win another Nobel Peace Prize?

Nothing, to President Obama. All that matters is his personal victory, even if America and her allies lose.

DEBKAfile, Political Analysis, Espionage, Terrorism, Security.

He gets away with insulting America

On Feb. 25, when the Iranian and Syrian presidents met in Damascus to confirm their military pact, they publicly mocked the US and its demands for Bashar Assad to distance himself from Tehran and made fun of secretary of state Hillary Clinton in person. On March, US Assistant Secretary of State Jeffrey Feltman summoned Syrian Ambassador Imad Moustapha for a quiet reprimand.
But still the Obama administration is going easy on both Iran and Syria. In fact this week it asked the Senate’s Foreign Relations Committee to confirm the appointment of Robert Ford as the first US ambassador to Damascus in five years.
Neither Clinton nor any other administration member has referred to Assad’s public insult to America and herself – in dramatic contrast to their harsh reaction to a bureaucratic step by Israel – for which prime minister Binyamin apologized – to approve the deposit of a long-term plan to build 1,600 homes in East Jerusalem. Since then, a week has gone by with Washington never tiring of berating Israel day by day.
The Syrian president has shown no contrition – nor was any demanded by the Obama administration – for joking: “We have met today to sign a separation agreement… We must have misunderstood because of a bad translation or our limited understanding, but instead signed an agreement to cancel visas.”
He was responding to Clinton’s assertion that his relationship with Iran was “deeply troubling to the region as well as to the United States.”
Assad took his time to reply to Washington’s diplomatic complaint. He finally relayed his answer not directly but through French president Nicolas Sarkozy, thereby turning a demonstrative cold shoulder to the United States government.

In his message, the Syrian president warned Washington frankly for the first time to stop expecting him to break off or degrade his ties with Tehran. In so doing, he has snatched a key Obama foreign policy goal out of the administration’s grasp. He explained that his bond with Iran was less ideological than strategic, grounded in the Arabs’ need to keep up their “resistance” to Israel. The Syrian-Iranian bond, says Assad, will peter out of its own accord when this need disappears.

Syrian contempt, intransigence and commitment to Arab violence against Israel have not discouraged the Obama administration in its courtship of this terror-sponsoring dictatorship. A senior emissary, John Kerry, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, later affirmed his belief that “it is important to have diplomatic representation in Syria.
On March 14, The Wall Street Journal wrote succinctly:
“Mr. Obama’s foreign policy pattern to date: Our enemies get courted; our friends get the squeeze. It has happened to Poland, the Czech Republic, Honduras and Colombia. Now it’s Israel’s turn.“

US Israel criticism ignites firestorm in Congress – News – Politics – bnd.com.

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration’s fierce denunciation of Israel last week has ignited a firestorm in Congress and among powerful pro-Israel interest groups who say the criticism of America’s top Mideast ally was misplaced.

Since the controversy erupted, a bipartisan parade of influential lawmakers and interest groups has taken aim at the administration’s decision to publicly condemn Israel for its announcement of new Jewish housing in east Jerusalem while Vice President Joe Biden was visiting on Tuesday and then openly vent bitter frustration on Friday.

With diplomats from both countries referring to the situation as a crisis, the outpouring of anger in the United States, particularly from Capitol Hill, comes at a difficult time for the administration, which is now trying to win support from wary lawmakers – many of whom are up for re-election this year – for health care reform and other domestic issues.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gestures as he speaks during the visit of Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, not seen, to the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, in Jerusalem, Monday, March 15, 2010. Lula da Silva is in Israel on the first official visit by a Brazilian leader. – AP Photo

• Story: Clinton slams Israel on housing announcement

// <![CDATA[
if(miyahoo.ads[mi_live_or_preview].dart.enabled){
_krdDartInc++;
document.write(”);
}
]]>

//

And those criticizing the administration’s unusually blunt response to Israel say they fear it may have distracted from and done damage to efforts to relaunch long-stalled Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.

“It might be well if our friends in the administration and other places in the United States could start refocusing our efforts on the peace process,” Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said Monday.

“Now we’ve had our spat. We’ve had our family fight, and it’s time for us now to stop and get our eye back on the goal, which is the commencement of the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks,” he said.

McCain and Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., both urged the administration to ease the tone of the dispute, which they said was demonstrating disunity and weakness to steadfast allies of Iran.

“Let’s cut the family fighting, the family feud,” Lieberman said. “It’s unnecessary; it’s destructive of our shared national interest. It’s time to lower voices, to get over the family feud between the U.S. and Israel. It just doesn’t serve anybody’s interests but our enemies.”

At least eight other lawmakers have offered similar concerns, and more are expected to weigh in after Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton upbraided Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for the housing announcement in a tense and lengthy phone call on Friday and White House officials repeated the criticism on Sunday’s talk shows.

“It’s hard to see how spending a weekend condemning Israel for a zoning decision in its capital city amounts to a positive step towards peace,” said Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan. He complained that the administration was attacking a “staunch ally and friend” when it should be focusing on the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear problem.

Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., accused administration officials of using “overwrought rhetoric” in suggesting that the east Jerusalem housing announcement threatened U.S.-Israeli ties.

“The administration’s strong implication that the enduring alliance between the U.S. and Israel has been weakened, and that America’s ability to broker talks between Israel and Palestinian authorities has been undermined, is an irresponsible overreaction,” she said.

With tensions still high, former Sen. George Mitchell, the administration’s Mideast peace envoy, has delayed his departure to the region, where he is scheduled to hold separate talks with Israeli and Palestinian leaders, a U.S. official said.

Mitchell had been scheduled to depart Washington on Monday night. He still intends to go, but the timing is uncertain, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity in order to discuss internal deliberations.

The State Department on Monday said it was still awaiting a formal response from Israel to Clinton’s call and, while repeating elements of the criticism, stressed that the U.S. commitment to Israel’s security remains “unshakable.”

But spokesman P.J. Crowley also said a lot is riding on whether Israel agrees to take steps suggested by Clinton to underscore its commitment to the peace process and strong relations with America.

“We will evaluate the implications of this once we hear back from the Israelis and see how they respond to our concerns,” he told reporters.

Reaction to the administration was particularly intense from pro-Israel groups.

Abraham Foxman, director of the Anti-Defamation League, said he was “shocked and stunned at the administration’s tone and public dressing down of Israel on the issue of future building in Jerusalem.”

“We cannot remember an instance when such harsh language was directed at a friend and ally of the United States,” Foxman said.

Associated Press writer Robert Burns contributed to this report.

American Thinker Blog: Thanks Barack. It really didn’t have to come to this.

Jerry Philipson

Iran nuclear weapon development has slowed: U.S. | Reuters.

(Reuters) – The pace of Iran’s nuclear weapons development appears to have slowed, buying time for a new round of sanctions now and possibly more sweeping measures further down the road, U.S. officials said on Tuesday.

Comments by U.S. General David Petraeus and senior government officials underscored the Obama administration’s message to Israel and Gulf allies — that there is time to pressure Iran to abandon its nuclear weapons program by imposing more economic sanctions without resorting to force.

Obama’s top military advisers — Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff — have made public their growing doubts about military action, warning Israel that an attack could have unintended consequences and merely set back Iran’s program temporarily.

During a visit to Israel last week, Vice President Joe Biden received assurances from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that his country would give a new round of sanctions against Iran a chance.

But the two governments appeared at odds over how forcefully and how soon to act if that round, now under consideration, does not succeed in persuading Iran to back down, U.S. and Israeli officials said.

“We have a common assessment: the regime is vulnerable at the moment and sanctions have a chance of having an impact. But this can’t be strung out for too long,” an Israeli official said on condition of anonymity.

While stressing its sense of urgency about the threat, the Obama administration has made clear it will need to assess the impact of whatever new sanctions are put in place before moving to additional measures.

“There is far more that unites Washington and Jerusalem than divides Washington and Jerusalem on Iran,” said Middle East expert David Makovsky of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “Both countries believe U.N.-backed sanctions need to be tried, hoping that tougher measures can be averted.”

“Yet there are differences” over tactics and the right mix of sanctions to use, Makovsky said. In addition, “it seems the U.S. and Israel could have different clocks about how long sanctions are given a chance to work before more coercive measures are considered.”

SHIFTING ESTIMATES

U.S. officials cite estimates that Iran, which denies it is seeking to build nuclear weapons, could have a nuclear weapon by the middle of this decade.

“Iran has to go through a lot of steps before it produces a ‘no-kidding’ nuclear weapon,” said a U.S. official familiar with the intelligence.

Israel, which is believed to have the Middle East’s only nuclear arsenal, sees an Iranian warhead by 2014 and believes a prototype may only be “months away.”

Asked at a Senate hearing when Iran would have a nuclear bomb, Petraeus said: “It has, thankfully, slid to the right a bit and it is not this calendar year, I don’t think.”

He did not elaborate.

Last month, the U.S. director of national intelligence, Dennis Blair, said Iranian advancements in enriching uranium and other areas showed the government was “technically capable” of producing enough highly enriched uranium for a weapon in the “next few years, if it chooses to do so.”

Blair cited information published by the International Atomic Energy Agency showing that the number of centrifuges installed at Iran’s enrichment plant at Natanz had grown to more than 8,000 from about 3,000 in late 2007.

But he said Iran appeared to be “experiencing some problems” at Natanz and was operating only about half of the installed centrifuges, constraining its overall ability to produce larger quantities of low-enriched uranium.

Petraeus made clear on Tuesday that contingency planning was under way at the Pentagon should Obama decide on military action, noting that Obama had “explicitly stated that he has not taken the military option off the table.”

But he and other officials said the administration’s focus was on using sanctions to get Tehran to change its behavior.

Biden, in an interview with Reuters at the end of his Middle East tour, said the Obama administration’s outreach to Iran, dismissed by some as naive, helped galvanize the international community to address the Iranian issue.

While nuclear development may have slowed by some estimates, Washington believes Iran continues to expand the scale, reach and sophistication of its ballistic missiles.

In response, Washington has expanded what Petraeus called a “regional security architecture” that includes a network of shared early-warning systems and ballistic missile defenses.

Some lawmakers point to signs that the Obama administration is moving to a containment strategy, rather than one aimed at denying Iran a nuclear weapon. Petraeus called that a “big policy hypothetical,” describing U.S. policy as clear: “The president has said that Iran cannot have nuclear weapons.”

(Additional reporting by Phil Stewart in Washington and Dan Williams in Jerusalem; editing by Mohammad Zargham)

YouTube – Battlestar Judaica.mp4.

A new video I made about the current nightmare Israel is going through.

]

Chazak V’Amatz…

Conservative News: Experts call Obama’s actions regarding Israel “counterproductive” and “outrageous.” – HUMAN EVENTS.