Iran - Drums of War

[Jeremy Roenick]

Well, with the entire world turning up the heat on Iran, including all the war hawks from Gingrich on down.  And considering our Commander-in-Chief being caught candidly on mic at the G-20 last week expressing his sympathy with Sarkozy and his disdain for Netanyahu.  We have this development from Iran the other day.  This wasn't covered in many of the mainstream news outlets, therefore it was a mere blip here.  But I feel its a significant development in the whole Iran soap opera.

http://www.debka.com/article/21474/

Explosions in Iran sparked by failed bid to fit nuclear warhead on Shahab-3?

November 13, 2011 – TEHRAN – Brig. Hassan Moghadam, head of Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) missile development and sections of its nuclear program, was killed in one of the two consecutive explosions that hit two IRGC bases 46 kilometers west of Tehran Saturday, Nov. 12. The official fatality figure is 32. Fourteen hours after explosions blasts could still be heard and fires raged. Debkafile’s exclusive sources report the bases are located in Malard, a town in the Shahryar district. The Moadarres facility was the first to be hit, while the second and bigger blast occurred at Amir-al-Mo’menin. Their force was such that the Iranian Red Crescent rushed 45 ambulances to the two facilities plus 23 buses converted to first-aid vehicles and a helicopter to evacuate the critically injured.

Now, there is this video on youtube showing the magnitude of one of these blasts.  Look closely at how large an explosion cloud it is in relation to the mountains in the background.  This was a huge blast.

Amateur video shows aftermath of huge explosion at Iran military base near Tehran

now, I believe one of two things happened here.

1. The Revolutionary Guard were as the story says putting a warhead on a missile and something went terribly wrong resulting in this huge blast.  Of course we have no idea of the casualties.  Either the numbers or who they were since this is Iran's media blackout per norm.

2. The Israeli MOSSAD saw the opportunity to take out a lot of key people in the Iranian nuke program and this was no accident.  If this is the case they may have just set back Iran's nuke ambitions significantly with the loss of key people.  With Israel feeling all alone considering who is in the White House, I wouldn't rule this out at all.  If so, it's a brilliant move by Israel to lessen the danger without resulting to an overt attack on Iran.

One thing is for sure, the tension in the ME is palpable.  If MOSSAD was involved in this expect Iran's proxy Hamas to take action.  Thus upping the ante.  Tensions could go even higher from here.  I applaud any action to setback Iran's nuke program that stops short of all out war.  I pray that steps can be taken to diffuse their nuke ambitions.  I only wish more Republicans would take this same stance instead of "flush the bombers" diplomacy.

[NCVol]

I wouldn't object to anything except this:

With Israel feeling all alone considering who is in the White House

I can't think of a single policy change that's taken place, except the current WH isn't getting all the way down on the ground to kiss their rears.  I'm a little tired of labeling anyone that takes the slightest pause at the policies of the far right wing of Israel an enemy or of questionable loyalty. 

[Just Win]

I wouldn't object to anything except this:

I can't think of a single policy change that's taken place, except the current WH isn't getting all the way down on the ground to kiss their rears.  I'm a little tired of labeling anyone that takes the slightest pause at the policies of the far right wing of Israel an enemy or of questionable loyalty.  

And I can't think of an Administration in my lifetime that has been more hostile to Israel than the current one. You are simply mouthing DNC talking points. The kind that want Israel to go back to the pre- 1967 six-day war borders.

during the G-20 summit, Obama and Sarkozy could be heard on an open mic complaining about Netanyahu, with Sarkozy calling the Israeli leader a “liar and Obama responding, “You’re sick of him, but I have to deal with him every day.” Reuters reported that Sarkozy also said, “I cannot bear Netanyahu.”

McCain said the “French have always been like that” toward the Israelis but suggested that the United States should know better.

“No one, not even [the] most ardent supporter of the president, can view the issue of Israeli-Palestinian issue and peace in the region as anything but a total failure as part of this … administration,” he said.

[Jeremy Roenick]

NC, gingko biloba does wonders for the memory.  I suggest you pick some up.

This wasn't that long ago either.  Trial balloon policy change that was met with so much static Sir Golfsalot retracted...

Obama Speech Backlash on Call to Reinstate 1967 Mideast Borders

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/obama-speech-backlash-call-reinstate-1967-mideast-borders/story?id=13639200#.TsB2Ola0aSo


Again, the point stands, the Obama administration has thrown Israel into an unsettled diplomatic state.  Expect the Israelis to defend their turf with our without us.

[MRM]

And don't forget Biden's comments to Netanyahu on a visit to the U.S. last year.

JR, my guess is it's option 1. The Iranians don't seem to be the sharpest people when it comes to their weapons.

[Jeremy Roenick]

I don't know MRM, this is really starting to smell like the work of MOSSAD.  If so, the Iran/Israeli war has already begun, just not overtly...


From HAARETZ...

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/western-official-israel-is-behind-recent-iran-explosion-1.395512

Western official: Israel is behind recent Iran explosion

Western intelligence source tells Time Magazine that he believes the Mossad was responsible for deadly blast near Tehran which killed key figure in Iran's missile program.

Israel stands behind the recent explosion at an Iran missile base, a Western intelligence source told Time Magazine on Sunday.

"Don't believe the Iranians that it was an accident," the Western official told Time, insisting that widespread assumptions that Israel's Mossad was responsible for Saturday's blast, which killed 17 and wounded 15, were correct.

[Dementia_Madness]

With the virus infections and the assassination of key Iran nuclear scientists.... this has been going on for some time.
http://www.jpost.com/IranianThreat/News/Article.aspx?id=199475
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/nuclear-scientist-ali-mohammadi-assassinated-in-tehran/story-e6frg6so-1225818621514

[NCVol]

Obama Speech Backlash on Call to Reinstate 1967 Mideast Borders

And that is simply not what Obama said.  It's FALSE, aka a LIE.  He said that we should use those borders as a starting point with MUTUALLY AGREED UPON SWAPS, which has been the position of the U.S. for several administrations now. 

It's right there in your link:

The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states." And that's been our negotiating position for several administrations.   

Here's Bush saying "there should be an end to the occupation that began in 1967" and "any peace agreement between them will require mutually agreed adjustments to the Armistice line of 1949.[/size]" 

Bush called for pre-1967 Israeli borders

So help me out - what is the policy change? 

Good gosh, the hard right is a pack of liars.  Deal with it.  He said out loud what had been our policy for a couple decades, and it was made into a big policy change by liars who forget about the Internet, video and print. 

[Jeremy Roenick]

I don't recall Bush or any of his predecessors loathing dealing with the Israeli PM on a daily basis, so you illustrate to me where the US/Israeli relationship is as good as it has ever been.

And you're dead wrong on the '67 borders.  That is a policy change.  Not only is Sir Golfsalot wrong, GWB was dead wrong also.  Any endorsement of the 1967 borders is a betrayal of Israel.  They cannot effectively secure their country along those old lines.  That's why this territory was seized in the first place. 

GWB started this betrayal of Israel and Obama has continued that betrayal and includes a real disdain for our alliance with Israel.

So again, the point stands.  Israel feels increasingly thrown under the bus and that the US does not stand behind them.  They are going to act on their own if need be. 

[NCVol]

I don't recall Bush or any of his predecessors loathing dealing with the Israeli PM on a daily basis, so you illustrate to me where the US/Israeli relationship is as good as it has ever been.

And you're dead wrong on the '67 borders.  That is a policy change.  Not only is Sir Golfsalot wrong, GWB was dead wrong also.  Any endorsement of the 1967 borders is a betrayal of Israel.  They cannot effectively secure their country along those old lines.  That's why this territory was seized in the first place.  

GWB started this betrayal of Israel and Obama has continued that betrayal and includes a real disdain for our alliance with Israel.

So again, the point stands.  Israel feels increasingly thrown under the bus and that the US does not stand behind them.  They are going to act on their own if need be.  

Seriously - the Bush administration, staffed chock full of pro-Israel neocons, betrayed Israel?  Give me a break JR.  So the hardest of the hard right in Israel is the new "accepted" position.  And NO ONE including Obama has proposed a return to the 1967 lines - what part of "agreed upon swaps" isn't clear?  Everyone recognizes those lines aren't defensible, which is why they ALL put in that bit about swaps, with the critical defense territory obviously part of the swaps. 

And it's just nonsense that the "based on 1967 lines, with swaps" is a change.  Here's a plan from 1969 - the Rogers Plan [Sec of State to NIXON] - that says:  

The boundaries from which the 1967 war began were established in the 1949 Armistice Agreements and have defined the areas of national jurisdiction in the Middle East for 20 years. Those boundaries were armistice lines, not final political borders. The rights, claims and positions of the parties in an ultimate peaceful settlement were reserved by the Armistice Agreements.

The Security Council Resolution neither endorses nor-precludes these armistice lines as the definitive political boundaries. However, it calls for withdrawal from occupied territories, the non-acquisition of territory by war, and for the establishment of secure and recognized botindaries.

We believe that while recognized political boundaries must be established, and agreed upon by the parties, any change in the pre-existing lines should not reflect the weight of conquest and should be confined to insubstantial alterations required for mutual security. We do not support expansionism.

So maybe it's a change since 1968.....  

Here's an analysis from a Jewish publication, the JTA:

http://blogs.jta.org/politics/article/2011/06/13/3088114/a-gop-precedent-for-1967-lines

Here's Bush, after meeting with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas on May 26 2005:

    "Any final status agreement must be reached between the two parties, and changes to the 1949 Armistice lines must be mutually agreed to."

Here's Obama on May 19:

    We believe the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states.

The author says - "I think there is still a substantive difference, although perhaps not as great as I originally thought."  with 'not as great' a huge understatement - talk about splitting hairs....  

And to be fair to Obama, Netanyahu did come to the U.S. and pretty much tell Obama to go    

[Dementia_Madness]

Is it just me or is Ncvol turning more and more into FL every day?

[NCVol]

I don't know what that means, especially you bringing it up in a non-response to the allegation that Obama is a foe of Israel because he proposed the same borders we've been proposing since 1968....

Sometimes I let the larger frustration with the liars on the right wing bleed into this place, and that's my fault.  My objection isn't with the people here, it's with the people who generate the talking points that get get repeated here - just tired of purposeful manipulation of facts for a political agenda. 

On this issue, for example, the Netanyahu govenrment is "the acceptable position." Well, dozens of the most respected citizens in Israel, including many in very high positions within their military, and winners of their highest award to civilians, vehemently disagree with the Nety government's position.  They're proven Israeli patriots who clearly are no fans of the Palestinians, and have fought and killed some of them in the many wars, and they simply think the current stance is BAD FOR ISRAEL.  Polls show a huge split as well, often with majorities showing disagreement with the hard right, sometimes large majorities.

But if anyone in the U.S. takes one step from the current position of Israel, they're foes, aren't in their corner, etc.  It would be like alleging if you disagreed with Bush/Cheney, you hated the U.S. and wanted the terrorists to win, even though at the time polls showed huge opposition to those policies, and the public were joined with former high ranking members of OUR military at the folly of the wars.  It's just frustrating and it's more so when speeches like Obama's are blown up over provable non-issues, and those zombie lies persist even after they were repeatedly debunked within minutes of them first appearing.  It's like information travels on parellel paths that never cross, so the lies never get corrected on one path.  It's frustrating.