Netanyahu's red line would be drawn with american blood

[Synthaholic]

We went it alone in Iraq? Are you insane?

Who was right by our side during the first night of Shock & Awe?

Which other country dropped bombs that night?

What other country dropped bombs in Libya while we led from behind?

Can't answer my question?

There's no shame in admitting you are wrong.

 

[Synthaholic]

I trust ex-Mossad chief Meir Dagan a hell of a lot more than I would ever trust Netanyahu, to tell us the truth about Iran.


The Spymaster: Meir Dagan on Iran's threat - 60 Minutes - CBS News

It's telling that everyone has ignored this.

 

[shock]

The March of Folly

by Uri Avnery, September 10, 2012


"Nothing could be scarier than the thought that this duo — Benjamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak — is in a position to start a war, the dimensions and outcome of which are incalculable.

It’s scary not only because of their ideological fixations and mental outlook, but also because of the level of their intelligence.

The last month gave us a small sample. By itself it was but a passing episode. But as an illustration of their decision-making abilities, it was frightening enough.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The routine conference of the Movement of Non-Aligned Nations was to take place in Tehran. One hundred twenty states promised to attend, many of them represented by their presidents or prime ministers.

This was bad news for the Israeli government, which has devoted much of its energies during the last three years to the strenuous effort to isolate Iran — while Iran was devoted to a no less strenuous effort to isolate Israel.

If the location of the conference was not bad enough, the United Nations Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon, announced that he would attend, too. And as if this was still not bad enough, the new president of Egypt, Mohamed Mursi, also promised to come.

Netanyahu was faced with a problem: how to react?

***

If a wise expert had been consulted, he might have asked: Why react at all?

***
But for Netanyahu, keeping quiet is not an option. So he did something exceedingly foolish: he told Ban Ki-moon not to go to Tehran. More precisely, he ordered him not to go.

Instead of isolating Iran, Netanyahu helped Iran isolate Israel.

***

This whole episode is important only insofar as it illustrates the incredible folly of Netanyahu and his close advisers (all of them handpicked by his wife, Sarah, easily the most unpopular person in the country). They seem to be cut off from the real world and to live in an imagined world of their own.

In this imaginary world, Israel is the center of the universe, and Netanyahu can give orders to the leaders of the nations, from Barack Obama and Angela Merkel to Mohamed Mursi and Ban Ki-moon.

Well, we are not the center of the world. We have a lot of influence, owing in part to our history. We are a regional power, much beyond our actual size. But to be really effective, we need allies, moral standing, and the support of international public opinion, just like everybody else. Without this, Netanyahu’s pet project, to secure for himself a place in the history books by attacking Iran, cannot be carried out.

I know that many eyebrows were raised when I categorically stated that neither Israel nor the U.S. would attack Iran. It seemed that I was risking my reputation — such as it is — while Netanyahu and Barak were preparing for the inevitable bombing run. When talk about the impending attack reached a crescendo, my few well-wishers were sincerely worried.

However, during the last few days, there has been an almost imperceptible change of tone here. Netanyahu declared that the “family of nations” must lay down a “red line” and timetable for stopping Iran’s nuclear arms effort.

Translated into simple Hebrew: there will be no Israeli attack, unless approved by the U.S. Such approval is impossible before the coming U.S. elections. It is highly unlikely afterward, too, for the reasons I tried to set out. Geographical, military, political, and economic circumstances make it impossible. Diplomacy is called for. A compromise based on mutual interests and respect may be the best outcome.

An Israeli commentator has made the interesting suggestion that the president of the United States — after the elections — personally travel to Tehran and reach out to the Iranian people. That is no more improbable than Richard Nixon’s historic visit to China. I would add the suggestion that while he is at it, the president come to Jerusalem, too, to seal the compromise.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

***
The obscurantist demonization of Islam can be dangerously misleading. The painting of Islam as a murderous, inherently anti-Semitic religion can lead to destructive consequences. Fortunately, the dire forecasts are being disproved daily.

***

And most importantly, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt is behaving with exemplary caution. Six thousand years of Egyptian wisdom is having a moderating effect on the Brothers, including Brother Mursi. In the few weeks of his rule, he has already demonstrated a remarkable ability for compromising with divergent interests — with the secular liberals and the army command in his own country, with the U.S., even with Israel. He is now engaged in an effort to settle things with the Sinai Bedouins, addressing their (justified) grievances and calling a halt to military action.

It is, of course, much too early to tell, but I believe that a rejuvenated Arab world, in which moderate Islamic forces play an important role (as they do in Turkey), may form the environment for Israeli-Arab peace. If we desire peace.

For this to happen, we must break out of Netanyahu’s imaginary world and return to the real world, the exciting, changing, challenging world of the 21st century.

Otherwise, we will just add another sad chapter to the late Barbara Tuchman’s brilliant book, The March of Folly."
================================================================

Uri Avnery and I have much in common including age, military and political service, etc. and similar views. His views are more deeply rooted in knowledge, experience, etc., than mine, but they are, nevertheless, ---strikingly, so far as I believe,--- similar.