Panetta: Israel strike in Iran will engage US

toomuchtime_

Gold Member
Dec 29, 2008
19,486
4,602
280
United States Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told US Marines and sailors on Friday that Afghanistan is making progress against the Taliban but Iran remains a potential threat to the US.

"If Israel decides to go after Iran and we have to defend ourselves, we could be engaged sooner than any of us want," he said.

It was not clear whether Panetta was saying the United States would automatically be engaged if Israel would attack. It also is not clear if the Obama administration has plans to be engaged with Iran.

Panetta: Israel strike in Iran will engage US - Israel News, Ynetnews

Of course it's clear that the US will join in when Israel strikes Iran's nuclear weapons and long range missile programs both from a policy and a political perspective. In terms of policy, the administration has been unequivocal in stating it would do whatever was necessary to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Since an Israeli strike will create a lot of blowback that will make it difficult to take strong action against Iran at a later time, it makes sense to make sure these programs are completely destroyed, and, of course, it makes sense in light of Iran's many threats to retaliate against US interests to destroy Iran's ability to project military force beyond its borders.

As a matter of politics, with recent polls showing the majority of Americans supporting using military force to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, it makes good political sense to make sure Iran's nuclear weapons and long range missile programs are smoked and that Iran's offensive capabilities are destroyed.
 
I don't believe US involvement would be imminent. America is war weary despite siding with Israel, and, Obama is wobbly on Israel.
 
I don't believe US involvement would be imminent. America is war weary despite siding with Israel, and, Obama is wobbly on Israel.

On his best days, Obama is wobbly on Israel, and I agree that he doesn't want to take military action against Iran at this time, but I am confident that once Israel attacks, the US will at least supply logistical support and may well join the attack for the reasons I cited above. To put it another way, it will get him more votes than the strongest pro Israel or anti Iran speech he can make.
 
I don't believe US involvement would be imminent. America is war weary despite siding with Israel, and, Obama is wobbly on Israel.

On his best days, Obama is wobbly on Israel, and I agree that he doesn't want to take military action against Iran at this time, but I am confident that once Israel attacks, the US will at least supply logistical support and may well join the attack for the reasons I cited above. To put it another way, it will get him more votes than the strongest pro Israel or anti Iran speech he can make.

If the calculus is that going into Iran would be politically expedient, Obama will do so. Otherwise, I don't see him helping Israel in an offensive, rather than defensive, war, especially given US pressure against an Israeli attack.
 
I don't believe US involvement would be imminent. America is war weary despite siding with Israel, and, Obama is wobbly on Israel.

On his best days, Obama is wobbly on Israel, and I agree that he doesn't want to take military action against Iran at this time, but I am confident that once Israel attacks, the US will at least supply logistical support and may well join the attack for the reasons I cited above. To put it another way, it will get him more votes than the strongest pro Israel or anti Iran speech he can make.

If the calculus is that going into Iran would be politically expedient, Obama will do so. Otherwise, I don't see him helping Israel in an offensive, rather than defensive, war, especially given US pressure against an Israeli attack.

I don't believe Obama would give Israel support for an attack beforehand, but if Israel attacks without a US green light, I think Obama would order US forces to at least provide logistical support. Perhaps we'll just have to wait and see.
 
United States Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told US Marines and sailors on Friday that Afghanistan is making progress against the Taliban but Iran remains a potential threat to the US.

"If Israel decides to go after Iran and we have to defend ourselves, we could be engaged sooner than any of us want," he said.

It was not clear whether Panetta was saying the United States would automatically be engaged if Israel would attack. It also is not clear if the Obama administration has plans to be engaged with Iran.

Panetta: Israel strike in Iran will engage US - Israel News, Ynetnews

Of course it's clear that the US will join in when Israel strikes Iran's nuclear weapons and long range missile programs both from a policy and a political perspective. In terms of policy, the administration has been unequivocal in stating it would do whatever was necessary to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Since an Israeli strike will create a lot of blowback that will make it difficult to take strong action against Iran at a later time, it makes sense to make sure these programs are completely destroyed, and, of course, it makes sense in light of Iran's many threats to retaliate against US interests to destroy Iran's ability to project military force beyond its borders.

As a matter of politics, with recent polls showing the majority of Americans supporting using military force to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, it makes good political sense to make sure Iran's nuclear weapons and long range missile programs are smoked and that Iran's offensive capabilities are destroyed.

It is clear as a bell, that Israel through the Power of AIPAC over Money donations to Congress and the Presidency that the Tail Wags the Dog America...Israel's plans are to start more wars against her enemies in Islam, so she can keep her war gains in Israel.

American boys die daily for a Foreign Power.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: Jos
United States Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told US Marines and sailors on Friday that Afghanistan is making progress against the Taliban but Iran remains a potential threat to the US.

"If Israel decides to go after Iran and we have to defend ourselves, we could be engaged sooner than any of us want," he said.

It was not clear whether Panetta was saying the United States would automatically be engaged if Israel would attack. It also is not clear if the Obama administration has plans to be engaged with Iran.

Panetta: Israel strike in Iran will engage US - Israel News, Ynetnews

Of course it's clear that the US will join in when Israel strikes Iran's nuclear weapons and long range missile programs both from a policy and a political perspective. In terms of policy, the administration has been unequivocal in stating it would do whatever was necessary to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Since an Israeli strike will create a lot of blowback that will make it difficult to take strong action against Iran at a later time, it makes sense to make sure these programs are completely destroyed, and, of course, it makes sense in light of Iran's many threats to retaliate against US interests to destroy Iran's ability to project military force beyond its borders.

As a matter of politics, with recent polls showing the majority of Americans supporting using military force to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, it makes good political sense to make sure Iran's nuclear weapons and long range missile programs are smoked and that Iran's offensive capabilities are destroyed.

It is clear as a bell, that Israel through the Power of AIPAC over Money donations to Congress and the Presidency that the Tail Wags the Dog America...Israel's plans are to start more wars against her enemies in Islam, so she can keep her war gains in Israel.

American boys die daily for a Foreign Power.
It's clear as a bell that Pbel doesn't work for Fox News Channel. Stormfront?
 
As Iran has long claimed that if Israel strikes them, Iran's counter attack would include us, or our interests, it would follow that we would be involved. Unless, obama just absorbs attacks on our interests around the world and does nothing.
 
United States Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told US Marines and sailors on Friday that Afghanistan is making progress against the Taliban but Iran remains a potential threat to the US.

"If Israel decides to go after Iran and we have to defend ourselves, we could be engaged sooner than any of us want," he said.

It was not clear whether Panetta was saying the United States would automatically be engaged if Israel would attack. It also is not clear if the Obama administration has plans to be engaged with Iran.

Panetta: Israel strike in Iran will engage US - Israel News, Ynetnews

Of course it's clear that the US will join in when Israel strikes Iran's nuclear weapons and long range missile programs both from a policy and a political perspective. In terms of policy, the administration has been unequivocal in stating it would do whatever was necessary to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Since an Israeli strike will create a lot of blowback that will make it difficult to take strong action against Iran at a later time, it makes sense to make sure these programs are completely destroyed, and, of course, it makes sense in light of Iran's many threats to retaliate against US interests to destroy Iran's ability to project military force beyond its borders.

As a matter of politics, with recent polls showing the majority of Americans supporting using military force to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, it makes good political sense to make sure Iran's nuclear weapons and long range missile programs are smoked and that Iran's offensive capabilities are destroyed.

It is clear as a bell, that Israel through the Power of AIPAC over Money donations to Congress and the Presidency that the Tail Wags the Dog America...Israel's plans are to start more wars against her enemies in Islam, so she can keep her war gains in Israel.

American boys die daily for a Foreign Power.

It's like you stepped right out of 19th Russia or 1930's Germany to put up this post. AIPAC issues no political endorsements and makes no political contributions. US politicians overwhelmingly support Israel because, as polls show, US voters overwhelmingly support Israel. Politicians go to AIPAC events to show their constituents they support Israel.
 
Panetta: Israel strike in Iran will engage US - Israel News, Ynetnews

Of course it's clear that the US will join in when Israel strikes Iran's nuclear weapons and long range missile programs both from a policy and a political perspective. In terms of policy, the administration has been unequivocal in stating it would do whatever was necessary to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Since an Israeli strike will create a lot of blowback that will make it difficult to take strong action against Iran at a later time, it makes sense to make sure these programs are completely destroyed, and, of course, it makes sense in light of Iran's many threats to retaliate against US interests to destroy Iran's ability to project military force beyond its borders.

As a matter of politics, with recent polls showing the majority of Americans supporting using military force to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, it makes good political sense to make sure Iran's nuclear weapons and long range missile programs are smoked and that Iran's offensive capabilities are destroyed.

It is clear as a bell, that Israel through the Power of AIPAC over Money donations to Congress and the Presidency that the Tail Wags the Dog America...Israel's plans are to start more wars against her enemies in Islam, so she can keep her war gains in Israel.

American boys die daily for a Foreign Power.

It's like you stepped right out of 19th Russia or 1930's Germany to put up this post. AIPAC issues no political endorsements and makes no political contributions. US politicians overwhelmingly support Israel because, as polls show, US voters overwhelmingly support Israel. Politicians go to AIPAC events to show their constituents they support Israel.

And pbel thinks that those arguments pass muster.





Fail.
 
AIPAC's stated purpose is to lobby the Congress of the United States on issues and legislation related to Israel. AIPAC regularly meets with members of Congress and holds events where it can share its views. AIPAC is not a political action committee, and does not directly donate to campaign contributions. Nevertheless, according to The Washington Post, "money is an important part of the equation." The Washington Post states that AIPAC's "web site, which details how members of Congress voted on AIPAC's key issues, and the AIPAC Insider, a glossy periodical that handicaps close political races, are scrutinized by thousands of potential donors. Pro-Israel interests have contributed $56.8 million in individual, group, and soft money donations to federal candidates and party committees since 1990, according to the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics. Between the 2000 and the 2004 elections, the 50 members of AIPAC's board donated an average of $72,000 each to campaigns and political action committees
American Israel Public Affairs Committee - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
The Walt/ Mearsheimer study led some light of Israel's influence on ME policies...an inordinate influence controlled by friends of Israel on the American Body Politic.

All perfectly legal even as Walt pointed out, when the US policy actually go contrary to American Interests.

It will trake a while, but campaign finance laws need to be enacted to protect American Democracy. Israel needs to get realistic and stop her selfish settlement building and share Jerusalem...

Her bullying has left a sour taste in world public opinion not controlled by AIPAC. World Peace demmands it! Enough land grab wars!
 
AIPAC's stated purpose is to lobby the Congress of the United States on issues and legislation related to Israel. AIPAC regularly meets with members of Congress and holds events where it can share its views. AIPAC is not a political action committee, and does not directly donate to campaign contributions. Nevertheless, according to The Washington Post, "money is an important part of the equation." The Washington Post states that AIPAC's "web site, which details how members of Congress voted on AIPAC's key issues, and the AIPAC Insider, a glossy periodical that handicaps close political races, are scrutinized by thousands of potential donors. Pro-Israel interests have contributed $56.8 million in individual, group, and soft money donations to federal candidates and party committees since 1990, according to the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics. Between the 2000 and the 2004 elections, the 50 members of AIPAC's board donated an average of $72,000 each to campaigns and political action committees
American Israel Public Affairs Committee - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nothing in this contradicts what I said. US politicians overwhelmingly support Israel because, as polls show, US voters, the vast majority of whom are not Jewish, overwhelmingly support Israel. AIPAC issues no political endorsements and makes no political contributions, but it does provide politicians with a venue in which they can show their constituents they support Israel. The amounts of money cited in the article are insignificant when one considers the billions of dollars spent on political campaigns over the same period of time and when one considers that it is rare in the US to find a political contest in which both candidates are not pro Israel.
 
images
 
The Walt/ Mearsheimer study led some light of Israel's influence on ME policies...an inordinate influence controlled by friends of Israel on the American Body Politic.

All perfectly legal even as Walt pointed out, when the US policy actually go contrary to American Interests.

It will trake a while, but campaign finance laws need to be enacted to protect American Democracy. Israel needs to get realistic and stop her selfish settlement building and share Jerusalem...

Her bullying has left a sour taste in world public opinion not controlled by AIPAC. World Peace demmands it! Enough land grab wars!

Why stop with the Walt/Mearsheimer book when Hitler said much the same things in his book as Tsarist Russia did in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion? Rational minds have rejected all three.
 
AIPAC's stated purpose is to lobby the Congress of the United States on issues and legislation related to Israel. AIPAC regularly meets with members of Congress and holds events where it can share its views. AIPAC is not a political action committee, and does not directly donate to campaign contributions. Nevertheless, according to The Washington Post, "money is an important part of the equation." The Washington Post states that AIPAC's "web site, which details how members of Congress voted on AIPAC's key issues, and the AIPAC Insider, a glossy periodical that handicaps close political races, are scrutinized by thousands of potential donors. Pro-Israel interests have contributed $56.8 million in individual, group, and soft money donations to federal candidates and party committees since 1990, according to the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics. Between the 2000 and the 2004 elections, the 50 members of AIPAC's board donated an average of $72,000 each to campaigns and political action committees
American Israel Public Affairs Committee - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nothing in this contradicts what I said. US politicians overwhelmingly support Israel because, as polls show, US voters, the vast majority of whom are not Jewish, overwhelmingly support Israel. AIPAC issues no political endorsements and makes no political contributions, but it does provide politicians with a venue in which they can show their constituents they support Israel. The amounts of money cited in the article are insignificant when one considers the billions of dollars spent on political campaigns over the same period of time and when one considers that it is rare in the US to find a political contest in which both candidates are not pro Israel.

Well put toomuchtime.
 
The Walt/ Mearsheimer study led some light of Israel's influence on ME policies...an inordinate influence controlled by friends of Israel on the American Body Politic.

All perfectly legal even as Walt pointed out, when the US policy actually go contrary to American Interests.

It will trake a while, but campaign finance laws need to be enacted to protect American Democracy. Israel needs to get realistic and stop her selfish settlement building and share Jerusalem...

Her bullying has left a sour taste in world public opinion not controlled by AIPAC. World Peace demmands it! Enough land grab wars!
Settlement building as long as Palisimians sell land to settlers. No sharing of Jerusalem because as soon as the Al Aqsa pig sty is demolished and the Dome is turned into a public restroom, the Palis will have no reason to be there.
 
The future belongs to Libertarianism....Fiscally responsible, individual liberty over Goverment, Isolationist in Economics and Foreign Policy...

F___ the Middle East and whackos on both sides....
 

Forum List

Back
Top