About those "red lines"...

[eyer]

...you remember them, right?

The first was infamously drawn by the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize winner and current President of the United Socialist State of America 10 months ago, when he first reacted to rumors that his self-chosen nemesis, Syrian President Bashar Hafez al-Assad, had used chemical weapons against the jihadist "rebels" Obama chose to back:

We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. That would change my calculus. That would change my equation.

(http://swampland.time.com/2013/04/25/six-times-the-white-house-discussed-the-syria-red-line/)

The USSA VP backed his boss up in March:

Because we recognize the great danger Assad’s chemical and biological arsenals pose to Israel and the United States, to the whole world, we’ve set a clear red line against the use or the transfer of the those weapons.

(ditto)

And a "White House Official" plainly reiterated in April:

It is absolutely the case the president’s red line is the use of chemical weapons or the transfer of chemical weapons.

(ditto)

The second "red line" came a month later - last September - from Binyamin Netanyahu as the Israeli Prime Minister addressed the UN, warning of the Islamic Republic of Iran's nuclear threat:

At this late hour, there is only one way to peacefully prevent Iran from getting atomic bombs and that's by placing a clear red line on Iran's nuclear weapons programme.

(http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/2012/09/2012927154228135624.html)

It has been reported that President Obama has instructed the Pentagon to draw-up plans for a no-fly zone over Syria, enforced by the US military and mainly Britain and France (ala the illegal Libya government overthrow)...

...and any day now the news will report that the USSA will begin overtly and directly arming the jihadist "rebels" doing Obama's dirty work (some of whom also participated in Obama's Libya excercise), with some of the world's most lethal weaponry.

Can anyone take this moment to inform me exactly what-in-the-fvck-business America has in friggin' Syria?

No?

That's what I thought...

...meanwhile, Israel's Intelligence Minister Yuval Steinitz yesterday reported that the Islamic Republic of Iran is not only about ready to cross Netanyahu's red line, they're likely to sprint across it with a gaggle of nukes in tow:

"The Iranians are getting very close now to the red line... They have close to 200 kilos -- 190 kilos (418 pounds) -- of 20 percent enriched uranium," Steinitz said.

"Once they have 250 kilos, this is enough to make the final rush to 90 percent," the level of enrichment required for a nuclear warhead, he said in a presentation to the Foreign Press Association.

"It is a matter of weeks or maybe two months to jump from 20 percent to 90 percent with so many centrifuges," he said.

"What they are doing now -- instead of crossing the red line, they are widening and enlarging their capacity by putting in more centrifuges, faster centrifuges."

Iran's aim, he charged, was to build a nuclear arsenal, not just a single bomb.

"Many people are saying it's a question of the Iranian bomb - whether they will have it or not. No. We are speaking about an Iranian arsenal."

http://www.france24.com/en/20130610-...srael-minister)

Now it's time for all the reasonable progressive minds (now that's an oxymoron) on LIT to reply with how the Twelvers in Iran having nukes isn't that big of deal because the threat of being wiped-off the map will keep them in check...

...while jihadi suicide bombers continue to score big without a care in the world of being wiped-off the face of the map.

Oh, yeah:

The USSA's big man and the Hebrew states' bigger man also said this about that when they got together a few months ago:

“We will do what is necessary to prevent Iran from obtaining the world’s worst weapons,” Obama said, calling a nuclear-armed Iran a threat to Israel, the greater Middle East and the world.

Although Obama did not promise that the United States would act militarily against Iran if Israel decided that must be done, he offered an explicit endorsement for Israel to take whatever unilateral measures it deems necessary to guard against the threat.

“Each country has to make its own decisions when it comes to the awesome decision to engage in any kind of military action and Israel is differently situated than the United States,” he said. “I would not expect that the prime minister would make a decision about his country’s security and defer that to any another country any more than the United States would defer our decisions about what was important for our national security.”

Netanyahu seized on the remarks, saying they were an important demonstration of America’s steadfast alliance with Israel and part of making the carrot-and-stick approach a credible option to avoid the use of force.

“I am absolutely convinced that the president is determined to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons,” he said. “I appreciate that. I appreciate the fact that the president has reaffirmed, more than any other president, Israel’s right and duty to defend itself by itself against any threat.”

(http://www.gosanangelo.com/news/2013/mar/20/Obama/)

The sh!t's about to get deep again, girls and boys...

...but don't worry! Be happy! You're "security" is of utmost importance to the state; through it all, don't ever forget:

Uncle Joe is keeping his statist eye on you.

 

[WeedSmoke420]

interesting..

 

[eyer]

One red line already crossed...

...the other awaits.

This time of this year is when some "intelligence" asserted the Islamic Republic of Iran would have enough enriched uranium to produce a nuke...

...Israel maintains it ain't gonna be a nuke when finally acknowledged - it's going to be scores of nukes.

The Twelvers in Iran, already invested up to their jihadi eyeballs in $$ and blood in fully supporting Assad and his reign now of death...

...have also proclaimed that any American attack on Syria will result in devastating effects.

Of course, no one is crazy enough to believe that the Twelvers - the largest of the Shia sects, whose religious philosophy centers on hastening the return of the Mahdi, the twelfth inman, so the final judgement of the world can begin - would actually use nukes for martyrdom like their suicide-bombing brethren...

...ah, nevermind.

Israel fears being left alone to counter Iran nuclear programme

Lack of US resolve on Syria chemical weapons sets a bad precedent Reed

When Barack Obama visited Israel in March, he made a speech in Jerusalem – virtuosic in parts and cloying in others – meant to endear him to an Israeli public which felt it neither knew nor trusted him much.

Atem lo levad (“You are not alone”), the US president intoned in American-accented Hebrew, channelling the same spirit of solidarity that John F. Kennedy invoked when he declared “Ich bin ein Berliner” in blockaded West Berlin in 1963.

Israelis are now recalling Mr Obama’s speech ruefully after his decision to refer any military action against Syria to Congress. Asked afterwards about how the decision made them feel, many offered up this word: “alone”.

Their worry is not that Israel is being left alone to cope with Syria, whose war Israel’s government and most of its people want no direct part in.

The fear – and it is a big one – is about the message America’s perceived wavering on Syria sends to its bigger and much more powerful ally: Iran.

Benjamin Netanyahu, who has made containing the Islamic republic’s nuclear programme the defining issue of his premiership, has said repeatedly in recent days that Syria is a “testing ground” for Iran.

Any lack of US resolve over disciplining Bashar al-Assad’s government for crossing “red lines” on chemical weapons use, Israelis feel, sets a bad precedent for efforts to stop Iran from developing a nuclear bomb. Israel was already worried western resolve to contain Iran’s nuclear ambitions was ebbing after the election of relative moderate Hassan Rouhani as president.

Mr Netanyahu, mindful of Israel’s delicate position in a region where Mr Assad or Hizbollah might respond to a US strike by attacking it, has told his ministers not to talk to the media about Syria.

However, Naftali Bennett, economy minister and head of the far-right Jewish Home party, gave one insight into official thinking on Friday – before Mr Obama’s speech, but after Britain voted against military action – when he wrote on Facebook: “The international stuttering and hesitancy on Syria just proves once more that Israel cannot count on anyone but itself.”

Commentators in Israel put it in earthier terms when they chided Mr Obama by quoting a line from Sergio Leone’s spaghetti Western, The Good, the Bad and the Ugly: “When you have to shoot, shoot – don’t talk”.

“You hear more and more people in government saying, ‘Can we really rely on the US to stop Iran?” said Mike Herzog, a retired Israeli general and international fellow with The Washington Institute for Middle East Policy. “If they can’t take a decision on a red line in Syria, why should we think they could do so on Iran?”

US resolve in Syria, Israelis say, has proved weak on a chemical weapons red line that according to the British intelligence dossier was crossed at least 14 times before the attack outside Damascus that prompted a hesitant US call to arms.

Whereas gruesome news pictures of gasping victims provided apparent visual evidence that chemical weapons had been used, the trigger for action in Iran is more fungible and open to interpretation, and Israel and the US define it differently.

The US has said it would not accept a nuclear Iran, but Israel thinks this is too fuzzy. Mr Netanyahu, speaking at the UN last September, said that Iran must be stopped before it had amassed enough 20 per cent-enriched uranium for a single bomb. Israel says Iran has not reached this but is taking broader actions such as building centrifuges that would make it easier to cross the nuclear threshold quickly.

“Red lines don’t lead to war; red lines prevent war,” Mr Netanyahu said in his UN speech, in which he brandished a cartoon of a sputtering bomb. “I believe that faced with a clear red line, Iran will back down.”

Israelis are this week more doubtful on that point, with many saying that US prevarication on Syria has weakened the red line’s deterrence. Some worry it is now more likely that Iran will cross it and if forced to act, Israel may need to go it alone.

“Will the US back its own red lines and do something about Iran?” asked Yoel Guzansky, a researcher for the Institute for National Security Studies. “The answer after Obama’s speech is no – we are alone. That’s a very basic feeling – this is what people here think.”

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9a5c0bd4-13a4-11e3-9289-00144feabdc0.html

 

[phrodeau]

Can you take this moment to inform me exactly what-in-the-fvck-business America has in friggin' Iran?

 

[eyer]

Can you take this moment to inform me exactly what-in-the-fvck-business America has in friggin' Iran?

Informing a playgrounder like you, playdeau...

...is as feasible as satisfying a nympho.

 

[eyer]

Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu invited members of the European press to his office today to use them to warn Britain about diplomatically getting closer to the Islamic Republic of Iran...

...Netanyahu took the opportunity to also reiterate his red line:

“Israel will not enable Iran to have nuclear weapons capability.” When pressed on what might trigger Israeli action or what form it might take, he said: “Our policy is never to speak about our military option”.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0728f686-31a1-11e3-817c-00144feab7de.html

The Twelvers seem uncharacteristically eager these days to pursue talks with many of those they've refused to negotiate with before...

...they say if one is to enter into negotiations, one should do so from a position of strength.

Wonder why Iran is feeling so strong all of a sudden...

 

[eyer]

Evidently, the USSA seems concerned that Israel is getting ready to preempt...

...earlier this week, Israel's air force undertook a massive drill which included long-range fighter exercises involving in-flight refueling practice.

Read what this Israeli defense source said yesterday:

Changes have recently occurred in the Middle East. The [Israeli Defense Force] is preparing for those changes in both the closer and more distant perimeters, and yesterday’s exercise was intended to signal the IDF’s serious intention of dealing with those problems and thwarting them.

I believe the USSA is negotiating with Tehran, knowing full well the Twelvers can now produce a nuke - and Obama is once again lying when he states that he thinks they're "a year or more" away from doing so...

...I don't doubt for a nanosecond that Israel will attack the Islamic Republic of Iran if it has determined the jihadis have a nuke now, even if it faces total world condemnation for it.

 

[eyer]

The Institute for Science and International Security now says the Islamic Republic of Iran may be 1 - 1.6 months away from weapons-grade uranium...

...and Israel again signals its intent:

"We have made it crystal clear – in all possible forums, that Israel will not stand by and watch Iran develop weaponry that will put us, the entire Middle East and eventually the world, under an Iranian umbrella of terror," Danny Danon, Israel's deputy defense minister told USA TODAY.

- full piece @

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/10/25/iran-bomb-uranium-israel/3186567/

If the Israelis are sincere...

...then we're within weeks of some big-time fireworks.

 

[Sean]

Ah, so Bibi runs US foreign policy?

 

[eyer]

Ah, so Bibi runs US foreign policy?

Actually, it seems much, much more like "Bibi", with the full support of Saudi Arabia, will be addressing what both nations perceive to be the most deadly of threats...

...in fact because "US foreign policy" seems to have developed a horrendous case of the "runs".

BTW:

If you find yourself downstream after the fact...

...please take many extra large gulps of air.

Thanx.

 

[Sean]

Actually, it seems much, much more like "Bibi", with the full support of Saudi Arabia, will be addressing what both nations perceive to be the most deadly of threats...

...in fact because "US foreign policy" seems to have developed a horrendous case of the "runs".

BTW:

If you find yourself downstream after the fact...

...please take many extra large gulps of air.

Thanx.

I'm just intrigued about the fact that your oft stated policy of American non interference seems to go by the board when Bibi calls the troops.

 

[eyer]

I'm just intrigued about the fact that your oft stated policy of American non interference seems to go by the board when Bibi calls the troops.

My "oft stated policy" is black or white, off or on, all or nothing:

Congress either declares war and we conduct ourselves accordingly...

...or we stay completely hands-off.

Your "Bibi" deal has absolutely no direct relevance to my "oft stated policy" that the Imamis need quashed and that the US Congress should clearly state to the world that a nuclear weapon-equipped Islamic Republic of Iran is absolutely unacceptable and will be prevented at whatever cost...

...so, with a spinless Congress and since the current President of the United Socialist State of America is quite obviously not up at all to standing firm on red line talk he is incapable of walking, it matters not a whole lot to me who steers today's terrorist Twelverville back into a dignified Persia.

The fact that Israel, Saudi Arabia, and many other Arab nations are allied together for that mission...

...primarily means to me that those mighty resources give the mission(s) itself a better than 50-50 chance of succeeding.

The options are black and white...

...unless your utopia lends you to believe that the Twelvers - masters of the suicide bomber - would never use their nuclear weapons-creating capabilities for exponentially increasing the death they currently pervade upon the world.

 

[neci]

string. red lines of string.

then he knotted them together.

two cones left on the ground underneath reminded me of ears.

mickey mouse ears.

poison.

he caught the spirits.

he will pay my price.

he was seven.

i hold him close.

he cries when they can not.

i hold him closer then back away, so he can learn to sleep on his own.

 

[VaticanAssassin]

Ninety-nine red balloons
Floating in the summer sky
Panic lads, it's a red alert
There's something here from somewhere else

 

[ms_ann_thrope]