Obama’s Threat of War Against Israel
Comments| Print friendly | Subscribe | Email Us |
The accusation that Obama said he would shoot down Israeli jets if they launched an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities are regarding an operation planned by Netanyahu back in 2014. It is being reported that after Obama verbalized the threat to commit an act of war against Israel, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was forced to abort the planned Iran attack.
The source being used in this story is a Kuwaiti paper, and according to that source the threat came after Israel revealed the plans of their attack on Iran’s nuclear program after discovering that the United States and Iran had been involved in secret talks over Iran’s nuclear program and were about to sign an agreement in that regard behind Israel’s back.
The report also says that “Netanyahu and his commanders agreed after four nights of deliberations to task the Israeli army’s chief of staff, Benny Gantz, to prepare a qualitative operation against Iran’s nuclear program. In addition, Netanyahu and his ministers decided to do whatever they could do to thwart a possible agreement between Iran and the White House because such an agreement is, allegedly, a threat to Israel’s security.”
Former US diplomat Zbigniew Brzezinski, who enthusiastically campaigned for Obama in 2008, called on him to shoot down Israeli planes if they attack Iran. “They have to fly over our airspace in Iraq. Are we just going to sit there and watch?” said the former national security adviser to former President Jimmy Carter in an interview with the Daily Beast.
“We have to be serious about denying them that right,” he said. “If they fly over, you go up and confront them. They have the choice of turning back or not. No one wishes for this but it could be a ‘Liberty’ in reverse.’”
Brzezinski, after being considered as a top candidate to become an official adviser to President Obama, was forced to create distance between him and Obama after Republican and pro-Israel Democrat Party members charged him with being anti-Israel, and the Obama camp believed that Brzezinski’s stance against Israel could be detrimental to Obama’s placement in the polls.
The news of Obama’s threat of war against Israel last year is being revealed while Netanyahu is already en route to Washington, D.C. for an address to Congress on Tuesday aimed squarely at derailing Obama’s cherished bid for a diplomatic deal with Tehran. Meanwhile, as Netanyahu is delivering his speech, Secretary of State John Kerry, and other international “Neville-Chamberlain-style appeasers” will be in Switzerland for talks with the Iranians, trying to create the framework for an agreement that is hoped for by a late March deadline.
Netanyahu’s speech before the American Congress also comes only two weeks before the next election in Israel, where the Israeli prime minister may either be elected to an unprecedented fourth term, or turn his position over to a new Israeli leader. The speech is expected to echo his first in front of Congress in 1996, when he warned that an atomic Iran would “presage catastrophic consequences, not only for my country, and not only for the Middle East, but for all mankind.”
Secretary of State John Kerry, in an attempt to downplay Netanyahu’s opposition to the Obama administration’s plan to negotiate with Iran regarding the country’s nuclear program, insisted the Obama administration’s diplomatic record with Iran entitles the U.S. to “the benefit of the doubt” as negotiators work toward a long-term nuclear deal.
“We are going to test whether or not diplomacy can prevent this weapon from being created, so you don’t have to turn to additional measures including the possibility of a military confrontation,” Kerry told ABC’s “This Week.”
“Our hope is that diplomacy can work. And I believe, given our success of the interim agreement, we deserve the benefit of the doubt to find out whether or not we can get a similarly good agreement with respect to the future.”
So much for the historical philosophy of America not negotiating with terrorists.
A Netanyahu adviser said of the situation, “We are not here to offend President Obama whom we respect very much. The prime minister is here to warn, in front of any stage possible, the dangers of the agreement that may be taking shape.”
According to the adviser, Western compromises with Iran are dangerous for Israel. Israel “does not oppose every deal.” Israel is merely doing its best to warn the U.S. of the risks entailed in the current one.
According to Speaker of the House John Boehner, who invited Netanyahu to speak before Congress, to the anger of the White House because Obama was not notified of the invitation (as if Congress is required to ask him permission), Netanyahu “can talk about this threat, I believe, better than anyone. And the United States Congress wants to hear from him, and so do the American people.”
Netanyahu disapproves of any deal that does not entirely end Iran’s nuclear program. President Barack Obama, however, has indicated he is willing to leave some nuclear activity intact, backed by safeguards that Iran is not trying to develop a weapon. Iran insists its program is solely for peaceful energy and medical research.
Commenting on Netanyahu’s visit and speech, Obama’s national security adviser, Susan Rice, described the “timing and partisan manner” of Netanyahu’s visit as “destructive” for the U.S.-Israeli relationship - as if threatening to shoot down Israeli jets is not destructive to the U.S.-Israeli relationship in the first place.
Obama firing on Israeli Jets is a Plausible Scenario - Pajamas Media
Obama Threatened to Shoot Down IAF Iran Strike - Arutz Sheva
Netanyahu Declines Dems’ Invite As Obama Ramps Up Hypocrisy - Political Pistachio
Obama Eyes Sanctions On Israel - Political Pistachio
Obama Administration’s Empowerment of Islam - Political Pistachio
Obama Regime Bans Muslim Apostates From “Stand With Mohammed” Summit - Political Pistachio
Obama, Netanyahu, on Collision Course 6 Years in the Making - ABC News
Netanyahu’s address to Congress will be most important speech of his life - Washington Post
No comments:
Post a Comment