Monday, June 14, 2010

Obama, Israel, and Iran

It is very obvious now that President Obama does not have a clue how to put a halt to Iran's nuclear weapon program other than through appeasement and almost laughable sanctions. Although Iran states that it only has the intent to use enriched uranium for peaceful purposes, most of the world knows that nuclear weaponry is very much on Iran's mind. It's obvious hatred of Israel and it's belligerent attitude toward that country gives Israel no choice but to take this matter seriously and consider a preemptive strike on Iran with or without the help of the U.S. So how can Israel force Obama's hand to take a tough and effective stand towards Iran's nuclear ambitions including the threat of military force?

I propose that Israel secretly convey to Obama through backdoor channels that if the U.S. does not take appropriate action to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons that it will be forced to strike Iran with conventional weapons including bunker busting bombs. It should add that if Iran retaliates and orders Hezbollah and Hamas to attack as well, and the U.S. does not come to Israel's aid, it would have no choice but to react with everything in it's arsenal including the use of nuclear weapons on Iran. It would tell the Obama administration that it would have no choice in protecting itself. It would say that if Obama chooses to leak this threat and try to spin it against Israel, it will deny it.

Unfortunately, because we have a very weak President who seems intent on appeasing enemies and dissing allies, Israel, as well as other countries that have always relied on U.S. military might, can no longer depend on the U.S. for protection. Our foreign policy has been terribly weakened by this President and it is unfortunate that a good ally like Israel may be forced to issue such a threat to force the U.S. into taking a stand. I don't know if it would work but Israel may have no choice with this president. Will it defend itself much like a grizzly bear backed into a corner, or would it just give up more territory to appease the U.S. and the rest of the world leading ultimately to its demise?

No comments: