Between a Rock and a Hard Place

Submitted by john w. mcginley (United States), Feb 23, 2014 at 12:50

Your analysis seems to me to be very perceptive. With President Obama as a player in these matters there will be no stopping the Iranians by way of "negotiations." I believe that well over a year ago the President had decided on a strategy of "Containment," thereby allowing Iran to go nuclear. Do you remember when Chuck Hagel went before Congress as a precondition of getting the Defense Post? He accidentally revealed the real strategy of the Obama Administration. In his testimony he maintained that "containment" was the Administration's position. The truth had been revealed by a future Defense Minister. Then very quickly Obama scrambled, while Hagel was still being questioned and deployed a messenger to inform that "Containment" was the Administration's position. I have no doubt that the Administration true but not-announced position is the "Containment" option. In other words, these negotiations are a sham. Iran knows it; Obama knows it. It's just a charade. ((But I really wonder if Kerry knows it)))

Then there is Netayahu and Israel. Is it still the case that America has not supplied those "bunker-buster" bombs to Israel? If so an Air Strike would, at best, delay the de-arming of Iran. And frankly I sense that when President Obama gets wind of any Air Strike plans he will alert the Iranians and, possibly, militarily interfere with the Israeli operation. I sense that President Obama has a personal enmity against Natanyahu in particular and the State of Israel in General.//// Would a submarine missile attack be more effective? What kind of retaliation would Israel be subject to?

Having said all of that I believe that Israel and Its Government MUST NOT ALLOW Iran to get nuclear capacity. To much has happened to turn back now. The Holocaust; the War of Independence; subsequent Wars. The ghost of Ben Gurion is looking down and whispering: NEVER AGAIN

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".