Author Topic: No More Blank Checks  (Read 6631 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

fatman

  • Guest
No More Blank Checks
« on: July 14, 2008, 12:54:31 PM »
No More Blank Checks for War
Fri Jul 11, 3:00 AM ET
 
By Pat Buchanan

After the assassination of the archduke in Sarajevo on June 28, 1914, Austria got from Kaiser Wilhelm a "blank cheque" to punish Serbia. Germany would follow whatever course its ally chose to take. Austria chose war on Serbia. And World War I resulted.

On March 31, 1939, Britain gave a blank check to Poland in its dispute with Germany over Danzig, a town of 350,000 Germans. Should war come, Britain would fight on Poland's side.

Poland refused to negotiate, Adolf Hitler attacked, and Britain declared war. After six years, the British Empire collapsed. Germany was burnt to ashes. Poland entered the slave quarters of Joseph Stalin's empire.

Lesson: No great power should ever give to a small ally or client state a blank check to drag it into war.

This raises the question: Has President Bush given Israel a blank check?

A year ago, Israel attacked and smashed an alleged nuclear reactor site in Syria. In April, Israel held a five-day civil defense drill. In June, Israel sent 100 F-15s and F-16s, with refueling tankers, toward Greece in a simulated attack. The planes flew 1,450 kilometers, the distance to Iran's uranium enrichment facility at Natanz.

On June 6, Deputy Prime Minister Shaul Mofaz threatened, "If Iran continues its nuclear weapons program we will attack it."

Ehud Olmert returned from a June meeting with Bush to tell Israelis, "George Bush understands the severity of the Iranian threat and the need to vanquish it, and intends to act on the matter before the end of his term."

Is Israel bluffing, or in dead earnest?

For while Israel can do damage to Iran, she cannot defeat Iran without using nuclear weapons. But any attack Israel launched against Iran would require U.S. complicity, and any Israeli war with Iran would almost certainly require the United States to do most of the fighting to win or end it.

Thus, if George Bush does not want war with Iran, with two U.S. wars already, he must inform the Israelis in unequivocal terms that the United States opposes any Israeli pre-emptive strike on Iran, and will not assist but denounce any such attack.

If Bush believes war with Iran is vital to U.S. security, he should make that case to Congress. To allow Israel to start a war we do not want would be an abdication of his duty as president.

Clearly, among the reasons Israel conducted its dress rehearsal for war was to maximize pressure on Iran to halt enriching uranium. Bush may well have welcomed the added pressure.

But as the Iranians have insisted, they are entitled, under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty they signed and Israel did not, to enrich uranium for fuel in power plants. Tehran has declared it will not be the only nation to surrender its legal rights under the NPT. And in response to the Israeli military exercises, Tehran conducted its own missile-firing exercises this week.

If neither side yields, confrontation is inevitable. Perhaps soon.

For we are only four months from the election, and Israel is pawing the ground to attack Iran's nuclear facilities.

Is this Bush's back door to war with Iran?

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Adm. Mike Mullen, in Israel a week ago, returned to say a "third front" in the Middle East, with Iran, would be "extremely stressful" to U.S. forces.

He is saying that U.S. ground forces probably cannot now cope with another war, with a nation three times as large as Iraq.

Asked about Israel taking unilateral action, Mullen replied, "This is a very unstable part of the world, and I don't need it to be more unstable." But Mullen is not the president. What did Bush tell Olmert? Does Israel have a green light, a yellow light or a red light?

Should Israel attack Iran and Bush deny complicity, he would no more be believed than were Britain and France in 1956. Then, the Israelis stormed into Sinai, and Britain and France said they were intervening to separate the warring nations and secure the Suez Canal. Outraged, Ike ordered the British, French and Israelis alike to get out of Suez and Sinai. They did.

President Bush must step up to the plate.

If he believes sanctions are not succeeding and Iran's nuclear program must be halted, he should go to Congress for authority to neutralize the facilities. If he has not so concluded, he should tell Israel it is not to start a war that U.S. airmen, sailors, soldiers and Marines will have to finish.

America needs to restore that absolute freedom of action in matters of war and peace she once had, before entering the skein of entangling alliances that now encumber the republic.

No ally, no client state, should ever be allowed to drag America into a war she has not chosen, constitutionally, to fight.

No more blank checks for any nation.

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: No More Blank Checks
« Reply #1 on: July 14, 2008, 02:11:54 PM »
Israel certainly has something closer to a blank check than anyone else. Israel thinks it has Washington by the balls. Perhaps it does. But I agree that this should not be the case.

Israel should be informed that if it does attack Iran without actual physical provocation, that it will be on its own. Perhaps the US could add that donations to Israel's defense by Amwerican citizens will not be deductible from income taxes, either.
 
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: No More Blank Checks
« Reply #2 on: July 14, 2008, 03:21:44 PM »
"...actual physical provocation, ..."

Please define this , what would be suffecient?

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: No More Blank Checks
« Reply #3 on: July 14, 2008, 05:13:27 PM »
<<Israel should be informed that if it does attack Iran without actual physical provocation . . . >>

With all due respect, those last four words constitute a loophole that the Israelis, who are probably the only people in the world who COULD drive a camel through the eye of a needle, could drive a tractor-trailer through.  I would tell the Israelis that they are on their own even if they start an armed conflict WITH actual physical provocation and tell the American people that the U.S. has nevertheless reserved the right to assist Israel if the provocation for the war was grave enough in the eyes of the Congress to justify a declaration of war.

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: No More Blank Checks
« Reply #4 on: July 14, 2008, 05:27:28 PM »
I would imagine that actual physical provocation would involve an Iranian missile being sent from Iran to Israel and actually killing an Israeli or perhaps a group of Israelis.

You are right, that the Israelis could probably interpret a Hamas or Hezbollah rocket that might have been made with some Iranian component or something like that. So your take on this wpould be better, Michael.
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: No More Blank Checks
« Reply #5 on: July 14, 2008, 09:54:31 PM »
I would imagine that actual physical provocation would involve an Iranian missile being sent from Iran to Israel and actually killing an Israeli or perhaps a group of Israelis.

You are right, that the Israelis could probably interpret a Hamas or Hezbollah rocket that might have been made with some Iranian component or something like that. So your take on this wpould be better, Michael.


Haven't thousands of such missles been given to Hezbolla , many already used?

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: No More Blank Checks
« Reply #6 on: July 15, 2008, 08:20:52 PM »
<<Haven't thousands of such missles been given to Hezbolla , many already used?>>

Yeah, whereas the Israelis used almost all of their $3 billion annual subsidy (now "only" $2 billion) from the U.S.A. to print bilingual Arabic-Hebrew copies of Kumbayah (words and music) and distribute them free across the Middle East.

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: No More Blank Checks
« Reply #7 on: July 15, 2008, 09:16:11 PM »
So a few thousand Iranian made missles landing on Isreli territory are not suffecient provacation.

Resolved.


What about takeing over a neighboring country?

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: No More Blank Checks
« Reply #8 on: July 15, 2008, 09:28:14 PM »
So a few thousand Iranian made missles landing on Isreli territory are not suffecient provacation.

Resolved.


What about takeing over a neighboring country?

=====================================
Observe that on any map you wish to peruse, Israel is NOT a neighboring country to Iran.
Iran would have to cross at least one or two other countries before it could invade Israel.

Iran has not fought to take territory from any other country for centuries. Iraq started the Iran-Iraq War, and took some Iranian territory. At the end of said war, it was a draw: no one held more than it had at the beginning.

There are just three things most Iranians agree on: the US has messed with Iran in the past and would like to do so again, (2) Israel is unjust in the manner it had dispossessed the Palestinians of their land, and (3) Israel is a close ally of the US and has never and will never have Iran's best interests at heart.

Since Iran can't attack the US, it can threaten Israel and annoy the US that way. Iran feels threatened because there are American troops on both the East and West sides of Iran.
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: No More Blank Checks
« Reply #9 on: July 15, 2008, 09:30:33 PM »
<<So a few thousand Iranian made missles landing on Isreli territory are not suffecient provacation.>>

Context, plane, context.  You love taking things out of context, but you need to ask yourself, in the same period of time, how many missile strikes, artillery strikes and plain old bombs were dropped by Israel on Arab territory?  And of those "few thousand" Iranian made missiles that landed on Israeli territory, how many Israelis were killed?  And of those tens of thousands of Israeli missile strikes, artillery strikes and plain old bombs dropped on Arab territory, how many Arabs were killed?

Trying to portray the Israelis as the innocent victims of Iranian aggression is, quite frankly, ridiculous.  They aggress against the Palestinians much more than the Iranians aggress against them.

<<What about takeing over a neighboring country?>>

Doesn't look as bad as taking over a country that's ten thousand miles away.  Besides, a lot of people in the neighbouring country don't seem to mind all that much about being "taken over."   They've got a lot more in common with the people who "take them over" than they do with the people on the other side of the border who are aggressing against them.

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: No More Blank Checks
« Reply #10 on: July 15, 2008, 09:40:07 PM »
<<So a few thousand Iranian made missles landing on Isreli territory are not suffecient provacation.>>

Context, plane, context.  You love taking things out of context, but you need to ask yourself, in the same period of time, how many missile strikes, artillery strikes and plain old bombs were dropped by Israel on Arab territory?  And of those "few thousand" Iranian made missiles that landed on Israeli territory, how many Israelis were killed?  And of those tens of thousands of Israeli missile strikes, artillery strikes and plain old bombs dropped on Arab territory, how many Arabs were killed?

Trying to portray the Israelis as the innocent victims of Iranian aggression is, quite frankly, ridiculous.  They aggress against the Palestinians much more than the Iranians aggress against them.

<<What about takeing over a neighboring country?>>

Doesn't look as bad as taking over a country that's ten thousand miles away.  Besides, a lot of people in the neighbouring country don't seem to mind all that much about being "taken over."   They've got a lot more in common with the people who "take them over" than they do with the people on the other side of the border who are aggressing against them.

What a relief.

I thought our flanking Iran with takeovers in Afgnistan and Iraq might bother them , thanks for pointing out that this isn't necessacerily so.

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: No More Blank Checks
« Reply #11 on: July 15, 2008, 11:41:42 PM »
<<What a relief.

<<I thought our flanking Iran with takeovers in Afgnistan and Iraq might bother them , thanks for pointing out that this isn't necessacerily so.>>

Wrong analogy, unfortunately.  A Christian army comes from ten thousand miles away to invade two unwilling and hostile Muslim countries, while a third Muslim country, bordering on both of them, looks to its defences, determined not to be the next victim.

In Lebanon, a Muslim majority, forced by colonial-era partitions to give unequal political weight to its Christian minority, and saddled with a pro-American, pro-Israel puppet government, awaits liberation from its fellow Muslims in the immediate region.  Israel, which TWICE invaded Lebanon, is, as you put it, "bothered" by this, but then, that's the way the cookie crumbles.

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: No More Blank Checks
« Reply #12 on: July 16, 2008, 11:24:08 AM »
What a relief.

I thought our flanking Iran with takeovers in Afgnistan and Iraq might bother them , thanks for pointing out that this isn't necessacerily so.

=============================================
Hunh? What are you talking about?
Iran is bothered by this, in the same way that the US would be bothered if Saudis, Iranians, or Iraqi militants somehow took over Canada and Mexico.
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: No More Blank Checks
« Reply #13 on: July 17, 2008, 01:14:19 AM »
What a relief.

I thought our flanking Iran with takeovers in Afgnistan and Iraq might bother them , thanks for pointing out that this isn't necessacerily so.

=============================================
Hunh? What are you talking about?
Iran is bothered by this, in the same way that the US would be bothered if Saudis, Iranians, or Iraqi militants somehow took over Canada and Mexico.

So Isrelis may indeed feel provoked by Syrian and Iranian involvement with Hezbolla in Lebanon?

Southern Lebanon is appropriated mostly as a missle launcher , mostly missles from Iran.

The Lebaneese elected a government which the Syrians assisanated.

Hezbolla represents a minority of Lebaneese but has a majority of voteing firepower, thanks to Iranian support.

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: No More Blank Checks
« Reply #14 on: July 17, 2008, 09:32:35 AM »
Why do you suppose that the people of Southern Lebanon allow Hezbollah to hang out there?

Could it be because the Israelis occupied the area for a decade and ruled it in a rather nasty manner?

« Last Edit: July 17, 2008, 11:37:33 AM by Xavier_Onassis »
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."