Doc's Talk: Israel, a One Bomb Country

Friday, October 18, 2013

Israel, a One Bomb Country

Nurit Greenger

Rep. Steve Southerland (R-Fla.) said Iran must be stopped from obtaining even one nuclear warhead because Israel is a “one-bomb country.” http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/policy-and-strategy/204311-gop-lawmaker-warns-israel-is-a-one-bomb-country

It is true. One nuclear bomb will end the state of Israel and that is the goal of Iran, to end Israel's existence with the nuclear arsenal it is developing. And nowadays, Iran has all the ingredients to produce 7-9 nuclear bombs.

Amos Yadlin is an Israeli Maj. General (Ret.) who served on his last military job as the head of Israel's intelligence. Today Yadlin heads the Institute for National Studies-INSS, an Israeli leading strategy and intelligence think tank its main objective is to try help Israel to navigate in the Middle East's rough and stormy neighborhood. Help a country that can be compared to being villa in the jungle.

Recently Mr. Yadlin spoke, in an off the radar kind of a meeting, in Los Angeles; his topic was Iran. The following is what I have taken away from his anecdotes.

The one country that worries the most about Iran's desire to acquire nuclear arsenal is Israel. The EU, which is in close proximity to Iran, the US and the Arab countries all join Israel in its concerns but express secondary worry.

In the Bible it is mentioned three times, and the land had rest for forty years. Coincidence?

The Book of Judges, Chapter 3:11: "And the land had rest forty years. And Othniel the son of Kenaz died"

The Book of Judges, Chapter 3:31: So may all your enemies perish, Lord! But may all who love you be like the sun when it rises in its strength. Then the land had peace forty years."

The Book of Judges, Chapter 8:28: "Thus was Midian subdued before the children of Israel, so that they lifted up their heads no more. And the country was in quietness forty years in the days of Gideon."

This year it is 40 years since Israel ended up, victoriously, its 1973 Yom Kippur War. Since then the Jewish state has enjoyed quiet time. It has signed a peace treaty with Egypt and Jordan and her border with Syrian has been peaceful as well. Israel has proved it is strong and its deterrence power works.

So Israel is quiet but the issue of Iran is slowly reaching a boiling point.

Iran's danger is looming; a nuclear Iran will be more dangerous to Israel than attacking Iran preemptively, as Netanyahu expressed in his first 2013 Knesset Fall session, or having to go to war with Iran. Israel cannot afford a nuclear Iran on its northern border. The world cannot afford a nuclear Iran because if Iran goes nuclear every Arab state that considers itself an influential power will go nuclear, i.e. Saudi Arabia, Qatar, etc. More so, this nuclear proliferation will never end till someone will blow up the world. The nuclear standoff between the USA and USSR will not play in this scenario.

While Israel's perception of nuclear Iranian threat is severe and bleak and many compare it to 1938 rise of Hitler, Iran has been moving towards its nuclear bomb goal in as safe as possible mode.

The only country Iran has openly threatened to annihilate is Israel; Israel is small and is in Iran's range of ballistic missiles.

While the United States persistently declares it will not tolerate nuclear Iran, and with this approach is joining Israel, the two country appear to have different perspective as to their tolerance level.

The Jewish nation still suffers from the Holocaust trauma; from being gathered into concentration camps, without an escape route and going through methodically murder of its people in the millions.

The US is suffering from the trauma of wars, mostly unsuccessful that have not achieved their goals if there were any goal set, i.e. Vietnam and as of recent Iraq and Afghanistan. A war with Iran, so far away from the US Atlantic ocean border is a hard sell.

Then there is the timing factor, for Israel it is short. While the Israeli air-force has doubts it can attack alone, for the US the timing is longer, rather untimed.

Israel and the US differ on the trigger issue. While Israel wants to pull the trigger just before the Bomb has been produced, the US wants to pull the trigger as the Iranians are breaking to have the Bomb.

The trust factor also plays. The trust factor between Benjamin Netanyahu, the current prime minster of Israel, and Barack Hussein Obama, the current president of the United States, is poor. If Israel is to lose its operation trust, who can she trust then?

Obama wants to buy time. His non-performance on Syria, after drawing a red line, then allowing Russian's intervention, empowered the Iranians; Obama's threatening statements to Syria that followed by fickle actions told Iran, it can catch the same US vacillating wave. Iran does not want to buy time; it wants to have the Bomb, though it keeps on claiming that it is developing nuclear capabilities for peaceful purposes of industrial nuclear power and nuclear energy.

As for the sanction, Israel demands that lifting sanctions will be only at the end, after all other threats have been lifted, i.e. totally ending enriching uranium and removing all enriched uranium out of Iran to a safe and inspectionable storage facility.

Wendy Sherman, is the United States diplomat and government official, who currently serves as Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, the third highest ranking position in the U.S. Department of State. During the Clinton Administration, she served as Counselor of the United States Department of State and Special Advisor to the President and Secretary of State and North Korea Policy Coordinator; she fell for North Korea's trap and has been proved to be a failing negotiator. Sherman is on the US team currently negotiating with Iran in Geneva, Switzerland; she promised not to fall for an Iranian trap. Can Israel trust her based on her past record?

While Israelis are smart, guided by a sense of security, the US does not see Iran as an immediate security threat.

A nuclear Iran will be a nightmare to Israel and the world. The world cannot afford an open ended race to nuclearization. Iran must be de-nuclearized before it achieved nuclear power.

The good news, Israel has been and is creative and has been surprising in the past; when no one expected Israel has done the impossible, in Entebbe, Uganda on July 4^th, 1976; on June 7th, 1981 in Iraq, when, during Operation Opera, also known as Operation Babylon, she destroyed the Osirak nuclear reactor; in the 1967 Six Day War and mostly and against all odds in becoming a power state 65 years after it was re-established.

Prime Minister Netanyahu swore he will not allow Iran go nuclear, we support him and hope he will do as promised.

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk