Huckabee: ‘I felt more fear in American cities’ than in Israel.
Huckabee: ‘I felt more fear in American cities’ than in Israel.
Just before boarding a plane for a two-day trip to Israel, a reporter asked former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee if he was worried “about security in the violence-plagued country.” Huckabee responded by saying that he has “no fear to go to Israel” because he has “felt more fear in American cities“:
“I have no fear to go to Israel,” Huckabee said before boarding a plane at Kennedy Airport.
“I felt more fear in American cities. I can walk down the streets of Tel Aviv at night without a problem. But I, of course, have the knowledge of which places not to go at night, just like any other city in America.”
- Comments
- 58
Israel building up strike capabilities against Iran.
Israel building up strike capabilities against Iran.
CBS News reports, “Israel is building up its strike capabilities amid growing anxiety over Iran’s nuclear ambitions and appears confident that a military attack would cripple Tehran’s atomic program, even if it can’t destroy it.” The country has also “purchased 90 F-16I fighter planes that can carry enough fuel to reach Iran, and will receive 11 more by the end of next year.” According to the Times of London, President Bush has given an “‘amber light‘ to an Israeli plan to attack Iran’s main nuclear sites with long-range bombing sorties.”
Obama: If sanctions fail, ‘Israel is going to strike Iran.’
Obama: If sanctions fail, ‘Israel is going to strike Iran.’
During a meeting with House Democrats yesterday, Sen. Barack Obama reportedly told the caucus: “Nobody said this to me directly but I get the feeling from my talks that if the sanctions don’t work Israel is going to strike Iran.” Rep. Howard Berman (D-CA) asked Obama how he would deal with Iran. “If the Iranians don’t accept a deal now because they think they’re going to get a better deal from the next president, they’re mistaken,” Obama responded. Israel’s defense minister Ehud Barak “has told top U.S. officials that Israel won’t rule out a military strike against Iran.”
Robertson Advocates Israel Striking Iran Before The 2008 Election
Robertson Advocates Israel Striking Iran Before The 2008 Election
On yesterday’s edition of The 700 Club, Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson sharply criticized the “moderate tone” the Bush administration has allegedly taken toward Iran and its nuclear weapons program. Robertson advocated that Israel look out for the “survival of its nation” and “make some kind of a strike” against Iranian nuclear facilities. He also predicted that it will likely happen before the 2008 elections:
But nevertheless, I think we can look in the next few months for Israel to make a strike — possibly before the next election — because I think George Bush — to use the term an “amber light” — he’s given the amber, the yellow light, saying, “Caution, but go ahead.”
Watch it:
Robertson’s predictions often turn out to be wrong. In 2004, Robertson claimed that the Lord told him it would “be like a blowout” re-election for President Bush. (Bush ended up receiving just 51 percent of the vote.) In 2006, he incorrectly predicted that “the outcome of the war and the success of the economy will leave the Republicans in charge.”
He does, however, have an inside track into the Bush administration. Last year, Robertson’s Regent University estimated that one in six of its graduates were employed in government work. Approximately 150 served in the Bush administration.
Today, top McCain surrogate Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) is also talking to controversial Pastor John Hagee’s organization. In 2006, Hagee declared:
The United States must join Israel in a pre-emptive military strike against Iran to fulfill God’s plan for both Israel and the West… a biblically prophesied end-time confrontation with Iran, which will lead to the Rapture, Tribulation, and Second Coming of Christ.
Other members of the right wing have also been unifying around the idea of striking Iran before Bush leaves. Both John Bolton and Bill Kristol have made the same argument.
(HT: Ari’s Freedom Switch)
Transcript: Read the rest of this entry »
Bush backs Israel’s plan for strike on Iran.
Bush backs Israel’s plan for strike on Iran.
The Times of London reports that President Bush “has told the Israeli government that he may be prepared to approve a future military strike on Iranian nuclear facilities if negotiations with Tehran break down, according to a senior Pentagon official”:
Despite the opposition of his own generals and widespread scepticism that America is ready to risk the military, political and economic consequences of an airborne strike on Iran, the president has given an “amber light” to an Israeli plan to attack Iran’s main nuclear sites with long-range bombing sorties, the official told The Sunday Times.
“Amber means get on with your preparations, stand by for immediate attack and tell us when you’re ready,” the official said. But the Israelis have also been told that they can expect no help from American forces and will not be able to use US military bases in Iraq for logistical support.
“This administration will not attack Iran. This has already been decided,” the official stated. But the offical added, “I know he doesn’t believe that anything but force will deter Iran.”
Former Cheney adviser: The odds of Israel attacking Iran are ’slightly, slightly above 50-50.’
Former Cheney adviser: The odds of Israel attacking Iran are ’slightly, slightly above 50-50.’
In an article for Mother Jones, Laura Rozen reports that there are “significant factors weighing against prospective Israeli military action on Iran before the Bush term ends.” “My sense is the Pentagon would be worried or opposed to an Israeli attack,” says David Wurmser, former Middle East adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney. But, according to Wurmser, an Israeli attack against Iran is still more likely than not:
“Even beyond the question of whether McCain or Obama wins, the Israelis are afraid that no new administration is really going to be able to get its act together quickly to be able to mobilize a plan and do something,” Wurmser said.
Wurmser put the odds of Israel striking Iran before Bush leaves office at “slightly, slightly above 50-50.”
Bolton: Israel Will Attack Iran After U.S. Election But Before Inauguration, Arab States Will Be ‘Delighted’
Bolton: Israel Will Attack Iran After U.S. Election But Before Inauguration, Arab States Will Be ‘Delighted’
This morning on Fox News, former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton continued his drumbeat for war against Iran. Adopting Bill Kristol’s argument, Bolton suggested that an attack on Iran depends on who Americans elect as the next President:
I think if they [Israel] are to do anything, the most likely period is after our elections and before the inauguration of the next President. I don’t think they will do anything before our election because they don’t want to affect it. And they’d have to make a judgment whether to go during the remainder of President Bush’s term in office or wait for his successor.
Bolton gamed out the fallout from an attack on Iran. He claimed that Iran’s options to retaliate after being attacked are actually “less broad than people think.” He suggested that Iran would not want to escalate a conflict because 1) it still needs to export oil, 2) it would worry about “an even greater response” from Israel, 3) and it would worry about the U.S.’s response.
Bolton then concluded that Arab states would be excited if the U.S. or Israel attacked Iran:
I don’t think you’d hear the Arab states say this publicly, but they would be delighted if the United States or Israel destroyed the Iranian nuclear weapons capability.
Watch it:
Bolton has said he is backing John McCain because he would handle the Iranian nuclear program in a “stronger” way than the Bush administration.
Netanyahu may hire Rove to help him challenge Olmert.
Netanyahu may hire Rove to help him challenge Olmert.
JTA reports that, according to Israel’s Channel 10, Israeli opposition leader and former Prime Minster Benjamin Netanyahu “may hire former White House adviser Karl Rove.” Sources “close to Netanyahu” said that “Rove’s name has come up on a roster of strategic consultants that the Israeli opposition leader is thinking of hiring as he prepares for a possible leadership challenge against the embattled Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.” Olmert recently met with President Bush and reportedly urged him to attack Iran.
Senior Israeli official: ‘Bush intends to attack Iran before the end of his term.’
Senior Israeli official: ‘Bush intends to attack Iran before the end of his term.’
The Jerusalem Post reports that a senior Israeli official said that President Bush and Vice President Cheney are of the belief that military action against Iran is necessary and that such an attack could be coming soon:
US President George W. Bush intends to attack Iran in the upcoming months, before the end of his term, Army Radio quoted a senior official in Jerusalem as saying Tuesday.
The official claimed that a senior member of the president’s entourage, which concluded a trip to Israel last week, said during a closed meeting that Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney were of the opinion that military action was called for.
However, the official continued, “the hesitancy of Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice” was preventing the administration from deciding to launch such an attack on the Islamic Republic, for the time being.
Rubin: McCain’s Rhetoric On Hamas Is ‘The Ultimate Flip-Flop’
Rubin: McCain’s Rhetoric On Hamas Is ‘The Ultimate Flip-Flop’
Sen. John McCain (R-Z) has criticized Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) by disingenuously claiming that he “approved” of negotiations with Hamas. “It is a grave and dangerous mistake for an American leader to meet with a terrorist organization like Hamas,” McCain claims. But in an op-ed today, James Rubin, a former State Department official under President Clinton, revealed that in a 2006 interview on Britain’s Sky News, McCain supported direct diplomacy with Hamas:
RUBIN: Do you think that American diplomats should be operating the way they have in the past, working with the Palestinian government if Hamas is now in charge?
McCAIN: They’re the government; sooner or later we are going to have to deal with them, one way or another, and I understand why this administration and previous administrations had such antipathy towards Hamas because of their dedication to violence and the things that they not only espouse but practice, so…but it’s a new reality in the Middle East.
Interviewed on CNN today, Rubin said McCain’s “180-degree flip flop” on negotiating with Hamas was at the “height of hypocrisy”:
RUBIN: This is the ultimate flip-flop in American politics. When he was in Davos amongst the European crowd…he was talking as if it were appropriate and natural and reasonable to negotiate with Hamas, the new government of the Palestinian territories. And then, two years later, he’s taking a very, very different position, saying anybody who wants to talk to them is somehow an equivalent to terrorists … It was he himself who was prepared to talk to Hamas two years ago.
Watch it:
“The old John McCain, it appears, was ready to do business with a Hamas-led government, Rubin wrote. CNN said it contacted McCain’s campaign for reaction to Rubin’s comments but said, “We have yet to hear back from them.”
There should be no confusion, John McCain has always believed that serious engagement would require mandatory conditions and Hamas must change itself fundamentally - renounce violence, abandon its goal of eradicating Israel and accept a two state solution. John McCain's position is clear and has always been clear, the President of the United States should not unconditionally meet with leaders of Iran, Hamas or Hezbollah. Barack Obama has made his position equally clear, and has pledged to meet unconditionally with Iran's leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the leaders of other rogue regimes, which shows incredibly dangerous and weak judgment.