| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
Asked about the world's approach to Iran's hard-line president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Olmert replied, "I am anything but happy about it. I expect that significantly more dramatic steps be initiated."Olmert did not specify what steps should be taken. He said he wanted "effective measures that are accepted by the international community to stop the Iranian danger."
Pressed on whether Israel has ruled out a military strike, Olmert said, "I rule out nothing." -- from this article
This requires no attempts to prevent by the American government. Possibly it would require assistance in the form of intelligence at the very least, and possibly certain kinds of weaponry as well, from the American government. But the attitude of Mr. Robert Gates is quite different from that of Donald Rumsfeld. He made two disturbing remarks on the subject of nuclear weapons. Both deserve note.
First, he referred to Israel's nuclear capability. It has always been agreed that there would be no public admission by American officials of that capability, just as Israel has neither confirmed nor denied what everyone knows it has. Why? Because studied vagueness is best in order to deflect the charges by the Arabs and the usual antisemites that Israel "must give up its weapons" if the Arabs must do so also.
This argument, which amounts to a demand for the Israelis to commit suicide, has been put forth by, among others, Lt. Gen. (ret'd.) William Odom, who says -- without any concern, apparently, that he will be seen for exactly what he is, or correctly labelled as such -- that Iran can "only" be expected to give up its nuclear weapons if Israel is pressured or forced into doing so. There is no doubt that Lt. Gen. (ret'd.) William Odom would love to see Israel facing its enemies stripped of its nuclear weapons. That's the kind of guy he is.
Gates’ public statement on Israel's nuclear capability was made in the course of giving what sounded like sympathetic justification for Iran's nuclear program. Iran, he said, "feels threatened" by the nuclear weapons possessed by Pakistan to its east, by Russia to its north, by Israel to its west, and by American forces to its south in the Gulf.
Would he explain away, or justify, the nuclear program of Kim Jong-Il by nothing other than that North Korea is "threatened" by nuclear powers to its north (Russia), to its west (China), to its east and south by the American nuclear submarines and naval fleets in the Sea of Japan and in the North Pacific? Of course not.
Even the slightest hint of thinking in the same way, or providing the same arguments as, the apologists for the nuclear program of the Islamic Republic of Iran -- the apologists such as Ahmadinejad -- is unacceptable.
What Gates said is unacceptable. The Senators should have noted that, and read him the riot act on that.
And though all but two voted to confirm, they can still -- those who voted for him -- bring up this remark, and demand clarification. I suggest John McCain do the asking, but it could be anyone. It could be a Democrat.
Weak on Iran, it sounds like, is Robert Gates. Don't let that part of his hearings go unremarked and uncriticized.
Between competing sets of idiocy, one becomes confused. One is so used to having many bad choices, but at least one semi-acceptable choice. What is currently on offer is even worse. One can see that in the solemn debates over the Iraq Study Group, in which no one in Washington dares to question the definition of "winning" when, for example, Robert Gates says "no, Senator, we are not winning." Not a soul asks: Perhaps we won? Perhaps we have permitted, with the removal of Saddam Hussein, the setting in motion of events that will inevitably divide and demoralize the camp of Islam and Jihad? Perhaps what you, Mr. Gates, and all these others call "catastrophe" in Iraq is no catastrophe at all, but a means to preoccupy Sunni and Shi'a alike, to cause them to squander men, money, materiel, against one another rather than against us? It may even lead, perhaps, if the Shi'a win, to the Saudis begging us to protect them, as they wanted us to during the First Gulf War. And this time, we may -- but only if they pay us, say, a few hundred billion (for a start), and if furthermore they agree to stop all funding of mosques, madrasas, armies of Western hirelings, including those at academic centers that are Saudi-funded, and CAIR-like groups all over the Western world.
That may be a "catastrophe" for Robert Gates and the Bush Administration, and the stolid Board-Members (just the kind of solid, dull people corporations like to have on their boards, and that's what they are: they are Board Members) whom James Baker rounded up for his ludicrous committee with its comical and worthless suggestions.
But it will only take one or two political figures who begin to tell, even obliquely, the truth. It need not necessarily be someone currently running for President. But it has to be someone.
Posted by Hugh at December 10, 2006 8:26 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
Another dhimmi in charge. We need someone with an overabundance of testicular fortitude.
Posted by: americanmadestrat![[TypeKey Profile Page]](https://swap.stanford.edu/was/20100322163935im_/http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at December 10, 2006 8:36 AM
Irans tactic is clear as cristal.
Today they not only encouraged Hamas to continue the fight against Israel, they even pressured him and promised full support.
Why?
To buy time again, to get the attention elsewhere, so that they can continue finishing their nuke.
That's what it is all about.
at December 10, 2006 8:40 AM
l respect Rummie, he was a person to make changes in the military, and most likely stepped on some toes, and he was not a softy on muslim terrorist. for the charges against him, his replacement is already a huge disappointment.
Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at December 10, 2006 8:53 AM
Yeah Rummie was cool, to bad he had to be the fall guy.
Posted by: americanmadestrat at December 10, 2006 8:58 AM
Aha, but you're not applying the definition of victory as that set forth by the George & Tony Club. They set out to transmorgify a squalid Moslem country into a civilized culture, failed, and are thus losing. Gates is right in that respect.
You, you're applying a lower, much more practical definition of victory: set the various factions of Moslems at one another's throats and benefit from the diversion. But this lowly standard, we're almost sure to win (given the endless bloodthirst Moslems suffer).
This is a good approach, but diversions are temporary. To work, the diversionary approach must be accompanied by 3 things in order to work over the long haul:
1) Stop all aid and assistance to all Moslems everywhere, always. Even assistance for tsunamis, earthquakes, droughts, famines, disease outbreaks, civil wars, and the like.
2) Stop all Moslem immigration, and send those who have not yet attained citizenship back home.
3) Open a Congressional debate using Article 3 Section 2 Clause 2 to clean house of those remaining, and to preclude all further judicial independence on cases involving Islam and the Moslems it causes.
Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at December 10, 2006 9:25 AM
Lt. Gen. (ret'd.) William Odom,at a certain point if an officer wants become a general he has too learn to be a political animal and odom is running true to form, as for Iran feeling threatened by the USA Pakistan Russia and China lets look of this Pakistan is part of dar al islam so why should Iran fear them Russian is one of Iran's biggest trading partners no danger there China also a major trading partner so neither of these countries is any danger to Iran and they've opposed sanctions against Iran to force it to abandon its quest for atom bombs and as for the USA being a danger unlikely the CIA maybe but Bush and Democrat Congress and Senate not likely
Posted by: islamakapigeaters at December 10, 2006 10:15 AM
If the Anarchist party wins the 2008 election the stage will be set for one of the biggest betrayals in history-that of Israel by the US. With all this talk about how the US should be chatting with Iran and Syria while the Light Democrats currently control the White House it's a near certainty that such talks will only accelerate in two years. It's a good thing Israel does have nukes but it won't be enough to save that country if all of its allies abandon it. Somewhere in hell Hitler must be having a good laugh at all this-his old enemies will finish off the work he started.
I might just quit bashing Pakistan's Mushy Raff for being duplicitous- what the US is trying to do to Israel is far worse than what he's been doing to the US.
Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at December 10, 2006 10:43 AM
"And this time, we may -- but only if they pay us, say, a few hundred billion (for a start), and if furthermore they agree to stop all funding of mosques, madrasas, armies of Western hirelings, including those at academic centers that are Saudi-funded, and CAIR-like groups all over the Western world".-Hugh
CAIR and Co. are really Al-Qaeda Lite. They are all (Hamas, Brotherhood, CAIR, etc.) on the same page in the matter of Jew-hating, deception and murder in the name of the belief-system. If all the Jews in Israel only consisted of those who had fled other Mideast countries, the issue would still be the annihilation of Israel. The issues are the supremacist assertions of Islam re Jews and other Unbelievers.
The problem here is that we have all been subjected to the "mosaic" crap of people like Armstrong and Esposito types re Islam for so long that we have not been able to see reality on the matter. I'm sure that Gates has seen mosaics.
However, things are changing because of sites like Jihadwatch. The indoctrination of people like Karl Ernst, etc. (who I believe is a Zachary Smith professor of Islam at UNC) are being undone by Jihadwatch style real education re the belief-system.
We learn from other cultures (such as Islam) and our own culture, by examining-focus on the supremacist assertions of the culture, and critically thinking about such assertions, in order to find out what is true and what is false in those assertions. Jihadwatch is the antidote for the "mosaic" hallucinations that I believe are a good part of the cause of bad policy decisions. Gates and everyone (including Olmert)need the antidote.
at December 10, 2006 10:45 AM
I keep saying this and no one is listening: ditch Olmert and reinstate Netanyahu.
Posted by: EliasAlucard at December 10, 2006 11:00 AM
Hugh-
A good example of how this "mosaic" nonsense will get in the way of reality is on the issue of deception in the belief-system. Some will argue that only some sects (Shia, e.g.) think that's ok, and that there is an great argument and difference of opinion among Muslim scholars as to when deception should be employed and when it should not be employed. But all that misses the point.
Christ said that deception came from "the evil one". (BTW, I'm a skeptic re organized religion, though not hostile to it.) He said "let your Yes be Yes and your No be No-everything else comes from the evil one". In Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, and all other major belief-systems truthfulness is mandated-even to enemies.
We cannot love that which we do not trust, we can only fear it and be forced to flight or fight in the face of malice-deception. This is true re this belief-system.
The very fact that deception is even a matter of choice and argument in this belief-system distinguishes the belief-system in that matter. All belief-systems are not the same. "Mosaics" are not a good glass to look through when we want to see reality. We need clear glass to sharply distinguish different things when we look at them.
Posted by: Frank at December 10, 2006 11:49 AM
I am no fan of Rumsfeld. But why replace a rat with a mouse?
On the Hugh's comments:
It may even lead, perhaps, if the Shi'a win, to the Saudis begging us to protect them, as they wanted us to during the First Gulf War. And this time, we may -- but only if they pay us, say, a few hundred billion (for a start), and if furthermore they agree to stop all funding of mosques, madrasas, armies of Western hirelings, including those at academic centers that are Saudi-funded, and CAIR-like groups all over the Western world.
That will never happen. That's what they put Baker in there for. He's running point. For once I am with the Lefty LiEberals. It is TIME TO PULL THE PLUG.
We also need to pull the plug on the corrupt oligarchy which rules us with a gilded fist.
As long as the Saudi Gold flows into the coffers of our politicians and our media outlets.. as long as Saudi Gold continues to blind the oligarchy to the true needs of the Nation..
As long as Saudis continue to set foot in this country - we will not have won a thing.
We have two more years to go. And PLEASE NO JEB BUSH and NO HITELRY!!!
Isn't it ironic that the forebears of this ruling class bought off the leaders of the American Indian tribes with glittering trinkets?
Now the Saudis have infected our body politic with greed and corruption. Imagine the size of James Baker's fridge if he were to stuff all his bribes in the freezer.
Posted by: germaninamerica at December 10, 2006 12:27 PM
How can you enlist the Help of someone who say's things like this? Doesn't anyone believe what Iran say's anymore? :
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has warned Western leaders to follow the path of God or "vanish from the face of the earth".
"These oppressive countries are angry with us ... a nation that on the other side of the globe has risen up and proved the shallowness of their power," Ahmadinejad said in a speech in the northern town of Ramsar, the semi-official news agency Mehr reported Wednesday.
"They are angry with our nation. But we tell them 'so be it and die from this anger'. Rest assured that if you do not respond to the divine call, you will die soon and vanish from the face of the earth," he said.
The outspoken president also maintained Iran's defiance over its controversial nuclear programme, saying it was on course to fully master nuclear technology.
"Thank to God's help, we have gone all the way and are only one step away from the zenith.
"We hope to have the big nuclear celebration by the end of the year (March 2007)," Ahmadinejad said, echoing comments he has made on numerous occasions in recent months.
A defiant Iran has refused to suspend its uranium enrichment work, a process that the West fears could be extended to make nuclear weapons.
Iran however insists its nuclear programme is solely aimed at generating energy.
Iran does not need to be emboldened by having the US ask for it's help, especially in light of comments like this. it needs to get a swift kick in the Ass and a warning. asking Iran for help will double Irans influence around the Region and around the and will validate comments like these.
Posted by: Concerned Canadian
at December 10, 2006 12:44 PM
sorry ^^^i posted this in the wrong topic.
Posted by: Concerned Canadian at December 10, 2006 12:51 PM
WAsn't robert gates involved with iran-contra??
Posted by: callmeinfidel at December 10, 2006 1:24 PM
What's with this bull manure that the Democrats are anti Israel.. historically the Dems have been adamanatly pro Israel and in fact the neo cons got their political start in the offices of Sen Scoop Jackson (D-Wa) a notorious Zionist (pro Israel) politician.. and the muslims voted for Bush in 2000, because of the fact that the Dems have been pro Israel (and according to Grover "Abdullah" Norquist) it was the muslim vote that put Dubya in Office.
Now doing some research on Nancy Pelosi and the current crop of Dems I find from this "anti Zionist" website (and others like it) Criticism of Pelosi because of her pro Israeli attitude, beliefs and actions.
LOL, what one finds via google. According to Jewwatch
" Nancy Pelosi's Hidden Jewish Heritage.
Pelosi Is Related to Argentina's Largest Jewish Family.
Her Husband, Paul Pelosi, Is a Jewish Real Estate Tycoon.
If Pelosi Is So Honest, Why Is This Information Not Made Public?"
There just ain't no winning is there? The rabid regressives (aka conservatives) beat Pelosi and "liberals" about the head and shoulders, and then along come the other rabid regressives (also social fascists) the "anti Zionists" who do the same thing.
And while at it, the only real difference between say a FReeper, LGF'er or many a JW poster and the fascistic neo NAZI anti semitics is the Jewish question..(Israel) other than that both sides share the same traditional anti liberal, anti gay, anti stem cell research, anti abortion "family values".. You hear as much talk bad mouthing Gramsci in their quarters as you do in these quarters, and the same attitude towards Marxism, Bolshevism, Communism., and incidentally both of these regressive reactionary ideologies share more in common with Islam than they care to admit..Islam is after all the epitomy of "conservative" family values.
at December 10, 2006 2:01 PM
"Imagine the size of James Baker's fridge if he were to stuff all his bribes in the freezer".-germaninamerica
Really sharp comment. Baker would call it "consulting". I have a hunch people like Armstrong and Esposito do a lot of consulting. They are all dancing bears for deception.
at December 10, 2006 2:28 PM
"There just ain't no winning is there? The rabid regressives (aka conservatives) beat Pelosi and "liberals" about the head and shoulders, and then along come the other rabid regressives (also social fascists) the "anti Zionists" who do the same thing".
Nariz-
I don't agree with you re "conservatives"-or at least people who are true conservatives.
I used to be conned by the crap about the "danger from the American right". But the real "right wing" in America is not like the right wing in Europe and has different roots. The right in Europe, the left in Europe, and the left in America are all authoritarian re state power.
The American right (typified by Goldwater, Buckley types, e.g.) are very distrustful of state power. The "right" in America almost borders on anarchism at its extreme (Libertarians, e.g.). They are the real "conservatives" when it comes to protecting individual rights and the US constitution. I think the roots of the true conservatives may be traced back to 1776.
The left and the racist fascists have a lot in common, though. They are both essentially authoritarian, and have sympathy for Islam for that reason.
at December 10, 2006 2:45 PM
Nariz-
The only person I see in 2006 America as typifying the spirit of the American right and conservatism is Michael Savage. (He's right that Bush is not a true conservative.) We need conservative politicians who can make the case for a Goldwater style conservatism. Conservatives loathe Jew-haters, and authoritarian fascists of the left or right. The danger from Islam is in its authoritarianism. This is a totalitarian belief-system that is thoroughly incompatible with true conservatism. It's incompatible with the Constitution of the United States.
Posted by: Frank at December 10, 2006 3:02 PM
americanmadestat said [Another dhimmi in charge. We need someone with an overabundance of testicular fortitude.]
Unfortunately the castrated left thinks that is an icky proposition.
Posted by: CottShop at December 10, 2006 3:21 PM
Nariz-
I don't agree with you re "conservatives"-or at least people who are true conservatives.
I used to be conned by the crap about the "danger from the American right". But the real "right wing" in America is not like the right wing in Europe and has different roots. The right in Europe, the left in Europe, and the left in America are all authoritarian re state power.
Damn that Nariz isn't RUNNING yet? Still up to his leftist tricks is he? YES, Nancy Pelosi deserves a few good slaps about the head. She wants to investigate Guantanamo I heard. And she has other Dhimmi plans for us.
I also am among those who were sucked in by the staedy drumbeat against the 'right wing'. Now I am awake and I look around and I say: "WHAT right Wing?"
The Left tries to say Hitlery Rodham is 'right wing'. I AM NOT KIDDING. They spout that Mumia the cop murderer is unjustly incarcerated. I think a lot of them KNOW that isn't true. They are engaged in Taquiyya that's all.
The Left is not that nice freedom-living bunch of careless hippies they pretend they are. The Left is more than flirting with Fascism these days. And they are joining ranks with the islamofascists.
Case in point PC-speak and other limits of free expression are all generated and disseminated by the Taquiyya-Media organs [MSM] of the Left.
Nariz - consider us full of "perceptivity" :-)
And for those who haven't seen mufti-on-the-roof yet:
[or should I say bin-laden-in-the-barn]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKN3KfSNrUo
Posted by: germaninamerica at December 10, 2006 4:48 PM
Frank -
Thanks for the nice compliment. Nariz may not agree but then I am much more on your side not only regarding:
Baker would call it "consulting". I have a hunch people like Armstrong and Esposito do a lot of consulting. They are all dancing bears for deception.
Posted by: Frank
But also a Big Thank You for setting our friend Nariz straight about a few other things such as conservatism and why true conservatives loathe anti-semitism and Islam. They both have their roots in deep-rooted insecurity complexes.
the Left is bankrupt - both morally as well as ideologically. After all it is ISLAM that is so much more extreme than all the Bader-Meinhof gangs and Red Brigades could ever dream of.
Posted by: germaninamerica at December 10, 2006 4:54 PM
Both the US and the UK need a leader like Thatcher, may she be blessed (sorry, I had to insert a little humor), who wasn't afraid to make the difficult decision to go to war, and when going to war, going to win.
I don't think Bush or Blair can see that when you go to war, you go to win, forget everything else. Yes, you should minimize civilian casualties, but the main thing is to win and protect OUR soldiers. If need be, get good spokesmen to explain why we did what we did. Never apologize to the infildels (muslims). If they attack from behind civilians and we kill them and the civilians, so be it. Explain their cowardice and be done with it.
I'm actually less concerned with the crazies in the middle east than what is going on in the west at the moment. The problem here in Germany at the moment is that those most opposed to the muslims are far-right organizations. I don't like them, but on this topic I have to agree with them. We need to do something to protect German culture in Germany and country X's culture in country X. After writing this, I may be deported soon.
at December 10, 2006 5:31 PM
'They both have their roots in deep-rooted insecurity complexes.'~ germaninamerica
And apparently, so does nariz, as he demonstrates with each new set of hysterics.
at December 10, 2006 6:05 PM
Alarmed Pig Farmer: If Catherine would deputize me to do so, I would grant you the Gold Star for the day.
Posted by: special_guest at December 10, 2006 7:36 PM
From the statements Gates has been making of late, especially that regarding Israel's nuclear capability, I'm concerned he will be Baker's poodle. I also agree with the others posters above, he is already becoming a disappointment.
Posted by: Bonniea at December 10, 2006 10:40 PM
Gates is NOT popular with our military.
CIA labelled him "the little prick"...and that by his FRIENDS...a totally inept, incompetant and egotistical bureaucrat who can't back up his words...and a total islamofascist suckup.
W may as well have called in Jimmy Carter for all the good this will do.
at December 13, 2006 1:12 AM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)