Former U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates recently warned that, “The results of an American or Israeli military strike on Iran could, in my view, prove catastrophic, haunting us for generations in that part of the world.” During Thursday's Vice Presidential debate the statement was read to Vice President Joe Biden and Vice Presidential Candidate Paul Ryan at the start of segment on Iran. What exactly Gates meant by “catastrophic” I’m not sure (Muslim/Middle East resentment towards the U.S.? Lack of access to oil? Increase in global terrorism?), but during the debate, both Biden and debate moderator Martha Raddatz seemed to argue that it meant going to war with Iran.
Mitt Romney seems to have a genuinely friendly view towards Israel, which he has made clear in various public statements and his recent visit to Israel. Yet, in his foreign policy address yesterday, he adopted the position which is at the heart of U.S. pressure on Israel: supporting Palestinian statehood.
At the end of his statement Netanyahu said it is preferable to have a "three month" campaign cycle than what would in practice be a year of campaigning until October 2013. Assuming that he would seek dissolution of the Knesset at the opening of the session -- October 15th -- that would put the elections at around or a little after January 15th.
Despite Obama’s poor debate performance, Romney’s rising likability numbers and voters saying he would better handle the economy – and two more polls which give him a significant bump since the debate – there is reason to fear that voters will still not vote against the incumbent.
Last week's U.S. presidential debate was a victory for Romney on all accounts, especially if one judges by the closing statements, where Obama couldn't muster any specific reason why voters should re-elect him aside from the fact that he was trying really hard as president. Looking at polls on how people view the candidates, I’m beginning to wonder why it is that Obama leads Romney in national polls and whether that is going start to change in a big way.
With Muslims attacking American embassies in the Middle East and rioting all over the world over an obscure youtube video, the U.S. State Department and the E.U. can no longer seriously contend that anti-Americanism, anti-Westernism are due to support for Israel or the fact that a Palestinian state has not been established or an Israeli-Palestinian peace accord has been signed.
Imagine Jews launched massive protests for every anti-Semitic youtube video.
Abbas is reported worth millions. So why not let him save his own skin, instead of having Israel repeatedly bail the Palestinian Authority out?
Soon after the attacks on American embassies in Egypt and Libya, Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney and his running mate Paul Ryan criticized President Obama for lack a clear and forceful message to the world. Soon after, the administration provided another example of why this was true, with Obama stating that Egypt was neither friend nor foe, while the State Department confirmed that Egypt is indeed an ally.
The U.S. reiterated its rejection of Israel's call for "clear red lines." Today, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded, saying those "who refuse to put red lines in front of Iran, don't have a moral right to put a red light in front of Israel." Here is the Prime Minister in his own words - responding to a reporter's question about the State Department's position:
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave an interview stating that the U.S. would not be setting any deadlines for Iran.