web analytics
August 29, 2014 / 3 Elul, 5774
At a Glance

Posts Tagged ‘Obama’

Netanyahu’s Cease-Fire Agreement Leads the Country into Confusion

Tuesday, August 26th, 2014

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu led the country into confusion Tuesday night by agreeing to a cease-fire that leaves Hamas armed and paved the way for Palestinian Authority chairman Mahmoud Abbas, whose new peace partner is Hamas, to guard the terrorists.

Netanyahu was so sure that his Security Cabinet would balk at agreeing to the ceasefire that he did not even bother to consult with the ministers, approximately half of whom are upset with his decision.

The Prime Minister’s spin was that since the Cabinet has accepted previous cease-fires, there was no need to ask the ministers again.

He also has the  Brooklyn Bridge for sale.

Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, Economy Minister and Jewish Home party leader Naftali Bennett, and Public Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch publicly stated they are opposed to Netanyahu’s decision, and Communications Minister Gilad Erdan would have been a doubtful supporter.

Israel lost the opportunity the past week to carry out a quick, penetrating and dangerous ground invasion of Hamas strongholds in Gaza cities. Orders for such a counter-terror motive were ready to be signed, but that is far as they got.

Whether it was the fear of the “day after” anarchy that would follow a ground incursion, the fear of a high number of Israel casualties, the fear of international criticism, the fear of interrupting President Barack Obama’s golf game or the fear of some bogeyman that does not exist, the government and the IDF opted for continuing aerial bombing raids that definitely hurt Hamas but left it strong enough to dictate certain terms of the  cease-fire.

Some security sources bragged to Israeli media how the IDF decimated Hamas and forced it into submission, but while Hamas did not get everything it wanted, Israel got nothing but a halt of rocket fire for the 12th time, or maybe it is the 13th time.

Hamas wildly celebrated the cease-fire, but no one in Israel, except for the small and inconsequential far left, was jumping for joy.

Few people expect the  cease-fire to last, but the problem is that it as long as it does, Israel may be forced into concessions that, like the Oslo Accords, become irreversible when the enemy figures it has conned for all it can get and then goes on to the next round of blackmail.

Israel will open the borders, but Hamas did not receive its demand for a deep-sea port and airport, issues that are up for negotiations in another month, along with the Israeli demand that Hamas dis-arm.

Can you picture Hamas agreeing to dis-arm in return for an airport and seaport unless the facilities will not be supervised so that it can bring in even more advanced weapons?

Israel’s stated goal in the war was to dis-arm Hamas. Netanyahu said there would be no cease-fire without that goal being achieved. He also insisted as late as today that there would be no negotiations under fire.

Those goals and promises clearly were empty.

It is true that Israeli negotiators were not in Cairo, but it is inconceivable that the Office of the Prime Minister simply sat back while Hamas and Egypt, with the help of Hamas’s patron Qatar, tied up the loose ends for a  cease-fire without consulting with Israel.

Moreover, the U.S. State Dept.’s ”man on the ground in the Middle East,” Frank Lowenstein, has been actively involved.

There is no way that the United States was participating in the secret talks without being in touch with Netanyahu, who pulled the wool over the country.

The Prime Minister might not have noticed, but opinion polls that his popularity sunk dramatically the past week, after broad support during the war.

Netanyahu Insists Military Force Needed to Stop Nuclear Iran

Friday, August 22nd, 2014

“A diplomatic solution is better than a military option but a military option is necessary for diplomacy to succeed” to prevent Iran from obtaining access to a nuclear weapon, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu told a Washington think tank.

Netanyahu spoke to the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution.

He added that he agreed with President Barack Obama’s preference for a diplomatic solution but that it will not work without a “credible military threat,” according to AFP.

Although a “threat” is not direct military force, it is difficult to infer that the Prime Minister meant anything other than the use of force since the radical Muslim world’s understanding of the word is inability or fear of using force.

The United States signed on with other Western powers in Geneva last November for a six-month deal, extended until this coming November, that provides that Iran would freeze or curtail some, but not all, of its nuclear development and that international sanctions would be eased.

“Steps must be taken to prevent further erosion of the sanctions because ultimately the sanctions remain an essential element of the international effort to compel Iran to dismantle its nuclear military infrastructure, to take apart all its centrifuges,” N Netanyahu said.

Iran now is again pulling out it latest trick from up its sleeve to buy off the West.

The Islamic Republic, whose stated goal is to establish an Islamic Caliphate in the Middle East, including Israel, will be happy to help the United States fight Islamic State insurgents in Iraq if the Obama administration simply would lift “all the sanctions imposed on Iran over its nuclear activities,” said Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif this week.

Obama Decides that ISIS Does not Speak for Islam

Friday, August 22nd, 2014

President Barack Obama has pontificated that the Islamic State (ISIS or ISIL) does not speak for Islam.

ISIS “speaks for no religion,” said the President, who doubles as de facto Secretary of Islamic Defense.

How does he know ISIS does not speak for Islam? He explains, “Their victims are overwhelmingly Muslim, and no faith teaches people to massacre innocents.”

America’s expert on religion apparently never learned about the Crusades, nor does he know that leading Christian leaders justify killing homosexuals because they are deemed a threat to Christianity.

“ISIL has no ideology of any value to human beings,” Obama continued, taking time off from his vacation at Martha’s Vineyard to explain that ISIS’s radical Islamic ideology is “bankrupt,” an implied assumption that bankrupt ideology does not speak for anyone.

Perhaps Hitler did not speak for Germans?

Responding to the ISIS’s beheading of American photojournalist James Foley, President Obama continued, “ISIL stands for the Islamic State of Iraq & the Levant while ISIS stands for the Islamic State of Iraq & Syria. The aims and objectives of ISIS/ISIL are clear – establish an Islamic caliphate in the Middle East and eventually a global caliphate. That global caliphate includes The White House. This means purifying Islam. Those Muslims who are deemed insufficiently Muslim will be killed….

“One thing we can all agree on is that a group like ISIL has no place in the 21st century.”

What constitutes someone speaking for a religion? There are no lack of usurpers who challenge the authority of Judaism and Christianity. Each faith has many sects that are not recognized by each other, but who, except for Obama, decides what religious leader speaks for Judaism or Christianity.

The answer, outside of the Vatican and Israel where religion and state are intertwined as a matter of self-survival, lies in valid surveys.

A 9/11/13 Pew Survey revealed that a “median of 57% across the 11 Muslim publics surveyed hold an unfavorable view” of Al Qaeda. That is a polite way of saying that 43 percent of Muslim dis not state an unfavorable view of the terrorist network.

A Gallup poll in 2008 stated that 36.6 percent of the world’s approximately 1.8 Muslims partially, totally, or in some way justified the 9/11 attacks on the United States.

In numbers, that means approximately 600,000,000 Muslims are roaming the world with radical Islamic views.

Not all of them, and perhaps a small minority of them, are ISIS enthusiasts. Many more are big on Al Qaeda, Taliban, Hezbollah the Army of Islam, the Muslim Brotherhood and its offspring Hamas.

If the definition of ISIS radicalism is beheading and establishing an Islamic caliphate in the Middle East, these groups are not far apart, unless Obama preaches that their ideology is no less bankrupt than suicide bombers who blow up women and children, and Hamas executions who shoot people in the head and the back, drag their bodies in the street and cart off body parts of Israel soldiers as souvenirs or booty for ransom.

White House Releases Weapons Shipment to Israel

Thursday, August 21st, 2014

The White House has unblocked the weapons shipment to Israel that they had recently blocked, according to a report on Israel’s Channel 1 TV. Among the more notable weapon blocked were Hellfire missiles.

The White House blocked the weapons shipment, after learning that Israel had standardized procedures in place to purchase weapons, and didn’t need to go through the White House for any approval.

President Obama reportedly blocked the shipment to show his disapproval of Israel’s actions in Gaza.

My Take on the Ceasefire

Tuesday, August 19th, 2014

For those of you who follow Israel_Shield on Twitter or Facebook, you know that I try to get information to you before you hear it on the news. You also know that I am VERY careful to release information only when it is confirmed and released by the IDF.

That is why this post is so difficult for me to write. Let me be perfectly clear, I have absolutely no information as to what is going on in Cairo. I have no idea why Netanyahu agreed at all to a ceasefire with a fanatic Islamic terror organization and I do not understand why he or anyone else (Obama) would ever contemplate accepting any terms by an organization that states loud and clear their goal of Israel’s destruction.

I have been feeding off Islamic news channels that are reporting a major breakthrough at the Cairo talks. I have heard everything from Netanyahu gave in to all Hamas’s demands to Hamas has agreed to let Abu Mazen take over Gaza.

Unfortunately, I have heard nothing from the Israeli side. My Prime Minister has kept complete and total silence and unlike the Gaza war where I had inside information, this time, I have nothing and it is making me VERY nervous.

The way I see it, there are one of three options here. 

1. Barack Obama has already held back missile delivery to Israel over this Gaza war and Mr. Obama is now threatening Netanyahu with some kind of apocalyptic threat.

As much as it is clear to me that Obama is no friend of Israel, I don’t believe Netanyahu would sell out, considering he knows Congress, the Senate and the majority of the American people understand that between Israel and Hamas, only Israel is a friend.

2. The second option is Netanyahu is waiting for Hamas to make a move and attack Israel. While Hamas has an impeccable record of screwing up and breaking ceasefires, this is a dangerous game of Russian Roulette Bibi is playing. All Hamas has to do now is keep a low profile and begin refurbishing its missiles without firing and call Bibi’s bluff. No missiles shot, Bibi can’t attack.

3. The third and most worrisome option yet most probable one is that Binyamin Netanyahu has given in to Hamas demands.

When I say Hamas demands I mean Bibi has given up on the demilitarization of Gaza demand as well as dropped the weapons blockade Israel has been holding on Gaza for the past 9 years and has also agreed to hold off all operations in Gaza including tunnel discovery, destruction and terrorist assassinations.

What has Hamas promised? Hamas has given us their word that they will not shoot at Israel (until their missile supply is fully refurbished!)

There is only one way for Israel to get out of this mess and that is if Hamas attacks. I know it sounds horrible but if they sit quiet and this ridiculous ceasefire goes through, Hamas will be busier than ever buying new missiles and digging new tunnels!

History of Cease-Fires Shows Israel as the Big Loser

Thursday, August 14th, 2014

President Barack Obama’s direct contact with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to devise a long-term cease-fire plan follows a long history of American and U.N. ventures that have flopped, all of them at Israel’s expense.

Egypt has been the power broker in trying to maintain a cease-fire between Hamas and Israel, and Obama is trying to put his foot in the Middle East door to reclaim American influence based by whittling down the popularity of Netanyahu.

His “poll numbers are a lot higher than mine” and “were greatly boosted by the war in Gaza,” Obama told Thomas Friedman of The New York Times last week. “And so if he doesn’t feel some internal pressure, then it’s hard to see him being able to make some very difficult compromises, including taking on the settler movement.”

It’s always the fault of the settlers. If it rains on the picnic, it is because of the settlers. If Obama’s popularity drops, it is because of the settlers who are an obstacle to his illusions.

The war against terror in Gaza has made Netanyahu even more popular. A Knesset Channel poll released this week shows that the Likud party that he heads would win almost 50 percent more seats than it now has in the Knesset if elections were held today. That translated into 28 mandates compared with 19.

Obama must be politically jealous of Netanyahu, considering the president’s dismal ratings.

Jealous or not, Obama has the habit of most previous presidents to pressure Israel, often by blocking or threatening to block military aid. That is what happened during the war, when Obama stopped the United States from shipping missiles to Israel, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Obama’s phone conversation with Netanyahu was reported as “combative,” nothing new for the two leaders who have distrusted each other during the president’s two terms of office.

The American government’s one-track mind for the “peace process” blocks out all reality, which is a lot different in the Middle East than in the United States. The Jewish Home party’s Housing Minister Ur Ariel said it in a matter of fact way on Thursday – “Americans don’t understand what is happening in the region.”

But that doesn’t stop Obama from throwing his weight around and bullying himself into Iraq, Syria and Egypt only to look like a fish out of water.

Like Carter, Clinton and even Reagan, Obama has the freedom to exploit Israel’s democracy and run roughshod over the government to “make peace” with cease-fires that make war.

That is what happened in 2012 to conclude the Pillar of Cloud campaign against Hamas terror, and that is what happened in 2009 to conclude the Operation Cast Lead campaign against terror.

That is what happened in 2006, when the United Nations and the United States brokered a cease-fire that ended the Second Lebanese War and promised the moon, whose location has not moved since. Hezbollah was supposed to be dis-armed under United Nations supervision, which is like Hamas agreeing to dis-arm under Mahmoud Abbas’ supervision.

“For proxies such as the Palestinian Sunni faction Hamas and the Lebanese Shiite group Hezbollah, the centuries old Islamic jurisprudence of Hudna (tactical truce) and Tahadiya (temporary calm) serve as a plausibly regrouping tactic that is continuously reshaped amid the changing face of modern warfare in the Middle East,” Israel Defense noted during the war.

Enter U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, whose “peace process” and ceasefires self-destruct.

He and U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon orchestrated a humanitarian cease-fire last month. It lasted for 90 minutes. At least five other cease-fires failed.

Israel Defense reported, “Following the inability to transmute any ceasefire, Hudna or Tahadiya over the last decade into encompassing political progress, the tone is that ceasefires only exasperate the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the medium-to long-term. Paradoxically, it is the achievement of these bitesize ceasefires as a short term benefit that has trampled on the utility of ceasefire.”

US Posture of Deterrence and Islamic Terrorism

Sunday, August 10th, 2014

According to the July 30, 2014 Rasmussen Reports, 59% of likely US voters believe that there is a global conflict between the Muslim World and Western civilization, only 17% disagree and 24% are undecided. Likely voters also believe that the “Arab Spring” does not bode well for the US.

The US posture of deterrence played a key role in bolstering Western civilization in face of intensifying threats, checking global violence and instability, bolstering the confidence of US allies, and constraining the maneuverability of rogue regimes.

However, the current perception of the US posture of deterrence among US Arab allies is reflected by a July 27, 2014 OpEd in the leading Saudi daily, A-Sharq al-Awsat, which is one of the most influential Arab newspapers, owned by the Saudi royal family: “…. Secretary John Kerry is representing a weak US administration…. He visits Baghdad to represent an administration that lacks decision-making. He shuttles between Tel Aviv and Cairo as a mediator with no real clout…. Barack Obama’s weak foreign policy is weighing on the deteriorating situation across the world…. Washington’s position on Egypt has changed over the course of the past three years in a manner which demonstrates America’s confused vision and weak foreign policy…. Obama did not even bother to issue a statement regarding the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) forcing Mosul’s Christians to flee. Obama’s increasingly isolationist policy is damaging Kerry’s credibility….”

In order to improve the US image in the Muslim World, President Obama issued a July 27, 2014 statement on the occasion of the Muslim holiday, Eid al Fitre:”…. In the United States, Eid reminds us of the many achievements and contributions of Muslim Americans to building the very fabric of our nation and strengthening the core of our democracy.” That statement was consistent with Obama’s June, 2009 speech at the University of Cairo: “America and Islam are not mutually-exclusive and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles of justice, progress, tolerance and the dignity of all human beings…. Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality…. I also know that Islam has always been a part of America’s story…. Since our founding, American Muslims have enriched the United States…. [The] partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is….”

President Obama’s view of Islam has been reinforced by CIA Director, John Brennan, who was Obama’s Advisor on Counter-Terrorism: “Our enemy is not ‘terrorism’ because terrorism is but a tactic. Our enemy is not ‘terror’ because terror is a state of mind and as Americans we refuse to live in fear. Nor do we describe our enemy as ‘Jihadists’ or ‘Islamists’ because Jihad is a holy struggle, a legitimate tenant of Islam, meaning to purify oneself or one’s community….”

While Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates and Oman dread the clear and present lethal threat of Islamic, Jihadist terrorism – initially and mostly bankrolled by Saudi Arabia – President Obama claims that there is no Islam-driven terrorism or radicalism, but local cases of Al Qaeda, Taliban and ISIS terrorism and Major Nidal Hasan Ft. Hood “workplace violence.” Therefore, he ordered the revision of the US National Security Strategy and the training literature of the military, intelligence and homeland security agencies, deleting all references to Islamic terrorism. Thus, the Los Angeles Times editorial stated on June 8, 2010: “The [Obama] administration has assiduously avoided terms that recognize the distinct threat posed by those who cite Islam as a rationalization for terror.”

President Obama’s ideological ambiguity undermines operational clarity in the battle against Islamic terrorism. It further erodes the US posture of deterrence among increasingly vulnerable US Arab allies, who are also concerned about Obama’s core belief in multilateral diplomatic engagement of – rather than unilaterally confronting – rogue regimes, such as Iran.

The anxiety of Saudi Arabia and other pro-US Gulf states – which are afflicted by domestic and regional Sunni and Shite Islamic terrorism – was expressed by a series of July 2014 columns in A Sharq al Awsat. For examples, “… it is clear that the policy of withdrawal and isolationism practiced by President Barack Obama’s administration has helped set instincts loose, encouraging [Middle Eastern] groups and people who show no respect for peaceful coexistence…. What if Egypt was left to the rule of the Muslim Brotherhood, according to the wishes of the Obama Administration?…. The Obama Administration is still dithering and preoccupied with the illusion of an agreement with Iran on its nuclear program….”

The Arab Tsunami-driven threat of Islamic terrorism is not limited to the pro-US Arab regimes. It has afflicted India (the largest victim of Islamic terrorism), China (XinjIang province), Russia (Chechnya), Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Thailand, the Philippines and Africa. It constitutes a clear and present threat to Europe and the US mainland, emboldened by US ideological and operational ambiguity and indecisiveness.

When it comes to “third down and ten yards to go” in the battle against Islamic terrorism, the US quarterback can rely on the Israeli wide receiver, which provides a uniquely reliable and effective battle-tested laboratory and training ground for America’s defense and homeland security forces and industries, the unconditional and democratic ally of the US.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/opinions/us-posture-of-deterrence-and-islamic-terrorism/2014/08/10/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: