web analytics
September 30, 2014 / 6 Tishri, 5775
At a Glance

Posts Tagged ‘threat’

A New Idea from the European Union

Monday, November 26th, 2012

What can I say but “thank you, EU”?

First, for again proving its malicious bias.

Second, for giving Israel the idea and, better, the rationale, to come down harder on the internationalists that block our roads, etc.

That’s from reading this:

The European Union is recommending a blacklist of “known violent settlers” who will be blocked from entering EU member states, a Western diplomat told Haaretz…[after] the consuls general of the EU countries in East Jerusalem and Ramallah wrote a report dealing with settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank, especially the incidents the settlers refer to as “price tag” revenge attacks.The report recommended that EU headquarters in Brussels draw up a blacklist of settlers who would be forbidden entry into the 27 EU states.

…This document, which was obtained by Haaretz, says most of the violent incidents perpetrated by settlers “appear to be part of a pattern of coercion aimed at forcing Palestinian communities in Area C to leave, with a view to expanding settlements or outposts.” The document also states that the “political strength of the settler movement has grown” and “the Israeli authorities have generally not taken firm action against outposts [that are] also illegal under Israeli law.” Given that, it states, a “culture of impunity is which the violence continues” has developed.

…The United Nations “considers settler violence as the biggest security threat to its personnel in the West Bank,” the document states. 

And there’s this:-

Several of the committee experts visited the West Bank and Israel last week. A Foreign Ministry source said the visit “was totally unbalanced. Unfortunately, this is typical of some of the European clerical staff.”

According to the source, the European diplomats devoted most of their time to visiting the Palestinian Authority areas, and made several tours of the region accompanied solely by Palestinian officials. The Foreign Ministry was infuriated when told of the document’s contents, with officials saying that Israel had had no inkling that EU institutions were preparing any such blacklist. “It’s hard to respond to a paper we haven’t seen,” said Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor. “As for the inflammatory proposal to refuse to admit what they call ‘known violent settlers’ because Israel hasn’t put them on trial, there’s an internal contradiction there. How will a person be defined as a ‘violent settler’ if he hasn’t been convicted? And if he’s been convicted, then Israel has brought him to justice. It seems as if in their eagerness to suggest tough measures, these esteemed experts neglected simple logic.”

Of course, if the EU reps would spend more time with people in the communities of Yesha, acting just a bit more objectively, maybe they would learn something.
Visit My Right Word.

Will the Iranian Threat Go Away? (Podcast)

Thursday, November 22nd, 2012

When Bibi Netanyahu addressed the U.N. and challenged the world to take a tough stance on Iran, his call to draw a red line met with comments on his artistic ability and mixed reviews on his political insights.

One can argue that the Europeans take the threat of Iran seriously. The European Union imposed its toughest sanctions on Iran to date with the hope that the economic effects of the sanctions will force the country’s Islamic government to give up its nuclear ambitions. However, without the backing of a threat of military action, the EU’s sanctions may not have much deterrence value against Iran.

America’s stance on Iran isn’t clearly drawn either. I recently spoke with Professor Alan Dershowitz, attorney and political commentator on the subject of Iran and its relationship with the West. Professor Dershowitz believes that, “President Obama means it when he says that he will not allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons, but he’s being undercut terribly by J. Street, which claims to be a pro-Israel organization.”

Furthermore, Professor Dershowitz does not think that sanctions, such as those adopted by Europe, are necessarily effective: “I think sanctions alone will never work, but sanctions combined with a credible military threat could work, but it has to be a credible military threat.”

However, this is not so simple either. In the interview, Professor Dershowitz adds, “The United States doesn’t want Israel to unilaterally attack Iran. It’s concerned about what the implications would be both for Israel and for the international community. I think it’s very clear the United States government doesn’t want Israel to attack Iran. Israel doesn’t want to attack Iran except as an absolute last resort. … I think Iran will stop its development of nuclear weapons only if it believes it will be attacked by the United States.”

So what’s the answer? How will the Iranian threat go away? Watch this video of my interview with Professor Alan Dershowitz to find out more.

Our Best To The President

Wednesday, November 7th, 2012

We salute President Obama on his solid reelection victory. Though we were highly critical of his performance these past four years in a variety of areas, we hope he succeeds in his second term, as his success is America’s success.

The challenges of the next four years will be the same had Mr. Romney prevailed. We have an economy headed toward disaster with out of control spending, spiraling deficits, limited growth and high unemployment. Iran’s threat to peace and international security continues, as do the provocations of terrorist groups in Gaza, Lebanon and other parts of the world.

We hope the president will focus on these fundamental bread and butter problems and eschew any grand, Pollyannaish visions of changing the world. Only a strong and resilient America with its own house in order can reach out to help others.

IAF Successfully Drops Flyers on Gaza

Monday, October 29th, 2012

The IAF dropped flyers onto Rafiach in southern Gaza explaining to them that they shouldn’t approach the border with Israel and try to break through.

The dropped letter stated:

Gazans,

Terrorist organizations operating among you, they use you as cover. Gaza residents are risking their lives on a regular basis because of the terrorist organizations. Their use of your residential areas, your houses and backyards and are creating a direct threat to your life, your children and your family.

Anything that will be viewed as a threat to Israeli territories, any attempt to breach the fence from your territories will result in a response designed to defend Israel’s sovereignty and ensure security to the population.

Warning: approaching the security fence within less than 300 meters will endanger your life.

IDF will use at any time, any and all the tools available to them to prevent anyone from approaching the fence and to disperse them by any means, including shooting if need be.

An ounce of prevention …

IDF Leadership

Maybe they should have added something more explicit about the rockets and mortars?

Fighter Jets Scrambled to Ben Gurion Airport in Response to Suspicious Object Report

Wednesday, October 10th, 2012

The IAF Air Control unit identified on early Wednesday morning a suspicious object in the sky above Ben Gurion Airport, alerting fighter jets to rush to the site. Shortly after the jets were scrambled, it turned out to have been a false alarm.

An IDF source commented to Walla that protocol requires quick response to all alerts, to counter even the remote possibility of a real threat.

Ben Gurion Airport was closed down for the duration of the incident. As a result, many flights will be experiencing short delays throughout the day today.

America’s Ambivalent Iran Doctrine

Thursday, September 20th, 2012

Is Washington’s refusal to set red lines over Iran’s nuclear military program spurring Tehran to continue onward, towards nuclear weapons possession, at full speed?

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has issued a call for clear red lines to be defined by the international community. The idea behind the lines is simple: A breach of them by Iran in its quest for nuclear weapons will trigger action against it.

Jerusalem presumably believes that without red lines, Iran will simply not take the threat of military force seriously enough to freeze its uranium enrichment, or enter into further negotiations in any meaningful way.

Washington, saying that the only red line it abides by is the production of nuclear weapons, rejected this call. Any further red lines, President Barack Obama said earlier this month, would constrain the U.S.’s room to maneuver.

Furthermore, according to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, countries are not governed by red lines.

However, as Dr. Emily Landau, a senior arms control expert from Tel Aviv University’s Institute for National Security Studies pointed out Obama himself used red lines twice this year — and did so effectively.

In the first instance, when Iran threatened to respond to economic sanctions by closing off the Strait of Hormuz shipping lane, through which much of the world’s oil passes, Obama said that doing so would constitute an unacceptable breach of a red line. Sure enough, Iran backed off, and downplayed its own threat within a few weeks.

The second use of a red line came after it emerged that Syrian dictator Basher Assad was moving deadly chemical weapons around Syria. Obama said that any further movements of the unconventional weapons, or signs that they were about to be used, would constitute a breach of a red line. There have been no further reports of chemical weapons on the move in war-torn Syria.

Iran knows that the U.S. is being selective about its use of red lines, and that the Obama Administration is reluctant to use this same pressure mechanism on its nuclear program.

What conclusion is Iran likely to take away? One need look no farther than Iran’s rapidly progressing uranium enrichment drive, its continuing refusal to allow IAEA experts access to nuclear facilities, and the fact that no serious negotiations between the P5+1 representatives (the U.S., Russia, China, France, Britain, and Germany) and Iran are on the horizon.

The threat of military force is supposed to be one of three critical pillars of a comprehensive policy to persuade the Iranian regime to stop its march towards atomic bombs.

The second pillar, biting sanctions, is in place, and is taking its toll on the Iranian economy. But the sanctions have utterly failed to convince Tehran to change course on its nuclear program. So long as the worsening Iranian economy does not influence the rate of uranium enrichment, sanctions cannot be considered to have worked.

The third and last pillar, diplomacy, is currently dead in the water, after three failed rounds of negotiations this year.

All three pillars are tied to each other – a structural weakness in one means the other two cannot function properly. In this instance, it is the pillar of a credible military threat that is looking weak, and a refusal to discuss red lines is contributing to that weakness.

Ironically, the less credible the threat of military force is, the more likely it is that military force will eventually have to be used.

Some in the Obama Administration, such as Defense Secretary Panetta, have pointed out that Israel too has not set red lines on Iran. But Israel is not involved in negotiations with Iran, and a red line pressure mechanism would be of no use to Israel — a fact that makes Panetta’s claim appear rather cynical in the eyes of Israeli national security analysts.

There are other factors leading Iran to confirm its belief that the international community is not serious about stopping its nuclear program.

One of them is the public spat between Netanyahu and Obama over these very issues. The open argument, which has escalated into unprecedented feuding via international media outlets, will surely give Iran more cause to trivialize international resolve and unity.

When chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, said last month that an Israeli strike would only delay Iranian nuclear progress, but not destroy the program, he seemed to be stating the obvious. Read between the lines, however, and Dempsey appeared to be hinting that a delay caused by an Israeli strike would not be significant.

The comment seemed to be part of an open U.S. media campaign to dissuade Israel from striking. What it may have done instead was damage Israeli deterrence in Iranian eyes.

The lack of red lines, diplomatic arguments among allies, and an unconvincing threat of military force will all lead Iran to move forward on its nuclear program.

In the meantime, it seems fair to believe that Iran is quickly approaching Israel’s own, unannounced red line.

It’s Not About Survival; It’s About Becoming the Spiritual Superpower

Thursday, September 20th, 2012

(((CLICK BELOW TO HEAR AUDIO)))

The Director of the international department of the Temple Institute, Rabbi Chaim Richman, joins Yishai. Together, they discuss the Iranian nuclear threat and how the Jewish People need to remain strong in the face of danger. Rabbi Richman speaks about the video that his organization recently produced and they end the segment by talking about reaching the tipping point within Israeli society and how it will shape the future.

Yishai Fleisher on Twitter: @YishaiFleisher
Yishai on Facebook

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/tv/radio/its-not-about-survival-its-about-becoming-the-spiritual-superpower/2012/09/20/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: