Many in the West interpreted the unrest in the streets of Tehran last week in the wake of the collapse the rial as a sign that the Islamist regime was shaken by the sanctions that have been imposed on its economy. The assumption is that the ayatollahs are chastened by the hardships that their people labor under and that it won’t be too long before they are ready to return to the negotiating table and make the concessions needed to craft a deal that will end the standoff over their drive for nuclear capability. But the Iranians and their terrorist auxiliaries in Lebanon (some of who are currently deployed in Syria defending their ally Bashar Assad) have other ideas about the outcome of this confrontation.
Iran’s leadership cannot be completely sanguine about the willingness of their people to go on putting up with Islamist extremism at home and endless conflict abroad. But they also have no intention of being influenced by domestic public opinion or intimidated by Western leaders who are still foolish enough to believe that diplomacy can solve the problem. To the contrary, they believe that it is Israel and the West that can be intimidated and it is in that context that we should interpret the puzzling appearance of the Hezbollah drone aircraft that was shot down over the Negev desert this weekend. Instead of the Iranians receiving the memo the West wants them to read about the futility of further resistance to demands to end the enrichment of uranium that will make a nuclear bomb possible, they have just sent their own message. The drone is more than an indication that Iran will seek to retaliate against any strike on their nuclear facilities with one on Israel. It’s also a sign that the terrorists in Lebanon can strike anywhere in Europe as well as the Middle East. Rather than this drone being a reason for Israel and the West to stand down from a policy of pressing Iran to give up their nuclear dream, it is a warning that ought to reinforce the imperative need to stop them.
As Haaretz reports, the drone is not the first Hezbollah attempt to penetrate Israeli airspace in this manner. Nor is it the only provocation they have delivered in recent months:
Israel .. believes Hezbollah, with Iranian backing, is behind a string of attempted attacks on Israeli diplomatic targets in India, Thailand and the former Soviet republic of Georgia, plus a deadly bombing earlier this year that killed five Israeli tourists in a Bulgarian resort. Last week, Israel announced the arrest of an Arab citizen it accused of spying for Hezbollah, the latest in a string of such cases.
Many speculated that the aircraft was trying to gather intelligence on Israel’s secretive nuclear reactor in the southern desert town of Dimona.
Iran’s terrorist network is part of the regime’s security blanket which it thinks guarantees that it can never be forced to do give up its nuclear dream. Far from being on their last legs or being weakened, Tehran thinks it can intimidate the Europeans and Americans into thinking the attempt to muscle them on the nuclear question is hopeless. They long ago concluded that President Obama doesn’t have the intestinal fortitude to stand up to them and think all they need to do to win is to hold on while sending messages about their willingness to start a fire no one in the West is interested in putting out.
Instead of seeing Hezbollah’s drone as an indication of the folly of threatening the use of force, this should be a warning of the necessity of setting red lines that will make it clear that diplomacy will go out the window unless they stop enriching uranium. Without them, Tehran will continue to believe they need not fear American resolve on the issue and that they can, in turn, act with impunity. If President Obama is serious about his promise to stop the Iranians he will understand that a passive reaction to this provocation will produce the opposite of what he wants: an emboldened Iranian government that will see no point in bowing to the West on the nuclear issue.
Don't let up. Grind them into the dirt. Beating them down over and over until their society goes back in time a hundred years is the only thing they understand. Nuclear power? They should be w/o electricity.
why not send an F-35JSF into Iranian airspace, where the Azeris live so our pilot and reo can be whisked to safety. nReverse engineering the F-35 would totally cripple Iran's economy. n nBut, I await verification. Was not NATOTurkey sharing drone technology with Syria, maybe two years ago?
I like it. It's how Reagan beat the Soviets!
re: F35JSF? I was half sarcastic: 1) the Haaretz article in the link above may have jumped to the conclusion that this is an Iranian reverse-engineered version of the drone the USA lost, oops!, in Iran, so, why not, 2) lose an F35, the most advanced aircraft ever, but 3) yes, if Iran took the bait, it would be like Reagan v Soveits, based on Paul Kennedy's thesis of how all great empires fall/dissolve/tear apart when their military expenditures exceed their state revenues, except 4) the F35JSF is not going well, and I keep waiting for it to come up (in a debate) because it is such a contentious and expensive program, which sort of means 5) the F35 might be a sign of America's fiscal dilemma. n nIf I had the mental will, I would go through the debate transcript because I thought I heard Obama refer to cuts in the F35, without actually saying F35. n nAnd, I assume Romney still supports it, tho a recent update (might be TOO complex) can give both candidates cover. The F35JSF is a huge future budget commitment, and less popular than Big Bird. except for the jobs – n n
Think of it this way: Obama is to Iran what he was to Romney in the debate, diffident, feckless, half hearted and not really there.
I dunno. I would think this drone probe should be good for at least one "Make no mistake . . . " by the Obama.
It's hard to guess what Obama is thinking. Code pink and all those groups are Democrat — so does he feel he can win re-election by being a dove and that he will lose if he rattles his saber and picks up the normal stand-behind-the-President-and-our-country-in-a-time-of-crisis but loses the Code Pink crowd in the process (or maybe he knows that that's sort of fleeting, like how short of a time after 9-11 it took for Democrats and the MSM to start numbering casualties on TV, although he surely knows how that's all been dropped once it was Dems in charge when casualties occurred)? That is, it seems to me he'd only be more popular by standing up to Iran. n nIn the debates on domestic issues, so one can only surmise similarities, it was clear that Obama believes the lies and garbage his campaign puts forth — suggesting why he can't debate, because his positions are rhetoric and not initiatives. That would mean that he cannot wrap his thoughts around the Libyan embassy attack as being a terrorist attack but believes currently that there was a huge demonstration in Libya against a You Tube video. That would explain his inaction — but it is beyond belief to truly put forth, as I just did, that the President of the United States is not just an idiot but one of the dumbest people on the planet. Could that really be? n nSo then, does Obama truly believe that the future must not belong to those who do not honor the prophet of the Muslims (and honoring him as Muslims mean it is worshipping him. right — which Jews and Christians don't)? If such IS the case, then maybe everything is going perfectly by plan — which is sure reason enough that it's impossible to guess what Obama is going to do or not do.
Hate to say it, but we are well past the time even for red lines. The Iranians have every reason to believe that the red lines will not really be red lines but more like yellow. The West has been absolutely weak in the face of repeated aggression since 1979, so why should Iran think anything has changed now? n nThe only thing Iran understands is force. It need not be outright invasion, but it needs to be unmistakable and it needs to hurt. An oil terminal suddenly being crippled by massive explosions. Pipelines being destroyed. A massive buildup of force on its borders. Afghanistan itself might be a lost cause but until we fly the last helicopter off the roof of the embassy yet again in disgrace, we should use it as a staging ground on Iran's border. Push Iran to be the first one to attack outright and then the genie is out of the bottle and the regime can be taken down. n nUntil then, forget red lines.
I think that I have taken the only possible stance (or, rather, have the only possible feelings) that is a coherent mix of yours and besht's: I agree with your post above, but I do have concerns about Romney's willingness to do anything about Iran [though the recent post "Romney Goes Bold on Foreign Policy" at least displays that he has a mind capable of understanding our concerns–then again, there are various things like his relationship with Netanyahu that do somewhat and ought to give me hope). Simply put, Romney is all we have against Obama now (he was my guy in the primaries though, actually); as to where Romney will stand and how he will act once he has taken the presidency is something that remains to be seen, if he does at all take the office. n nShould Israel be on its own though, I have wondered about (or rather, have just begun to wonder) whether or not Israel actually needs all that much time to prepare if it does actually want to strike the Iranian program. Sure, every conventional operation must surely be incredibly hard to plan, but operations and means less conventional could probably be of degree easier to plan. Nothing but lack of precedence and fear of setting future precedence prevent Israel from using EMP/HEMP to make Iranian defense as soft as tissue, right? n nAdmittedly, I'm writing this with the benefit of having read the above-mentioned post about Romney's foreign policy speech already.
This was a drone. Not a Stealth fighter. n nWe don't have to connect each and every data point into something even more sinister, more gigantic in its evil, than the day before. It is just another Iranian-Hezbollah toy. Yes, it is of concern that Iran via Hezbollah can send these things into Israeli airspace from the Mediterranean. But Obama was not more of a feckless empty suit after it took off than he was before. Iran doesn't have the capacity yet to fire ordinance from them You can't spring from one drone being shot down to the conclusion that something must be done, right now! because of it. n nA lot of things could have been done before this and weren't and won't be because Israel, whatever Mr. The Future Cannot Belong to Defamers of the Prophet is up to, remains in a holding pattern, stymied by the timorous, inconstant, and wavering undercurrents of Obama, but seeing no way forward except to avail themselves of the institutional benefits of Israeli-Pentagon-Intelligence cooperation he has passively allowed to go forward. To extrapolate from a drone to a radical new Iranian capacity that the Hezzis can "strike anywhere in Europe as well as the Middle East" is just hyperventilation. n nThe drone is an indication that Iran now has some drones and let Hezbollah play with it to see what they can do. This is not end times.
btw, Romney has already stated that he doesn't believe military force will be necessary against Iran. Do not expect a radical change should he become President from what the status quo policy is–yes whatever Obama has in store for us if he decides to double down on "flexibility" in the second term won't see the light of day, but don't expect a build-up of American force threatening Iran from the Afghani side of the border accompanied by pipelines blowing up across Iran, because a) the Pentagon doesn't want to do this–really, and b) you'd have to overthrow the Afghani government to do this because Kharzi will freak out and call it a violation of the U.S.-Afghanistan Strategic Partnership Agreement.
of course Romney says that, besht. Romney doesn't have access to the intel that Obummer has and it would be reckless (and electorally stupid) to say otherwise. Romney might turn out to be a bigger cream puff than Obummer but his regard for Israel and his comments thus far indicate he would take a stronger line vs. Iran. Thankfully, the Pentagon is only in an advisory role and Romney would get the final say in what does or doesn't blow up in Iran. (And it's a pretty poor argument, in any case, to say "the Pentagon doesn't want to do" X as if it is a homogenous Hive Mind of some kind. Leadership at the Pentagon currently reflects Obummer thinking and policies. Romney would naturally bring in leadership that would be different). n nAs far as Kharruptzai in A-stan, not a big obstacle. He can be persuaded.
" not so poor argument " n nif Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Chief of CENTCOM resigned and publicly declare the televion "an attack on iran is a folly we do not want to associate nobody in the pentagon wants war in Iran, and it will not stop iranian programm. " n nno president will go to war. n nin 2007, mike mullen, Adm Fallon with the help of Robert Gates held in check Bush, Dick Cheney and all other warmongers n nthe pentagon has certainly more influence than AIPAC in Congress
Romney knows guys who have access. This is his position. And this is the position, so far, to the chain of command in the American military. The Pentagon, by which I mean the integrated chain of command on the *military* side, not the civilian side, does not want a war over Iran and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is talking for them as much as the civilian side. It is not "hive mind" but an integrated network of institutions, culture, and priorities, and war in Iran is outside the current consensus. They have told you this. n nAnother point, if it would be so electorally stupid of Romney to even mention an all-out war what makes you think that Romney, whose focus remains domestic technocracy, would them execute a war whose very mention you have said would have prevented him from being elected in the first place. n nAnd no, the agreement with Kharzi matched Bush's own Iraq strategy–we were on the way out of both countries and the notion that we would reverse course top use Afghanistan as a launching pad for a threatened encirclement of Iran is Jules Verne. n nAnd, of course, once you go down that road, reconcile yourself to the real thing. The Iranians are partly bluffing but they have shown the ability to ride out long wars of attrition. n nWhat you don't get with Romney is Obama's possible premature cave-in to Tehran.
Maybe Romney will take out all the loopholes Obama knitted into the sanctions Congress proposed?
Jonathan, you've cunningly forgotten to mention the many provocative flights of IAF aircraft over Lebanon, yet here you are carrying on like a pork chop over a provocative drone flights from Hezbollah. What did you expect?
First, I do not believe sanctions on Iran under a President Romney, will have the gaping holes of Obama’s pathetic sanctions, which were designed to be ineffective in stopping Iran from developing a nuke.
By the way, after studying the first presidential debate of last week, I believe it is possible to project the winner of the election.
Jonathan I submit to you, sir; the first final prediction of the election. But first a summary of the next debates.
VP Debates: Biden will surprise us by how well he has prepared for this debate, despite his weak position. He is the type to get energized by Obama’s loss in Denver. This elevates his importance and provides him an opportunity to “save” Obama, like a good liberal. Unfortunately for Biden and by extension Obama, Ryan will come out swinging and give the superior performance. Ryan will dazzle. Ryan will showcase Obama’s detrimental policies in The Middle East, espcially the trashing of USA commitments made to Israel as part of The Camp David Accords and a variety of strategic cooperation agreements.
As the debate progresses, Biden will show signs of fatigue and will be vulnerable to gaffes. There is a high probability Biden will make a monkey out of himself at about the time he realizes he is losing badly and time is running out. That will be highly entertaining.
The Town Hall Presidential Debate on October 16 and the foreign policy debate on 22 October, will go to Romney.
There is a chance Obama will try to worm his way out of these debates citing National Security for some odd reason.
When confronted with the individual’s best interest vs. political leanings, many die hard leftists will “slip” in the voter’s booth and cast their vote for the one and only(Thank g-d) Roseanne Barr, Peace and Freedom party.
Roseanne will make a lot of money on two books and countless talk show invites.
The Result (PROJECTED) of The November 6, 2012 General Election.
The next President of The United States, WILL BE:
Mitt Romney
Who remembers the RQ-160 high performance stealth drone the Air Force 'lost' over Iran a year or two ago? Yeah good job, guys.
At least encourage your sons to enlist.
re: Romney foreign policy speech–no calls to blow up Iran's pipelines.