Under most administrations I would agree that we likely would defend them. Under this one I sadly doubt it. Not without reason did Kissinger and other observors note the current danger of being a US Ally.If they were attacked by Iran, we should defend them (that's quite a fantasy) but otherwise there is no reason for the US to be goaded into a war by Bibi Netanyahu.
Originally Posted by jmotivator
Originally Posted by jmotivator
"Obama said Sunday he too would not tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran and would act -- with military force, if necessary -- to prevent that from happening.
But "as president and commander in chief, I have a deeply held preference for peace over war," he said, and "I firmly believe that an opportunity still remains for diplomacy -- backed by pressure -- to succeed.
"The United States and Israel both assess that Iran does not yet have a nuclear weapon, and we are exceedingly vigilant in monitoring their program."
At the same time, he said Iranian leaders "should understand that I do not have a policy of containment -- I have a policy to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon."
Containment was a U.S. Cold War policy to prevent the spread of Soviet communism. It represented a middle ground between detente, or developing working relationships with governments, and "rollback," or forcing change in major foreign-government policies, often by replacing a ruling regime.
Obama said the United States would "do what it takes to preserve Israel's qualitative military edge -- because Israel must always have the ability to defend itself, by itself, against any threat."
Netanyahu, who was on a state visit to Canada before traveling to Washington, responded quickly to Obama's speech.
"I appreciated the fact that he said Israel must be able to defend itself, by itself, against any threat," Netanyahu told reporters in Ottawa, Ontario.
"I appreciated the fact that President Obama reiterated his position that Iran must not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons, and that all options are on the table. I also appreciated the fact that he made clear that when it comes to a nuclear-armed Iran, containment is simply not an option."
Read more: Obama on Iran: 'Speak softly, carry stick' - UPI.com
Even as somebody who prefers offensive military strategy I just can't get behind threats of military strikes on Iran. Eventually we've got to force diplomacy to work. We can't afford to keep spending money on strikes which merely piss people off. It's like shooting a beehive with a bb gun.
"Hmmm...Can't decide if I want to watch "Four Houses" or give myself an Icy Hot pee hole enema..." - Blake Shelton
Personally, I don't give a damn about Israel, I think that if we're going to bomb something, we ought to bomb Jerusalem and get rid of the religious reasons for this asinine conflict. Screw the Christians, Jews and Muslims. The only reason we've become a target of the Middle East is because we won't leave them alone. Heck, we all know why Iran wants a nuke, it's a guarantee that the U.S. won't fly over there and start bombing. We only attack people who can't adequately fight back, we never go attack real threats, such as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Why? They have nukes. Yet all of the 9/11 bombers came from those two countries. Go figure.
If the Muslim world wants to take Israel out, so be it. Nobody has a "right" to exist. If they can't fight their own battles, they haven't earned it.
"God is the name by which I designate all things which cross my path violently and recklessly, all things which alter my plans and intentions, and change the course of my life, for better or for worse."
-C G Jung