Mobile Version
Free Internet Press
  Uncensored News For Real People

FIP Year In Review

FIP Month in Review

FIP Archive Search

Multiple Discoveries from NASA's New Horizons Pluto Mission

R.I.P. William 'Bill' Herbert Kelder - Intellpuke

Gamers Donate 37,500 Pounds Of Food To Needy

Statement From The Whitehouse Regarding The Government Shutdown

An Open Response To 'Organizing for Action'

Bayou Corne: The Biggest Ongoing Disaster In The U.S. You Have Not Heard Of

Boston Mayor Hopes Feds 'Throw the Book' at Marathon Bombing Suspect

Boston Police Closing In On Suspects

2 Explosions At Boston Marathon. 2 Dead, Many Injured.

The Press vs Citizens Rights and Privacy - Act 3

CBS News - Year In Review 2012 - 366 Days: 2012 In Review

The Guardian - 2012 In Review: An Interactive Guide To The Year That Was

TruTV - The Biggest Conspiracy Theories of 2012

Colbert Nation: 2012: A Look Back

FIP Year In Review(s?)

Happy Holidays

Welcome To A New Era!

An Open Letter To United Health Care, Medcom, And The Medical Insurance Industry In General

Whitehouse Petition To Remove "Under God" and "In God" From Currency And The Pledge.

December 21, 2012

If Hillary Clinton Ran For President, She Would Probably Be The Best-prepared Candidate In American History

CIA Director David Petraeus Resigns After FBI Investigation Uncovers Affair With High-Profile Journalist

FIP Format Update

Thank you for voting.

Live Election Results

FIP In Hiatus

U.S.-Afghan Military Operations Suspended After Attacks

Iran Nuclear Chief Says IAEA Might Be Infiltrated By 'Terrorists And Saboteurs'

Romney Stands By Gaffe

Israel's Netanyahu Demands President Obama Commit To Military Action If Iran Sanctions Fail
2012-03-01 20:59:15 (238 weeks ago)
Posted By: Intellpuke
Israel is pressing U.S. President Barack Obama for an explicit threat of military action against Iran if sanctions fail and Tehran's nuclear program advances beyond specified "red lines".

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is expected to raise the issue at a White House meeting on Monday after weeks of intense diplomacy in which Obama has dispatched senior officials – including his intelligence, national security and military chiefs – to Jerusalem to try and dampen down talk of an attack.

Diplomats say that Israel is angered by the Obama administration's public disparaging of early military action against Iran, saying that it weakens the prospect of Tehran taking the warnings from Israel seriously.

The two sides are attempting to agree a joint public statement to paper over the divide but talks will not be made easier by a deepening distrust in which the Israelis question Obama's commitment to confront Iran while the White House is frustrated by what it sees as political interference by Netanyahu to mobilize support for Israel's position in the U.S. Congress.

"They are poles apart," said one diplomatic source. "The White House believes there is time for sanctions to work and that military threats don't help. The Israelis regard this as woolly thinking.

(story continues below)

They see Iran as headed towards a bomb, even though they agree there is no evidence Tehran has made that decision yet, and they want the White House to up the ante. The White House has the Europeans behind its position but it's losing Congress."

The mood is not helped by worsening distrust between the two leaders. Relations soured within weeks of Obama coming to power after he attempted to pressure Netanyahu to halt construction of Jewish settlements in the Palestinian territories.

Netanyahu told his weekly cabinet meeting on Sunday that Iran will dominate his talks with Obama.

"There is no doubt that one issue will be at the center of our talks, and that is, of course, the continued strengthening of Iran and its nuclear program," he said.

Israeli officials say that Netanyahu is not happy with Obama's "vague assertion" that all options are on the table in dealing with Iran. The Israeli Prime Minister wants President Obama to state unequivocally that Washington is prepared to use force if Iran's nuclear program advances beyond specified red lines.

U.S. administration sources say that President Obama is unlikely to make a major shift in policy in public although he may give Netanyahu firmer assurances in private.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said the administration is intent on preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon but that for now it is committed to using sanctions and diplomacy.

"We believe that there is time and space to continue to pursue that approach," he said. "Even as we refuse and make clear that we do not take any option off the table in our effort to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon," he said.

But last month the Guardian newspaper revealed that some American officials are convinced that sanctions will not deter Tehran from pursuing its nuclear program, and believe that the US will be left with no option but to launch an attack on Iran or watch Israel do so.

One of the principal differences is over timing. The U.S. continues to say it believes Iran has not yet decided whether or not to develop a nuclear bomb, and that even if it does it is perhaps years away from being able to do so.

Israel's Defense Minister, Ehud Barak, was in Washington this week for meetings with Vice-President Joe Biden and U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, among others, at which he pressed his view that a direct decision by Tehran to develop a nuclear weapon is not the immediate issue so long as it continues to build the means to do so, and that the matter is urgent.

The chairman of the U.S. joint chiefs of staff, General Martin Dempsey, told Congress this week that during a recent visit to Jerusalem the principal difference was over the question of how long to give sanctions and diplomacy an opportunity to work. "We've had a conversation with them about time, the issue of time," he said.

Dempsey was one of several senior U.S. officials to travel to Israel in recent weeks, including President Obama's National Security Adviser Tom Donilon and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

Dempsey infuriated Netanyahu with comments that it is "premature" to launch an attack and that an Israeli assault on Iran would be imprudent and destabilizing, and not achieve Israel's objectives. He also said that Iran is a "rational" player and should be treated as such.

Netanyahu met a group of U.S. senators last week, including John McCain, and complained strongly about Obama administration officials publicly opposing an Israeli strike on Iran.

After the meeting, McCain criticized the White House position. "There should be no daylight between America and Israel in our assessment of the [Iranian] threat. Unfortunately there clearly is some," he said.

McCain described relations between the U.S. and Israel as in "very bad shape right now" saying that differences over Iran have caused "significant tension". He appeared to side with the Israeli position in noting that "there is very little doubt that Iran has so far been undeterred to get nuclear weapons".

The Republican chair of the House of Representatives intelligence committee, Mike Rogers, said on Monday after meeting Israeli officials that there is a wide difference of opinion between Israel and the White House.

"I got the sense that Israel is incredibly serious about a strike on [Iran's] nuclear weapons program. It's their calculus that the [U.S.] administration … is not serious about a real military consequence to Iran moving forward," he said. "They believe they're going to have to make a decision on their own, given the current posture of the United States."

Last week, 12 senators sent the president a letter warning that he should not allow Tehran to buy time by engaging in fruitless diplomatic negotiations, expected to begin in the coming weeks. They demanded that Obama insist Iran halt its uranium enrichment program before talks begin.

More than half the members of the Senate have backed a resolution that some see as pressing for an attack in declaring that the White House should not pursue a policy of "containment".

Senator Joe Lieberman, one of the sponsors of the resolution, said it is intended "to say clearly and resolutely to Iran: You have only two choices – peacefully negotiate to end your nuclear program or expect a military strike to end that program."

Critics of the resolution said that it smacks of a congressional authorization for an attack on Iran. That view was reinforced when the sponsors declined a request from some Democrats to amend it to clarify that the resolution did not imply consent for war.

Israeli officials told the Associated Press this week that Israel will not notify the U.S. before an attack on Iran. U.S. officials scoff at the idea that Washington would not know an assault is coming, and the Israeli position may be intended to allow the White House to deny any responsibility.

Intellpuke: You can read this article by Guardian Washington, D.C., correspondent Chris McGreal in context here:

Email To A Friend
Email this story to a friend:
Your Name:
Their Email:
Readers Comments
Add your own comment.
(Anonymous commenting now enabled.)

Creative Commons License
Free Internet Press is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License. You may reuse or distribute original works on this site, with attribution per the above license.

Any mirrored or quoted materials may be copyright their respective authors, publications, or outlets, as shown on their publication, indicated by the link in the news story. Such works are used under the fair use doctrine of United States copyright law. Should any materials be found overused or objectionable to the copyright holder, notification should be sent to, and the work will be removed and replaced with such notification.

Please email with any questions.

Our Privacy Policy can be viewed at

XML/RSS/RDF Newsfeed Syndication XML/RSS/RDF Newsfeed Syndication:

XML/RSS/RDF Newsfeed Syndication XML News Sitemap