Archive for the ‘Netanyahu’ Category

Iran tests missile that could hit Israel, Europe

May 20, 2009

We just reported that a government study team told President Obama that missile defense in Europe was unnecessary.  The study concluded that Iran was several years from having a missile that could reach Europe.

Related:
Obama Told Missile Defense in Europe Not Needed: Iran Years Away from Having Missiles
.
Today Iran tested a missile capable of reaching Europe.

The fact that Iran chose to conduct this test while Israel’s Benjamain Netanyahu is in Washington for talks with Obama is indicative of the subtle way Iran is “engaged”….

Iran
AP

*****************************

TEHRAN, Iran – President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Iran test-fired a new advanced missile Wednesday with a range of about 1,200 miles, far enough to strike Israel and southeastern Europe.

The announcement will not reassure the U.S. government, coming just two days after President Barack Obama declared a readiness to seek deeper international sanctions against Iranif it shunned U.S. attempts to open negotiations on its nuclear program. Obama said he expected a positive response to his outreach for opening a dialogue with Iran by the end of the year.

“Defense Minister (MostafaMohammad Najjar) has informed me that the Sajjil-2 missile, which has very advanced technology, was launched from Semnanand it landed precisely on the target,” state radio quoted Ahmadinejad as saying. He spoke during a visit to the city of Semnan, 125 miles east of the capital Tehran, where Iran’s space program is centered.

Ahmadinejad is running for re-election in a June 12 vote and has been criticized by his opponents and others for antagonizing the U.S. and mismanaging the country’s faltering economy.
.
Most Western analysts believe Iran does not yet have the technology to produce nuclear weapons, including warheads for long-range missiles. Many experts believe Iran is three to four years away, some think sooner, from having the capability.

Read the rest:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090520/ap_o
n_re_mi_ea/ml_iran_missile_test;_ylt=AuoU
wdaDTLlhHvepbpkgtKus0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMT
JsdmU3Z3ZiBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkwNTI
wL21sX2lyYW5fbWlzc2lsZV90ZXN0BGNw
b3MDMgRwb3MDNwRzZWMDeW5fdG9wX
3N0b3J5BHNsawNpcmFudGVzdHNtaXM

Iran's Revolutionary Guards tested their medium-range Shahab-3 ...

Iran’s Revolutionary Guards tested their medium-range Shahab-3 missile at an undisclosed location in July 2008. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says Iran has test-fired a new medium-range surface-to-surface missile.

*************************

From AP

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Iran test-fired a new advanced missile Wednesday with a range of about 1,200 miles, far enough to strike Israel and southeastern Europe.The announcement will not reassure the U.S. government, coming just two days after President Barack Obama declared a readiness to seek deeper international sanctions against Iran if it shunned U.S. attempts to open negotiations on its nuclear program. Obama said he expected a positive response to his outreach for opening a dialogue with Iran by the end of the year.

“Defense Minister (Mostafa Mohammad Najjar) has informed me that the Sajjil-2 missile, which has very advanced technology, was launched from Semnan and it landed precisely on the target,” state radio quoted Ahmadinejad as saying. He spoke during a visit to the city of Semnan, 125 miles east of the capital Tehran, where Iran’s space program is centered.

Read the rest:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/20
09/may/20/iran-says-it-tests-missile-isra
el-within-range/

Advertisements

‘Israel will have to take on Iran alone once Obama’s efforts fail’ — In three months

May 19, 2009

Israel will be forced to take on Iran’s contentious nuclear program alone once U.S. President Barack Obama’s overture for dialogue with Tehran fails, an Israeli official said on Tuesday.

The official was quoted by Channel 10 as saying that Obama’s insistence on engagement with Iran would force Israel to make a “difficult decision” on the matter by the end of 2009.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and U.S. lawmakers said earlier Tuesday that Israel and the United States had agreed that Iran must not be allowed to continue its contentious nuclear program.

From Haaretz Newsaper

Read the rest:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1086628.html

****************************

During his meeting with US President Barack Obama on Monday, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu made a commitment that Israel would not attack Iran at least until the end of the year and would not disturb Washington’s plans for dialogue with Teheran over its nuclear program in any way, Channel 2 reported on Tuesday. 

Also according to the report, Obama said that in three months – not the previously reported six – he would reassess his attempts at dialogue with the Islamic republic.

The two sides decided to set up intimate US-Israeli strategic teams to coordinate moves vis a vis the Iranian issue, continued the report.

However, quoting a top Jerusalem official, Channel 10 said that Israel was concerned that after realizing that his attempts at dialogue with Iran had failed, Obama would refuse to acknowledge it, and that Israel would then be left alone to deal with the threat posed by Teheran and would need “to make a tough decision.”

From the Jerusalem Post

Read the rest:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1
242212416792&pagename=JPost%2FJPA
rticle%2FShowFull

Obama Gives Iran Until The End of The Year; Top Iranian General Predicts Israel’s Destruction in 11 days

May 19, 2009

For the video of Iran’s general, link to the Jerusalem Post:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=124221241
0740&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Yesterday, President Barack Obama told Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu and assempbled reporters that he would allow his diplomatic initiatives with Iran to work until the end of the year….

“By the end of the year we should have some sense whether or not these discussions are starting to yield significant benefits, whether we are starting to see serious movement on the part of Iranians,” he said.

See the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/1
9/world/middleeast/19prexy.html?em

See also Reuters:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/2009
0518/pl_nm/us_usa_iran_obama_3

*****************************

Iran is in the midst of a multi-year plan that it hopes will culminate in the production of several hundred missile launchers and over 1,000 long-range ballistic missiles within the next six years, according to estimates in the Israeli defense establishment.

Read the rest:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=12422123
98670&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Related:
For Stopping Iran, “It’s late in the game”

Obama Told Missile Defense in Europe Not Needed: Iran Years Away from Having Missiles

.
U.S. President Barack Obama (R) meets with Israel's Prime ...
U.S. President Barack Obama (R) meets with Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, May 18, 2009. REUTERS/Larry Downing

Our Jekyll and Hyde President

April 30, 2009

Will the real Obama stand up?  Is the real president the one joking with Hugo Chavez and sending a video to Iran’s Ahmadinejad?  Or is he really the guy that executed three Somali pirates who had never before hurt any captives?

*************************

By Victor David Hanson
National Review

In matters of foreign policy during the president’s first 100 days, we have seen two Barack Obamas.

Consider “Obama I.” After taking office, the president gave his first interview to the Dubai-based Al-Arabiya TV station, and listed various sins of America while praising the Saudi king as courageous.

On trips abroad since then, Obama I has continued to apologize for the U.S. being arrogant and dismissive of Europe. He thinks we have been inconsiderate to Mexico. And, judging by a speech he gave in Prague, we apparently carry a special burden to eliminate nuclear weapons since we ended World War II by using them.
.
Obama I seems far kinder to our rivals than to the prior Bush administration when he assures various South American thugs and Iranian and Russian strongmen that he represents a sharp break from a recent, unfortunate American past.

Obama I sat quietly for nearly an hour while Nicaragua’s thuggish leader, Daniel Ortega, trashed the U.S. at the recent Summit of the Americas. Instead of defending his country, the president, in his call to move forward, replied that he was only three months old at the time of our alleged misdeeds in Cuba — and therefore not responsible for them.

Most maddening, Obama I released classified memos about past enhanced interrogation techniques — over the objections of former CIA directors from both parties.

But there has been another Obama as well. This more centrist “Obama II” kept Bush appointee Robert Gates as secretary of Defense. He named no-nonsense Gen. James Jones national-security adviser.

Most of the campaign rhetoric about leaving Iraq on a strict timetable has been scrapped. Instead, the Bush-Petraeus plan of withdrawal based on conditions on the ground continues.

Obama sent more combat troops to Afghanistan, while trying in vain to get the Europeans to fulfill their NATO obligations by doing the same. Despite the hostile anti-Bush rhetoric, Obama has kept intact many of his predecessor’s homeland-security measures. There has been little change with the Patriot Act, wiretap and e-mail intercepts of suspected terrorist communications, and renditions of overseas suspects.

Obama II gave the green light to execute suspected Somali pirates who were holding an American hostage. And in the case of our continued Predator drone attacks in Pakistan, such bombings are a little more extreme than waterboarding known terrorists.

There could be several explanations for our split-personality president.

Read the rest:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?
q=ODc5MTE3NmVhNGU1MzEyOD
A2MGFiMTRhMmU1MmM1YmQ
=

Related:
All Knowing, All Present, Obama (and Global) Government? 

Obama’s Day 100: Reaction From Around the Globe: “achieving only the minimum”
.
 Obama’s Too Many Dichotomies; Requires a Telepromter to Keep Himself Straight

First 100 days: Obama’s National Security Challenge Still Lurks Somewhere in the Future

April 24, 2009

In April 2001, George W. Bush was enjoying Texas style poll numbers.

On September 11, 2001, his morning schedule featured a school visit.

George W. Bush stood at 62 percent in a CNN/USA Today Gallup poll in April 2001, Bill Clinton was at 55 percent in a CNN/USA Today Gallup poll in April 1993, George H.W. Bush stood at 58 percent in a Gallup poll from April 1989, and Ronald Reagan was at 67 percent in a Gallup poll taken in April 1981.

Kudos To CNN On Obama Poll Numbers; Comparison Shows They Are Just About Meaningless — AP Gushes!!

For most president’s, first term poll numbers in April and the “first 100 days” is pretty much meaningless.

But not, apparently, for Barack Obama.  He’s being called by some, “the best starting president ever.”

So President Obama has again scheduled a news conference next week.  But as we all know, he has nothing new to say.  In Hollywood, this is called “chewing up scenery.”

The president to best manage and co-opt the media ever naturally wants to bask in their glow: especially in the glow of the adoring but dying newspapers.  Who even knows if they’ll be around when he really needs them, or if they’ll come to his aid in a real crisis.

Incest is Best: GE Largest Supplier of Wind Turbines, Owns Obama TV (NBC), Obama Went To Turbine Plant for Earth Day

So I forgive the gushing over his accomplishments while it lasts.  The Obama White House and much of the media enjoys a Hollywood marriage which could well eveolve into an ugly Hollywood divorce.

Obama deserves to enjoy the moment and the adulation: just as he did in London and Austria and Mexico and Trinidad and in Iowa on Earth Day. 

All that is meaningless prologue, if history is any guide.

In April it is all about possibilities and rebirth and Easter — even for those that haven’t seen the inside of a real church in a long time.  And for every president in the past it is about when will the poll numbers go down, by how much, and what unknows will come to put their teeth into our collective legs.

There are several looming international problems that Obama yet may be  compelled to face: North Korea, Pakistan, Iran, Israel and the greater Middle East to name a few.

Any one of these will be a lot tougher than shooting Somalis in a row boat.

And don’t forget about Russia and China.  Both are re-arming.  Russia is headed by a former KGB Agent who, we are certain, is laughing about the American focus on the issue of waterboarding as torture.  That’s child’s play to Vladimir Putin.  Leaders in China also certainly share this belief.  One can venture a guess that Obama shook hands just last weekend with tyrants that have ordered worse torture than waterboarding…..

But the real fear we all must be prepared for is what George Bush and the nation faced on September 11, 2001: the “unknown unknown.”  The complete surprise.

We can argue now in the comfort of April 2009 about what George W. Bush did, might have done and should not have done.  But Obama’s day is likely ahead, and he, and all of us should not lose sight of that.

Related:
Pakistan’s Military Chief: Army “will not allow the militants to dictate terms”
.
Obama Remains Without Coherent Foreign Policy; Just “Love Me” Mania
.
Obama and Israel’s Netanyahu Will Cooperate or Face “Mutually Assured Destruction”

Obama Remains Without Coherent Foreign Policy; Just “Love Me” Mania

April 24, 2009

In 1993, Bill Clinton joked, “Gosh, I miss the Cold War.” And, he explained, somberly: “We had an intellectually coherent thing. The American people knew what the rules were.”

By Jonah Goldberg
Townhall

Such Cold War nostalgia vexed many conservatives. It seemed to us that the Cold War consensus had broken down with the Vietnam War. Clinton himself didn’t much like that Cold War endeavor, which is one reason he worked so assiduously to avoid serving in it. A young John Kerry did serve, but he also threw away his medals and denounced his fellow servicemen as war criminals. Jimmy Carter, meanwhile, had proclaimed that he had no “inordinate fear of Communism,” suggesting that those who disagreed with him did.

The “intellectual coherence” of the Cold War didn’t stop many liberals from opposing Ronald Reagan’s foreign-policy efforts in Europe, the Caribbean and Central America, nor did it temper Hollywood’s ardor in portraying Reagan as a warmonger, a dunce or both. In the 1980s, the SANE/Freeze movement fired the minds of much of the Democratic Party. And when the Cold War ended without a shot fired, the left worked hard to give all the credit to Mikhail Gorbachev, since he seemed like a more reasonable fellow.

All of that comes to mind as I watch Barack Obama stroll across the globe apologizing for, or condemning, the sins of his predecessors and, by extension, his country.

After former Soviet pawn and now Nicaraguan president Daniel Ortega berated the United States at a recent summit, President Obama joked, in reference to the failed Bay of Pigs operation, “I’m grateful that President Ortega did not blame me for things that happened when I was 3 months old.”

Ah, yes, because the pressing issue is Obama’s blamelessness, not the apparently embarrassing faux pas of America’s effort …

Read the rest:
http://townhall.com/columnists/Jona
hGoldberg/2009/04/24/giving_b
ack_cold_war_gains

Related:
How’s Obama Doing? Just Ask America’s Closest Allies

Obama and Israel’s Netanyahu Will Cooperate or Face “Mutually Assured Destruction”

April 24, 2009

His meeting with U.S. President Barack Obama in Washington next month will be a formative event in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s political career. Its outcome will determine whether Netanyahu’s impressive comeback a decade after he left the prime ministership will lead him once again into disputes and confrontations with the U.S. administration, as happened in his first term, or whether the old-new Netanyahu will become a desired and welcome guest in the White House.

By Aluf Benn
Haaretz Newspaper, Israel

The prime minister is aware of the assumption of many that his rejection of the idea of a Palestinian state, and opposition to withdrawals from the West Bank and the Golan Heights, will result in an inevitable crisis in relations with Obama and propel Israel into political isolation. But he is not afraid. The way he sees it, it’s better to come to the White House with a list of demands and requests, and to condition any concession on a quid pro quo, than it is to play the role of yes man to the president and gain nothing in return.

Ehud Olmert emerged from his many talks with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas with the impression that, because of the Palestinians’ positions on the so-called core issues, there is no chance for a final-status accord with them – which is why he opted to emphasize Israeli generosity to secure international support. Netanyahu prefers to enter into negotiations with maximalist positions rather than to begin with concessions that may win the world’s approval but won’t satisfy the other side. He is ready to pay the political price this will exact abroad for the sake of appearing consistent in his positions and preserving his coalition at home.

With the Washington trip on the horizon, Netanyahu has filled the international media with hints that Israel is ready to launch a preemptive strike against Iran, and with the demands that the Palestinians recognize Israel as the national homeland of the Jewish people, something he said would be a precondition for Israeli recognition of a future state. Obama replied to these messages with a call for goodwill gestures and confidence-building measures, and with a reminder of the commitments made by Netanyahu’s predecessors – i.e., a freeze on settlement construction, the evacuation of outposts and the removal of checkpoints in the West Bank.

‘Itamar for Natanz’

Translated from diplomatic-speak, it means something like this: Netanyahu threatens to disrupt Obama’s “new order” in the region, if he sends the air force to bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities; Obama threatens to undermine Netanyahu’s coalition, if he demands that the Israeli rein in the settlers. This equation, “Itamar [the West Bank settlement] for Natanz,” was posed before, during the Olmert-Bush era, but both leaders were too weak to make the threats credible it – Bush because of Iraq and Olmert because of Lebanon. Their successors currently enjoy a burst of political strength, at this early point in their tenure, and so the “mutually assured destruction” equation relevant once again.

Read the rest:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/s
pages/1080670.html

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/04
/23/netanyahu-to-obama-you-take-c
are-of-iran-and-then-well-talk/

Related:
Israel To Obama: Stop Iran’s Nuclear Effort and We’ll Talk
.
Israel Worries Obama “Cannot be Relied Upon”
.
Israel Alarmed By Obama Administration’s “condescending attitude toward our prime minister and Israeli public opinion”

Sharing Intelligence Relies Upon Trust: Obama Has Given That Away, Called an End To Terror War
.
 Obama Seems To Have Missed Importance of Holocaust Remembrance Day: Scolds Israel In Front Of Jordan’s King Hussein