The Real Israelites

Tag: iran

Obama postpones World War III till next week

by on Sep.02, 2013, under News Events

Dr. Kevin Barrett

US President Obama announced on Saturday that World War III has been postponed.

Rather than unilaterally bombing Syria, and setting off a regional conflagration that could escalate into nuclear confrontation with Russia, Obama has decided to seek Congressional approval before risking blowing up the world.

Obama postpones World War III till next week

Obama’s surprise move left observers stunned – especially Israeli leaders and lobbyists, who had gleefully assured the world that Obama would bomb Syria starting Saturday.

Obama’s move makes it likely that a cataclysmic planetary nuclear holocaust will not happen for at least eight more days. On September 9th, when the US Congress returns from its month-long vacation, legislators will decide whether or not to risk destroying human civilization.

Obama’s decision to procrastinate, and preserve the world as we know it for one more week, may be braver than it appears at first glance. Obama has been under tremendous pressure from Israel and its American lobby to bomb Syria. The script for his speech announcing “we begin bombing in five minutes” – or words to that effect – had already been written. All the President had to do was stride up to the teleprompter and deliver it. Nobody had even considered seeking Congressional approval.

Yahoo News explained what happened next: “And then, sometime around 6 p.m. ET, Obama went for a 45-minute stroll around the South Lawn of the White House with Chief of Staff Denis McDonough, the aides said. During that walk, the president said that he wanted to go to Congress.”

Some of Obama’s advisors strongly disagreed with the President’s last-minute postponement of World War III.

The same Yahoo News report explains how the Administration will try to ram a US attack on Syria through Congress: “Hammer home the potential threat to staunch ally Israel’s security.” The Congressional debate will pit the American people, who oppose attacking Syria by an overwhelming margin, against the Zionist lobby, which has Congress in its pocket, and which has been pushing hard for a US attack.

Does Obama really want Congress to authorize attacking Syria? Does he want to risk becoming the president who blew up the world? Or might he secretly hope that the American people will force Congress to vote down the war plan?

In his article “Obama’s Kennedy Moment” Richard Sheck suggests that Obama cannot directly stand up against the hawks without risking his political future – or even his life:

“Many writers have speculated that John Kennedy was assassinated because he resisted the demands of the military-industrial complex during the height of the Cold War… It’s 50 years later and history seems to be repeating itself to the extent that President Obama’s sudden ‘change of heart’ today places him in grave jeopardy from those who were hell-bent on ratcheting up the level of violence in the Middle East with the expected attack on Syria.

“By postponing and possibly stifling the plans for a wider war in the region, the President has risked much political capital and placed himself directly in the path of those who are eager to see him gone – whether through resignation, impeachment or worse.”

If Sheck is right, Obama hopes the American people will rise up and put Congress on notice: No war in Syria! This would give Obama the political cover he needs to avoid starting World War III.

While postponing World War III for one week by passing the buck to Congress hardly merits a Nobel Peace Prize, it may turn out to be one of the wiser and more courageous decisions the generally feckless Obama has made.

Though the US President has approved drone murders, bloated military budgets, anti-Constitution atrocities, and other horrors, he has at least resisted the pressure from Netanyahu and the Zionist lobby to launch a wider war in the Middle East. What’s more, Obama has made no secret of his loathing of Netanyahu. Rumors of Zionist threats to the President’s life have surfaced periodically. The Editor of the Atlanta, Georgia newspaper the Jewish Times, Andrew Adler, actually published an editorial calling on Israel to assassinate President Obama. Why? Because Obama won’t obey Netanyahu’s orders to attack Iran.

And the whole point of destroying Syria is to open the door for Netanyahu’s long-desired attack on Iran.

If President Obama is indeed playing a game of passive-aggressive resistance against Netanyahu’s orders to launch a major Mideast war, as seems to be the case, one hopes that Obama’s Secret Service detail is more loyal than JFK’s was.

By passing the buck to Congress, Obama may be saying to the Zionists: “Okay, this is your project, so make it happen yourselves. If you can’t push this through Congress, which you practically own outright, then it’s your tough luck. I don’t want to go down in history as the President who unilaterally decided to launch a potentially apocalyptic war in the Middle East. I know you don’t like it. So shoot me.”

Leave a Comment :, , , , , , , , , , , more...

Ex-Russian General: America Must Be Kept at Gunpoint

by on Mar.04, 2013, under Israelite Knowledge

Tactical nuclear weapons “should constantly be aimed at the United States”

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
March 4, 2013

Retired Russian General Leonid Ivashov told Pravda in a recent interview that America must be held at gunpoint by means of of tactical nuclear weapons which “should constantly be aimed at the United States.”

Leonid Ivashov. Image: Wikimedia Commons

Ivashov was former chief of general affairs in the Soviet Union’s Ministry of Defence before becoming vice president of the Academy on Geopolitical Affairs.

“Tactical nuclear weapons that are constantly threatening the United States must become the factor that will deter large-scale aggression. Holding it at gunpoint – this is the deterrent,” Ivashov told Pravda.Ru editor-in-chief Inna Novikova.

Ivashov went on to explain that Russia remains suspicious of China as an ally because Beijing continues to make decisions with the United States behind Russia’s back, but that China and Russia remain the primary targets of America’s geopolitical aggression.

“In America, it is all vice versa. On October 18, 2003, Bush signed a directive on the concept of Prompt Global Strike. A priority was not a first massive nuclear strike, but a strike with the use of high precision technologies. Glide bombs then finish it off and a country is presented with an ultimatum. If this country does not agree, it will repeat all over again. It is clear that the first target for this potential attack is Russia. But Russia – accidentally or not – may launch its strategic nuclear arsenal,” said Ivashov, explaining how both Russia and China will struggle to repel a U.S. attack.

“To attack China or Russia, cruise missiles will be used. A third of them come with nuclear warheads. Nowadays, four-class “Ohio” submarines, the largest American subs, that had 24 intercontinental ballistic missiles on board, are being reequipped. They remove the ICBMs and replace them with 158 cruise missiles on each sub. The same thing happens to “Virginia” subs. They develop a strategic cruise missile, the range of which will be not less than 5,000 kilometers. Its speed will be equal to two sonic speeds. It will be the type of arms that no one will be able to destroy – neither Russia, nor China or anyone else,” he said.

Ivashov went on to argue that Russia’s only deterrent to the threat of a U.S. attack were tactical nuclear weapons that, “should constantly be aimed at the United States,” suggesting Cuba as a potential site for such weapons, an alarming throwback to the 1962 Cuban missile crisis, which marked the closest moment that the world came to World War III and a potential nuclear holocaust.

The former General expressed the need for Russian leaders to “reformat the world” in a different mould to the Anglo-American model in order to avoid a “disastrous scenario” that would be “catastrophic” for the planet.

Ivashov called for the UN Security Council to be expanded as a counter-balance to American hegemony, adding, “The next step is to develop the Euro-Asian continental union, which includes Russia, China, India, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Mongolia within the framework of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.”

In essence, Ivashov is re-iterating the call for a multi-polar world to replace the ‘new world order’ model led by America, Britain and NATO powers. However, his call for that model to be enforced by tactical nuclear weapons aimed squarely at the United States is sure to stoke concern amongst military leaders in the west.

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

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.

 

This article was posted: Monday, March 4, 2013 at 5:52 am

Leave a Comment :, , , , , , more...

Iran warns Patriot missiles in Turkey could lead to ‘World War III’

by on Dec.17, 2012, under News Events

Iranian armed forces chief joins other Islamic Republic officials who caution that the stationing of NATO missiles could cause conflict in the Middle East and elsewhere.

The planned deployment of NATO Patriot missiles along Turkey’s border with Syria could lead to a “world war” that would threaten Europe as well, Iran’s military chief of staff was quoted as saying on Saturday.

Turkey asked NATO for the Patriot system, designed to intercept aircraft or missiles, in November to help bolster its border security after repeated episodes of gunfire from war-torn Syria spilling into Turkish territory.

General Hassan Firouzabadi, the Iranian armed forces chief, said Iran wanted its neighbor Turkey to feel secure but called for NATO not to deploy the Patriots in its easternmost member state, which also borders Iran.

“Each one of these Patriots is a black mark on the world map, and is meant to cause a world war,” Firouzabadi said, according to the Iranian Students’ News Agency. “They are making plans for a world war, and this is very dangerous for the future of humanity and for the future of Europe itself.”

Iran has been a staunch ally of Syrian President Bashar Assad throughout the 21-month uprising against his rule and long a strategic adversary of Western powers who have given formal recognition to Syria’s opposition coalition.

U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta signed an order on Friday to send two Patriot missile batteries to Turkey along with American personnel to operate them, following similar steps by Germany and the Netherlands.

Iranian officials including parliament speaker Ali Larijani have previously said that installing the Patriot missiles would deepen instability in the Middle East, and the foreign ministry spokesman said they would only worsen the conflict in Syria.

Turkey has repeatedly scrambled jets along its border with Syria and responded in kind when shells and gunfire from the Syrian conflict have hit its territory, fanning fears that the civil war could inflame the wider region.

 

Leave a Comment :, , , , , , , , , , , , more...

If all else fails, US will hit Iran in 2013, say former top advisers to Obama and Bush

by on Dec.11, 2012, under News Events

At Washington Institute gala, Dennis Ross, Elliott Abrams and outgoing US ambassador to Iraq James Jeffrey insist the president will strike next year if diplomacy doesn’t succeed

Haviv Rettig Gur | Times of Israel

If the standoff over the Iranian nuclear program is not resolved diplomatically in the coming year, it will be resolved militarily by the end of 2013, two top US foreign policy officials told The Times of Israel on Thursday.

“I think there’s the stomach in this administration, and this president, that if diplomacy fails [to deter Iran from developing nuclear weapons] — to use force,” according to Dennis Ross, a former Mideast envoy during the Clinton administration, and until November 2011 President Obama’s top advisor and planner on Iran in the National Security Council.

James Jeffrey, a former deputy national security advisor and, for the past two years, the US ambassador to Iraq, agreed with Ross’ assessment.

“I think [Obama’s] first choice will be a negotiated settlement. Failing that, I think that we’re going to strike,” Jeffrey said.

“One way or the other, these guys [the Iranian regime] are either going to stop their program or, before we’re halfway through 2013, they’re going to have enough [enriched nuclear materiel] to go critical in a few weeks,” he added. “I think if we don’t get a negotiated settlement, and these guys are actually on the threshold [of weaponization capability], as Obama said during the campaign, then the president is going to take military action.”

The two officials spoke with The Times of Israel at the gala dinner of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, held Thursday night at New York’s Waldorf Astoria Hotel. The event honored Ross and Elliott Abrams, a former deputy national security advisor to George W. Bush. Jeffrey, who was in attendance, recently joined the institute as a visiting fellow.

During an on-stage discussion with Ross and Abrams halfway through the evening, Washington Institute director Robert Satloff asked the former officials, “Will either America or Israel employ preventive military action against Iran’s nuclear program – yes or no?”

The two replied in unison, “yes.”

“Will this happen in 2013?” Satloff pressed.

“Yes,” said Ross.

“Yes, I agree,” added Abrams.

Obama’s “preference is to have diplomacy succeed,” Ross clarified to The Times of Israel after the panel discussion. But, he added, Obama is able and willing to carry out a military strike.

“If [Obama’s] position was going to be not to use force, he would have accepted the objective of containment [of a nuclear Iran]. He did not. He adopted the objective of prevention. That doesn’t mean you want force to be the case. What it means is, fundamentally, that if diplomacy doesn’t succeed you’re prepared to do it. And I believe he is.”

Asked if the Obama administration had an interest in pressing for a new Israeli-Palestinian peace initiative, Ross suggested the US had a more limited view of its role than in the past.

“I don’t think it’s the president’s view that somehow the United States can wave a magic wand and you can have peace,” he said. “If you go back to an interview he gave at the end of the first year [of Obama’s first term], he said [bringing the sides together to discuss peace] has proven more difficult than he hoped it would be.”

He insisted that “It’s very important to try to preserve a two-state outcome,” and that “I don’t think the administration will walk away, and I don’t think we should walk away. If you can create a set of circumstances where it looks like there’s an opportunity, I think the administration would make a major effort. But to assume the administration will make a major effort as if there’s an opening [when there isn’t one,] that remains to be seen.”

Leave a Comment :, , , , , , , , , , , , , more...

Israel issues military threat to Syria(the gutter rats in Israel will draw you other edomite nations into world war III)

by on Nov.12, 2012, under News Events

Jeremiah {49:20} Therefore hear
the counsel of the LORD, that he hath taken against Edom;
and his purposes, that he hath purposed against the
inhabitants of Teman: Surely the least of the flock shall
draw them out: surely he shall make their habitations
desolate with them.

 

 

 

Israeli forces carry out a military exercise in the occupied Syrian territory of Golan Heights. (File photo)

Israeli forces carry out a military exercise in the occupied Syrian territory of Golan Heights. (File photo)
Mon Nov 12, 2012 5:32AM
The Israeli regime has threatened Syria with tougher retaliation following an incident in the occupied Syrian territory of Golan Heights where an Israeli military post was hit by a stray mortar shell fired from Syria.

It was not clear whether the shell was fired by the Syrian army or the foreign-sponsored insurgents fighting against the Syrian government.

The Israeli military immediately responded to the shelling on Sunday, firing a guided missile into Syria as a “warning shot.”

According to a military source, the Israeli forces fired a Tammuz missile, also known as Spike, toward the Syrian army unit in the Golan Heights.

The Tel Aviv regime said in a statement that the Israeli military “has filed a complaint through the UN forces operating in the area, stating that fire emanating from Syria into Israel will not be tolerated and shall be responded to with severity.”

The Israeli regime seized the Syrian territory on the strategically important Golan Heights in the 1967 war. Tel Aviv annexed the territory on December 14, 1981 — a move which has been met with international condemnation.

Leave a Comment :, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , more...






Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:

Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!