Oops. Wrong picture. That's the Spanish Armada. I wanted to post a picture of the Iranian "flotilla" attempting to send "humanitarian aid" to Gaza. But that picture will not be available, since Iran backed away from its commitment to join the other Muslim terror ships attempting to break the Israeli blockade.
The Iranian ship (or ships) was supposed to join the latest flotilla yesterday (Sunday). But they got cold feet at the last minute. Iran set up its own "relief committee" of fellow Muslim Israel-haters called The International Conference for the Support of the Palestinian Intifada. Its chief spokesman, Secretary General Hossein Sheikholeslam, announced "the trip is not going to happen." Instead of the usual "we ain't scared a no Jews" rhetoric, the thrust changed slightly: "Due to the restrictions from the occupying Zionist regime, it was decided that this ship would not sail. The Zionist regime has made the blockade a political issue and we do not wish to politicise this kind of humanitarian aid because the most important thing for us is to break the blockade of Gaza. Therefore, we have canceled the sailing."
But what really caused Iran to back off and decide that it would try to get supplies to Gaza by other routes? Sheikholeslam himself told us. "The voyage was canceled because Israel had sent a letter to the United Nations saying the presence of Iranian and Lebanese ships in the Gaza area will be considered a declaration of war on that regime, and it will confront it (emphasis added)." That's a whole lot different rhetoric from "we will wipe Israel off the map," now isn't it?
For a country which claims to have superior forces and a complete lack of fear of Israel, Iran suddenly sounds pretty shaky about taking on a nation which has declared that there is now a line drawn, and if certain states cross it, it's war. Internally, and out of public sight and hearing, I'm guessing that Iran is finally getting the message that Israel is on the brink of doing the job the United Nations and the cowards in Washington DC won't do. Israel is letting Iran know that Iran's assistance to terrorists in Palestine is not a good enough diversion from their nuclear ambitions. Israel is further making it clear that it's about ready to accept not one more provocation from its sworn enemy in Tehran.
Michael Ledeen at PajamasMedia wonders what would happen if the jellyfish in the White House suddenly developed the same backbone and announced that any attacks on Israel would be tantamount to an attack on America (anybody remember John Kennedy and the Cuban Missile blockade?). He also points out, appropriately, that Bush had that opportunity as well, and didn't take it. Fair enough.
Even something less than total defeat in a military confrontation with America and Israel could very well be the catalyst that reawakens the opposition in Iran and brings about the fall of the Iranian dictatorship. A direct confrontation with Israel in the flotilla, assuming it failed, would probably be a mortal blow to the ayatollahs and Imadinnerjacket. It would also mean the death of imprisonment of Iranians when the whole idea is to have Arabs become martyrs with Iranians egging them on. Israel, 1. Iran, 0. America, on the sidelines.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Iran Calls Off Its Ships
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
22 comments:
I'm on the sidelines too, cheering for Israel. GO! GO! GO!
Tam: Me too. But God how I'd love to see America honor its commitments to our only genuine ally in the Middle East and make credible announcements that any action taken against Israel by a terrorist nation will be considered an act of war on the United States. Kennedy was certainly no war-monger, but he made exactly that commitment for all of Latin America during the height of the Cuban Missile Crisis.
I agree, but since we do have a jellyfish in DC, I am thrilled that Israel is standing up to Iran for themselves. I hope and wish and pray that we will get someone with a backbone in the whitehouse in 2012 who would honor such commitments as Kennedy and Reagan and Netanyahu.
Good luck pushing the Israeli's around. They aren't playing around because it's their existence at stake. . . unlike a certain incompetent commander in chief I could name.
Tam: The Republicans have a fairly decent field of potential candidates on domestic issues. But frankly, I don't know where any of them are coming from on foreign policy, and particularly on Israel. That's one area where every future candidate needs to be grilled. I don't expect any good candidate to announce specifics, strategy or even tactics. But I do expect to hear a firm commitment to the only true democratic government in the Middle East.
God Bless Israel. Atmahdinnahjob can suck it. (been a long few days. best i gots!)
Andrew: So true. The fact is that Ahmadinejad is smart enough (or at least crafty enough) to know the difference between blustery rhetoric (at which he is a master) and the real thing. Israel calmly and deliberately warned the UN of what would happen if Iran joined the flotilla, and the Iranian tyrant knew immediately that this was no bluff.
On the other hand, if the Big O had said that he would do everything in his power to prevent Iran joining the flotilla, Ahmadinejad would simply have laughed it off and made a corresponding empty threat to the US.
Patti: Well, that isn't the most diplomatic way of putting it, but, what the hell--Mahmoud can suck it!
Lawhawk--Ahmadinejad is like the typical schoolyard bully. He's got a few sycophants, and he's a little bigger than the other kids, but underneath it all, he's a coward. Israel's like the little guy who doesn't say much and rarely threatens anything. But when he says "back off," the bully knows he means it and he's terrified.
HamiltonsGhost: Imadinnerjacket's supporters are also like the ones who support the schoolyard bully. They'll cheer him on as long as he appears to be the top dog. But they'll abandon him faster than you can say Ayatollah Khomeini if it looks like he's about to get whipped. Mahmoud knows that he can't afford even a clear and simple loss, and he had to get out of that flotilla before it cost him his dictatorship.
Let's hear it for Israel! I can't wait to see what Iran says about women's rights!
ACG: Now that Iran's on the UN Commission on The Status of Women, I'm sure they will demand that Israel remove its women from the military, cover them up, and put them back in the kitchen. And if the Israelis don't comply immediately, Iran will make another threat. LOL
And speaking of the UN, Iran seems to have learned a lot from them. The big lesson is to make some nation do what you want it to do. If it doesn't, send them a threatening note. If that doesn't work, send them another. If it hasn't worked by the twenty-fifth threat, send them another, and add "and this time we really mean it.
CalFed: That sounds about right. The UN is a little better at claiming the title of Grand Master of World Peace, and it bullies a little less than Iran. But overall, the similarities are strong. Both make a pretense to peace-loving democratic leadership, and both are toothless tigers. Israel is smart enough to realize that once Iran gets the bomb, it also gets teeth, so if the US and the UN won't do anything about it, Israel will have no choice but to solve the problem itself. At least we know there's one nation that will simply not tolerate terrorist threats. Too bad that isn't the US.
maybe after Obama is finished wee weeing around and gets vote out of office, we could invite Israel to be part of NATO. Really, what OUGHT to happen is western civilization should have an "Attack on One" clause. As you point out, Hawk, we won't see that kind of commitment from this president except for trying to tear down our country. This is the president who insulted the British for heaven's sake.
LawHawk,
My first thought is the bully scenario. Second thought is that Obama can't afford to not back up Israel at this time and Iran knows it.
Third thought is that Iran is all bluster no actual action.
I don't know if Obama will or won't back up Israel, but I do know the whole flotilla operation was only supposed to be a push to embarass Israel into letting ships into Gaza. Neither blinked, and Israel bloodied their nose. It was done through intermediaries on the Iran side.
Still, the question, if push comes to shove, will Obama back our allies?
Well, apparently we're not planning on defending our own country, so why worry about Israel?
Does Obama realize that we have a military, and that he is allowed to use it?
Monica: He thinks that the military is just a bunch of guys and gals hired to make him look good by saluting him a lot. He has no idea that they actually have weapons and can shoot enemies. He thinks that only gangsters in Chicago are allowed to shoot people, and could never conceive of anyone who used deadly force for a legitimate purpose.
LawHawk: That really made me laugh :) I just wish it was 100% sarcasm!
Monica: That's my Pagliacci thing. Laughing on the outside, screaming bloody murder on the inside (or something like that).
Just like you “Don’t Mess with Texas,” shout out to Patti, you don’t mess with Israel. There will come a time that the Israelis will thump Iran. My concern is Barry the Boy Wonder, what will he do when the Middle East erupts? Dither I’d expect.
I read the other day on Drudge, where the Saudis gave Israel flyover rights. It sounds like the Sunnis (Saudi Arabia) are not interested in a Shiite nuclear bomb, either.
Stan: At least the Israelis don't have to worry that Obama would interfere with any action they deemed necessary. Even though he shows a clear antipathy towards Israel, he's simply incapable of making a decision, good or bad, that would stop the Israelis from doing what is required of them for their own safety. By the time he comes to a decision, it will already be too late to change anything.
That's the first I had heard about the Saudis. That's semi-good news.
Post a Comment