The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Politics => Topic started by: Eupher on September 17, 2013, 12:06:36 PM
-
Start quote:
A significant change from Israel’s earlier diplomatic diffidence on the fate of the Bashar al-Assad regime — and perhaps about three weeks late. Israel’s US Ambassador Michael Oren tells the Jerusalem Post that the Assad regime and its ties to Tehran are more dangerous than a takeover by the al-Qaeda affiliates in Syria battling the Assad army and its militias:
“The initial message about the Syrian issue was that we always wanted [President] Bashar Assad to go, we always preferred the bad guys who weren’t backed by Iran to the bad guys who were backed by Iran,†he said.
This was the case, he said, even if the other “bad guys†were affiliated to al-Qaida.
“We understand that they are pretty bad guys,†he said, adding that this designation did not apply to everyone in the Syrian opposition. “Still, the greatest danger to Israel is by the strategic arc that extends from Tehran, to Damascus to Beirut. And we saw the Assad regime as the keystone in that arc. That is a position we had well before the outbreak of hostilities in Syria. With the outbreak of hostilities we continued to want Assad to go.â€
The Netanyahu government had expressed hope that Assad and his alliance to Iran would exit soon, but had remained quiet in the debate over chemical weapons. When US politicians tried to use Israel as an argument for all sides of the question of the response to the August 21st chemical-weapons attack, Israel would only publicly state that it could handle its own defense regardless of what the Obama administration decided to do about Syria. If Israel had publicly spoken about their desire to see Assad fall even with AQ-affiliated terrorist networks taking control, would that have boosted Barack Obama’s chances of getting Congressional authorization for military strikes? Possibly; it certainly wouldn’t have hurt.
Rest of article at the Hot Air link. (http://hotair.com/archives/2013/09/17/israel-assad-must-go/)
End quote.
Well, well, well. Kinda looks like Bibi isn't really interested in making Barry look good. Or even getting involved in the statesmanship game played between Barry and Vlad and Assad.
Let's see what happens with Hezbollah.
-
If Israel had publicly spoken about their desire to see Assad fall even with AQ-affiliated terrorist networks taking control, would that have boosted Barack Obama’s chances of getting Congressional authorization for military strikes?
Probably not, most of the people in Congress who would piss on their constituents to make Israel happy were already "Yes" votes. The long delay in coming to this position also indicates it's a position of the Israeli PM and his cabinet, not necessarily a universally-endorsed idea in Israel itself. I'm sure the IDF is for it (Which by itself would be enough to get the Likud's favor for it) since a change in government in Syria means the newest Russian ADA weapons won't be showing up there anytime soon, and so the IAF could continue to penetrate Syrian airspace at will, but that's really a short-term tactical consideration rather than a long-term strategic one.
-
Probably not, most of the people in Congress who would piss on their constituents to make Israel happy were already "Yes" votes. The long delay in coming to this position also indicates it's a position of the Israeli PM and his cabinet, not necessarily a universally-endorsed idea in Israel itself. I'm sure the IDF is for it (Which by itself would be enough to get the Likud's favor for it) since a change in government in Syria means the newest Russian ADA weapons won't be showing up there anytime soon, and so the IAF could continue to penetrate Syrian airspace at will, but that's really a short-term tactical consideration rather than a long-term strategic one.
Israel isn't known for a lot of public debate, particularly on their national security interests, but I find it remarkable that there really hasn't been much discussion at all out of Israel -- even on the QT -- until now.
No leaks, no back-and-forth, no bullshit.
If there are strong feelings about not ousting Assad in any faction of the Likud, they've done a masterful job keeping it quiet.
-
Israel isn't known for a lot of public debate, particularly on their national security interests, but I find it remarkable that there really hasn't been much discussion at all out of Israel -- even on the QT -- until now.
No leaks, no back-and-forth, no bullshit.
If there are strong feelings about not ousting Assad in any faction of the Likud, they've done a masterful job keeping it quiet.
No doubt you're right about the Likud, but there are just about as many Labour Party members, even though Likud has the upper hand right now.