Archive for June, 2012

Washington Is Worth a War: Obama, Iran and the Israel Lobby


Washington Is Worth a War:  Obama, Iran, and the Israel Lobby (by Stephen Sniegoski)

The following is my response to Robert Wright’s article “Obama’s Drift Toward War With Iran” in “The Atlantic” of June 14.



Washington Is Worth a War:  Obama, Iran, and the Israel Lobby                 By Stephen J. Sniegoski

When, in 1593, Henry of Navarre converted from Protestantism to Catholicism in order to become king of a united France, he is reputed to have said:  “Paris is worth a mass.”  For President Obama, as Robert Wright points out in his article, “Obama’s Drift Toward War With Iran” in “The Atlantic” magazine (June 14), his re-election to the presidency would seem to be worth a war. Wright, a senior editor of “The Atlantic,”  writes: “The most undercovered story in Washington is how President Obama, under the influence of election-year politics, is letting America drift toward war with Iran.” Wright notes that “There are things Obama could do to greatly increase the chances of a negotiated solution to the Iranian nuclear problem, but he seems to have decided that doing them would bring political blowback that would reduce his chances of re-election.” And the blowback Obama fears is “largely from Bibi Netanyahu, AIPAC, and other ‘pro-Israel’ voices.”  In short, Obama fears the Israel Lobby more than he opposes a war that would be unnecessary and also of unknown, but possibly immense, consequences. -war-with-iran/258433/     It is apparent that Obama does not want war with Iran, and he is certainly being pilloried  by neocons and other members of the Israel Lobby along with Republican hawks for his alleged appeasement of that country, but although he may eschew outright war measures,  the fear of the Israel Lobby causes his administration to pursue an inflexible,  pro-Israel hard-line diplomacy toward Iran on the nuclear issue that does not include any real quid pro quo; the diplomatic process has been simply geared to demanding that Iran make concessions, with no reciprocation being offered by the United States and its allies.

The United States is unwilling to  offer Iran any significant relief from the draconian sanctions imposed on it “even in exchange for Iranian concessions that would have moved the world further away from war,” in Wright’s words.  Most significantly, “Those concessions would have included Iran’s ceasing production of uranium enriched to 20-percent levels.” Weapons grade uranium is 90 percent enriched, but Western officials have been expressed the dire concern that the 20 percent enrichment version, which is used for medical research purposes,  could quickly be converted into nuclear weapons-grade material.  (Much lower enrichment levels are used for peaceful nuclear power.)  Such an Iranian concession would thus be in line with America’s near-term goal of preventing the 20 percent enrichment and would reduce the chances of war.  Even if Romney should be elected president, it would be politically more difficult for him to launch an attack, if he so desired;  and, if should he think otherwise, it would provide him with more justification not to do it.

Wright’s reasoning appears to be perfectly sound.  President Obama definitely would seem to have the  power to greatly reduce the chances of war with Iran, if he so desired.  And Wright also is on the mark when he labels Obama’s willingness to improve his  election chances by “imperiling peace and America’s security”  as a “little scandalous, ” and that it is even “more scandalous” that people in the “Washington establishment” do not complain about it.  But Wright also adds the  highly questionable claim that the blowback Obama fears “is probably less forbidding than he assumes. And the political upside of successful statesmanship may be greater than he realizes.”

However,  though the Israel Lobby is not all-powerful, its staunch opposition would be sufficient to tip the scales against Obama  in a close election.  It should be pointed out that the only two recent US presidents who lost re-election bids-Jimmy Carter (1980) and George H.W. Bush (1992)-had taken positions antithetical to those of the Israel Lobby and drew its full ire.   In short, in political terms Obama’s fear of the Israel Lobby is perfectly reasonable for a politician concerned about winning elections, which would seem to be the case for most politicians.  And it is obvious that almost all elected politicians act in this manner toward the Israel Lobby-as clearly indicated by the votes in Congress and the extreme pro-Israel rhetoric of most of the Republican presidential candidates this year.

And to make the political power of Israel  crystal clear to Obama, multi-billionaire Zionist Sheldon Adelson, who during the Republican primaries had single-handedly kept Newt Gingrich in the race, has pledged to spend $100 million or more to defeat President Obama.  Adelson is an ultra-hard-line Likudnik hawk, but Obama must realize that there are many more less-ardent pro-Israel magnates who would come out openly against his re-election if he should  dare to make an open effort to establish peace with Iran, currently Israel’s foremost enemy.

Moreover, a contingency which Wright neglects to consider is that if it appears that Obama is falling behind Romney in the polls, which is completely possible given the state of the economy (and some current polls actually show Romney slightly ahead in the nation-wide popular vote), involvement in a war with Iran could likely enable him to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat-the American people patriotically uniting behind the President in wartime.

Phil Weiss, a very courageous American Jew who dares to openly oppose the Israel Lobby, looks at Wright’s article  in a very different light.  He finds the very fact that a mainstream individual in a mainstream publication would dare to make mention of the Israel Lobby to be an issue of utmost significance.  He writes: “I believe this is a new consensus: outspoken Americans are actually building a new understanding in the global discourse, that the United States is hamstrung by the special relationship with Israel.”– out-of-pathetic-fear-of-blowback-from-the-lobby.html

If there were such a consensus,  Obama and other politicians would begin to stand up against the policies advocated by the Israel Lobby.  But the fact is that nothing approaching a  “consensus” of “outspoken Americans” opposing the Israel Lobby has emerged,  as Wright appropriately notes when he refers to the issue of Iran and the Israel Lobby as the  “most undercovered story in Washington.”

So it would appear that President Obama will continue his policy of “drift toward war with Iran,”  at least until after the November election.   Should he be re-elected, perhaps he would change in his second term, but he still must consider  the effect such a move would have on the political success of his second term, his legacy,  and, as a relatively young man,  his career after the presidency, all of which could be seriously jeopardized by  his taking positions that run afoul of the Israel Lobby.

Best, Stephen Sniegoski     __________________________________________________________


Obama’s Drift Toward War With Iran Robert Wright Robert Wright is a senior editor at The Atlantic and the author, most recently, of The Evolution of God, a New York Times bestseller and a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize. JUN 14 2012, 9:54 PM ET 206

Simulating an Iranian attack on Israel – Why?

Simulating an Iranian attack on Israel – Why?

“Netanyahu has decided to attack Iran before the U.S. Elections in November.”

“Netanyahu has decided to attack Iran before the U.S. Elections in November.”

The Babylonian Captivity of Washington: Israel Can Start a War and the US Can do Nothing to Stop It (scroll down to Philip Giraldi’s mention of how US media isn’t reporting US military concern about Israel dragging US into war with Iran if Israel attacks Iran in following article as Mitt Romney and the Israel first neoconned GOP is mentioned near the end):

Israel lobby pushing Syrian regime change to weaken Iran:

More Bombs and Aircraft for Israel (to bomb Iran)!

General James David (Ret) who is mentioned on the cover of the third edition of former Republican Congressman Paul Findley’s ‘They Dare to Speak Out’ book (about the power/influence of the pro-Israel lobby on the US political system and media) wrote:

When is enough, enough?

Co-chair of Bipartisan Policy Center to Congress: Israel needs bombs, refueling tankers for strike on Iran

Former Senator calls on Congress to provide Israel with 200 bunker busters and aerial refueling military aircrafts.

By Amir Oren | Jun.22, 2012 | 1:19 AM | 10
The U.S. Air Force's KC-135 refueling tanker (L) and a F-15K fighter.

The U.S. Air Force’s KC-135 refueling tanker (L) and a F-15K fighter of South Korea’s Air Force participate in a drill of aerial refueling May 9, 2012. Photo by Reuters

Former Senator Charles Robb co-chairman of the Bipartisan Policy Center said that in order to perform a successful attack on Iran Israel’s aerial refueling capabilities and bunker-buster bomb stores need to be enhanced. Robb, who was giving testimony at a Congress subcommittee, presented the material gaps in the IDF’s preparedness for an attack on Iran, and called on the United States to provide Israel with KC-135 aerial refueling military aircrafts and 200 bunker-busting munitions to supplement the 100 Israel already holds.

During his testimony Robb warned that an Israeli attack on Iran carries with it the danger that the aerial attack will fail to achieve its objective – deterring Iran from rehabilitating its nuclear program or completely negating its ability to do so. According to Robb, whether or not the attack is successful, Iran and its proxies and especially Hezbollah are expected to respond. This would include terror attacks around the world and a rise in the price of oil. Despite this, the possibility that Iran would obtain nuclear weapons was more dangerous.

Robb added that expanding Israeli and American capabilities to attack Iran would help pressure Iran in its negotiations and help convince the countries purchasing oil from Iran to adhere to the limits imposed on them. According to Robb, supplying Israel with aerial refueling aircrafts and bunker-busting munitions would help alleviate Israeli fears and thus will contribute to postponing an attack. And if an attack is in the end to take place it is better it be successful than if it failed.

Robb said that the 100 GBU-28 bunker-busters the U.S. provided Israel with, in 2006, were no longer enough and that Israel required 200 bombs of the improved GBU-31 model. This model, he explained, can be dropped from the same planes (F-15s and F-16s) and have the same penetration capabilities, but their tail kits are more advanced allowing for more accuracy. The result of this, according to Robb, would be more devastating damage to Iran’s underground facilities, a larger attack fleet, and the opening of possibility for a second round of attacks, in case these are needed.

Robb said that he believes the U.S. should deal with the Iranian nuclear threat with the parallel routes; negotiations, sanctions and preparation for an attack by preparing U.S attack capabilities, providing the Gulf States with a missile defense systems and munitions, as well as, providing Israel weapons. He said that he prefers that the matter be resolved through negotiations but called congress to fund the purchase of super bunker-busters dropped from B-52 bombers that are able to penetrate bunkers 65 yards deep, which is enough to neutralize Iran’s underground facilities. Currently the U.S. has only 20 bombs of this model.

Robb served as an officer in the U.S. Marine Corps and as Lyndon Johnson’s military aide and married one of his daughters. He later went on to serve as a governor and senator.

‎’Your Voice Counts’ radio show with co-host James Morris & guest Steve Sniegoski talking about Syria, Egypt & Iran

‎’Your Voice Counts’ radio show with co-host James Morris & guest @SteveSniegoski talking about #Syria, #Egypt & #Iran

Following is an audio file:

Ron Paul: Hands Off Syria! Let’s Not Fall for the Same Lies Again!

Ron Paul: Hands Off Syria! Let’s Not Fall for the Same Lies Again!

Israel lobby pushing Syrian regime change to weaken Iran:

Covert Wars, Waged Virally

Turkey threatens action after Syria downs jet

Turkey threatens action after Syria downs jet
Israel lobby pushing Syrian regime change to weaken Iran:

McCain Confronted on USS Liberty Cover-up & Media Accomplices

McCain Confronted on USS Liberty Cover-up & Media Accomplices

 USS Liberty Survivor (Phillip Tourney) Email to Aide about Sen McCain ‘Jerk’ Remark

Can see entire video of John McCain and Mitt Romney via C-SPAN video at following URL:

Activist James Morris Confronts John McCain for Ignoring Israeli Attack of USS Liberty

John McCain Confronted About USS Liberty Cover-up Memorial Day 2012:

USS Liberty Memorial Service Renews Calls of a Government Cover-Up:

Additional via

Cindy McCain on the USS LIBERTY COVERUP: “I don’t care about this issue.”:


Operation Detain McCain – Phoenix – Pete Santilli Speaking (1 of 2):

Operation Detain McCain – Phoenix – Pete Santilli Show (2 of 2):

Protesting McCain – Stopped At The Gate:

Jewish Neocon Billionaire Willing to Spend $100 Million on Romney to Beat Obama

Sheldon Adelson Willing to Spend $100 Million to Beat Obama

Adelson is punching bag for Axelrod, but Axelrod doesn’t dare mention Adelson’s big issue

USS Liberty survivor Phil Tourney wrote:

Why is John McCain not giving back money from there JEWISH backers (AIPAC/Neocon) friends?:
McCain: Foreign cash sneaking in via super PACs: