The Panishment of Gaza

Buy this book:
The Panishment of Gaza

Article from UPI.com
TEL AVIV, Israel, Sept. 28 (UPI) — The United States has agreed to help Israel develop a new defense system known as David’s Sling to protect the Jewish state against large-scale missile attack.

Few details of the arrangement have been disclosed, although the Pentagon’s Missile Defense Agency, said it emphasized “the continued commitment of the United States to the defense of Israel.”

Over the last decade, the Pentagon has provided large amounts of funding for the high-altitude Arrow anti-ballistic missile system and the recently deployed Iron Dome system designed to shoot down short-range rockets used by Hezbollah and Hamas.

However, the agreement regarding David’s Sling, which is being developed by Israel Aerospace Industries and the U.S. Raytheon Corp., follows a string of major deals with the Pentagon that provide Israel with advanced fighters, massive amounts of fuel and defense funding.

Washington provides Israeli with some $3 billion in military aid annually and there’s always some project in the pipeline.

But the deals unveiled in recent weeks indicate they could be linked either to rewarding Israeli for its acquiescence in not opposing an unprecedented $60 billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia, ostensibly to counter Iran, or to prod the Jewish state into making concessions to the Palestinians under President Barack Obama’s new Middle East peace initiative.

To get the planned sale of advanced combat aircraft and helicopter gunships for Riyadh through the U.S. Congress, where the Israeli lobby has thwarted such ground-breaking arms sales to Arab states in the past, Obama’s administration had to pledge not to provide the Saudis with long-range precision weapons that Israel complains could threaten it.

The United States has never committed to such an expensive arms buildup for an Arab ally before.

But the huge arms deal reflects a significant change in U.S. strategy in the region by confronting Iran through allies and proxies rather than deploying American forces already stretched thin in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The fear is, of course, that far from persuading Iran to back off its alleged quest for nuclear weapons, these deals will only make it feel less secure and reinforce its effort to become a nuclear power.

Whatever, Israel has benefited considerably. These deals will ensure that it retains its traditional technological military edge over its adversaries, despite the festering rift between Obama and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu over settlements expansion.

In recent weeks the U.S. administration has approved the sale of 20 F-35 stealth fighters, the world’s most advanced combat jet, to Israel with the $2.75 billion bill being covered by the Pentagon in the form of military aid.

That means the Israelis essentially get the fifth-generation fighters for nothing, plus contracts worth up to $1.5 billion going to Israel’s high-tech defense industry to provide components for the F-35.

It also means the Israelis get to maintain their air superiority over their adversaries since the F-35, even in such limited numbers, is a generation ahead of anything the Americans sell the Persian Gulf states.

The Israelis eventually want 75 of these radar-evading jets.

In July, the Pentagon forked out $422.7 million to fund a dozen batteries of the Iron Dome system, built by Rafael Advanced Defense Systems, as well as to expand production of ISI’s long-range Arrow-3 system, designed to shield Israel from Iran’s ballistic missiles.

The development of the Arrow has cost around $3 billion over the last decade, the bulk of the funding came from the United States.

On Aug. 6, the U.S. Defense Security Cooperation Agency informed Congress it planned to sell Israel a vast amount of fuel for an estimated $2 billion.

The sale comprises 60 million gallons of unleaded gasoline and 100 million gallons of diesel fuel for Israel’s ground forces and 284 million gallons of JP-8 aviation jet fuel “to enable Israel to maintain the operational capability of its aircraft inventory.”

The threat of a nuclear-armed Iran has changed many of the realities in the Middle East and its volatile environs. Saudi Arabia and Israel have found themselves linked by their deep fears of a nuclear-armed Iran.

This hardly makes allies out of these longtime foes. But, in a changing world, the Israelis appreciate the more able Saudi Arabia and its gulf partners are to stand up to Iran and support U.S. forces in the region, the better they will all be.

Unplugged and Uncut: Ahmadinejad
Eric Shawn’s entire interview with the controversial Iranian president

Ahmadinejad Repeats Call For 9/11 Investigation, Says Iran Open To Talks [Press TV News]

By: Afshan Khan

This seems familiar to anyone or it is just me? Propagandists are yet again to prepare ground for another illegitimate war by creating a hoax, just like Iraq war which was merely based on false pretenses. Trying to portray Ahmadinejad as the villain of the world just like they did to Saddam Hussein , which utterly proved to be a hoax. In the end Iraq war caused nothing but death and destruction of Iraq, at same time draining American economy and indebting USA to the Chinese economic dominance. History should never be forgotten. Unless the fundamentals of economy is strong, no matter how big of a military powerhouse a country is, it will eventually collapse. Remember “Great Former Soviet Union” and its downfall.

State of Israel with its own selfish, unfounded apprehensions of Iran, with all its might,(control of Media, enormous clout on US’ Government) is trying and pushing for a attack on Iran to create another fiasco just like Iraq, while doing so Israel is undermining American power and it might very well be the cause for American downfall. As we all can imagine we can not , any way afford another war. Our economy is in shambles, our national debt is all time high and we people started to feel the pain and futility of wars.

President Obama should use his presidency and fulfill his campaign promise of implementing the reasonable foreign foreign policy, which should be solely based on protecting the national interest of USA not of Israel. America as the world leader should worked towards maintaining the peace around the world with rational foreign policy promoting dialogue among the nations not wars.

Checkout the video below and feel unfolding of the hoax…

Iran180 Press Conference 9/20

Ahmadinejad speech 2010 at UN

New York (CNN) — Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad lashed out at Benjamin Netanyahu in an interview with CNN’s Larry King Wednesday, calling the Israeli prime minister a “skilled killer” who “should be put on trial for killing women and children.”

The Iranian president denied that international sanctions were hurting his country, and refused to commit to meeting President Obama if the opportunity arose.

Ahmadinejad also deflected questions about Iran’s nuclear program, saying Iran has “no interest” in a nuclear bomb and that no one is concerned about Iran’s intentions other than “the Zionist regime and some American authorities.”

“We are not seeking the bomb,” Ahmadinejad said.

The United States and its allies are not convinced by Iran’s regular denials, and the International Atomic Energy Agency — a United Nations body — says it cannot confirm that Iran is not diverting nuclear materials for military purposes.

RELATED TOPICS
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
Iran
Nuclear Weapons
Israel
International powers discussing Iran’s nuclear program with Tehran are pushing to restart negotiations soon, a senior U.S. official told CNN Wednesday. Iran has not responded to the request.

Meanwhile, Ahmadinejad insisted that “we have no interest in [a nuclear bomb] and we do not think that it is useful.”

“Both the Zionist regime and the United States government should be disarmed,” he said. “The threat to the world are the bombs

Source:CNN

Arab states’ campaign to have the International Atomic Energy Agency call on Israel to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty is likely to impair efforts to promote arms control in the Middle East, a senior Israeli official said yesterday.
Arab nations have drafted a nonbinding resolution that they are expected to push this week at a gathering of the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency’s 151 member states in Vienna, Austria. The resolution calls on Jerusalem to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. In 2009, Arab states saw a similar resolution narrowly approved by the IAEA General Assembly.
In remarks at the conference, Israeli Atomic Energy Organization Director General Shaul Chorev harshly criticized what he described as the “continuous ill-motivated efforts to single out and to condemn the state of Israel.”
He said the resolution was “incompatible with basic principles and norms of international law.”
Israel is widely believed to possess the only nuclear arms in the Middle East, though it has for decades maintained a policy of neither confirming nor denying its arsenal. The United States has lobbied Arab states to drop their IAEA campaign, arguing it would undermine a 2012 conference aimed at creating a WMD-free zone in the region.
“Any approach that … singles out the state of Israel not only weakens the ability of the international community to confront (nuclear) proliferators and violators but also defeats the prospect for advancement of arms control measures in the Middle East region,” Chorev said.
Israel has accused Arab states of trying to divert international attention away from concerns about the nuclear activities of Iran and Syria.
“Iran continues its relentless pursuit of nuclear weapons in complete disregard of all relevant resolutions taken by the international community,” Chorev said (see related GSN story today; Fredrik Dahl, Reuters, Sept. 21).
The Israeli official said four Middle Eastern countries — Iran, Iraq, Libya and Syria — have at some point all “grossly violated” the terms of the nuclear treaty, the Jerusalem Post reported.
“These four cases make it absolutely clear, that the NPT is unable to adequately address the security challenges of the Middle East region, where the treaty has been mostly abused,” he said.
The real danger to the pact’s viability is “is posed from within, by those states that pursue nuclear weapons, under the cover of their NPT membership,” Chorev asserted.
Additionally, it is not within the International Atomic Energy Agency’s authority to call on Israel to sign the treaty, he said.
While other countries have not signed the pact, Israel is the “only state that has been singled out, and is called upon to take a decision which is against its best national interests,” Chorev said.
Nuclear-armed countries India and Pakistan are not NPT members (Herb Keinon, Jerusalem Post, Sept. 22).
The resolution is anticipated to be debated tomorrow, Agence France-Presse reported (Agence France-Presse/Google News, Sept. 21).
Meanwhile, Bahrain yesterday allowed heightened monitoring of its nuclear activities when it signed the Additional Protocol to its IAEA safeguards deal, the Bahrain News Agency reported.
Protocol signatory states permit IAEA officials to collect additional data on their nuclear activities and to carry out atomic site inspections on short notice (see GSN, Sept. 21).
The agreement was inked at the IAEA conference by agency chief Yukiya Amano and Bahrain Foreign Ministry Undersecretary Abdulla Abdullatif Abdulla (Bahrain News Agency, Sept. 21).

Israel Objects to Arab Calls to Join NPT

Analyst: Another Approach Should be Taken to Resolve Israel-Palestinian Conflict

Stephen Kinzer, a journalist and author of the book ‘Reset: Iran, Turkey, and America’s Future’

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been visiting Washington and New York. He met with U.S. President Obama and U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, to discuss issues, including the Middle East peace process. Mr. Obama said the Israeli leader showed a willingness to engage in serious talks with the Palestinians. Mr. Netanyahu said it was time for direct talks between Israel and the Palestinians to begin.

However, Stephen Kinzer, a journalist and author of the book Reset: Iran, Turkey, and America’s Future, which looks at conflict resolution in the Middle East, believes another approach should be taken to resolve the conflict. VOA’s Susan Yackee asked him what new policies the United States could pursue to help stabilize the region.
Kinzer: I start from the idea that our policies are really stuck in the past. We have a policy designed to confront the Middle East of the Cold War, but the Cold War’s been over for more than 20 years and our policy is stuck in the past. So I feel that we need new ideas and creative thinking and “out of the box” approaches to that region. That’s my first conclusion.

The second is, as we approach that region in a new way to try to promote our own interests and the interests of stability in the Middle East, we would be wise to look for partners and not try to do it all ourselves and assume that only we have the good ideas in the Middle East.

And my third is, who would those partners be? If you look around that region and ask yourselves, “Which countries have long-term strategic goals that are similar to ours and also have societies that are similar to ours?” The only two Muslim countries in the Middle East that fulfill those criteria are Turkey, and surprise, Iran. So, I think in the future, in the 21st century, you’re gonna see the emergence of this power triangle: U.S., Turkey, and Iran.

Yackee: But why should the U.S. pursue a partnership with Turkey and Iran?

Kinzer: There are different reasons for the both of them. I think in both cases, you see societies that are open and democratic and eager to engage with the rest of the world. In Iran, you don’t see a government that encourages that but the society in Iran, as I found in my recent visit there last month, is amazingly vibrant and democratic. But over the long run, what about strategic goals? So it’s not a hard sell to say that Turkey and the U.S. have closely linked strategic goals.

After all, we’ve been NATO allies with them for decades. But what about Iran? Isn’t it a little counterfactual to think of the U.S. in a strategic partnership with Iran? I’d suggest this: First of all, Iran has a great ability to stabilize Iraq. They can do more to stabilize Iraq than anyone else, particularly in cooperation with the Turks who have very good ties to the Sunni factions there. So if we want to get out of Iraq, without another explosion of violence there, Iran is a vital partner and also has the great ability to stabilize Afghanistan on the other border.

Iran, of course, has long relations with Afghanistan and a lot of Afghanistan used to be a part of Iran up until Iran lost a few wars in the 19th century. Iran is eager to ensure the free flow of energy resources from the Persian Gulf to the West. Iran is the bitter enemy of radical movements like Taliban and al-Qaeda.

So when you look forward and put aside the prejudices of the moment, you think about state interests, which don’t change when regimes change, you see that Iran’s long-term state interests, along with its vibrantly democratic society, if not government, make it a very intriguing potential partner for the United States.

Yackee: Well, should the U.S. rethink its relationship with Israel?

Kinzer: I think it is right for the U.S. to maintain a long-term strategic partnership with Israel, but when I was in Israel researching this new book I have, I did find a new growing body of opinion in Israel and I think it’s also reflected in the United States. It’s asking themselves, “Are our political leaders able to make decisions that really guard our security over the long run or are we taking steps that seem to defend ourselves right now, but may undermine our security in the long run?”

So, I’d like to see the United States adopt a view that in the long run, Israel is not going to be able to defend itself forever with only military means. The best guarantee for Israel’s long-term security is a calm neighborhood.

Therefore, anything the United States or anyone else from outside the region does in the Middle East that helps stabilize that region and diffuse confrontation is actually good for Israel in the long run.

Yackee: Could Turkey be the arbitrator in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

Kinzer: I hope so and I fear that the confrontation over Turkey and Israel over this Gaza flotilla in recent weeks might weaken that possibility. That’s a very bad idea. Turkey is caught up in a lot of emotion now, because their citizens were killed on the high seas and there’s a lot of anger about what’s happening in Gaza.

But Turkey should not pick up one of the bad habits of the United States. One of our bad habits is that we make our foreign policy often based on emotion without stopping to think about what’s really in our long-term interests.

Turkey’s in an emotional state about Israel now, but actually the Turkey-Israel relationship is so important for the Middle East. Israel needs a Muslim country as a bridge out of its isolation. Only Turkey can play that role because of its long relationship with Israel. Turkey needs to ratchet down its feelings of anger and confrontation and realize that since it also wants a stable Middle East, it needs to maintain a good relationship with Israel.

To read more click..
Turkey and Iran are Best Strategic Partners for USA in Middle East

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Thursday that the United States must make its position on Israel’s nuclear strategy clear before talks on Tehran’s atomic program could resume.

Sanctions imposed by “arrogant” Western powers would not slow Iran’s nuclear progress, he said.

	Technicians measuring parts of Iran’s Bushehr nuclear power plant in this undated photo.
	Photo by: AP

The United States, Europe and the United Nations have imposed sanctions on Iran over its disputed nuclear program. Iran says its aim is to generate electricity and rejects Western suspicions it is seeking to build a nuclear bomb.

Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator suggested in a letter to the European Union’s foreign affairs chief this week that talks could be held as soon as September on issues including Tehran’s atomic program.

Speaking in Nigeria after a summit of the D8 group of developing nations, Ahmadinejad said Iran supported dialogue but blamed the United States for the failure of previous talks.

Asked what conditions must be met for talks to resume, Ahmadinejad said Washington must make its position on Israel’s nuclear strategy clear.

“The first condition is they should express their views about the nuclear weapons of the Zionist regime. Do they agree with that or not. If they agree that these bombs should be available to them, the course of the dialogue would be different,” he said.

Israel is widely assumed to have the only nuclear arsenal in the region but it refuses to confirm or deny having such weapons. It has usually been spared scrutiny by its guardian ally but the Obama administration alarmed Israel in May by backing an Egyptian initiative for talks in 2012 on a Middle East free of weapons of mass-destruction.

However, hosting Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday, U.S. President Barack Obama echoed Israel’s veiled justifications for having the bomb and said Israel had “unique security requirements”.

The White House said Obama had further pledged to keep Israel, which has not signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty, from being “singled out” at a meeting of the U.N. nuclear watchdog in Vienna in September as well as at the Egyptian-proposed regional conference.

Ahmadinejad, speaking to reporters through an interpreter, said the United States must also clarify its own commitment to non-proliferation and its position on its readiness to “resort to force”.

Iran is seeking closer trade ties with Africa and Ahmadinejad laced a speech to Nigerian academic, civil society and religious groups with parallels between African relations with ex-colonial powers and Iran’s own standoff with the West.

“The wealth they stockpiled came from the pockets of others. They have plundered and looted all the mines in Africa. They have plundered the labor force for hundreds of years,” he said.

It was a message that resonated with some of the audience at the gathering in Africa’s most populous nation of 140 million people, roughly equally divided between Christians and Muslims.

“They call the leaders of America leaders of the free world. We call you the leader of nations struggling for freedom,” said Shehu Sani, president of Nigeria’s Civil Rights Congress.

“Dr, Ahmadinejad is a role model, he is an inspiration.”

But Sani also tackled the Iranian leader about his public statements questioning whether the Nazi Holocaust in which six million Jews were killed across Europe had indeed occurred, comments which stirred tensions with Israel.

Ahmadinejad replied: “Why should they occupy the land of the Palestinian people. The people of Palestine committed no crime during World War Two.”

a haaretz.com article