Time Is Definitely Running Out

Have you heard? There is talk that Israel is planning a military strike on Iran. Also under discussion is the notion that the U.S. and the British are preparing for such a strike themselves.

Does our president have the backbone to tackle Iran? That doesn't sound like the Barack Obama whom I have been studying for the last four years. Will his sagging poll numbers turn him into a tough guy? I have to see it to believe it.

No question Iran and its nukes need dealt with. If and when this occurs, Iran will unleash its proxies, Hamas and Hezbollah, and the Middle East will be on fire. Prepare to pay an arm and a leg for gas and heating oil. Plus our troops are in the region; that's an awful thought that they could get in the middle of all this conflict.

Read from Joshua Pundit:

War Drums On Iran?

"There were a number of interesting developments today that are said to point towards a possible attack on Iran. It's worth taking a look at them and seeing where they lead:


•Israeli PM Benyamin Netanyahu is described in one major story in the British press as 'trying to rally support in his cabinet for an attack on Iran, according to government sources'.


•The Israelis successfully test fired a new ballistic missile, the Jericho 3 that has a range of over 4,300 miles, or 7,000 kilometers, putting all of Iran within easy reach.


•Aside from some of the usual Iranian saber rattling, Hezbollah's cockroach-in-chief Sheik Nasrullah threatened Israel with massive retaliation, claiming that if another war starts the rockets will be aimed Tel Aviv first this time.


•Rumors are flying that the Obama Administration is considering an attack on Iranian facilities to prevent Iran from going nuclear in view of recent developments. The latest, sparked by a visit by Israeli defense minister Ehud Barak to London and British chief of defense Staff David Richards to Jerusalem has NATO, led by the U.S. and UK doing the heavy lifting.


•The Israeli Air force just completed a major drill in Italy with NATO forces that is said to be designed to familiarize Israeli pilots with NATO procedures in the lead up to an Iran strike


Okay...now let's look at what's actually going on here.

The Iranians appear to have mostly overcome the damage to their nuclear weapons program caused by stuxnet and other sabotage, including some deliberate slow ups by the Russians building these facilities in order to jack the costs up and get more money out of the Mullahs for their new toys.

The November IAEA report, due out in a matter of days is pretty clear that the Iranians are proceeding apace in their race to nuclear weapons. The current sanctions haven't deterred them one bit. My sources tell me that the IAEA report clearly states for the first time that a number of the facilities, processes and materials Iran is working with have no possible peaceful applications. That's something you knew over three years ago if you were reading this site.

The biggest problem is the ongoing dispersal,protection and concealment of Iran's nuclear facilities and stockpiles of material. The most liberal estimates are that in another 12 months or so, getting to them to take them out without massive damage and civilian casualties is going to be close to impossible.

The Israelis understand this very well. What they are essentially saying to the Obama Administration is that time is running out, and if you don't do something about this we certainly will.

The Israelis don't particularly need NATO , or even the Jericho 3. Israel's drones, pilots and nuclear subs can already get close enough to Iran to hit whatever they need to hit, and an Israeli raid on Iran would almost certainly be accompanied by the Saudis turning a blind eye to Israel flying over their territory.

The Israelis are fully capable of doing this themselves, which is the last thing the Obama Administration wants. Aside from the fact that it would undoubtedly be messy and might even involve tactical nukes, this president doesn't want to have to choose between alienating all those new Islamist regimes he's so fond of by supporting Israel in a strike on a Muslim country, or alienating even more of the pro-Israel vote at home in an election year by not doing so.

President Obama's preferred scenario is to try and use the Israelis as leverage to try and get support from Russia and China for actual, punitive sanctions on Iran.

The pitch would go something like this: 'Look, there's only so much I can do with these psycho Jews just now. It's better we all act now like the adults in the room to solve this thing instead of letting it get out of hand.'

If that doesn't work, there are indeed signs that President Obama may be leaning reluctantly towards an Iran strike, but one that definitely won't involve Israel, at least not openly.

The first signal was the departure of Robert Gates, the former Secretary of Defense and a long time Iran appeaser. Along with former Secretary of State Condi Rice, it was Gates who was instrumental in making sure that the Bush Administration kicked this can down the road as well as seeing to it that the Israelis didn't get any kind of green light for it either, back when Iran would have been a lot easier to deal with than they are now. He pulled exactly the same trick during his tenure in the Obama Administration, aided and abetted by Admiral William J. Fallon, then commander of CENTCOM.

The second sign is the coming removal of all US troops from Iraq, scheduled to be completed by the end of next month. For political reasons,( both American and Iraqi) the president is required to finish the draw down, which has the small silver lining of removing a nearby target for retaliation and attack by Iran or its Shi'ite proxies within Iraq. True, many of those troops will be redeployed next door in Kuwait, but Kuwait is not controlled by Shi'ites and can be defended a lot easier than Iraq if necessary.

If President Obama does decide on military action against Iran, it will probably come within a few months in the run up to the election to get maximum electoral benefit for the president. It would most likely involve NATO forces, most likely lead by the US, and including the British and the French. It might also include token forces from Saudi Arabia and the Emirates to avoid the 'stigma' of attacking a Muslim country, similar to the coalition President George HW Bush used in the Gulf War for exactly the same reason.

The Israeli role in this scenario would be limited to intel, recon and keeping Iran's proxies in Gaza, Lebanon and Syria busy,so as not to complicate things with the Muslim world.

Again, things falling out this way are very much up in the air. A lot depends on how the current elections go and what President Obama sees as more beneficial to campaign on. Will he get more mileage as the president who brought our troops home from Iraq, or as the president who took out Iran's nukes? Will he garner more criticism from his base as President Warmonger or more from people complaining about him allowing Iran to go nuclear on his watch? Would it be better for him politically to take on Iran, or to let Israel do it?

One thing I'm certain of. As much as this president hates decisions, he will try to delay things as long as possible."