Leaderboard

Netanyahu is openly intervening in the US presidential race. If Romney wins, all well and good for Israel, at least until the Dems get back in power. But if Obama's re-elected, then Israel will have opened a real breach with the only reliable ally it has. In fact, the ally on whose goodwill it's national security is entirely dependant. Netanyahu's problem is that there is no plausible way for Israel to take out Iran's nuclear program on it's on. Further, a clear majority of Israelis oppose any military strike on Iran that does not have the US in active (read military) support. He proposes to square this circle by demanding the US make a public committment to a 'red line' for Iran and a clear threat to attack nuclear support facilities if Iran does not submit. (In the good old days, this kind of diplomacy used to be called an ultimatum.) Aside from the domestic problem of explaining to an American public who appear to be sick of 10 years of war in the Mideast why we are getting into what appears to be a protracted war with Iran, right now we have the problem that we can't carry a single one of our Nato allies with us on an ultimatum. I only hope Romney can manage to keep at least a little bit of daylight between himself and Netanyahu's scheme to draw us into war.

He hasn't said it explicitly, but allowing the Republicans to hoist themselves on their own budget/debt petard as a way to finally lower *vastly* overdone spending on our military-industrial complex is something I support President Obama at 100%! He just needs to stand up to them instead of backing down/cowering in the corner (the Democratic Party way!)... those budget provisions were Republicans own fucking idea and no, the ones affecting Republican fetishes/constituencies will not all be written off, no matter how dire the Republicans make *any* cut whatsoever to military spending WHICH OUTSTRIPS THE NEXT *14* COUNTRIES COMBINED sound! You know what, saying we don't need more than, what, 12 super-carriers--when none of our enemies operate ONE, or that we don't need hundreds to thousands of planes designed to fight WWIII against the Soviet Union is actually fucking reasonable but is somehow a 3rd rail in our politics. OF COURSE I'm not saying cut back on the troops, training, consumables, and most certainly not veteran care--especially for the injured. But every single one of those things should be a far higher priority than an entire new class of nuclear subs!

If the faction ridden world of Israeli politics has concensus on any two things, it's that Iran's nuclear program is an 'existential threat' (think a collective vision of nukes going off in Tel Aviv & Haifa) and that the tight bi-partisan political support of Israel in the US must be maintained no matter what. So far the early reaction in Israel to Netanyahu's current shenanigans is mixed. Most folks applaud his effort to squeeze the US for explicit military support for an attack on Iran and, at the same time, most folks are horrified that he appears to be indulging in a partisan political intervention in US presidential politics. Making support for Israel into a partisan political issue in the US strikes most Israelis as suicidal for the Jewish state as Iran having nukes. At least in the past, Mid-eastern wars have been insanely intense affairs. Munitions and other miltary consumables were blown through at extraordinary rates. Israel has on hand enough stockpile for 10 days to 2 weeks of all out war, tops. After that it must rely on an airlifted flow of munitions from the US strategic inventory (as it did in the Yom Kippur war). W/O that airlift, Isreal would be unable to deal with large convential armies, a circumstance most adult Israelis understand. And if support for Israel becomes a partisan political issue in the US, then every time the Dems control Washington, a window of opportunity could possibly open for Israel's enemies. Even laying aside thrir own truly weird internal politics, the Iran nukes vs US alliance conundrum makes for a real headbanger for thinking Israelis.

Agree with lookin. Also, weapons spending containment begun by Gates continues under Panetta, nobody's fool. He, like Hillary (and like Obama come to think), does not make a lot of noise, just goes about the job. The defense contractors I follow in my consulting biz are tripling down on their lobbying, desperate to use their Congresspeople to thwart or at least blunt the cuts that the Administration is pushing. Time for yet one more prime-time re-airing of Ike's farewell speech?

Agree with all you say, except for the part about Obama 'backing down/cowering in the corner'. While you may not see a lot of fist pounding and chest thumping from this President, I think you will see a backbone that's sturdy enough to keep us moving steadily in the direction of less conflict with other nations and, eventually, less conflict at home. In my opinion, the day he starts rattling sabres tit-for-tat with the Republicans is the day they will have won the battle. And all of us will have lost the war.