All Posts Tagged With: "minister"
The identity of Israel’s post-Olmert prime minister will determine its war options on Iran
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report
DEBKAfile is usually viewed as an authoritative and well informed source.
July 1, 2008, 4:23 PM (GMT+02:00)
According to DEBKAfile’s military and intelligence sources, the overriding considerations that will determine if and when Israel attacks Iran are these: whether to strike before George W. Bush’s exit, whether Iran’s strategic ties with Syria and the Palestinian Hamas can be severed in advance and what Israeli prime minister is chosen to manage the war, and who is elected U. S. President.
These are the determinants, rather than “the red lines” cited by senior Pentagon officials to ABC News Monday as triggers for an Israeli offensive, namely when Natanz nuclear facility produces enough weapons-grade uranium - some time in 2009 or this year - and when Iran acquires SA-20 air defense systems from Russia
DEBKAfile quotes intelligence sources as negating those triggers:
1. Contrary to most reports, including those put out by Teheran, Iran is lagging behind its target date for producing a sufficiency of weapons-grade uranium. It is held up by the technical hitches dogging the smooth, continuous activation of its high-grade centrifuges.
2. Moscow has suspended all sales of sophisticated air defense systems to Iran and Syria alike - so that Israel has no cause for haste on that score. Sources other than DEBKAfile say Russia’s decision was an accomodation to President Bush’s plea not to be the provocation for war.
3. That Iran is heading for a nuclear weapon is no longer in doubt. What Israel must decide very soon is whether to strike Iran’s production facilities before Bush leaves the White House or wait for his successor to move in, in 2009. Most observers say if Obama is elected Israel feels it must attack but, think a McCain win would lessen the urgency.
There is a preference in Jerusalem for a date straight after the America’s November 4 presidential election - except that military experts warn that weather and lunar conditions at that time of the year are unfavorable.
If Israel does opt for an attack, August and September would be better, they say - or else hold off until March-April 2009.
Non-DEBKAfile sources speculate that the discussion about timing is a ruse.
Israel’s political volatility is another major factor in the uncertainty surrounding an attack. Towards the end of September, the ruling Kadima party is committed to a leadership primary. The party’s choice of prime minister and the factors that determine how he (or she) reaches a decision on attacking Iran can only be guessed at.
4. A final consideration must be Israel’s ability to prevent Syria and Hamas opening war fronts at the time of Israel’s attack on Iran. In other words, the IDF needs to know it must contend with two fronts, Iran and the Lebanese Hizballah, not four.
Notwithstanding these major deterrents, the weight of opinion in Israel’s decision-making community at this time is in favor of an early military strike. There is an international consensus that Iran cannot be allowed to attain a nuclear bomb, but no sanctions or incentives are proving effective as preventatives. Therefore, it is felt, the sooner Israel pre-empts a nuclear-armed Iran, the better, because the longer it delays, the more dangerous the Islamic Republic’s retaliatory capabilities will become.
So What Is Hypocrisy Anyway?
“Hypocrisy” is kind of a strange word. It’s made up of two Greek words, “hypo,” meaning “under,” and “krisis,” which has to do with judging or condemning. The word came to mean “answerer.” The puzzle is how those two basic words got together to mean that and then eventually “one who plays a part, pretends” (Webster’s Unabridged). In the ancient Greek theater, it was probably Aeschylus who added a second actor. He was known as the “hypocrites” because he answered the protagonist. In doing so, he wore a mask, and that is undoubtedly where our idea of the hypocrite as one who is one thing and pretends to be another comes from. The words spoken by that second actor are not his, nor are they words he might be expected to speak in the marketplace. They are the words of Aeschylus, Sophocles or some other dramatist. Our modern hypocrite is a person who pronounces words from behind a mask, words that do not at all reflect what that person truly is or believes.
A minister who claims to represent the God of the Bible, who is described as a God of love, and then spews out venomous hatred, is a prime example. Also, I remember a championship basketball player at a university where I taught who spoke at a junior high school and urged the children there not to take drugs. Two weeks later he was arrested for dealing drugs. That is also a perfect example. The politician who sits down with his or her handlers to ask what stance will influence the most people favorably, regardless of his or her personal views, is also a hypocrite, as is one who pretends to agonize over the poor and downtrodden but lives the life of an elitist.
Our word “person” also comes from Classical Greek theater and, somewhat ironically, means “mask.” In fact, in dealing with prominent figures in politics, sports or entertainment, we sometimes ask, “Who is the person behind the mask?” The opposite of hypocrisy is something called integrity. The person who possesses and practices it is one who is an integral whole, whose appearance and internal reality are of a piece.