Will America defend Iran against Israel? 3

The Blog (of the Weekly Standard) brings us this piece of dumbfounding news:

In a little noticed interview with the Daily Beast (presumably little noticed because serious people don’t read the Daily Beast), Zbigniew Brzezinski suggests that Barack Obama do more than just refuse to support an Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear sites — the American president must give the order to shoot down Israeli aircraft as they cross Iraqi airspace:

DB: How aggressive can Obama be in insisting to the Israelis that a military strike might be in America’s worst interest?

Brzezinski: We are not exactly impotent little babies. They have to fly over our airspace in Iraq. Are we just going to sit there and watch?

DB: What if they fly over anyway?

Brzezinski: Well, we have to be serious about denying them that right. That means a denial where you aren’t just saying it. If they fly over, you go up and confront them. They have the choice of turning back or not. No one wishes for this but it could be a Liberty in reverse.

The reference here is to the USS Liberty which was fired on by Israel during the Six Days’ War in June 1967. It was a friendly fire error. (See Michael Oren’s article on the incident here.) Brzezinski is implying that Israel attacked the ship deliberately, and that the US should avenge it. To him, Israel is America’s enemy and not Iran.

Contrary to Brezinski’s half-hearted disclaimer that no one wishes for such an outcome, there are plenty on the left who would delight in a pitched battle between the United States and Israel. Democrats in Congress routinely support resolutions affirming Israel’s right to take whatever steps it deems necessary to assure its own national defense. And Obama has at least paid lip service to the concept. But hostility to Israel among the rank and file is very real on the left — and among “realists.”

So conjure the image — the Obama administration sending U.S. aircraft up to protect Iran’s airspace and it’s nuclear installations from an attack by a democracy that is one of America’s closest allies. Unfortunately, this may not be so hard to imagine in Israel, where the number of people who believe Obama is pro-Israel is at just 4 percent — and falling. And given Obama’s (literally) submissive posture to the Saudis, his indulgence of the Iranians, and his simultaneously hard-line approach to Israel, it seems even some of Obama’s supporters can savor the possibility of a “reverse Liberty.”

Zbignew Brzezinski , who was National Security Adviser (1977-1981) to that 0ther anti-Semite Jimmy Carter, is now influential again as adviser to Obama.

Posted under Arab States, Commentary, Defense, Diplomacy, Iran, Iraq, Islam, Israel, jihad, middle east, News, United States, War by Jillian Becker on Sunday, September 20, 2009

Tagged with , , , , , , ,

This post has 3 comments.

Permalink
  • Israel is on its own. Finally, Mullahs of Iran have an ally in the White House.

  • rogerinflorida

    I need to apologise (again) to the writers and readers of this blog for my crudity in my comment above.
    I am sorry; my vulgarity springs from my frustration at the total gutlessness that the US Govt. has shown in it's dealings with Iran. I understand the EU response, I expect nothing from them and I am not disappointed.
    The gutlessness has been going on for years, since the revolution that overthrew the Shah; consider:
    1. The detention (kidnapping) of US embassy staff.
    2. The bombing of the Khobar towers in saudi Arabia.
    3. The bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut.
    4. The downing of TWA 800.
    5. The attack on the synagogue in Buenos Aires.
    6. The deployment of IEDs in Iraq to kill US personnel.
    7. The use of the 0.50 caliber sniper rifles purchased by Iran from Austria, that have been used to kill approx. 160 US soldiers. There was no censure of Austria, despite pleas from the US and UK Govts. to stop this sale, and there has been no reaction against Iran despite the clear Iranian involvement in what can only be called assinations of US and British personnel by Iranian commandos.
    Where is the outrage?
    Where are the consequences of these attacks?
    The whole handling of Iran by GWB and the O make me physically sick, we will pay for this.

  • rogerinflorida

    This is not new. you have to face the fact that the US political and military establishment is terrified of Iran. The reason for this is that they know that there is no such thing as “proportionate response” for the Iranians. If the US gets into a fight with Iran, New York is going up in radioactive smoke. So instead of understanding that and reacting accordingly; ie nuking Iran. The US hopes that if they hide their head the Iranians won't see them.
    A respected political analyst told me privately after the Vietnam debacle; never mind the weapons, after this the US doesn't add up to a bucket of cold piss.
    This is what Iran, Russia, China and North Korea all understand and what the Poles and Czechs have lately come to realise.