Posted 1 year ago on Sept. 3, 2012, 11:31 p.m. EST by arturo
from Shanghai, Shanghai
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Maintaining its oligarchical tradition, the Wall Street Journal Sept. 1 issued an editorial blasting the efforts of the U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff for his efforts to forestall Israel's drive for a preemptive military attack on Iran. Its editorial, "Why Israel Doesn't Trust Obama," leads with "Barack Obama is fond of insisting that he 'has Israel's back.' Maybe he should mention that to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs."
The Wall Street Journal was responding to the widely publicized remark by JCS Chief Martin Dempsey in London Aug. 29, where he counseled against both a no-fly zone in Syria and an Israeli attack on Iran in the strongest terms yet. Dempsey said such an attack would "clearly delay but probably not destroy Iran's nuclear program," and would have broad consequences in a highly volatile region. He added: "I don't want to be complicit if they [Israel] choose to do it." Dempsey said he did not know Iran's nuclear intentions, as intelligence did not reveal intentions. What was clear, he said, was that the "international coalition" applying pressure on Iran "could be undone if [Iran] was attacked prematurely."
The Journal tries to portray this as appeasement to Iran, and in effect demands Obama come out against him:
"If Gen. Dempsey or Administration officials really wanted to avert an Israeli strike, they would seek to reassure Jerusalem that the U.S. is under no illusions about the mullahs' nuclear goals or about their proximity to achieving them. They're doing the opposite. Since coming to office, Obama Administration policy toward Israel has alternated between animus and incompetence. We don't know what motivated Gen. Dempsey's outburst, but a President who really had Israel's back would publicly contradict it."