”You Can’t Handle The Truth!”
Vol: 105 Issue: 22 Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Only days after hailing the latest round of international sanctions against Iran, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates brought up the prospect of an Israeli attack on Iran.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates warned that Iran, under a new set of United Nations sanctions, would become increasingly vulnerable to such a strike unless it halts uranium enrichment.
“Clearly, the purpose of which has come the sanctions and of the UN resolution is, combined with diplomatic efforts, to try and persuade the Iranian government that their security will actually be worse if they proceed with a nuclear weapons program than if they do not, because of proliferation in the region and the potential for military action, whether it’s from Israel or someplace else,” Gates said.
After a few harrowing weeks, some observers believe Iran has emerged from the latest Security Council sanctions stronger than ever. The sanctions don’t stop Iran from importing Russia’s S-300 air defense systems, gasoline or dual-use components. They don’t stop Iran’s state-owned shippers from operating abroad.
In a briefing on June 11 at NATO headquarters in Brussels, Gates said Israel and the United States were engaged in consultations regarding the Iranian nuclear threat. He said the U.S. intelligence community has assessed that Iran could be as little as one year away from nuclear weapons capability.
“We are in very close touch with the Israelis on developments in Iran,” Gates said. “I think everybody agrees we have some more time, including the Israelis. And we will just continue to work it as hard as we can.”
Unlike other administration officials, Gates did not urge Israel to refrain from attacking Iran. In April, Vice President Joseph Biden warned Israel against any such military operation.
Gates’s remarks came after a Security Council vote to impose sanctions on Iran. The administration has already acknowledged that the sanctions do not block Russia from selling the S-300 air defense and other systems to Teheran.
But the defense secretary, who in January warned the White House of Iran’s nuclear program, did not echo the confidence in the sanctions regime expressed by the rest of the administration.
“Most people think that the Iranians could not really have a nuclear weapon for at least another year or two,” Gates said. “I would say the intelligence estimates range from one to three years or so.
“But that’s different than weaponization or a delivery system or anything like that. But clearly, them getting to the threshold of having a weapon is what concerns everybody, not the other things.”
At the same time, the Center for Naval Analysis says the Navy has been ordered to reduce major operations in the Gulf by 2012. The Center for Naval Analysis report said Washington plans to get out of the Gulf as soon as it completes its withdrawal from Iraq.
The report, commissioned for the U.S. Navy, said the reduced presence in the Gulf was based on the expectation that Washington would reconcile with Iran.
“This reduced demand is predicated on the assessment that there would be a lower threat from Iran, or a similar rogue nation, and Islamic terrorist activity,” CNA said in a report dated March 2010. “Maritime security operations — e.g., piracy — would continue to be handled by coalition actions involving a modest level of U.S. forces.”
Great. But what if Iran doesn’t want to reconcile with us?
It seems clear that Iran has decided to push the envelope, not just with the US, but with Israel. Iran says it will dispatch a ship called “The Children of Gaza” on Sunday.
The privately owned ship, which will arrive in waters off the Gaza Strip in about two weeks, will be carrying about 1,000 tons of medicine and food aid, as well as clothing and toys donated by Iranian citizens. It will also be carrying five Red Crescent volunteers and five reporters.
The ship will sail through the Persian Gulf and the Red Sea and enter the Mediterranean Sea via the Suez Canal, according to reports.
Israel’s alleged peace partner, Egypt, has reportedly refused to close the canal to the blockade runners. (Egypt is also maintaining a blockade of Gaza.)
For its part, the White House believes that it can strike a ‘grand bargain’ with Iran if it downplays its relationship with Israel — ignoring the fact that Iran considers Israel “the little Satan” and reserves the epithet “the Great Satan” for the United States.
One of the main pillars of Iran’s revolution is embodied in its foreign policy slogan, “neither East nor West.” But that is evidently meaningless as far as the White House is concerned.
The Islamic regimes surrounding Israel have rightly concluded that the president will not lift a finger to help Israel — partly out of weakness and partly out of conviction. The Gaza blockade exists not to starve the Gazans, but to prevent Hamas from importing weapons it can use against Israeli civilians
That isn’t political rhetoric — it is political reality. While it is fashionable and even politically correct to hate Israel by pretending to be an anti-Zionist instead of an anti-Semite, it is illegal in many places and unwise in all cases to say anything negative about Islam.
But it isn’t Israel that is a threat to world peace. It has been said that if the Islamists laid down their arms, there would be no more war. If Israel were to lay down her arms, there would be no more Israel. History proves that indisputably true.
Still the world sides against Israel, preferring to believe what it wants to believe — because it doesn’t like the alternative explanation. The world would much prefer to believe that tiny Israel is the real threat, because otherwise the real threat is from the Islamic side.
Nobody wants to believe that. There are more than 1.2 billion Muslims worldwide. If only ten percent of them are fundamentalist Islamists, that is potentially 120 million jihadists.
It is preferable to see Israel as the real threat. It is delusional, but preferable. In our politically correct world, the truth is not what is true, but what people prefer to believe is true.
People prefer to believe that Israel is the aggressor because that scenario gives people hope for peace. After all, Israel wants peace, whereas Hamas exists only for the purpose of annihilating the Jewish state.
It doesn’t make any sense when one sits down and thinks about it but for those who form their opinions based on 30 second news soundbytes, thinking it through is just too scary.
The media continues to highlight the worst that they can find about America and Israel while ignoring Islamic excesses because they know they have nothing to fear from America or Israel and that the public doesn’t want to know about the dangers posed by Islam.
In the 1920’s Adolf Hitler coined the phrase “The Big Lie” to describe how to manipulate public thinking. He said that the public is far more willing to accept a big lie than a small one.
According to Hitler, the public will swallow a big lie on the premise that nobody would tell a lie that big if it weren’t true. Soon people begin to repeat the lie. And eventually, they start to defend it.
They will even defend it after they find out it is a lie rather than admit that they were fooled. Eventually, the lie becomes the truth and the actual truth becomes irrelevant.
It worked for the Nazis. It works for the White House. And it works for Islam
Remember the scene in the movie, A Few Good Men where Tom Cruise demands “the truth” from Jack Nicholson? The Nicholson character shot back, “You can’t handle the truth!”
When it was first spoken, that was just a great movie line. Today, it is the foundation upon which America conducts foreign policy.
“For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.” (2nd Timothy 4:3-4)
That time is now.