The Obama Doctrine: The Not So Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.

The Obama Doctrine: The Not So Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.HT: Heritage.

The state of U.S. foreign policy under President Obama resembles nothing so much as the mess surrounding Obamacare. This was the grim message of Thursday’s event at The Heritage Foundation.

The event featured chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee Michael McCaul (R–TX), followed by a panel of experts on Islamist terrorism: Frank Cilluffo of the Homeland Security Institute, Katherine Zimmerman of the American Enterprise Institute, and Heritage Foundation South Asia senior research fellow Lisa Curtis.

The root of the problem is the Obama doctrine itself, a concept that previous Heritage panels have also attempted to define. 

McCaul called the Obama doctrine a “contradiction in terms,” as it is based on a negative: the belief that the United States cannot claim to be an “exceptional nation.” The nation, therefore, has no particular mission in the world and should reduce its footprint.

The lack of faith in America’s fundamental role in the world has led the Obama Administration to both inconsistency and inaction, which have harmed American national security and relationships with critical allies in the war on terrorism, such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Israel. Red lines are drawn and then mysteriously cease to exist. Outrage is followed by inaction. Opportunities to support real progress are missed again and again.

Abdicating foreign policy leadership has led the Obama Administration to a state of denial about the threat of global terrorism. The U.S. State Department, U.S. embassies and diplomats, and even the U.S. military have scrubbed the word terror from their vocabularies. Obama himself speaks of being in a “pre-September 11” state with al-Qaeda “on the run.”

Yet the slew of recent terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Boston, and Nigeria (to name a few) show a different reality. Curtis remarked that being able to define the problem is a crucial step in being able to act effectively, harkening back to a seminal Heritage working group report. Blinding itself to the real threat, the Obama Administration is veering toward President Clinton’s law enforcement approach to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and away from the military response of the Bush years. Yet, reminded McCaul, “jihadists are not common criminals.”

Fighting the terrorist groups that are metastasizing from Pakistan to the Middle East and throughout Africa requires allies and long-term relationships. But because of the Obama Administration’s weak and inconsistent foreign policy in the Middle East, Israel and Saudi Arabia are now looking for options to protect themselves if (or when) Iran develops nuclear weapons.

Saudi Arabia has downgraded its intelligence sharing with the U.S. And the Egyptian military, for decades a cornerstone for the U.S. in the Middle East, feels deeply betrayed by having American aid canceled after it removed the dictatorial President Mohamed Morsi from power.

“I believe this President is weak on national security and quite simply not interested in it,” said McCaul. The big picture of where U.S. counterterrorism and Middle East policy stands today, presented with great clarity by McCaul, should concern every American. This is particularly so as the Obama Administration is in a state of denial about the very real threats still facing this country.


The post The Obama Doctrine: The Not So Good, the Bad, and the Ugly appeared first on The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation.

Masters of Deceit - IAEA report: Iran halted uranium enrichment for maintenance purposes.

Masters of Deceit - IAEA report: Iran halted uranium enrichment for maintenance purposes.(JPost).

VIENNA - Iran appears to have moved quickly to prevent a large increase in its most disputed nuclear stockpile, a new UN watchdog report indicates, in what may be an attempt not to undermine talks on a nuclear deal with six world powers next week.

The Islamic Republic's holding of uranium gas refined to a fissile concentration of 20 percent is closely watched by the West as it represents a relatively short technical step away from the level required for the core of an atomic bomb.
Israel, which has long warned it could use force to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons, has said its foe must not obtain enough of this higher-grade uranium for one warhead if processed further. Iran says its work is peaceful and that it is Israel's assumed nuclear arsenal that threatens peace.
The powers, which are due to resume negotiations with Iran in Geneva on November 20 on a preliminary deal towards ending the decade-old standoff over its nuclear program, want Tehran to stop 20 percent enrichment and neutralize the stockpile.
Iran has over the past year in effect kept the amount of its 20 percent reserve well below Israel's so-called "red line" by converting a large part of the uranium gas into oxide to make fuel for a medical research reactor in Tehran.
"Iran does not want to provoke Israel to attack Iran. Especially now," said nuclear expert Mark Hibbs of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace think-tank.

But conversion work was halted between August 20 and November 5, in part for maintenance reasons, according to the quarterly report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), issued to member states late on Thursday.

As Iran continued its production of 20 percent uranium gas, the stockpile would probably have grown steadily during much of the August-November period covered by the report, perhaps to significantly above 200 kg, analysts and diplomats said.
The IAEA data suggests, however, that Iran moved fast once it resumed conversion early this month, leading to a more modest rise to 196 kg in the November 14 report, up by about 10 kg since the previous one issued in late August.
Tehran may have done so by attaching a full cylinder of uranium gas to the conversion process, thereby reducing the stockpile, one nuclear expert said.

"There are rumors it got quite high - though not over the 'red line'," one Western diplomat in Vienna, where the IAEA is based, said. "I think the decision to blend down is politically driven."

Iran faced a "delicate balancing act," the envoy said: if it stops refining to 20 percent it gives in to the powers' demand for nothing. But if it fails to convert enough it risks provoking Israel and sends the wrong message to the West.

A senior diplomat familiar with the IAEA's report said Iran's move to stop converting during a couple of months for maintenance was "normal ... nothing exceptional".

Iran says it is refining uranium to produce energy. But its refusal so far to scale back its nuclear program and open it up to unfettered IAEA inspections has drawn tough sanctions that have severely damaged its oil-dependent economy.
However, the marked slowdown in the growth of activities of possible use in developing nuclear bombs may be meant to put substance in Rouhani's warmer tone towards the West after years of confrontation and strengthen Tehran's bargaining position.
"I think they were desperate to show that during this first IAEA report under Rouhani's tenure they were able to cap the capacity," proliferation expert Mark Fitzpatrick of the International Institute for Strategic Studies think-tank said.
"That whole image could have come undone if the amount of gasified 20 percent product had crept too close to 250 kg, so they had to make a rush effort to lower the amount."

Senator Cruz tells 'Post': Obama is degrading the US-Israel relationship

Senator Cruz tells 'Post': Obama is degrading the US-Israel relationship.(Jpost).

WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration is giving away its leverage with Iran through a bad deal in negotiations in Geneva, Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) told a group of congressmen on Thursday afternoon.

This is the time for more sanctions, he said, claiming US President Barack Obama is degrading the US-Israel relationship by grasping for "any deal" it can achieve.
Cruz said he supports new sanctions legislation that the administration fears will undermine an international negotiations effort underway with Iran over its nuclear program.
"I think it is likely the Senate will debate it in the next couple of weeks," Cruz told The Jerusalem Post after his speech. "The exact timing is up in the air, but I'm hopeful it'll be sooner rather than later."
The bill, currently being considered in the Senate Banking Committee, could go through markup as soon as next week— the last procedural move before a bill goes to the chamber floor for a full vote.
If that does not occur, one Republican senator, Mark Kirk, is threatening to amend it to the National Defense Authorization Act, an omnibus bill that typically passes through Congress by the end of the fiscal year. 
On whether he thought the bill would proceed independently or as an amendment to the NDAA, Cruz said: "that's a question still up for debate."
The senator was one of many prominent figures to address the Israel Allies Foundation on Thursday during its 2013 conference.Hmmm....the most anti Israel pres Evah.

U.S. and Israeli threats are not serious - Iranian Defence Minister calling it "sickening".

U.S. and Israeli threats are not serious - Iranian Defence Minister calling it "sickening".(Taz).

U.S. and Israeli military threats against Iran are not serious topics, Iranian Defence Minister, Hussein Dehghan said, IRNA news agency reported on Nov.15.

He went on to note that Iran is not paying attention to those threats.

Earlier in September, Dehghan said the US has no interest in a fight, adding that Israelis have always tried to provoke the Americans to taking action against Iran.
On Nov. 9, Iranian media outlets quoted Deputy Chief of Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces, Brigadier General Massoud Jazayeri as saying the US and Israeli interests are within Iran's weapons range.

Jazayeri also criticised U.S. President Barack Obama due to his "all options on the table against Iran" phrase, calling it "sickening".

The majority of the Iranian public in general supports the idea of elected President Hassan Rouhani's attempts to normalise country's relations with Western states.
On the other hand, some hard-line politicians in Iran 's higher circles stand against the more moderate foreign policy of Rouhani.

"Yes We Can" - EU to re-impose Iran sanctions quashed by court.

"Yes We Can" - EU to re-impose Iran sanctions quashed by court.(Taz).

The European Union will re-impose asset freezes on several Iranian companies, annulled this year by court order, even as world powers appear close to a breakthrough deal with Tehran over its contested nuclear programme, Reuters reported.

EU diplomats said the move was to re-establish sanctions already imposed, rather than increasing pressure on Iran. Any new sanctions could risk scuppering a deal that global powers hope to reach with Iran at talks that start next Wednesday.
President Barack Obama has called on the U.S. Congress not to impose new sanctions on Iran - which the West accuses of developing nuclear weapons technology - while the talks are under way.
The EU decision, taken by senior officials on Thursday, must still be approved by EU governments later this week, diplomats told Reuters. It covers Persia International Bank, Export Development Bank of Iran and Bank Refah Karagan, among others.
It aims to counter mounting litigation by hundreds of people and companies from Iran after several legal challenges succeeded in quashing sanctions this year.
It is the first time the EU has sought to address legal challenges by imposing new measures against previously listed targets, instead of trying to win appeals, and reflects growing concern that sanctions can be difficult to defend in court.
"We are maintaining the current sanctions regime, not broadening it. The relistings amount to keeping the current system," one EU diplomat told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity.
In striking down sanctions, Europe's second-highest court has said EU governments have failed to provide sufficient evidence to link targeted companies with Tehran's nuclear work.
The EU has in the past appealed against sanctions being quashed, for example after the court overturned sanctions on Bank Mellat and Bank Saderat, among the biggest private banks in Iran, earlier this year.
Diplomats now say a growing body of litigation makes it difficult to find legal bases for appeals.
They say it is impossible to provide detailed proof of the targeted companies' links to Iran's atomic programme because doing so could expose confidential intelligence.
Iran denies it is seeking nuclear weapons and says its nuclear work is for energy and other peaceful applications.
At talks in Geneva last week, six world powers - the United States, Russia, China, France, Britain and Germany - came close to agreeing preliminary concessions with Iran, but failed to clinch a deal. The parties meet again next week.

Video - Obama's march to war.

Video - Obama's march to war.HT: IsraelMatzav.

As the Obama administration continues its push for a deal with Iran, today the Emergency Committee for Israel released a one-minute TV ad titled "Obama's March to War."

Airing multiple times this week and next on CNN, MSNBC, and FoxNews, the spot shows why Americans and our allies have reason to doubt President Obama's promises on Iran.

Kerry Was Not In Obama Meeting That Pulled Back from Military Intervention in Syria.

Kerry Was Not In Obama Meeting That Pulled Back from Military Intervention in Syria.(EAWorldview).


Tucked away in a lengthy Politico article about the White House handling of President Obama’s Cabinet is this revelation about Obama’s decision to pull back from military intervention after the Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons on August 21:

On Aug. 30, [Secretary of State John] Kerry had just delivered an impassioned argument in the State Department Treaty Room for launching an immediate missile strike on Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria, when Obama invited [Denis] McDonough — his most trusted national security aide before taking up the [White House] Chief of Staff portfolio—for a long stroll around the White House grounds….

Obama returned to tell a stunned group of aides gathered in the Oval Office that he had decided to seek congressional approval first, despite dim prospects of passage.

A few weeks later, sitting on the sunny patio outside McDonough’s West Wing office, I asked him if it was true that Kerry and [Secretary of Defense] Hagel weren’t around to hear Obama’s big decision. “They were not in the Oval, that is correct,” McDonough told me, though he said the notion of going to Congress had at least been broached during several contentious meetings earlier that week, at which both men had been present….

“I’m trying to figure out if I’m about to commit news here, but the President talked to both of those Cabinet members [later that evening by phone then they had another meeting the next morning.”

There was nothing out of the ordinary about the process, McDonough insists. But Kerry was taken aback, according to several people in his orbit—as stung by the West Wing’s planting of the “Walk” narrative in the media as by the snub itself.Hmmm......'Commander-In-Chief.

Obama: Military strike could lead Iran to 'pursue nukes more vigorously' .

Obama: Military strike could lead Iran to 'pursue nukes more vigorously'.(Jpost).

US president warns of cost of military conflict; US Secretary of State Kerry says imposing more sanctions on Tehran will indicate to the Iranians that Washington is not willing to negotiate in good faith.

US President Barack Obama said on Thursday that, no matter how powerful the American military, a strike against nuclear facilities in Iran could lead the Islamic Republic to "pursue even more vigorously nuclear weapons in the future."

"No matter how good our military is, military options are always messy," Obama said. "Any armed conflict has cost to it."

At a press conference in the West Wing of the White House, Obama, speaking primarily about changes to his signature health care law, said that he hoped the US Congress would hold off on new sanctions against Iran as negotiations proceeded in Geneva - "if, in fact, we're serious about trying to resolve this diplomatically."
"Our policy is, Iran cannot have nuclear weapons, and I'm leaving all options on the table," the president reiterated.
The new sanctions bill, being considered by the Senate Banking Committee, could see a markup this week - the last procedural motion before reaching the chamber floor for a vote.
"I know a little bit about sanctions, because we set them up," Obama said, noting that his administration had "mobilized the entire international community" to enforce punishing financial restrictions on Iran since 2010.
"It has never been realistic that we would resolve the entire problem all at once," he added.
Obama said he hopes that the deal being forged in Geneva - which will offer Iran modest sanctions relief "at the margins" of the core sanctions regime - will challenge Iran to commit to a final-status commitment without a fixed time period.
"What that gives us is the opportunity to test how serious are they," he said, adding: "If it turns out six months from now that they're not serious, we can crank those sanctions right back up."Hmmmm.....Six months from now they'll have the Bomb....thanks Hussein.

Come Again? Russian FM Lavrov: P5+1 didn’t raise a single negotiation document with Iran in Geneva.

Come Again? Russian Foreign Ministry: P5+1 didn’t raise a single negotiation document with Iran in Geneva.(Taz).

The P5+1 international mediators on the Iranian nuclear programme didn't work out a single project for settlement of the problem at the Geneva negotiations held on Nov.7-8, RIA Novosti reported citing Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.

Lavrov said the U.S. project for resolving the issue was considered at the meeting.
"This time the P5+1 didn't work out a joint document. There was a U.S project which Iran agreed. We actively supported this U.S. project as did a number of other P5+1 members," he said on the results of negotiations with his Egyptian counterpart.
According to Lavrov, amendments to the U.S. project appeared at the last moment.
"We didn't see the amendments and that version was issued at the last moment when it was time to leave Geneva. We said that at first glance we did not see any significant problems in these amendments, but the language in which all these ideas must be expressed should be acceptable to all participants of the process namely P5+1 and Iran," Lavrov said.
According to the Russian Foreign Minister, the U.S. document and its amendments remain on the negotiation table.
"We will consider all of this at political directors' level. That meeting has been scheduled for Nov.20 ," Lavrov said.

Hollande, Obama say 'up to Iran' to accept nuclear deal.

Hollande, Obama say 'up to Iran' to accept nuclear deal.(NCRI).

French President Francois Hollande and US President Barack Obama on Wednesday jointly urged Iran to accept a deal presented by world powers on its nuclear programme, Hollande's office said.

In a statement issued after a call between the two leaders, they also expressed support for the text of an agreement put forward by world powers at recent talks in Geneva.

"The two heads of state expressed their shared determination to obtain from Iran every guarantee that it will finally give up its military nuclear programme," the statement said.

Hollande and Obama "confirmed their full support for the text agreed" by the P5+1 group of world powers at this weekend's talks, which they said forms "the basis for a serious, solid and credible agreement".
"Now it is up to Iran to give a positive answer," the statement said.
In its own statement, the White House said the two leaders were in "full agreement" on the "unified proposal" put forward by world powers in the P5+1 group.

"They consider the P5+1 proposal to be a sound step toward assuring the international community that Iran's nuclear programme is exclusively peaceful," the White House said.

The statement also highlighted Washington's close relationship with Paris, after reports it was opposition from France that scuttled a deal with Iran.
"The United States deeply values its relationship with France, including as NATO allies, and we will continue to consult closely on global security," the White House said.
Iran and world powers failed to agree a deal on Tehran's disputed nuclear programme at talks in Geneva at the weekend but are planning to meet again on November 20 for further negotiations.
Western diplomatic sources say the two sides were close to a deal, but that Iran backed away because it was unhappy with some of the wording in the text presented by the six powers.
The P5+1 is made up of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council -- Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States -- plus Germany.
They have been negotiating with Tehran for years over its nuclear programme, which some suspect is aimed at developing a nuclear weapon -- a claim Iran vehemently denies.

When Obama is scared of Iran - The U.S. is now afraid of war against Iran.

When Obama is scared of Iran - The U.S. is now afraid of war against Iran.(AA).By Abdulrahman al-Rashed.

We thought it was Iran who is afraid of a war launched by the U.S. to make it halt its military nuclear program. The surprise is that we’ve now found out it’s the U.S. who’s afraid of a war with the Iranian regime. 

It was strange when the American president told Congress that tightening economic sanctions against Iran during the negotiations may drag into a war.
Then why all this display of heroism for so many years? Hadn’t it been easier for American president Barack Obama to let Iran enrich uranium and produce nuclear weapons instead of making empty threats and imposing political and economic sanctions?

Okay. If the Obama strategy stipulates not starting a war, then why doesn’t he stop his security apparatuses from pursuing al-Qaeda and let it be? Isn’t this easier than fighting it in Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan?

It’s nice of the American president to think, like the late Mother Theresa, of turning the other cheek to his rivals and reconciling with hostile forces and transferring his troops from Bagram and other bases to domestic military bases at Cherry Point, San Diego and Hawaii.
But will the Ayatollah in Iran, Sheikh Zawahiri and Taliban’s mullah in Afghanistan and Pakistan really leave him alone because he withdrew the marine forces or shut down his bases in Qatar and Germany? If the world had enjoyed such a lovely way of thinking, we would have been among the first of those applauding President Obama because we would be the first of those to benefit from peace. But this is not a video game, it’s the real world.
Those who die in Syria everyday are real humans and not cartoon characters. When al-Qaeda attacked New York and Washington, President George W. Bush did not initially have a program to confront the terrorist organization or to send troops to the Gulf. On the contrary, Bush had voiced his desire to sponsor peace in the Middle East. He, for the first time, announced his intention to support the establishment of a Palestinian and an Israeli state, and visited the Islamic Center of Washington. He thought al-Qaeda was the problem of the region’s countries.
Obama will find out what Wilson and Roosevelt found out before him: superpowers, who have interests across the world, must perform a global role. President Roosevelt insisted for a whole year to remain neutral during World War II, and rejected to confront Nazi Germany until he realized that Hitler the extent of Hitler’s ambitions and intervened.

What prevents many regimes and terrorist organizations from engaging in adventures is their fear that the price may be high. The idea of deterrence based on the option of using power has, for around seven decades, succeeded at decreasing the number of wars and maintaining stability in most of the world. The opposite is also true - making threats without implementing them deepens wars and encourages crimes to be committed.

The Syrian regime is criminal in its nature, but it was afraid of an international confrontation at the beginning of events. This is why its troops didn’t dare kill more than 13 people a day. After the regime found out that the possibility of international intervention against it is weak, it increased the number of killings to 100 a day.
When the regime realized that no one will deter it, it used the excuse of the presence of armed gangs to shell cities and towns with tanks, jets and cannons. Since no one acted against it after it used heavy weapons, it then intentionally used chemical weapons several times to suffocate its people. The regime’s crimes went punished and no military action was taken against it, so it dared use chemical weapons again to annihilate hundreds. And thus came the photos of the accumulated dead children that terrified the world.

Sadly, history will record that the American president who spread optimism five years ago calling for reconciliation and abstention from resorting to force is in fact the only one who concluded a truce with the Syrian regime - which used heavy weapons and prohibited chemical weapons - and that he did nothing but grant it more time. And now, at this decisive moment, he’s letting the Iranians get away with their plans.

Abdulrahman al-Rashed is the General Manager of Al Arabiya News Channel. A veteran and internationally acclaimed journalist, he is a former editor-in-chief of the London-based leading Arab daily Asharq al-Awsat, where he still regularly writes a political column. He has also served as the editor of Asharq al-Awsat’s sister publication, al-Majalla. Throughout his career, Rashed has interviewed several world leaders, with his articles garnering worldwide recognition, and he has successfully led Al Arabiya to the highly regarded, thriving and influential position it is in today.

The Story About Obama Wanting Marines To Wear 'Girly' Hats Is Total B.S.

The Story About Obama Wanting Marines To Wear 'Girly' Hats Is Total B.S. HT: BusinessInsider.

There's a big story getting passed around in military circles and beyond from The New York Post that President Obama wants the Marines to start wearing 'girly' caps.

The Post writer, Jeane MacIntosh, writes of a "plan by President Obama to create a 'unisex' look for the Corps, officials are on the verge of swapping out the Marines’ iconic caps – known as 'covers' — with a new version that some have derided as so 'girly' that they would make the French blush."

As a Marine veteran who knows how these changes actually happen, I can tell you the story is 100% B.S. The bottom line: The President doesn't involve himself in what troops happen to be wearing.

But just to make sure, I called Headquarters Marine Corps and a spokesperson confirmed that the process for making changes to Marine uniforms hasn't changed since I last left the service in 2010. 

Every year, a board (made up of senior enlisted Marines) meets and goes over things that they may want to change with uniforms. In 2007 for example, the board made a change that outlawed "sleeve" tattoos — and I don't remember thinking that was all President George W. Bush's fault.

"The President in no way, shape, or form directed the Marine Corps to change our uniform cover," said Capt. Maureen Krebs, a spokesperson for the Marine Corps. "We're looking for a new cover for our female Marines for the primary reason that the former manufacturer went out of business. The Marine Corps has zero intention of changing the male cover. Read the full story here.

Video - Charles Krauthammer: 'What's at stake here is whether anything this President says is believable'

'Commander-In-Chief' Obama Disarmed Marines During Inauguration.

'Commander-In-Chief' Obama Disarmed Marines During Inauguration.(IW).David Codrea reported on February 9 that a United States Marine Corps source forwarded an email to the Gun Examiner stating that soldiers marching up Pennsylvania Avenue in Obama’s inaugural parade had the bolts removed from their rifles.
“The email linked to a YouTube video of the 57th Presidential Inaugural Parade, embedded in this column, featuring Bravo Company Marines from the Marine Barracks Washington,” the USMC page on the Examiner reported. “Sure enough, the observation in the email is confirmed by watching the video, with screen shots provided in the photo and slide show accompanying this article.”
“Apparently Obama’s Secret Service doesn’t trust the USMC. Simply searching each guy to make sure he didn’t have a live round hidden on him wasn’t enough, they had to make sure the guns were inoperable,” the Blur-brain blog wrote on February 8.
Is it possible that the notorious “litmus test” reportedly used by Obama to determine what military leaders must stay and which must go has experienced some sort of reversal? The test was allegedly concocted to determine if the military will fire on U.S. citizens. The claim was made by 2009 Nobel Peace Prize nominee Jim Garrow.Hmmmm.....I wonder if he'll demand they disarm the Israeli and Palestine military during his visit, well i doubt about the latter....but surely the Israeli.Read the full story here.

"You see these dictators on their pedestals, surrounded by the bayonets of their soldiers and the truncheons of their police ... yet in their hearts there is unspoken fear. They are afraid of words and thoughts: words spoken abroad, thoughts stirring at home -- all the more powerful because forbidden -- terrify them. A little mouse of thought appears in the room, and even the mightiest potentates are thrown into panic." ~ Sir Winston S. Churchill,     'Blood, Sweat and Tears'.

General Dempsey sends a message of U.S. weakness to Tehran.

General Dempsey sends a message of U.S. weakness to Tehran.(GR).Is the Obama Administration more concerned that Iran may get a nuclear weapon, or that Israel may use military force to prevent Iran from doing so? The answer is the latter, judging from comments on Sunday by Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey.
Appearing on CNN, General Dempsey sent precisely the wrong message if the main U.S. strategic goal is convincing Iran to give up its nuclear ambitions.
He said the U.S. is urging Israel not to attack Iran—because Iran hasn't decided to build a bomb, because an Israeli attack probably wouldn't set back Iran by more than a couple of years, and because it would invite retaliation and be "destabilizing" throughout the Middle East.
"That's the question with which we all wrestle. And the reason we think that it's not prudent at this point to decide to attack Iran," the General said, referring to a possible Iranian response to an attack. "That's been our counsel to our allies, the Israelis. And we also know or believe we know that the Iranian regime has not decided that they will embark on the capability—or the effort to weaponize their nuclear capability."
In a single sound bite, General Dempsey managed to tell the Iranians they can breathe easier because Israel's main ally is opposed to an attack on Iran, such attack isn't likely to work in any case, and the U.S. fears Iran's retaliation. It's as if General Dempsey wanted to ratify Iran's rhetoric that the regime is a fearsome global military threat.
If the U.S. really wanted its diplomacy to work in lieu of force, it would say and do whatever it can to increase Iran's fear of an attack. It would say publicly that Israel must be able to protect itself and that it has the means to do so. America's top military officer in particular should say that if Iran escalates in response to an Israeli attack, the U.S. would have no choice but to intervene on behalf of its ally. The point of coercive diplomacy is to make an adversary understand that the costs of its bad behavior will be very, very high.
The general is not a free-lancer, so his message was almost certainly guided by the White House. His remarks only make strategic sense if President Obama's real priority is to contain Israel first—especially before the November election.
This might also explain General Dempsey's comments that the U.S. doesn't believe Iran's regime has decided to build an atomic bomb and that it is a "rational" actor, like, say, the Dutch. This would be the same rational Iran that refuses to compromise on its nuclear plans despite increasingly damaging global sanctions, and the same prudent actor that has sent agents around the world to bomb Israeli and Saudi targets, allegedly including in a Washington, D.C. restaurant.
Iran doesn't need to explode a bomb, or even declare that it has one, to win its nuclear standoff. All it needs to do is get to the brink and make everyone believe it can build a bomb when it wants to.
Then the costs of deterring Iran go up exponentially, and the regime's leverage multiplies in the Middle East and against American interests. General Dempsey's assurances obscure that military and political reality.
Like most of Mr. Obama's Iran policy, General Dempsey's comments will have the effect of making war more likely, not less. They will increase Israel's anxiety about U.S. support, especially if Mr. Obama is re-elected and he has a freer political hand. This may drive Israel's leadership to strike sooner. Weakness invites war, and General Dempsey has helped the Administration send a message of weakness to Israel and Iran.Hmmmm.....Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power. ~ Abraham Lincoln.Read the full story here.

MFS -The Other News - What the main papers don't say.

                    Morning Posting.

• Updated !Earthquakes in the last 24 hours in the world seismic activity situation Indonesia 5.6 - 5.4 ; Philippines 5.2 !More info here.

• Fast and Furious News: With Zero Hour Approaching, It’s Revealed the DOJ Suggested Gun Running.(Biggovernment).February 2nd is fast approaching for Attorney General Eric Holder, who is set to appear before the House Oversight Committee for questioning on Fast and Furious. This will put him in the hot seat in front of Congressman Darrell Issa (R-CA) and other congressional members like Paul Gosar (R-AZ), who have been steady on Holder’s trail since details of Fast and Furious became public.Holder’s last appearance before a congressional committee was on December 8, when Issa made it clear how irritated he was over the changing timeline, Holder’s perceived arrogance, and the ongoing refusal to turn over subpoenaed DOJ documents. In one of the best exchanges on Dec 8, Issa looked at Holder and asked, “Have you no shame?” That was also the hearing in which Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI), expressed his outrage over the fact that Holder’s DOJ had submitted inaccurate testimony then withdrawn it in an attempt to avoid being charged with providing false testimony.But a lot has changed since that early December hearing. Most recently, the last minute release of subpoenaed documents which show that Holder learned about Border Agent Brian Terry’s death on the day it happened: a point Holder has heretofore denied. (Emails between Dennis Burke, former U.S. Attorney for Arizona, and Holder’s then-deputy chief of staff prove this.) Additionally, other emails in the recently released DOJ documents show that the head of DOJ’s “criminal division, Lanny Breuer, suggested letting some illicit ‘straw’ weapons buyers in the U.S. [to] transport their guns across the border into Mexico where they could be arrested.”In light of the emails, Holder needs to give a clear and binding answer regarding when he found out about Terry’s death. He needs to explain how the DOJ can claim ignorance regarding “gun running” while their own man, Lanny Breuer, was pushing it as a means making arrests. He needs to explain what, if any, interaction he or other DOJ officials/affiliates had with Patrick J. Cunningham between the time Cunningham was subpoenaed and the time his attorney announced he would plead the fifth. And he needs to describe what, if any, interaction he or other DOJ officials/affiliates have had with Michael Morrissey at this time regarding the testimony Morrissey is expected to give when he speaks with investigators.Read the full story here.

• 'Iran will be able to make nuclear bomb within a year'.(JPost).By Yaakov Katz."Iran is a global problem, a regional problem, and a problem for Israel," there is no doubt that Iran is working on developing a nuclear weapon, IDF Chief of Staff Gantz says at Herzliya Conference.The world needs to develop a credible military option to stop Iran’s nuclear program, IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Benny Gantz said Wednesday, warning that if Iran wants to it has the ability to develop a nuclear weapon within 12 months.“Iran is a global problem, a regional problem and a problem for Israel. Iran wants to solidify its regime by creating a nuclear deterrent,” Gantz said in a speech at the Herziliya Conference. “Israel is the only country which someone calls for its destruction and is building the tools to do so.”Read the full story here.

• Clueless TSA agents found two possible pipe bombs at LaGuardia,kept them in a public area for six hours without notifying cops.(NYPost).Clueless TSA agents found two possible pipe bombs in a passenger’s luggage yesterday at La Guardia Airport — and kept them in a public area for six hours without notifying cops, The Post has learned.The Transportation Security Administration bozos at one point left the pipes — which eventually turned out to be harmless — resting on a radiator as hundreds of fliers passed through security nearby, sources said.“Six hours to report a potential bomb? It’s outrageous,” one Port Authority police official fumed.The stunning security screw-up, a violation of TSA policy of alerting police to all suspicious activity, began at about 11:30 a.m. at the central terminal when the male flier’s bags passed through an X-ray machine, the sources said.“When I saw the image, I took a step backward and said, ‘What’s that?!’ ” one startled TSA employee said, according to police sources.Another screener saw the objects, one gold, the other silver, and both 6-inches long with “springs” inside, and thought they could be bombs, the sources said. The screeners promptly called their supervisor. He questioned the passenger, who claimed the pipes were for homeopathic medicine.The supervisor bought the story and let the man board his flight without taking down any information, the sources said.The flier left the pipes behind and it wasn’t until 3 p.m., with the devices still lying around the screening area, when the supervisor finally realized he should notify someone.He called a TSA bomb specialist — who took another two hours to arrive.Hmmm...........Read the full story here.

• Darrell Issa threatens Eric Holder with contempt.(Politico).BY TimMak.House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) threatened Tuesday to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress if the Justice Department did not provide certain documents in response to the committee’s subpoena.In a letter to Holder, Issa wrote that “this committee will have no alternative but to move forward with proceedings to hold you in contempt of Congress” if Holder and the DOJ didn’t produce documents they demanded relating to the Fast and Furious gun-walking scandal.Holder has until Thursday, Feb. 9. to comply, according to Issa.Issa accused the Justice Department of trying to “obstruct our investigation and deceive the public” by withholding documents.“Your actions lead us to conclude that the department is actively engaged in a cover-up,” he said in a four-page letter.The California Republican pointed to a document that the DOJ released last Friday, which indicated that Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer had promoted gun-walking to Mexico on the same day that Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich wrote to Congress denying that the DOJ had allowed guns to walk.“It is inconceivable that the Department just became aware of this highly damaging document,” writes Issa, pointing out that the Oversight Committee had originally issued a subpoena on Oct. 12, 2011.Read the full story here.

• Grassley says Obama is behaving dictatorially, ‘usurping legislative powers’.(DC).Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley accused President Obama of dictatorial behavior in a floor statement Thursday, saying that his recess appointments were not the first acts he has taken to circumvent the constitutional system of checks and balances.“President Obama’s decision to bypass the constitutional advice and consent of the Senate is not an isolated incident,” Grassley said, according to prepared remarks. “It is merely the latest escalation in a pattern of contempt for the elected representatives of the American people and the constitutional separation of powers.”Grassley accused the president of “usurping legislative powers” by overriding and working around Congress when possible. This, Grassley argues, is in violation of the Constitution.“Having had their rights violated by a king, our Founding Fathers intentionally put the power to make laws in the branch of government that is most directly accountable to the citizens,” the Iowa senator said.Congress, Grassley said, needed to stop the president’s usurpation before it was too late.With this latest escalation, the time has come for Congress, on a bipartisan basis, to say ‘Enough is enough.’”“I would ask my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to think hard about the precedent being set for the next Republican president,” Grassley warned. “Once the genie is out of the bottle, you are not likely to be able to get it back in.”.read the full story here.

• Sen. Lee to Testify at Hearing on Illegal Non-Recess Appointments.(Heritage).A handful of constitutional law experts are slated to testify before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee tomorrow about President Obama’s four unconstitutional non-recess appointments. The witnesses include Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), one of Congress’ chief critics of Obama’s unprecedented decision. Lee will offer his expertise as a former clerk for a Supreme Court justice and attorney specializing in Supreme Court litigation. His testimony will come on the heels of a testy exchange with the president that began with the former’s announcement that he may block all of Obama’s nominations until the four illegally appointed officials make their way through the Senate confirmation process.“I find myself duty-bound to resist the consideration and approval of additional nominations until the president takes steps to remedy the situation,” Lee said at a House Judiciary Committee business meeting. “The president certainly will not continue to enjoy my nearly complete cooperation, unless and until he rescinds his unconstitutional recess appointments.”Obama fired back at Lee specifically, claiming, “One senator gumming up the works for the whole country is certainly not what our founding fathers envisioned.”That prompted a response from Lee, who rejected Obama’s accusations of political gamesmanship. “The Constitution is not partisan,” Lee wrote at the conservative blog RedState. “I will oppose any president, regardless of party, who attempts to ignore constitutional limits on executive power.”Lee’s objections will likely be fleshed out further at Wednesday’s hearing of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, titled “Uncharted Territory: What are the Consequences of President Obama’s Unprecedented ‘Recess’ Appointments?” Other witnesses include legal experts C. Boyden Gray, Andrew J. Pincus, Michael J. Gerhardt, David B. Rivkin and Mark A. Carter. The hearing will be streamed live on the committee’s website.While Lee has been the most outspoken opponent of the president’s power-grab among U.S. senators, others have hinted at similar tactics in response to the move. Speaking at The Heritage Foundation on Tuesday, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC), while declining to endorse Lee’s tactics specifically, noted that “there are a number of people thinking, like Senator Lee, [that] we can no longer continue to work with this president and the other side in any form.”Read the full story here.

• Pro-Obama Think Tank: Only 35% of Deficit Is Bush’s Fault, 65% Obama.(Washington Examiner) — Most of the soaring $1 trillion federal deficit is the blame of President Obama’s spending and political deals according to a pro-Obama think tank that pegged former President George W. Bush’s responsibility at just 35 percent.While opening its analysis by blaming Bush and showing pictures of Senate GOP leaders, the Center for American Progress said that the other 65 percent of the deficit surge came on Obama’s watch, a combination of high spending, extension of the Bush tax cuts and additional defense spending.“The analysis reveals that events that occurred before January 2009, including the onset of the Great Recession and increased spending—especially on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq—attributed to 35 percent of the swing from surplus to deficit,” said the center founded by long-time Obama advisor John Podesta.“The remainder of the deterioration did happen after 2009, but mostly because of lower-than-expected revenues. While some of the decline in revenue resulted from the continued economic weakness, the majority of it, about $335 billion, is the direct result of the tax deal signed into law in December 2010, which extended all of the Bush tax cuts,” said the group.Read the full story here.

• Obama green jobs program faces further investigation.(USAToday).By Gregory Korte.WASHINGTON – House Republicans are expanding their probe into the Obama administration's energy programs, investigating $500 million in green job training grants that reached just 10% of its job-placement goal, according to a government report.The program's goal was to train 124,893 people and put 79,854 in jobs. But 17 months later, 52,762 were trained and 8,035, or roughly 1 in 10, had jobs. Those numbers come from an audit by the Department of Labor's inspector general, which recommended that the administration end the program and return unspent money.President Obama has made green jobs a cornerstone of his economic agenda. In his first 2012 campaign ad this month, he said clean energy industries created 2.7 million jobs and were "expanding rapidly." But Republicans have pounced on failures, such as the bankruptcy of Solyndra, a solar panel maker backed with a Department of Energy loan guarantee.Citing what he calls "abysmal results" in the job training program, House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, R-Calif., is demanding answers about how the Department of Labor awarded the grants, which were funded out of the 2009 stimulus bill.But Assistant Secretary of Labor Jane Oates defends the initiative, saying the inspector general's audit used old numbers and that it was never designed to provide immediate results.Read the full story here.

• GOP weighs contempt charges against White House on Solyndra.(TheHill).Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.), who is heading the GOP probe of the failed solar company Solyndra, said Republicans are meeting this week to discuss contempt charges against the White House over its response to last year’s subpoena for documents.“We are meeting this week to look at a very serious charge, which would be contempt of Congress, because they are slow walking,” Stearns said on the Fox Business Network Monday, according to a transcript. Stearns leads the investigations panel of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.Republicans allege the White House has not provided enough internal documents to satisfy the GOP probe of Solyndra, the California solar panel manufacturer that received a $535 million Energy Department loan guarantee in 2009 and went bankrupt last year.White House officials say they have been responsive to the subpoena that Energy Committee Republicans issued in November, as well as earlier document requests. More on that here.Stearns, in the Fox segment, also took aim at David Axelrod, President Obama’s senior campaign strategist. Read the full story here.

• Obama Exploits Navy Seals.(DocsTalk).By Ed Lasky.For a basketball player, Barack Obama sure can stoop low.Leif Babin, a much-decorated Navy Seal, takes President Obama to task for exploiting Navy Seal operations to gain votes. This is not harmless credit-hogging by Barack Obama for the heroism and tough decision-making by our military. Babin -- joining a range of others -- writes in today's Wall Street Journal that Barack Obama is endangering the lives of Navy Seals for cheap political points: America's premier Special Operations force is once again in the headlines after a team of Navy SEALs rescued two hostages from captivity in Somalia last week. Elite U.S. forces have carried out such operations periodically over the past decade, always with skill and bravery. The difference in recent months is that the details of their work haven't remained secret. On the contrary, government officials have revealed them for political gain -- endangering our forces in the process.The floodgates opened after the raid that killed Osama bin Laden last May, and the Obama administration's lack of discretion was on display again at last week's State of the Union address. As President Obama entered the House chamber, in full view of the cameras, he pointed to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and exclaimed: "Good job tonight, good job tonight." Clearly something had happened that he wanted the world to know about.After delivering his speech, which included multiple references to the bin Laden raid, the president again thanked Mr. Panetta. "That was a good thing tonight," he said as if to ensure that the viewing public, if they missed it initially, would get it a second time around.Sure enough, shortly thereafter, the White House announced the successful rescue of the hostages in Somalia by U.S. Special Operations forces. Vice President Biden appeared on ABC's "Good Morning America" to highlight the success the next morning, and Mr. Panetta also publicly praised it. Then came the "anonymous U.S. officials" to provide extensive details of who conducted the raid and how. As with the bin Laden operation, the top-secret unit that carried it out was again front-page news, as were its methods and tactics.Babin noted that the work of special ops teams are highly classified for good reasons that make it illegal for military personnel to divulge details to anyone. However, President Obama and his team have opened the floodgates -- virtually every detail of the bin Laden raid was widely publicized and is now available to anyone with the click of a mouse. The Defense Secretary added to the problems when he disclosed the name of a Pakistani doctor who was key to discovering the whereabouts of bin Laden. That doctor is now is a Pakistani prison and Panetta's disclosure will undoubtedly make his life worse.These disclosures endanger lives and will make future operations that much riskier. Babin, who has put his life at stake numerous times in battle, knows the game being played with him and his fellow soldiers serving the roles of pawns in a political farce: It is infuriating to see political gain put above the safety and security of our brave warriors and our long-term strategic goals. Loose lips sink ships.Babin, as noted above, is not the only observer to question Obama's priorities.J.D. Gordon, a retired navy commander, writes in the Washington Times about Obama's deadly new PR firm:The dramatic rescue of an American aid worker and her Danish colleague in Somalia by Navy commandos was a terrific encore to the killing of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan nine months ago. However, all the White House-driven publicity for both events has helped turn the once-secret SEAL Team 6 into a household term, with likely negative consequences...The military still avoids discussion of the unit and its highly classified missions...The one and only reason why there has been so much recent publicity on SEAL Team 6 rests with the commander in chief.Casting aside decades of careful leadership to keep these stealth warriors out of the public eye, away from would-be revenge-seekers and assorted far-left protesters, Mr. Obama has discussed their exploits to such an extent that their mystique is largely diminished - and their identities closer to being disclosed.Gordon sharpened his focus and characterizes Obama's unwanted publicizing of Navy Seals missions for what it is: a political ploy:The first problem with Mr. Obama singling out our elite units is that they all live and train somewhere. High-profile discussions draw more attention to them personally, their families, their bases and their local communities. That presents force-protection concerns in our open society, where the Sept. 11 hijackers lived freely and the "Occupy" protesters have run amok.But, of course, the exploitation get worse. Obama is allowing his Hollywood donors to coin a profit from the heroic bin Laden mission the Seals undertook. Obama supporters in Hollywood are rushing to make a film about the raid originally scheduled to be released one month before the election. Apparently, the administration is greasing the way for the people behind the film/campaign spot to have high-level access to speed along the production.Congressman Peter King, chairman of the House Security Committee, has called for an investigation, as Caroline May of the Daily Caller has noted:The chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee has called for an investigation into reports that the Obama administration is granting Sony Pictures and director Kathryn Bigelow "high-level access" for a film about the Navy SEAL operation which killed Osama Bin Laden. The movie is scheduled for release one month before the 2012 presidential election. By the time it hits the screen, will Obama be portrayed as a heroic commander-in-chief in the way that John F. Kennedy and Dwight Eisenhower were? Hollywood is one creative town.New York Republican Rep. Peter King sent a letter Tuesday to Defense Department Inspector General Gordon Heddell and CIA Inspector General David Buckley, expressing his concern about declassifying sensitive information for pure entertainment.Obama is masking with photo-ops the fact that he is eviscerating our military to fund programs that reward his base. Obama has previously defined politics as all about rewarding friends and punishing enemies. He has been sending hundreds of billions of dollars to his base (government workers, crony capitalists, environmentalists -- the list goes on and on) while slashing funds for our military. He rewards his friends in Hollywood by using the powers of his office to aid them in producing a film that will undoubtedly reflect well on him. Cleverly, the Hollywood cast of characters behind this film do not even have to declare the millions spent on this film as a campaign contribution. Barack Obama is cynically using our soldiers as political props for his campaign.When the Commander-in-Chief exploits the heroic work of our military he not only degrades the office but endangers the lives of our soldiers.This is a dereliction of duty on his part-and he should suffer the political equivalent of a court martial come November.Read the full story here.

• Canada Expels Two More Russians in Spy Scandal.(RN).Two more Russian diplomats have quit Canada following the arrest of a Canadian sailor charged in January with handing over secrets to a foreign power, the Globe and Mail newspaper reported.Dmitry Gerasimov, a consular officer with the Russian government’s office in Toronto, left in a routine posting change, the Russian embassy in Toronto said on Monday. The Russia’s defense attache in Ottawa, Colonel Sergey Zhukov, moved back to Moscow in a “normal rotation,” a Russian embassy official said.But the Globe and Mail reported yesterday that Canada had removed Gerasimov and Zhukov from the list of envoys recognized by the government.Canadian naval intelligence officer Sub-Lieutenant Jeffrey Paul Delisle was charged with giving classified information to a “foreign entity” between July 2007 and January this year. Local media reported that the entity was Russia.Delisle may face life in prison if convicted.Four other Russian embassy staff have left Canada in recent months but Russia’s Foreign Ministry denied their departures were linked with the spy controversy.Read the full story here.

• IAEA inspectors to return to Iran after 'good' trip.(JPost).VIENNA - The UN nuclear watchdog said on Wednesday it had held "good" talks in Iran about suspicions Tehran was seeking atomic weapons but more discussions were needed.The senior United Nations nuclear inspectors went to Tehran on Saturday for talks with Iranian officials on the Islamic state's suspected atomic weapons program, and to try to advance efforts to resolve the nuclear row. Tehran say its nuclear activities are for peaceful electricity generation."We are committed to resolving all the outstanding issues and the Iranians certainly are committed too. But of course there is still a lot of work to be done and so we have planned another trip in the very near future," Herman Nackaerts, deputy director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), told reporters after returning from Tehran.Asked if he was satisfied with the talks, Nackaerts, who headed the six-member IAEA mission, said "Yeah, we had a good trip."He described the three days of talks as "intensive discussions" but declined to comment on whether his Iranian counterparts had engaged in substantial dialogue or to give any more details, saying he first needed to brief his superiors.Iran earlier described the talks as "constructive" and said further meetings were planned.Read the full story here.

• U.S. Intelligence Agencies Pushing Iran's U.S. Terrorist Attack Plot Propaganda.(WashingtonPost).U.S. intelligence agencies believe that Iran is prepared to launch terrorist attacks inside the United States in response to perceived threats from America and its allies, the U.S. spy chief said Tuesday.Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. said in prepared testimony that an alleged Iranian plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in Washington that was uncovered last year reflects an aggressive new willingness within the upper ranks of the Islamist republic to authorize attacks against the United States.Highlights from a series of potentially volatile incidents. That plot “shows that some Iranian officials — probably including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei — have changed their calculus and are now more willing to conduct an attack in the United States in response to real or perceived U.S. actions that threaten the regime,” Clapper said in the testimony, which was submitted to the Senate Intelligence Committee in advance of a threat assessment hearing Tuesday. “We are also concerned about Iranian plotting against U.S. or allied interests overseas.”The assessment signals a potentially dire new direction in the adversarial relationship between the United States and Iran, at a time when there are indications that a covert campaign is already underway to thwart Iran’s alleged ambition to develop a nuclear weapon.Clapper’s warning about Iran was delivered as part of the U.S. intelligence community’s annual overview of the nation’s most serious national security concerns. As the hearing got underway, Clapper signaled that the United States is seeking to avoid a violent confrontation with Iran, instead pushing for more and more sanctions while also monitoring the possibility of a preemptive strike by Israel.Read the full story here.

• Iranian FM: We Are In “Constant Contact” With Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood.(Egypt Independent) — Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood maintain close contact, Iran’s foreign minister has said in an interview with Al-Masry Al-Youm.“Tehran is in constant contact with the Muslim Brotherhood,” said Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi.He said Iran is ready to promote its diplomatic relations with Egypt to the ambassadorial level, paricularly in light of the Muslim Brotherhood’s recent ascendancy to power. The group’s party, the Freedom and Justice Party, controls 43 percent of parliamentary seats.Salehi told the paper that Iran would immediately send an ambassador to Cairo if Egypt agreed.Some countries “are not happy about improving relations between Egypt and Iran,” he said, adding that if Egypt, Iran, Turkey and Saudi Arabia cooperated, all would benefit.Hmmmm.......probably trough the same person Obama uses to talk with the Taliban: Muslim Brotherhood leader Sheikh Youssef Qaradawi.Read the full story here.

• US foresees May as tentative date for clash with Iran. Floating SEALs base for Gulf.(Debka).A hurried decision not to de-commission the USS Ponce helicopter marine carrier after duty in Libya - but to refit it for deployment by May in the Persian Gulf as a floating base for commando teams - was confirmed by the US Pentagon and Navy Sunday, Dec. 29. This transportable floating base will expand the commandos' range in coastal areas and support counter-measure against mines which Iran has threatened to plant in the Strait of Hormuz in reprisal for the US-EU oil embargo. The SEALs will also take on Iran's menacing fleet of military speedboats.debkafile reports Tehran operates four different kinds of these craft in the Persian Gulf:

1. Small, fast vessels, each armed with a small missile for striking tankers and coastal oil targets around the Gulf region, such as export terminals. Earlier this month, Tehran claimed to have developed stealth cruise missiles capable of disabling aircraft carriers with a single shot.
2. Small, extra-fast boats armed with torpedoes. Iranian publications claim several such boats are capable of stealing up on US aircraft carriers and large warships from several directions without being detected and cause serious damage.
3. Floating bombs for kamikaze missions. These fast boats cannot be deflected after locking in on target, whether on sea or shore, and explode on contact.Iran used these floating missiles piloted by suicide squads to attack oil tankers in the Gulf in November 1987. Since then, their naval tacticians have upgraded this fleet with the technology gained from the British Bladerunner 51, a model of which Iran purchased some years ago.Since early January, the Pentagon has reported four cases of harassment by Iranian military boats sailing close to American warships in the Persian Gulf.
4. Boats carrying teams of Iranian marine frogmen trained for secret suicide underwater missions: One member of the boat's three-man crew dives close to the targeted ship and attaches a magnetic bomb to its hull.Iran has scattered hundreds of speedboats of different types around uninhabited islands off the Iranian mainland, tucking them out of sight in well-hidden inlets and bays. The US commando teams based on the Ponce platform will have the task of ferreting out and destroying this fleet.The US Defense Department aims to get the Ponce ready for its new mission as a floating commando base with all possible speed. To save time, the US military published one no-bid contract for the engineering work, waiving normal procurement rules on the grounds that any delay presented a "national security risk."The contract carries pointers to the timeline expected in Washington for a military confrontation to erupt between the United States and Iran, as well as the form it may take, say debkafile's military sources.The target date for deploying the commando platform in the Persian Gulf in four or five months indicates Washington is preparing for military clashes to blow up with Iran in the late spring or early summer.Read the full story here.

• US Official: U.S. Maintains Full Control of Turkish-Based Radar – facing wrong direction to help Israel.(DefenceNews).TEL AVIV — Refuting reports from Ankara, a U.S. government official said a U.S. X-band radar deployed in eastern Turkey as part of NATO’S ballistic missile defense shield is operated solely by American personnel, with no restrictions on the use of data generated by the powerful early warning sensor.“That radar is exclusively operated by U.S. personnel, exactly as it is here. We will control the data and fuse it with data from other radars in the region to generate the most comprehensive and effective missile defense picture,” the U.S. official said of the AN/TPY-2 radar recently deployed at Turkey’s Kurecik Air Force base and a twin system operating in Israel’s Negev desert.But the official vigorously denied Turkish reports of preconditions imposed by Ankara restricting the sharing of radar data with non-NATO nations, particularly Israel.“There are some people in Turkey that did not want the radar. They argued that the reason we’re putting the radar in there is to help Israel. Well, that’s not why we’re doing it.”According to the U.S. official, the Turkish-deployed radar is facing the wrong direction to be of much help to Israel.“In fact, the opposite is really true. Our radar here in Israel helps Turkey. ... Bottom line, it’s in all of our interests to have an American radar 400 kilometers from the Iranian border,” he said.Read the full story here.

• Turkey's Erdoğan tells Paul Auster'Who cares?'(HurriyetDaily).Turkey’s prime minister responded today to criticism from American novelist Paul Auster over the number of jailed journalists in the country, saying it made no difference whether he came to Turkey or not, daily Hürriyet reported. "Writer Paul Auster told a newspaper over the weekend that he wouldn't come to countries that lack democratic laws," Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan said. "What difference does it make if you come to Turkey, or if you don't?"Auster had said earlier this week that he refused to visit Turkey because of the number of journalists and writers that had been jailed in the country. Read the full story here.

• Russia, China oppose ‘forced regime change’ in Syria; Lavrov warns of ‘bigger drama’.(AlArabiya).China and Russia have reiterated their opposition to the use of force to resolve the crisis in Syria, where escalating violence has killed thousands of civilians who oppose President Bashar al-Assad. As many as 25 people have been killed by the fire of Syrian security forces across the country on Wednesday, Al Arabiya reported, citing Syrian activists. 39 people were reported to have been killed on Tuesday.Russia’s envoy to the European Union said on Wednesday he believes a Western-Arab draft U.N. Security Council resolution cannot pass without language clearly ruling out potential military intervention, the Interfax news agency reported.Vladimir Chizhov’s remarks were the latest indication that Russia could veto the resolution, which supports an Arab League plan calling for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to cede power, if it is not changed to take Moscow’s concerns into account.The draft “is missing the most important thing: a clear clause ruling out the possibility that the resolution could be used to justify military intervention in Syrian affairs from outside. For this reason I see no chance this draft could be adopted,” Chizhov said, according to Interfax.Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said they would not support any action that would be imposed on Syria and would avoid taking sides in an internal conflict, according to Reuters. “The international community unfortunately did take sides in Libya and we would never allow the Security Council to authorize anything similar to what happened in Libya,” Lavrov said in an interview with the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.In Washington, U.S. intelligence chief James Clapper said the fall of the Assad regime was in any case inevitable.“I do not see how he can sustain his rule of Syria,” Clapper told senators. “I personally believe it's a question of time but that's the issue, it could be a long time.”The opposition Syrian National Council meanwhile deplored the international community’s lack of “swift action” to protect civilians “by all necessary means,” in a statement on Facebook.On Monday alone, almost 100 people, including 55 civilians, were killed during a regime assault on the flashpoint city of Homs, said the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.The rebel Free Syrian Army said half of the country was now effectively a no-go zone for the security forces.“Fifty percent of Syrian territory is no longer under the control of the regime,” its Turkey-based commander Colonel Riyadh al-Asaad told AFP.CIA director David Petraeus told senators in Washington that Assad now faced challenges in Damascus and Aleppo, two cities that had been seen as insulated from the unrest.“I think it has shown indeed how substantial the opposition to the regime is and how it is in fact growing and how increasing areas are becoming beyond the reach of the regime security forces,” Petraeus said. Read the full story here.

• Why Are the Chinese Buying Record Quantities of Gold?(Forbes).This month, the Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department reported that China imported 102,779 kilograms of gold from Hong Kong in November, an increase from October’s 86,299 kilograms. Beijing does not release gold trade figures, so for this and other reasons the Hong Kong numbers are considered the best indication of China’s gold imports.Analysts believe China bought as much as 490 tons of gold in 2011, double the estimated 245 tons in 2010. “The thing that’s caught people’s minds is the massive increase in Chinese buying,” remarked Ross Norman of Sharps Pixley, a London gold brokerage, this month.So who in China is buying all this gold?The People’s Bank of China, the central bank, has been hinting that it is purchasing. “No asset is safe now,” said the PBOC’s Zhang Jianhua at the end of last month. “The only choice to hedge risks is to hold hard currency—gold.” He also said it was smart strategy to buy on market dips. Analysts naturally jumped on his comment as proof that China, the world’s fifth-largest holder of the metal, is in the market for more.There are a few problems with this conclusion. First, the Chinese government rarely benefits others—and hurts itself—by telegraphing its short-term investment strategies.Hmmmm.......Someone trying to replace the Dollar as world currency?Read the full story here

• Turkey - Main opposition leader slams Prime Minister Erdoğan : ‘You are no pious man’.(HurriyetDaily).Main opposition leader Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu yesterday leveled harsh accusations against Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan for exploiting people’s religious feelings, as he attacked the government for covering up a high-profile embezzlement probe into an Islamic charity.“You are not a pious man but a religion-monger. Before categorizing people as pious and not pious you should first hold to account those who got away with the money that people donated for the poor,” Kılıçdaroğlu said yesterday at the parliamentary group meeting of his Republican People’s Party (CHP).His outburst came in response to Erdoğan’s accusations that the CHP was annoyed by the existence of the imam-hatip religious schools and suggested the main opposition aspired for “a less-religious generation.” Erdoğan made the remarks after two CHP deputies asked the Council of State to scrap a regulation that put graduates of imam-hatip religious schools on equal par with others at university entrance exams.Slamming Erdoğan’s comments as “divisive,” Kılıçdaroğlu said, “Was the previous generation unreligious? How do you measure people’s religiousness?” He recalled that imam-hatip schools and divinity faculties were inaugurated under CHP rule.He renewed criticism of the indictment of three prosecutors who were removed from the embezzlement probe into the Deniz Feneri (Lighthouse) charity last year on charges of forgery in official documents and abuse of office that carry up to 11 years in jail.“They first took the prime minister’s friends from the grip of the prosecutors, but that did not suffice. The prosecutors are after the embezzlers, while the ministers are after the prosecutors. This is an open intimidation of the judicial community,” Kılıçdaroğlu said. Read the full story here.

• Should Turkey embrace Hamas as a ‘civilian’ party?(HurriyetDaily).By Yusuf Kanli.Turkish Foreign Ministry sources have “corrected” charges made by Israeli President Shimon Peres and a leading Israeli newspaper by declaring that the amount of Turkish funding to Hamas would not be anything close to the quoted “$300 million.”This is good news, and of course bad news. On the good side, Turkey was not making such a “huge contribution” to Hamas, while on the bad side the statement revealed that, if not at the level of $300 million, Turkey was still providing some funding to Hamas.Is Hamas not a terrorist organization? Excluding some Arab countries and Turkey’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) (but including the Turkish state), the entire international community of nations say it clearly: As long as Hamas does not denounce terrorism, lay down arms and opt to become a “civilian” political party, it will remain a terrorist organization and will be treated as such.The president said allowing Hamas to have a bureau in Turkey was an issue that must be handled later. What does that mean? He did not say “Hamas wanted to have a bureau in Turkey.” He just said it was not the time to make a decision on the issue. That is a between-the-lines confirmation that such things are being considered.Furthermore, the president stressed that Hamas was a “political formation” of Gaza that had entered and won elections. Yet what dimensions Turkey’s relations with Hamas would take would be seen in time.Was Turkey not recognizing the official Palestinian government? Was Turkey not considering the Palestinian Liberation Organization as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people? Had Hamas not very recently joined the PLO?Embracing Hamas to the extent of letting it move its HQ to Turkey would mean intentionally placing ourselves in far deeper difficulties than we could ever imagine.Read the full story here.

• Egypt’s Christians want political party.(BM).CAIRO: A number of Coptic Christian activists said on Tuesday that they agreed on the need for the establishment of an independent political Coptic Council away from the influence of the Coptic Church, pointing to the continued policy of marginalization of the Coptic community in Egypt, especially after the revolution, and described their situation as “no different from the era of Mubarak.”The activists added that their situation is “even worse under the rule of the military junta.”The activist demanded, during a conference on the “situation and state of Copts after the revolution,” freedom from the grip of the Church, which,according to them, fell in the “trap of the military council and continued its wrong path in political life and caused the election to turn into a sectarian issue.”Head of the General Coptic Association, Sherif Doss, stressed that the political situation is the “same as it was before the revolution, as the state did not take any action towards the incidents and violations against the Copts.”Prominent activist Naguib Gobraiel said “Copts must unite in one party, as the military junta did not offer anything for the Copts.”He added that “We [Copts] shall make the Party a political bloc, not religious.”Hmmmm.......Read the full story here.