Benny Gantz on Iran

Benny Gantz (R) and Moshe Ya'alon (L) at an event in Tel Aviv, January 29th, 2019. 

In June 2016, at Ben-Gurion University, Benny Gantz put the threat from Iran on 5th place in significance of the dangers threatening Israel, so after the lecture I came up to him and asked him should we not be more concerned about Iran since according to Prof. Bernard Lewis   “for people with this mindset, Mutually Assured Destruction M.A.D. is not a constraint; it is an inducement... “ and therefore  Iran cannot be deterred, only preempted.  

His answer – Israel will defend itself if attacked.

I am afraid that would be too late.  It seems Benny Gantz does not take Bernard Lewis seriously enough, if he understood whom I was quoting in the first place.  

Russian logic

Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said:  "The practice of delivering arbitrary airstrikes against a sovereign state should be ruled out. The escalation of hostilities in the region is not in line with the interests of Middle East states, including Israel."

So according to Maria Zakharova, not preventing Iran, whose Brig. Gen. Aziz Nasirzadeh just stated that Iran’s young airmen were prepared for the day when Israel will be destroyed, from entrenching itself on Israel’s border is actually in line with Israel’s interests!?

Following this logic, the Soviet invasion of eastern Poland,1939, Finland,1939, Baltic states, 1940, Czechoslovak coup d’etat and the defenestration of Jan Masaryk, 1948, invasion of Hungary, 1956, Czechoslovakia,1968, Afghanistan,1979, and Russian invasion of Georgia, 2008, and Ukraine, 2014, had all been in the interests of these respective invaded sovereign states.

When it comes to Russia, plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

Iran, you seem to be lost.

Bertrand Russell on meeting Lenin

I wish we had heard Bertrand Russell’s impressions of Lenin in my high school history lessons.  
excerpt from the audio:

Lenin: Oh dear me no, we are not establishing peasant proprietorship, you see there are workers and some rich peasants and we stirred up the poor peasants against the rich peasants and these soon hanged them to the nearest tree . Ha, ha, ha, ha! 

Bertrand Russell:  I did not much like that.    

Moshe Ya'alon announces new party but should clarify his position on the Iranian threat

Letters to the Editor, Jerusalem Post, December 31, 2018

Regarding “Gantz, Ya’alon may combine parties” (December 27), there are only three Israeli politicians who I am certain understand the magnitude of the Iranian threat. They are Benjamin Netanyahu, Michael Oren and Moshe Ya’alon. Why only them? Because Netanyahu and Oren quoted Bernard Lewis’s warning, “For people with this mindset, Mutually Assured Destruction is not a constraint; it is an inducement.”

Ya’alon, in a 2012 interview, said: “The regime of the ayatollahs is apocalyptic-messianic in character... It will be impossible to accommodate a nuclear Iran and it will be impossible to attain stability. The consequences of a nuclear Iran will be catastrophic.” 

While other Israeli politicians may share the above concern, I find no record of them declaring that the Mutually Assured Destruction doctrine would not work with the ayatollahs of Iran.

I had every respect for Moshe Ya’alon. He stood up to US secretary of state John Kerry and president Obama’s absurd policies toward Israel and his paper “A New Strategy for the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict” is excellent. However, in 2016, after leaving the cabinet, he said: “At this point, and in the foreseeable future, there is no existential threat facing Israel.”

While Ya’alon may consider that an estimated three-month breakout time after the Iran Deal with the expiration due to the sunset clause in the Deal as sufficient reason to change his mind, I do not think that the Iranian existential threat has diminished. This change of opinion by Ya’alon looks more like an issue picked by him to differ from Netanyahu than as a result of him responding to a changed reality.

A politician has to be consistent, especially on such an important topic as Iran, or he loses credibility. I urge Ya’alon to clarify his position on the Iranian threat.

MLADEN ANDRIJASEVIC 
Beersheba

Jeremy Corbyn denies calling Theresa May 'stupid woman' in PMQs clash

"I did not use the words 'stupid woman' about the prime minister or anyone else and am completely opposed to the use of sexist or misogynist language in absolutely any form at all."

Jeremy Corbyn ‘clearly ‘ used phrase ‘stupid woman’ – team of lip readers tell Sky News

MI5 or the Mossad can easily filter out the noise from the Commons recording and establish without any doubt what Corbyn said.  Is it not obvious that this is exactly what should be done?

Egyptian President Al-Sisi: People in Our Countries Should Not Expect the West to Welcome Them; They Should Solve Their Own Countries' Problems Instead

November 4, 2018

Clip No. 

6887

Egyptian President Al-Sisi: People in Our Countries Should Not Expect the West to Welcome Them; They Should Solve Their Own Countries' Problems Instead

During a session of the World Youth Forum that was convened in Sharm Al-Sheikh, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi was asked about Western countries preventing the entrance of people from undeveloped countries. He answered: "Instead of asking me why the West closes its gates to us, you should ask yourself why the people of Afghanistan don't take better care of their country... [The same is true] in Pakistan, in Egypt, in Syria, in Libya, in Iraq, in Yemen, and in Somalia." He said that people in those countries have been fighting amongst themselves for decades, so it is unreasonable for them to expect to be welcomed by Western countries while keeping their own culture and work ethic. President Al-Sisi's comments aired on Ten TV (Egypt) on November 4, 2018.

Following are excerpts:

President Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi: "Every country has the right to protect its people and their interests. It must generally respect human rights in a framework that preserves its national interests.

[…]

"Instead of asking me why countries [in the West] close their gates to us, you should ask yourself why the people of Afghanistan don't take better care of their own country. Why have they been killing one another for 40 years? This happens in other countries as well – in Pakistan, in Egypt, in Syria, in Libya, in Iraq, in Yemen, and in Somalia.

[…]

"We fight amongst ourselves in our own countries, and then we expect countries that work day and night to achieve progress, to protect their people and to maintain a certain standard of living for them… We demand that they l let us in so that we can have part of their [success], after we have been fighting amongst ourselves in our own countries. Of course [they say] no. I'm not for them or against them, but I am trying to be fair in the way I look at this issue. We should be criticizing ourselves. Are we protecting our countries – yes or no?

[…]

"Are you upset with the leaders of Germany, England, Italy, or any other European country for closing their borders in order to protect the achievements of many long years? Do you expect them to open their doors so that we can go there, demanding to keep our own culture? We demand to keep our culture, which could be very different from the work ethic in those countries.

[…]

"You demand to go there with your culture, which you consider to be non-negotiable. You say: 'This is how we are and you must accept us [because of] human rights.' No. By the way, if you go to another country as a guest, you must completely abide by its laws, customs, traditions, and culture. You must abide by them completely! If you are not willing to do this, don't go. Don't expect them to open the door for you, so you can go into their country and cause trouble. No.

[…]

"You've been fighting amongst yourselves for 40 years, yet you expect [the West] to open their doors for you? No. If you want to solve the problem, you should solve it in your own countries. That's why I'm telling Egyptians that they should take better care of their country."