Friday, June 12, 2009

Are you happy now?

Flashback to May 17, 2008. On that day, Hillary Clinton, then the senior Senator from New York, debated with Barack Obama. During the debate, hosted by ABC, the candidates were asked: "Should it be US policy now to treat an Iranian attack on Israel as if it were an attack on the United States?"

To this Obama answered:

"I have said I will do whatever is required to prevent the Iranians from obtaining nuclear weapons."I think it is very important that Iran understands that an attack on Israel is an attack on our strongest ally in the region, one whose security we consider paramount. It would be an act of aggression that I would consider unacceptable, and the United States would take appropriate action."

"I believe that that includes direct talks with the Iranians where we are laying out very clearly for them, here are the issues that we find unacceptable, not only development of nuclear weapons but also funding terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah, as well as their anti-Israel rhetoric and threats towards Israel.

Senator Clinton then responded:

"Of course I would make it clear to the Iranians that an attack on Israel would incur massive retaliation from the United States."

These two former candidates are now the President and the Secretary of State of the United States. They are the faces of the American administration. So you would like to believe them when they state that Israel's security is absolutely guaranteed against aggression by Iran. In addition, Obama's comments regarding Iran going Nuclear and also consider Hamas and Hezbollah terror organizations seems to put the matter of who is the victim and who is the aggressor to rest.

But of course, to paraphrase our President, these were just "words."

In an interview on ABC TV's 'This Week', George Stephanopoulos reminded Senator Clinton of her remarks and this is what she said:

"Is it US policy now? I think it is US policy to the extent that we have alliances and understandings with a number of nations," she said, then added, "I don't think there is any doubt in anyone's mind that, were Israel to suffer a nuclear attack by Iran, there would be retaliation."

Stephanopoulos pressed her, asking "By the United States?" Hillary responded:

"Well, I think there would be retaliation."

In the world of politics, this is known as being "non-committal."

Clinton's readiness to publicly back her country off from a position she said she would hold were she president is in line with the recently-revealed shift in America's alliances in the Middle East.

In his major foreign policy speech from Cairo, Obama came out strongly in support of historically-illegitimate Arab aspirations, while effectively undermining the legitimacy of Israel's claims and rights.

Israelis have rightfully reacted to the betrayal with shock and disbelief. My question is for all of those Jews who claim to be pro-Israel (and even those who aren't Jewish).

Are you happy now?

No comments: