Time's Joe Klein Harsher on Israel Than Iran

Photo of Ken Shepherd.
  • Bookmark and Share

So who died and made Time's Joe Klein the head of Mossad? Because clearly he is a better military intelligence expert than anyone in Israel, judging by his April 22 blog post on "Israel's Iran Game" at the magazine's Swampland blog (emphasis mine):

I have no doubt that Israel is--legitimately--freaked out by Iran, although not so much by the prospect of an Iranian bomb as by Iran's support for Hezbollah and Hamas. (The only plausible use of an Iranian bomb would be as a deterrent against Israel's own nuclear weapons.) But it seems clear that the Netanyahu government's wild overstatement of the Iranian threat, and its linkage to progress on the Palestinian issue, is a subterfuge to allow the continued illegal Israeli settlement of Palestinian areas on the West Bank, which will ultimately subvert a two-state solution.

Whatever should Obama do? Klein would be glad you asked, and even if you hadn't, he'd probably tell you anyway (emphasis mine):

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

It's time for President Obama to make clear, in no uncertain terms, that the U.S. favors a Middle East peace settlement similar to the one proposed by Bill Clinton in 2000: no right of return for Palestinians, Jerusalem as a shared capital, the restoration (more or less) of the 1967 borders and an American peacekeeping force in the Jordan River Valley. The idea that Israel can continue to slow-walk the process and, by continuing to seize Palestinian lands, create a new reality on the ground, needs to be vehemently opposed by the U.S. government.

Of course, it's kind of hard to get a two-state solution when the Palestinian Authority is divided into two regions, one of which is controlled by an Iran-sponsored terror network (Hamas), with no plans anytime soon of ripping to shreds its founding charter calling for the destruction of Israel.

As for Iran, which is actively funding terror operations against Israeli civilians, Klein's favored approach is decidedly less bellicose than his call for Obama to castigate the Netanyahu government (emphasis mine):

As for Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's latest anti-Israel rant seems to have increased the possibility that the Europeans will join us in raising economic sanctions if Iran doesn't fully comply with the IAEA non-proliferation regime. Obama's quiet diplomacy with the Russians and Chinese has increased the possibility that those countries will also send the message to Iran that a bomb-making program will have negative consequences. I'm not sure that any of this stop the Iranians form [sic] developing a bomb, but I remain convinced that if Iran does go ahead, a policy of strict deterrence and containment--perhaps including the Arab states threatened by Iran's aggressive posture--is far preferable to any sort of military action.

So let's review. According to Klein, Obama should publicly chide Israel and press it to make concessions which benefit an unstable political entity rife with Iran-funded terrorists. Meanwhile, the Obama administration should quietly work through a multilateral effort to beg and plead Iran to pretty please stop its nuclear program which he's "not sure" will "stop the Iranians" anyway.

Brilliant, Joe, brilliant.

—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

putting the Hale-Bopp comet cult in charge

It is clear that when Joe Klein makes the statement (The only plausible use of an Iranian bomb would be as a deterrent against Israel's own nuclear weapons) that he neither understands the region in general nor the Islamic Republic of Iran in specific.

The use of a single nuclear weapon is not held solely to the use as a retaliatory weapon, particularly when your stated goal is the destruction of the state of Isreal. 

When you analyze it, Isreal can effectively be destroyed by a small number of nuclear weapons or even a single weapon of requisite size due to its small size and compact nature of its population centers. 

Iran on the other hand is comparatively vast and the population widely dispersed.  If Iran were able to build this weapon, then acheive plausible deniability by passing  this weapon off to Hezbollah for delivery to downtown Tel Aviv Iran could conceivably ride out any retaliatory strike by an Isreal which would be foreced to reserve at least part of its nuclear force to deal with other nations beside Iran.

And the worst of it is that the current Shia based extremist regime in Iran can view victory in defeat since the religious dogma of that sect see's that act as a guaranteed way to acheive its peculiar religious goals.  It is the equivalent of putting the Hale-Bopp comet cult in charge of nuclear devices. 

Klein is expecting a western rationality from a land and population who do not adhere to its logic.

Hezbollah suicide bombers

Hezbollah suicide bombers would kill for the chance to hand-deliver a nuclear device to Tel Aviv. I know that. You know that. Israel knows it. Iran knows it. The only people who don't believe this are the NYT, the Obama administration, and Congressional democrats.

On a side note, I see the NYT shares fell 16 percent yesterday. Revenue is down. The company is bleeding money and subscribers. I know why. They, apparently, don't have a clue.

___________________________________ 

The challenge is to follow a consistent plan despite inconsistent prices - Sarah Palin, State of the State of Alaska speech

TnT... ...and Hezbollah

TnT...

...and Hezbollah are making their way in here too.

I don't know if people are ever going to wake up..until plenty are killed.

Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart

Netanyahu has cancelled one meeting with the OAF..

man oh man, I'd like to be a bug on the wall, when they finally meet.

Netanyahu  is Totally dependant on the USA for conventional weapons. I'm sure the OAF will push this fact, get Netanyahu to knuckle under..give up lands in a Country that just a bit bigger than Hawaii..

Netanyahu  will just say, you know what!  We have H-bombs, thanks for nothing, see ya!

P.R.I.N.T. Money   30 sec YT 

Isn't Joe Klein Jewish?

"Netanyahu government's wild overstatement of the Iranian threat" that's an a amazing statement.
Why should Israel give up any land? They won the war.
There will never be peace with most Islamic states. They hate Israel and are hell bent on their destruction. Ahmadinejad is particularly crazy and suffering from worse Israel Derangement Syndrome than the left in America suffers from Bush Derangement Syndrome. And does anyone really believe that Obama is pro-Israel?
And isn't Joe Klein Jewish? Some loyalty. With friends like him they don't need enemies.
TSF Protests!

SF... What is sad is

SF...

What is sad is there are plenty more like him we hear daily...I wished he would have just stayed Mr. Anonymous.

Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart

Garofalo analysis

Let's see.  If we view this from Jeaneane (sp?) Garofalo's analytical method: 

(1) Joe Klein is Jewish,

(2) Israel is the Jewish national homeland,

therefore

(3) Klein is full of self-loathing and suffering from Stockholm Syndrome.

Galv... Bingo! Doubling

Galv...

Bingo!

Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart

Obama throws hostages under the bus

This might be a little off topic, but since we're on the topic of Iran, I just had to post this: The Obama administration has asked a federal judge to throw out a lawsuit against Iran filed by Americans held hostage at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran 30 years ago.

Aiding and abetting an enemy has no meaning at all for Obama, does it. Except he thinks of the U.S. as the enemy.

___________________________________ 

The challenge is to follow a consistent plan despite inconsistent prices - Sarah Palin, State of the State of Alaska speech

watch what he does

It does appear that Borak's actions reflect the desires of our muslim enemies. "Humility in the face of evil" is a sorry motto.

Iran hostage

And what about the latest hostage Iran is holding? Obama doesn't give a hoot.

D

Keep the ILLEGALS out, join NumbersUSA to send free faxes to your reps.

It does lead one to wonder

It does lead one to wonder where Obama's Desert One will be... And who we will lose un-necessarily.

Suprise?

Is anyone really suprised by these ridiculous remarks? Just another example on how out of touch people are these days.

 

"My mom was a crackhead and my dad wasn't around, not to mention I only make 14.00 pr. hr. I still do not want a hand out and i'm fed up with all the liberal cry babys." -ME

Self-interest

Another classic case of diplomatic ignorance ...

There's only one nation that pursues American self-interest; America (and even then, not very often). The talk of two-state solutions backed up by a US military commitment is a fantasy. It serves a domestic political interest, but it isn't realistic. Why? Because Hamas and Iran have absolutely no reason to abandon their present course. Every "solution" that comes from the United States will demand that they recognize Israel, which they don't want to do. They're gaining little by an agreement, and they lose a lot (in their calculus), so they won't budge unless they have to. Neither Hamas nor Iran has any motive to change, and therefore, neither does Israel. Stalemate.

Strong or vehement statements, or diplomatic pacifier-rattling, aren't worth the oxygen they're wasting.

Obama needs to learn a lesson about change. People and nations change when they see it in their interest, not when they see it in Obama's interest.

The selection--not election--of Barack Obama and, among others..

. . .his secretary of state Hillary Clinton appears to have uncorked the bottle for anti-Semites among liberals and leftists.

Of course, Obama learned this behavior well at the feet of anti-Semite anti-American Jeremiah Wright.

Fortunately, the Israelis will soon bomb Iran and destroy, rightly so, its nuclear-bomb-making capabilities.

And in doing so, with or without U.S. and/or world support, the Israelis will have done the world, but particularly the Mideast, a huge favor.

Of course, ASS -- anti-Semite socialist -- Obama and his administration, including Rahm Emmanuel, will not be able to acknowledge this, either from ignorance or spite.

Two states impossible

A two state solution is impossible, because while Israel is a state, the so-called 'palestinians' have shown themselves to be incapable of self-government and the formation of a state. The terrorists in control of 'palestinian' territories, Hamas and Fatah, are terrorist organizations that have no interest in peaceful co-existence. They are dedicated to killing all the Jews and erasing Israel.

Re others' comments; yes Iran is much bigger than Israel, but Israel has hundreds of real nuclear weapons of US-NATO quality, not science-fair projects like Iran's will be. In terms of destruction, Iran will come out much worse than Israel will. Re plausible deniability, there is none for Iran. If a nuclear weapon goes off in Israel, within 24 hours, fifty will go off in Iran. No sane person will doubt that the bomb came from Iran.

We have made it over fifty years thus far because of MAD, but that doesn't work on a country that is on a suicide mission as Iran is. When they have it, they will use it, and Iran will cease to exist.

Huh?

So, according to Klein, Iran only pursues nuclear weapons in order to deter an Israeli nuclear attack on Iran.

(Reality Check) But the only reason for Israel to attack Iran would be suspicion of an impending Iranian nuclear first strike.

On other words, Iranian development of a nuclear capablity -- combined with its incessant rheotric regarding the destruction of Israel -- is what makes it a real threat to Israel. 

But I'm not surprised that Klein can't understand the simple logic.  He seems to be convinced that armed, raving ideological and theologic lunatics are passive, and democracies are threats.

 

 

 

Deterrence?

lol! Exactly. How many times have you seen an Israeli PM on TV, in front of the U.N., etc., ranting and raving about wiping Iran off the face of the earth?

Liberals again show their 'tolerance'.

"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason

There is another possible...

...use for an Iranian nuclear bomb.  You see, what we keep hearing is that the only possible use for such a weapon is as a deterrent against Israeli nukes.  However, Iranian nuclear weapons could very easily become Hamas nuclear weapons; in which case, it is likely that the weapon would not be used as a deterrent.

Deterrence is only useful when one can guarantee self-control over weapons.  If your enemy doesn't trust you to keep your weapons locker locked, deterrence becomes antagonistic.

Bucking the trend

I dunno.. I think that Iran is whacked-out enough to use the very first one they get - even if they have to strap it to a camel or push it in a cart. They are that irrational. 

"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.