summer patriot, winter soldier

Israel: Blueprint for Survival ... "Changing Course"

Israel:  Blueprint for Survival …  “Changing Course”

Preface.  Even the most ardent and diehard optimists among Israel’s and America’s Jews must concede that Israel has been abandoned to the vagaries of geo-politics by formerly stalwart America.  In a twinkling, 50 years of American foreign policy has literally "changed course," this abandonment an utter repudiation of friendship based upon common values, religion, heritage and common geo-political interests.

Israel is alone.

She has been left isolated and exposed by the shifting fortune of time and circumstance, and an American President and administration, his train of bureaucrats, and an American intelligentsia who have chosen the expediency of allying with radical Islam as opposed to reaffirming an historical, cultural and philosophical heritage shared between Christians and Jews, and, as a consequence, with the State of Israel.  See the link: http://wintersoldier2008.typepad.com/summer_patriot_winter_sol/2009/03/obamas-vision-a-muslim-compatible-america-the-abandonment-of-israel-.html.  In so doing, this country’s leaders have chosen expediency over principle, and material aims over religious and cultural values: what else might one expect from a leadership raised without principles, faith or values?  Such is one price for the decay of a society’s values.                       .

Israel’s diplomatic ties in the Mediterranean erode equally rapidly.  Turkey’s attempts to achieve modernity exceed her reach, and she slides back towards a strident Islamic fundamentalism that evidences a basic hostility, diplomatically and culturally, towards Israel’s interests: the possibilities for geopolitical alliance with Turkey slip away.  For years Egyptian hostilities have lain quiescent, quelled more by military defeats for having borne the brunt of Arab aspirations to destroy Israel, than any lasting concession to the realities of coexisting with a Jewish state.  Now that Obama and his State Department have evidenced their capitulation to the desires of the Muslim/Arab States, I would expect the expression of Egypt’s grudges to become more overt and belligerent. I would also expect Egypt to slide into the Iranian and Syrian sphere of influence, especially if Iran obtains nuclear weapons.  The Saudis may be expected to remain overtly hostile, and even less restrained now that they are convinced America lies prostrate, spread eagled over the oil barrel, unwilling and so glutted by oil consumption as to be unable to help Israel against pan Arabic attack.  There remains open to Israel the narrow possibility of “clandestine” diplomacy with the Saudis insofar as it might help both countries oppose Iranian expansion, but Israel must always count on the Saudis taking overt steps to destroy her should the opportunity present itself.

Russia remains hostile, not likely to forget the successive humiliations dealt it and its proxies by Israel’s intransigent opposition towards Russian expansion into the Middle East at the height of Soviet influence, and the stinging military defeats inflicted upon Russian arms, tactics and battle doctrines.  Europe is peopled by mollusks, peopled by physical and intellectual cowards made hostile to Israel by insanely leftist politics and very much dependent upon Soviet energy reserves for heat in the winter.  In both instances, however, lies open the possibility of limited co-operation with these entities if somehow Israel can aid them in covert opposition to American interests.

Nonetheless, Israel’s prospects are grim, and become grimmer as the very real prospects of “Eurabia” move closer to reality and not just mere forecast.

The question must be asked, how is Israel to survive without America?  And, it better be asked pretty quickly by the Israelis.  This paper modestly proposes a strategy for Israel’s survival.

Israeli assets.  Fortunately, she is not without assets, some of which she retains in full vigor, and some of which have fallen in a sorry state because of her reliance upon U.S. geo-political patronage.  That protection now a thing of the past, Israel must take stock of those things which still work in her stead, and must revitalize assets that have fallen into disrepair and misuse.

Geographical isolation.  It sounds strange to say, given that Israel lies on a sea coast, but one of Israel’s greatest military assets is geopolitical isolation, and the resultant relative difficulty of attacking her by conventional weapons because of her geography.

On her eastern border lies first a great range of mountains from the south to the north, a natural defense which is even more formidable because of the vast tracts of waste stretching into Jordan to the east.  Any foe with the temerity to attack this formidable border would have the additional task of a river crossing immediately at the border.  It would be a brave bunch indeed who would try to mass armor and artillery and infantry along this border preparatory to invasion, as they would be horribly exposed to Israeli air and artillery fire, in very open and exposed ground.  And, if you will go to Google maps at http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tab=wl, you will find a dearth of road and rail approaches by which a foe intent on attacking Israel can marshal her forces preparatory to attack.  Israel, in contrast, is crisscrossed by roads, whereas Arab countries do not have roadways or rail by which to bring their forces to a “front”: in any armored or infantry campaign, Israel has both the advantage of interior lines of defense and ease of mobilizing and transporting military assets, a very great advantage in executing a military defense.

To the southwest the same situation exists.  Two thirds of the southwestern border is extremely difficult terrain, with little or no road and rail, so any Egyptian attack on Israel would be confined to a very constricted neck of land along the Mediterranean, and completely exposed, along a corridor defined by one road.  It would be a very daunting thing indeed for Egypt to force her way along this route with a long supply train strung out behind her, and her armor and infantry confined to this narrow stretch, so deployed.  I do not know if the Israeli’s have any A-10 Warthogs, http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/a-10.htm, but if they do, they would inflict massive and horrible damage upon any attacking Egyptian forces.  The town of Elat, at Israel’s southernmost tip, might provide some theoretical point of attack for an amphibious assault, but I know of absolutely no pan Arabic capability along this line, and it would be a fool’s task for an Arab force, given their current force posture and lack of appropriate assets, to try and bring a naval fleet up the narrow channels of the Red Sea even to approach a landing site on Egyptian territory, let alone at Elat itself: such an attack would be absolutely suicidal.

The only good approach into Israel by an attacking armor and infantry column remains the classic route down the Becca valley, onto the Sheba Farms and Golan Heights, from which the way lies open to the heart of Israel.  And, to bring such a column up to Israel is a truly daunting task.  Were Syria, the antagonist likely to use this avenue of approach silly enough to attempt this maneuver again, she would have first to mass and stage her forces, move them smartly into Lebanon, and then swing south on the floor of the Becca, http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tab=wl, with her forces and supply lines strung out over long stretches, and easily observed by satellite.   Such anti aircraft defense as Syria were able to muster would necessarily be slung in very close to the flanks of her tank and artillery columns, with almost no room for movement or maneuver.  Being exposed north to south like that, in long unprotected columns, her forces would be exposed to flanking air attack from east to west, just withering fire from the air, unless she could maintain unrestricted air superiority over attacking Israeli forces.  And, she cannot.  Then, as she put her forces into battle array to mount her assaults on the Golan, assuming her progress that far, and this is a dubious assumption given the realities of a full scale Israeli onslaught, she would then be subject to fly over the length and breadth of her front, again with very little cover or protection from the air.

Such is not a very enviable prospect for a force attacking from the north, especially given the demonstrated vulnerabilities of armor to air attack.  Any Syrian plan of armored attack upon Israel would have to be premised upon an aerial assault upon Israel’s air assets, and complete destruction of them, …, and, failing that, the armored assault would be over before begun.

Israel is, therefore, although thoroughly accessible by ship from the Mediterranean and modern air travel, exceedingly formidable to approach from the ground by conventional forces.  And, since the Arab states have had a force posture consisting only of conventional ground forces along with their limited air power the entire history of Israel’s existence, this goes a long ways toward explaining Israel’s continued existence.

It goes almost without saying, but, for Israel to give up the Golan and Sheba Farms is to fall prey to suicidal impulse.

For whatever reasons, no Arab state or consortium of states has ever attempted to acquire the sea power to approach Israel by amphibious invasion along her very vulnerable appearing coast line: an attack along Israel’s coast, coordinated with an attack on her eastern borders would present Israel with great problems, as she would have no depth to her defense, and could be attacked in her “rear” from both sides.  In theory.  But in fact, given the prowess of the Israeli air force, this is a coast line that is vulnerable only to one power on earth, because only the United States could sufficiently brace for Israeli air attack while maneuvering on the narrow confines of the Mediterranean, given its limited room for approach and maneuver.  And, that is because the United States Navy and supporting air out of Europe are the only forces on earth that could maintain the air superiority protecting its shipping and troop transport and supply train from Israeli air attack: it must be added, that such air superiority would not be purchased cheaply, not even by the American military. 

Were Israel to use its nuclear weapons assets, it is doubtful that even the United States could mount an amphibious assault against Israel, or even force its way onto the Mediterranean.  This is something for Samantha Powers to think about, before she shoots her mouth off again about the United States putting troops on Israeli soil.

So, as a practical and practicable matter, as long as Israel has a world class and elite air force, it is almost totally isolated and remote in a geopolitical sense, even along its coast line.  That equation no longer stands, of course, if Israel is susceptible to nuclear attack by ballistic missiles launched by an Iran allowed to develop and acquire such weapons. If Iran deploys missiles armed with nuclear weapons capable of reaching Israel, the calculus above is rendered moot, and Israel looses all protection associated with her geography.  A similar negation of such strategic isolation might occur, were the Arab states through an enormous expenditure to acquire airplanes capable of achieving air superiority over Israel’s forces, and were Arab pilots ever to acquire the necessary proficiency and skills to fight on an equal basis with Israel’s pilots.  Given that Arab pilots are not chosen on their merits and skills as flyers, nor upon their psychological fitness to be combat fighter pilots, but for sociological, political and religious reasons, this is not likely to occur, and quite likely they will never be the equal of Israeli pilots, who are stone cold killers when they fly.  (And, as they should be.)  The history of Arab fighter pilot aces is a short one, and the list of their victims comprised solely of fellow Arabs.  You can “Google” it up. I have.

Dangers on the near horizon.  This is the status quo, which has obtained for decades.

This is a status of things, not likely to obtain for very much longer. 

Near term: diplomatically.  Israel must stop deluding herself about the world’s diplomatic landscape, and must start a mental process of looking at things objectively, and seeing things for what they are.

The first step in this process must be that Israel realize that American foreign policy under Obama has abandoned Israel and has made an overt decision to court Arab interests, to the great detriment of Israel.

The second step in this process must be that Israel realize that the two state solution is a calculated sham, and designed ultimately to destroy Israel.  The only solution proffered by the “two state solution” is the destruction of the Jewish state, and it is a solution decidedly favoring the Arab states.

The third step in this process must be that Israel realize that the United States, in insisting that diplomacy can prevent Iran attaining the bomb, has outright conceded Iran the “right” to build the bomb, and to develop missile delivery systems.  It must understand that the United States will not do anything militarily to prevent Iran from building the bomb, nor to intercede on behalf of Israel to prevent its deployment and use.

The final step in this process must be that Israel realize that the United States is not the nation that is once was, and that its diplomatic aims if not precisely & entirely hostile towards the interests of Israel are absolutely indifferent to her fate in deference & favor of Arab interests. If Israel is to survive, it will be on her own dime and by her own initiative.

Please see the case I have built for the four basic propositions above, at this post: http://wintersoldier2008.typepad.com/summer_patriot_winter_sol/2009/03/obamas-vision-a-muslim-compatible-america-the-abandonment-of-israel-.html .

These realizations, requiring Israelis to give up their reliance and dependence upon American intervention on their behalf diplomatically and militarily, also necessitate Israel now act independently to preserve her very existence.

She is alone.

No one will help her.

Surrender is not an option as it is oblivion, therefore the only path for Israel to follow is one aggressively designed to assert her interest, preserve her identity, and preserve her right to exist as a state.

 In order to effectuate these aims, in order to act independently, and in order to preserve her independence and identity as a nation, Israel must withdraw from any and all previous peace accords; must withdraw from any diplomatic negotiations to arrive at peace with her Arab neighbors; must repudiate any extension of legal or nation state authority to either Hamas or Abbas or the Palestinian Authority in Gaza and in the West Bank; and must reassert her jurisdiction and sovereignty in these areas.  There will be no peace with Hamas and Abbas as presently constituted, or in the future, and it is a fool’s errand to act as though this is possible.  http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2009/04/mahmoud-abbas-i-do-not-accept-the-jewish-state.html .[1] 

There will be war, of course, but how does that stand as any different from the result that will eventually obtain if the “two state” solution is imposed by outside diplomacy, and Israel’s acquiescence to it.  In the near term, seeing war as inevitable and likely to be in engendered by an Israeli strike against the Iranian nuclear facilities, it must be a bedrock tenet of Israeli politics, military strategy and geo-political necessity, that she will never surrender the Golan Heights or the Sheba Farms: they were won too dearly.  And, in the long term, Israel must openly debate ejecting the Arab populations from within Israel, to include the West Bank and Gaza, which should be again part of Israel.  The statement of Mahmoud Abbas merely confirms that the Arabs conceive of the “two state solution” as the oblivion of Israel.  Nothing more, and nothing less.

Near term militarily.  Militarily, Israel must take out and destroy Iran’s nuclear research, weapons development and manufacture, and deployment systems.  Israel must do this, and pay any price necessary to do this, before she is attacked with nuclear weapons by Iran.  Unless Iran is checked in her nuclear pretensions and her nuclear program stopped dead cold in the water, war will obtain between Iran and Israel.  The situation demands it.  No other result is possible, as long as Iran seeks the bomb.  It is simply the situation as it must play out: http://wintersoldier2008.typepad.com/summer_patriot_winter_sol/2008/05/war-and-logic.html

Israel must simply accept the proposition that she must do this for herself.

Long term: military.  In the discussion of the difficulties faced by an aggressor who would attack Israel over land, there is one recurrent theme.  And, that is air superiority.  The Arabs have overwhelming numerical advantage in manpower, and from time to time when refurbished by the Soviets and Soviet remnants they have had fair to middling armor, and fair to good artillery.  What the Arabs have lacked historically is quality airplanes, and competent flyers.  http://wintersoldier2008.typepad.com/summer_patriot_winter_sol/2008/01/bill-whittle-ej.html .  The Israelis, by contrast, have produced very good pilots, pilots who preferred the kill with machine guns up close to stand off kills with missiles, and they have had good planes, acquired from the U.S. mostly, and stolen on occasion from the French.

If Israel is to exist she must always maintain this force superiority in the air, to fend off invasion both by land and sea, and to repel air attack.  When Israel looses air superiority over the Mediterranean & Middle Eastern skies, Israel will simply cease to exist.  Air superiority, as exerted by fighter planes, is this important.  It will never cease to be this important.

But these outside sources of suitable airplanes will dry up, as the effects of international isolation increase, so Israel must develop her own full product line aerospace industry, devoted to developing her own designs and building the same, and capable of being able to produce her entire need for tactical and strategic airplanes.  To help finance such an undertaking, this industry should be large enough to sustain foreign sales.  This is not past Israel’s abilities either in terms of science, technology or engineering skills, nor her economic might, as shown by an interesting comparison of the capacities of Israel’s economy and that of two of the principle loci of airplane/aerospace production in the United States, the States of Kansas and Washington. 

Follows a comparison of the relative size and strengths of some of the nation state economies of the world, the economies of Washington and Kansas, and of Israel’s economy, the figures expressed being in terms of millions of U.S. dollars.--

Israel for year 2008 had a gross domestic product of $201,761 millions, ranking as the 42^nd largest economy in the world.  Washington State ranked as the 14^th largest state economy in the United States for calendar year 2008, with a gross domestic product of  $311,276 millions, while Kansas came in at $117,305 millions to rank as the 32^nd largest state economy in the U.S.  Kansas and Washington State are the home of Boeing aircraft, a U.S. manufacturer that produces everything from jumbo jets to fighter planes to cruise missiles to guided missiles to pilotless missile firing drones: Boeing is a well integrated company.  This company, with its manufacturing plants in Kansas and Washington State, with economies roughly comparable to Israel, serves as the model for a viable aircraft industry in a country Israel’s size. [2] Were Boeing to move to Israel, for instance, it would quite a respectable aerospace “industry” all by itself: and, Israel would most assuredly have infrastructure to support it in very quick order.

Israel’s economy does not compare with that of California, the largest state economy in the U.S., which has one of the largest gross domestic products in the world, in the neighborhood of $1,812,968 millions: this makes California  approximately the 7^th largest economic entity in the world, slightly ahead of Russia’s $1,676,586 millions and Brazils $1,572,839 millions.  South Africa’s economy ranked 32^nd largest in the world, at $277,188 millions, not out of scale compared to Israel’s gross domestic product, and it is a very large arms maker.  Now, obviously Washington State's aerospace industry is tied into the world’s largest economy, but the key point is that the State of Washington locally is capable of producing the labor force which makes the planes, and its university and educational system is sufficient to produce many of the engineers and other skilled craft workers necessary to support the infrastructure for such an industry.  This is true and a matter of historical fact, as Boeing is one of the great entrepreneurial stories of America, being entirely family owned at one time, and home grown and building most of its airplanes on a basis of self financing and a gambling speculation on what the aviation markets would support in terms of product.   There is no reason, therefore, that Israel could not do the same for a full scale aerospace industry.  Sweden, for instance, ranked as the world 22^nd largest economy at $484,550 millions, and at one time had a very viable and healthy aircraft industry.  There is no reason Israel cannot maintain her own healthy aircraft industry, and what product is nobler than making the means for one’s own self defense.[3]  For, as noted, Boeing is an aerospace “industry” unto itself, under one roof, and fully compatible with an economy the size Israel’s: perhaps Israel ought to acquire Boeing.

Israel should have an aerospace industry that sells fighter aircraft for international sale, there being a ready market for such planes, and Israel could specialize in planes suitable for smaller air forces, that do not necessarily fancy themselves acquired high altitude intercepts or fleet air superiority aircraft.

Israel should also acquire the capacity to build strategic aircraft, (Boeing for instance, built the wonderful B-52 bomber), including strategic bombers and those tanker aircraft necessary to refuel them, as well as to refuel fighter and fighter bomber attack aircraft.  Israel could build an aircraft similar to the B-52 with modern upgraded engines & avionics, as well as a supersonic attack bomber such as the old B-58, or its replacement, the B-1b which was initially designed to go supersonic but as it was developed, was given low flight terrain hugging ability to avoid and evade improved radar systems: apparently Air Force doctrine is content to have the B-1b chug along at about .9 to .95 mach, to reduce stress on aging air frames.  Having several models like this would give Israel the option to both lay on a lot of heavy ordnance, or, the capacity to deliver large nuclear bombs or cruise missiles, either at high altitudes, or with a ground hugging approach, depending upon tactical and strategic considerations.  And, presumably, to stay out of the reach of air craft and ground to air missiles, using either attack profile.[4]

Attack on Iranian nuclear facilities. It is imperative that the Israeli air force attack the Iranian nuclear weapons facilities now, in order to prevent nuclear attack upon herself.  Israel may have to go back from time to time and redo the job, as it does not appear she has the present capability to do more than delay the building of the bomb, not having the throw wait to take the facility out, once and for all.

She will probably have to go back in the future, hopefully with strategic bombers that can effectively do the job without recourse necessarily to atomic weapons.

The lack of a strategic air force is severally hampering Israel right now, because it has to be taken into consideration that in any potential attack against Iran’s nuclear industrial/military complex, Israel simply does not have the attack airplanes appropriate to do the job nor any aircraft with the appropriate range capacity to do the job.  By considering the difficulties associated with the present operation, it can be easier seen what sort of aircraft Israel will need in the future.

The trouble is distance. 

Israel needs airplanes that can fly back and forth to Iran, an operational distance there and back of some 2,500 miles, during which combat may be joined: combat takes time and fuel.  When Israeli fighters took out the Syrian reactor several years ago, it was a matter of 500 flight miles in, and 500 flight miles out, fully within the capability of her fighter bombers with refueling, and probably having required refueling over international waters above the Mediterranean.  By contrast, if Israel is to attack the Iranian reactors, which she must, she will have to fly roughly 1400 or 1500 miles to & into Iran at Isfahan, attack the installation, and engage in loiter and combat as the attack continues, then, she will have to fight her way out:  this fighting and loiter will add “miles” to the trip.  And then, the planes will have to fight their way out for another 1400 or 1500 miles on their way home, perhaps while being pursued for a portion of the distance.  An additional complication will be securing granted passage over Saudi air space (or even fighting their way through it, in and out, and providing fighter escort to the tankers), as the U.S. and Iraq have denied Israel access to Iran via Iraqi airspace.  This is a proviso I doubt very damned much that the Obama administration will relax, as the U.S. is committed to “diplomacy” to “prevent” Iran from acquiring the bomb.  It is a diplomacy calculated to fail.

Indeed, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has just testified before a U.S. Senate Committee that it is inevitable that Iran obtain the bomb, if military means are resorted to.  In his opinion, only economic sanctions and the like will prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.  In other words, left solely to the devices of the United States, Iran will obtain the bomb, and the missiles by which to deliver them.

To accomplish this attack, Israel will need a complicated system of refueling the fighters, several times in and several times out, and over flight air cover, and she will be extended, and she will be exposed to attack if the Iranians have the courage and expertise to press the defense. With the fuel tankers involved, it is not just a matter of defending the fighter bomber aircraft, but fighter cover will have to be provided the tankers, and they will have to be defended as they fly home.   

Israel will lose considerable life and material in executing such an attack, no doubt about it.

Whatever the near term cost of such an attack, it must be borne, or else Israel faces destruction by Iranian nuclear attack.  It is not optional, as i do not regard Iran’s rhetoric about the annihilation of Israel as bluff.  Say it is, though.  Well, if that is the case, it is a bluff that is not going to cease when Iran gets a deployable nuclear weapon.  It will be a source of continuing & increased intimidation, forever. Israel will have to take out the Iranian nukes eventually, or cease national existence; such will be the hectoring and badgering she will be subject to.  It reduces itself to a situation in which Israel must remove the threat at any rate.  Far better to do it now, then when Iran could react by the use of nuclear weapons.  Sometimes you just have to screw your courage to the sticking point, and strike first, and now is that time.

I don’t know just exactly how far the B-52 or the B-1b airplanes will fly without refueling, but either would comfortably achieve the trip contemplated in and out of Iran on such a mission to take out the Iranian nuclear facilities, carrying far more payload that a fight bomber could ever approach. This differential is exacerbated, as it is quite likely that a fighter bomber would lighten its payload to meet needed fuel considerations.[5]  It is also likely that B-52’s and B-1b’s would obviate the need for very many repeat missions, as they could carry sufficient conventional heavy bombs to destroy the nuclear facilities, completely, in a limited number of attacks.

With a strategic air force, Israel could deal with the nuclear pretensions and/or aggressions of its neighbors quite decisively for the foreseeable future.

Long term: naval operations.  In order to defend herself, Israel needs to develop a blue water navy.

She needs principally to design, build and deploy a carrier task force group or several such groups centered around a scaled down fleet aircraft carrier, such large carriers supported by several amphibious landing task force group carriers, equipped with attack helicopters, harrier jump jets, and amphibious troops, as modeled after the United States Marine amphibious land task force groups.  http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=4200&ct=4&tid=400 .  Little known, these “harrier carriers” (as in the American force) are among the most potent and responsive weapons systems on the face of the earth, capable of combined amphibious assault of American Marines, and literally almost instantly deployable.  They are the very essence of the ability to project combined military arms & force to almost any point of the globe, very rapidly.  They have the ability to conduct amphibious landings with on board troop contingents, and to support those Marines on the beach with Harrier V/STOL fighter bombers, and move them to the beach in hover craft and landing craft, and to take troops and supplies on and off the beach and combat zone with helicopters.  They would be perfect craft for the Israelis to protect their interests in the Mediterranean, and to conduct elite troop landings if need be in that region.  Given appropriate air cover, and reduction of missile threat, they could also maneuver in the Red Sea or the Persian Gulf, though no air craft carrier skipper would take his ship into such confined waters if he had any other choice.  They are formidable weapons systems,[6] and they go anywhere that will float them.

This blue water navy needs to be scaled back a little from United States Navy carrier groups, which sail the world, to make it compatible with sailing in the Mediterranean, the Black Sea, the Red Sea, the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman, the Bay of Bengal and the Arabian Sea.  Such a carrier group, say composed of a carrier with fleet cover aircraft and strike aircraft, comparable to the U.S. F-14 and the F-15’s and F-16’s, or better yet, the F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightning II, and also complimented with amphibious carriers launching Harrier jump jet types of craft, and equipped with Israeli Marine and Special Commando units, could be capable of many interesting and varied operational roles: it would give the Israeli armed forces operational flexibility such that it can only dream of now.

Israel needs to acquire a full complement of ship-borne wild weasels, to seek out and destroy radar installations, and ground to air missiles, and ground to sea missiles, in order to give these ships the ability to move and maneuver in the confines of localized waters, where the ships might be subject to attack from such ground installations: transit of the narrow water ways of the Middle East is very dangerous. Another way of securing air superiority for such ships and task force groups in such restricted waters would be for Israel to acquire U.S. F-22’s[7] which are capable of operating from flight decks, and which are entirely capable of fulfilling the ground attack role: acquisition of such a high tech plain seems entirely more practicable now than mere months ago.  Such airplanes ought to be available now from the manufacturer given that the United States has cancelled purchase of the F-22 Raptors, and Lockheed Martin/Boeing ought to be very eager to acquire markets to make up for the loss of anticipated sales to the United States.  If such a plane cannot be purchased, then it should be stolen: in another part of this paper, it is related how the Israeli’s stole the plans to the Dassault Mirage fighter-bomber and used them to produce its own version, the Kfir.  By stealing the plans, the Israeli’s were saved probably 10 or 15 years of conception, design, prototype testing, and building and tooling the production lines, an almost inconceivable savings on resource expenditure.  Were the Israeli’s able to buy the F-22 from Lockheed Martin/Boeing, Israel could achieve a similar savings of resource and time, and have one of the best fighters in the world, … , but it would be even cheaper to steal it.  My suggestion would be, if Israel cannot acquire the plane, or the rights to manufacture it on the open market, then it should acquire the plans for the plane by espionage.  Simply put, steal it, and put the thing to good use in the defense of good, e.g., our joint religious heritage, political and religious values, and way of life.  Acquiring these kinds of assets would be a good and proper use of Israel’s espionage capability.  An F-22, adapted to carrier operations, would be a very desirable weapon to have, and would go a long way to giving Israel sea-borne air superiority in the entire region.

And, while they are at it, the Israeli’s should steal the plans to the joint strike fighter, the F-35, which will be purchased by the United States in great number, according to the Pentagon.[8]  

All of these aircraft weapons systems are sufficiently adaptable for either flight off a carrier deck, or for use out of land bases.  All are flexible enough for both air combat, and ground attack.  The Israeli’s should have them.  Possession of these two fighters in sufficient numbers, the F-22 and the F-35, probably would secure Israel air superiority over the Mediterranean and the Middle East for the next 25 years, as I have heard of no other countries having planes rivaling the capabilities of these two fighters in development.

All the bottoms should be capable of going through the Suez Canal, and sailing in battle array through the Red Sea, with air cover available off the Sinai if deemed advisable.

Well, you say, the Israeli’s have never designed a blue ocean bottom.

Technically, that is correct.  But, the Israeli’s have done a lot of things the first time.  And, it is not to say that the Israeli’s don’t have the comparable expertise, with regard to design, although not heretofore applied to seagoing ships.  They design and build some of the world’s most advanced computer chips.  What is a computer chip?  Well, it is a wafer with many layers, connected by conductors and having compartments and passage way between the compartments and various levels of the chip.  What is an aircraft carrier?  Well, it is a wafer with many layers, connected by conductors and conduits and having compartments and passage ways between the compartments, only bigger, and it floats and is, if everything goes just right, reasonably water tight and does not tip over or submerge itself at inopportune times.

Get yourself a bunch of naval architects, and a few computer chip guys, and you could design one pretty quickly.  It really isn’t a farfetched notion: Israel has a lot of design and engineering capacity.  They lead the world in nano technology and design, and materials design, and it would not be much of a stretch for them to design boats.

What the Israeli’s don’t have is an experience building big nuclear power plants like the U.S. fleet carriers have, which enable them to go very fast indeed, for long times, and to power around in some of the biggest water in the world under any sort of conditions.  Impressive ships, to say the least.  That’s o.k., Israel doesn’t need a ship like that.  An Israeli carrier wouldn’t need to carry as many air planes, and wouldn’t need to go as fast, and could meet its cruise requirements by the use of a single large diesel engine: some of the biggest commercial tankers in the world are powered by single engine single screwed power units, and do just fine, thank you.  A cruise of 5 or 6000 miles would get you into the Arabian Sea off the southern coast of Iran in pretty good order, say within striking distance of the Iranian nuclear facilities, and give you a little cruising around room, with a top off for fuel here and there at sea from a lighter.  A like range would allow a lot of putting around room in the Mediterranean, enough for extended patrol out in the Sea and away from the Israeli coast, and a lot more room to monitor air traffic and interdict any suspicious planes making way towards Israel.

Israel is nearly impervious to ground attack, as it is nestled in inaccessible terrain.  And, air traffic issuing out of Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Iran, Egypt and Libya, while capable of penetrating Israeli air space is capable of being tracked, and readily identifiable as to origin.  Such is not the case, however, with air traffic coming in off the Mediterranean.  I have always thought that a plane coming in low and hot off the med, right down on the deck, would be very hard to see or spot, and that such a plane could pop off the surface, launch a missile or lob a nuke in, and be turning away and scudding to safety before Israeli air defense could even react, or get an interceptor off the ground.  Well, an aircraft carrier group or two, with a couple of birds in the launch catapults, could help monitor that problem.

Now, you take that sort of a task force capability, along with the amphibious landing carriers, and you could keep a lot of coastal and localized mischief in that area relatively handily suppressed, if you were a mind to.

In addition, Israel needs a boomer sub or two, and even if my understanding is correct that she may have a sub with sea launch capacity, this need exists.  A couple of short coupled subs, with relatively small launch tube bays, patrolling on rotation in the Arabian sea, would be handy to have for either deterrent effect, if the Iranians could even conceptualize such a thing, or for pre-emptive nuclear attack upon Iran, or North Korea, for that matter.  Again, such a craft would not necessarily need to be huge, just efficient, silent, and crewed by people who wouldn’t be bumping into things with it.

Finally, Israel needs short range ballistic missiles, say with a range to Moscow or so, which would handle most potential adversaries. 

As a final matter, Israel needs to build a New Groton or Boston ship yard class of naval shipyard, to go along with her aerospace and rocketry works.  And, a steel industry probably would not hurt.

As a stop gap measure American ship yards would probably be quite happy to talk to the Israelis about putting a couple vessels on the ways, low priced, basic features, and fast production,  seeing as how they won’t be busy making many American bottoms for our defense needs.  There are probably lots of shipyards in the world that would be more than happy to build such boats for Israel, and would love to have the business, given current circumstances.

Long term: revamp espionage, intelligence & covert operations.

The weapons systems discussed above are complex, and take years to plan and develop and get operational, as it takes years to train the mechanics and pilots who will fly them in everyday service.

If a country can buy state of the art, advanced weapons systems foregoing all of the advance development work, and testing and getting the bugs out, it amounts to a considerable savings of time, and an enormous savings in money and effort.

 It would behoove Israel to purchase the necessary weapons systems from the U.S. if possible or if not possible, simply to steal them by espionage: in short, Israel should acquire needed weapons systems by hook or by crook, and as a matter of necessity to exist.  And, if it is to be by crook, then Israel needs to revitalize its espionage mission, and give it again the ability to gather intelligence, and give it again the capability to operate clandestinely with military force and precision.  For Israel enters an era, again, in which she had best be capable of performing "wet work," and carrying out armed intelligence intervention to assert her independence and preserve her very existence. 

The Israelis already have a domestic industry that can build the planes, and design and build good avionics and missiles.  They have built such planes under license.  It is just as easy to build from somebody else’s designs as your own, and there is an added confidence if the product you have stolen is known to be reliable and serviceable, and there is an added bonus if it is state of the art.  There is also a famous incident demonstrating my point, in which the Israelis stole the entire plans for a French fighter bomber, including shop and fabrications drawings, and rolled the first one out the doors for flight testing mere months from the date of theft.

Israel has always had a vaunted intelligence service, its reputation at one time nearly sacrosanct among some circles.  For years it worked very closely with American intelligence, that situation changing somewhat with the case of John Pollard who conducted espionage against the United States on behalf of Israel.[9]  It has not always been the case that Israeli intelligence favored an alignment with the U.S.  This, especially so, given the fact that a lot of Jews had emigrated from eastern Europe and Russia, where they had run in very progressive, socialist and even communist circles, and those in the spy services tended to be more comfortable with a European and Soviet alignment as a result.  The alliance of the Israeli and American spy services began with American spy James Angleton, who is credited with bringing Israeli intelligence into the American orbit, although just to whose benefit this always worked out is not historically clear: suffice it to say, both sides willing used the other, and both sides were used to being used by the other.

The Pollard case should not have surprised the American intelligence community, because the Israelis have always been very resourceful in acquiring weapons secrets, and they have done so by working Western weaknesses just as assiduously as they have sought to exploit Soviet block and Russian contacts.

I am going to run an excerpt at some length form “Every Spy a Prince,” by Dan Raviv and Yossi Melman, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1990, which serves to remind the world just how daring & resourceful Israeli espionage was in obtaining weapons technology for the fledgling state.

This excerpt is how the Israeli’s stole a marvelous airplane, the Mirage, from the French:

“With a prevailing sentiment in favor of taking whatever Israel felt it needed but could not obtain by negotiation, Lakam’s [Lakam was an Israel intelligence front: jjjay] business flourished.  Theft, bribery, and other scheme bordering on the illegal were used to procure valuable treasures that no one was willing to sell.

“An” outstanding coup came in Switzerland, where the Israelis penetrated a company manufacturing engines for the French Mirage warplane.  A joint operation of Lakam, the Israeli army, and the air force performed the classic intelligence procedure of identifying and then exploiting the personal weaknesses of a Swiss engineer, Alfred Frauenknecht: his resentment of his company, his need for money to afford having a mistress, and his sympathy with Israel after the six-day war.

“Colonel Dov Sion, Israel’s military attaché in Paris, who happened to be Moshe Dayan’s son-in-law, took the first step.  He met Frauenknecht a few times, took him out to dinner, and sized him up.  Before long, Lakam’s agents persuaded the Swiss engineer to supply a complete set of blueprints for the Mirage.  He accepted payments but insisted that he was not acting only for money, but also for ideological reasons.  Frauenknecht was not Jewish, incidentally, so employing him was not a violation of the lesson learned by Israeli intelligence after fiascos in Iraq and Egypt; not to employ foreign Jews to spy on their own home countries.

“At first, Frauenknecht met Israeli operatives in hotels or restaurants, where he would hand over photocopies of the blueprints.  To speed up the operation, Frauenknecht got his nephew to help him photograph documents, places them into boxes, and deliver them to Israeli agents who brought them to Germany.  Eventually these activities were noticed by the Swiss authorities, who arrested the engineer and quickly elicited a confession.

….

“Within half a year Israel was flying a new warplane, the Nesher which had the benefit of some of the Mirage technology.  On April 29, 1975, Israel proudly unveiled its latest jet fighter: the Kfir.  It bore an uncanny resemblance to the French Mirage, and the man responsible for that – Frauenknecht – made his first visit to the Jewish state to see the inaugural flight, looking up in the air knowing he had something to do with that silver streak across the Middle Eastern sky.”  Pages 203-204, “Every Spy a Prince.”

Israeli intelligence has not been quite as swashbuckling in recent years, a staid reliance having been placed upon U.S. diplomatic efforts to protect the state.  Quite frankly, it would appear that the Israelis have gotten a little complacent about a world in which it appeared that it would be protected forever by U.S. sovereign interests and a U.S. enforced “peace”, so long as Israel bore a dutiful fealty to the larger country.

A little bit of the cocksure élan needs to return to Israeli intelligence, a little daring, and the old confidence to take life when necessary to protect the Israeli state.  And, now that the west has turned its back on Israel, Israel needs to start stealing weapons and strategic secrets from its former friends, now seeming adversaries at every turn in diplomacy and the United Nations.

Israel needs to toughen its attitude, and to get used to the idea of going it alone.  And, being vicious and cut throat if need be.

I will tell you a little anecdote, a personal one, which illustrates the Israeli reliance upon the U.S., and how it has softened them.

I was at a dinner auction to promote a stray animal shelter in Trout Lake, Montana and just in case you don’t know where that is, it is some miles from Thompson Falls, Montana on the Clark Fork River.  There, that ought to clear that up.  During an intermission in the festivities I nursed a carrot stick to a back table, and happened upon a young couple, she blond and trim and neat, and he, shaggy haired, shaggy bearded, but obviously in a good humor and quite at ease with himself, having a good time.  They looked like a nice couple to chat with during the intermission.

I sidled up to them, and said hello, and that I was from out of town and they looked like they were, too, so I asked them, “Where you from?”  She said, Missoula, and he said, Haifa.  (Hint: Missoula is not in Israel.) Said that he had come to America for the white water rafting and kayaking, and that he had decided to stay, giving the nice blonde lady a tug at her waist, for which she squeezed him back and smiled.

We chatted for a while, and then I said, looks to me like things are getting kind of tight in Israel, and that you guys had better take out the Iranian nukes.  He said, no, i don’t think that Israel will, we don’t have to, somebody else will do it for us.

Well, you could have knocked me over with a feather.  I said, Obama? And he said sure, or the French. By then I was so flabbergasted, I was simply unable to say more.

New Friends & Diplomacy.  When you change schools.  When you move to a new town.  When you have a fight w/ your friends.  When your girlfriend who wore braces and looked like a boy in denim shirts & jeans & tenny runners, suddenly blossoms into young womanhood and takes to riding to the drive-in movies with the town rich kid in his new Corvette.  When you get a divorce.  When the country you have had intimate relations with for 50 years spurns you for an entirely new set of geo-political buddies, who are your sworn enemies.

You get new friends.

It is as simple as that.  And, as complicated.

Israel has been dumped by the United States, and the United States and its new President and administration have decided to cozy up with the Muslim nation states and the terrorists who have sworn the destruction of Israel.  Time for Israel to face up to it.

It is time for Israel to get new friends, who may protect her geopolitical interests, and G_d willing, may help preserve her.

(The entire inspiration for what follows is owed to Pamela Geller, proprietress of http://www.atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com , from remarks she made to me during email correspondence, when we were discussing Israel.  She wrote to me that Israel was very isolated in the world, and that Israel needed new friends and allies, and Pamela said that India was a natural.  She amplified her remarks by saying that both Israel and India were under implacable assaults from Islam, citing the most recent atrocity at Mumbai, and noted further that India is under constant terrorist attack by Muslims inside India, and the aggressions of her Muslim neighbors.  She then mentioned China and South Africa as potential allies of Israel, supporters of her interests, and wonderful trade partners.  This got me to thinking, and was the clear source and inspiration for this article, and quite specifically, for the remarks that follow.)

Let us look at a map of the world.  Let us, moreover, consider the most likely threat to Israel’s existence, that being nuclear attack from Iran.  Let us, moreover, consider all that has been said to this point about Israel expanding her defensive posture, and recognizing that she must take measures for her self-preservation over and above a now very misplaced reliance at this point upon American protection.  Is there a country or region of the world that is a good fit to help Israel with her strategic needs, is amenable or at least not hostile to the fact that Israel is a Jewish state and wishes to remain a Jewish state, and could be a positive asset and partner to Israel’s economic and technological posture, … , and, could help her with her strategic military needs.

Well, as a matter of fact, India seems to fit the bill quite nicely.

Take a look at the map.  And the world.  And those who would exert power in it.  India is one such who so aspires.

Several quite suitable ports lie on the western Indian coast about a 4,000 mile steam from Israel, through the Suez Canal and the Red Sea.  Were Israel able to utilize Indian ports for ship’s chandlers and lightering purposes, this would greatly lessen the burden upon Israel to keep her ships supplied and oiled while on station, as she could pop into Indian ports for ships supplies, repairs and such very conveniently.  Oilers and lighters, moreover, could be dispatched to Israeli ships at sea relieving Israel of the necessity of transit up and down the Red Sea via the Suez, greatly reducing tactical and strategic risks associated with such passage.

India has ambitions for a blue water navy, one capable of projecting power perhaps on a level with 20^th century America.  Israel does not have such ambitions, because for Israel such ambitions would be pretense and illusion: she hasn’t the economy or the man power to have such aspirations, while India clearly does.  As such, Israel’s presence in the Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean does not present the situation for a conflict of rival powers over control of the same area.  Rather precisely the opposite, the Israeli presence in these waters with small carriers and amphibious carriers, just precisely appropriate to defend her interests, rather nicely would dovetail and supplement Indian requirements for larger fleet carriers, likely nuclear powered, by which to project power in the region, and over the entire African continent, and especially those coastal regions of the Middle East which lie on the Indian ocean shoreline.  The smaller Israeli carriers could provide fleet screening and anti-submarine capabilities to the Indians, and protective air screens.  The larger Indian carrier groups could quite obviously provide air cover and protective screening to the Israeli forces.

Both countries and forces could provide a nice defensive compliment one to the other, while the presence of either’s forces would not present geo-political complications for the other.

In short, Israel could do a whole lot of things to help India become a major world power on the high seas, (and as a ground force, though not discussed at length herein), and India could do a lot to make Israel a more dominate regional power in the Middle East, acting as a very effective counterpoise to Arab/Muslim hopes of expansion.  Essentially, India will soon be strong enough that she can exert, in practical terms, more than enough “security” for Israel to replace the loss of the United States, and India will probably prove a far more reliable partner for Israel than the United States. India may never be as powerful as the United States, but she will be powerful enough, and not subject to the current vagaries of the American domestic political scene.  It really is a grand relationship to contemplate in these regards, and such a relationship would very much assuage the departure of the United States from the world stage, in terms of Israeli security.

On a tactical level, Israel has some of the most effective fighter airplane doctrine and training in the world, and such resources and experiences would prove invaluable to the Indians as they brought their fleet air strength up to par, and in terms of training and imparting actual combat experience to the Indian pilots.  India could also profit mightily from a relationship with Israel, in terms of her development of very mobile armored and infantry units, as well as doctrine and tactic in movement and maneuver: Israel has learned a lot about tank combat & gunnery from the United States, England and Germany, and India could readily profit from an interchange of military ideas with Israel.  And, Israel just very well might have a thing or two up her sleeves in terms of intelligence gathering, and small unit anti-terrorist tactics, that the Indian military and civil police might profit from.   India has a long tradition of able and brave warriors; just ask the Greeks and the British and the Japanese, while Israel has a short but proud tradition of some of the best fighter pilots ever to fly, the most able tank fighters and armored unit commanders in the history of battle, and a tradition of able infantry.  (Quite frankly, Israel could have learned much from the United States in infantry doctrine, but has not, except in her special commando units which are very good, but probably not the equal of U.S. Navy Seals and Marine Recon Scouts. But, then again, few other military units in the world are as good, either.  I suspect, however, that the Israeli’s might learn a thing or two from the Nepalese Ghurka's, who I think will shop around to the Indians, as England has gone full tilt pussy in almost all matters, and the Ghurka’s will soon have no use for them.)

India also has the great British infantry doctrine and heritage, acquitting herself well in WWII and Korea, and there could be further interchange here of benefit to all, in terms of battle doctrine and discipline.

Let us consider other matters.  India is fast turning into an economic colossus, and her birth rate far outstrips that of the Chinese, as does her rate of sustainable economic growth.  If you do not pay attention to such matters, you will be surprised to learn that India has one of the largest and most dynamic free standing computer industries in the world, not to mention, one of the largest gross domestic products in the world.  And, some of the ablest and most talented engineers and doctors in the world.  India is not, and has not been for some time, a “third world” country.  She is a world power.  As it turns out, Israel is one of the most technologically and scientifically literate countries in the world.  Somewhere in the neighborhood of 180 Israeli’s have won Nobel Prizes.  Much of the computer might of Intel and Microsoft is owed to Israeli computer scientists, chip designers, soft ware code writers, and allied geeks of all sorts.  The fit between Israeli and Indian business in these fields, and allied fields such as engineering, architecture, and the like, is so obvious as to not need much further elaboration.

Of less obvious dimension, but no less potentially valuable to India in partnering up with Israel, is Israeli knowledge in horticulture, and in the agricultural and water sciences so essential to agriculture.  No doubt India is skillful in these areas as well, but, again, there is a good meshing of interests here.

Indian’s can write.  Israeli’s can write.  Nuff said.

The religions are compatible, and the Jews certainly do not see any threat from Hindus and Buddhists, and Hindus and Buddhists do not see any threat from the Jews.

And, finally, there is Islam.

Both countries live under the implacable threat and reality of Islamic terrorism, and the campaign and plan of conquest of Islamic jihad is directed, exercised and executed daily by Islam against both countries.

It is in the tactical and strategic interests of both countries to actively defend against the Jihad, and it is in the tactical and strategic interests of both countries to exercise cooperation on all levels in this defense.  Israeli intelligence and operational experience in fighting Jihad is unrivaled in the world, and surely the Indians could profit from what the Israeli’s have learned by bitter experience in combating terrorism.  For Israel and India to share their considerable intelligence assets and positioning in the middle and Far East makes a great deal of sense.  It makes special sense to the Indians, because it gives them intelligence assets in the Middle East that she might have been decades in building, and Israel can be especially helpful in providing access to Arab countries and societies that might be willing to provide behind the scenes help in dealing with the truly intransigent, bellicose and aggressive Islamic nations, such as Iran.  Iran is as much a geopolitical threat to Indian ambitions as she is an immediate threat of destruction to Israel.

Israel’s direct and immediate threat is Iran.  India’s direct threat lies in Pakistan.  Pakistan and Iran neighbor.  Pakistan and Iran lie between India and Israel.  Certainly, in the simplest geopolitical terms possible, it would behoove both Israel and India to be able to flank their adversaries, and to be able to use each the other for more direct access to offensive and defensive strategic positioning with regard to their Islamic adversaries.

Consider this one simple scenario, by way of illustrating these issues.—

As it stands today, an Israeli operation to take out the Iranian nuclear facilities is an extremely arduous task, as discussed above, requiring a long flight over potentially dangerous territory, and a long flight home under the guns of those pursuing Iranian pilots with the stomach for combat against the Israeli air force.  By contrast, had Israel built aircraft carriers years ago along the lines I have suggested, attack upon those reactors from carriers positioned in the Arabian Sea would have presented far simpler strategic and tactical considerations.  And, given the Israeli passion for detail and strategy, Israel might even have figured out how to fight her way into the Persian Gulf with a carrier task force group and amphibious landing groups.  This renders such attack even more feasible. And involves far less flying, thereby increasing payloads and ordnance capacity.  I would imagine that any ability to fight one’s way into the Persian Gulf or through the Red Sea in order to take on Iranian or Saudi military and nuclear installations would require several squadrons of wild weasel airplanes, fully capable of finding, taking out and destroying mobile radar installations, along with their complement of missiles.  Such forces would be complimented by overhead satellite and surveillance forces, which is well within the Israeli technological and weapons capability.  Moreover, given the ability to fight from the Indian Ocean with Indian aircraft carrier support and screening defense, Israel’s aircraft carrier jets would also be capable of receiving protection on their flanks from land based planes in Israel.  Finally, given the presence of an amphibious landing carrier group, such as now fielded by the U.S. Marines, Israel would be able to put special commando troops on the ground in Iran, and perhaps other similar places, with the express purpose of gathering intel, or of taking out installations peculiarly resistant to air attack, or doing the surveillance and clandestine things in order to make Israel fighter plane attack on radar and missile installations more successful and less problematic.  I am given to understand, for instance, that before Israel took out the Syrian reactor, that she had special ops troops on the ground to prepare the way for that attack, and to make the preliminary determination that the Syrian facility was indeed dedicated to the production of nuclear weapons grade fuel, and, by inference, nuclear weapons.

Were Israel to have naval assets as discussed, capable of putting airplanes such as the F-22 or F-35 in the air, as both are carrier operable, combined with strategic bomber assets as discussed earlier, she would have wonderful operational flexibility, and could give cover to the strategic planes while they flew into and away from the target, as well as launching carrier based air sorties again a strategic target, such an a nuclear reactor being rebuilt years after initially having been destroyed.  It would give her wonderful operational dexterity.  Plus it would give her the ability to have on scene naval personnel like our own seals to recover downed pilots, as well as infantry capability to go ashore and do various sorts of missions, from recon to rescue.

It goes without saying, almost, but Indian operations in the area engendered by provocation or attack from Pakistan would obviously benefit from the flanking and screening that could be provided by Israel aircraft carrier task force groups.  Israel might find herself involved in some adventures she would not otherwise readily engage in, but, if such is the price of existence, such is the price of existence.

And, there are other potential friends for Israel, in the world.

Australia is one.  Though sufficiently removed from the rest of the world to be of little strategic and military help to Israel in a military sense, Australia does present several grounds for alliance.  First, it too has its problems with Islam, and will have problems in the future with Islamic terrorism, stealth Jihad, and other social “management” problems.  The Australians might have much to learn from Israeli intelligence practices, techniques and doctrine, and in outright experience gained by fighting Islamic fifth column movements internally.  But, the most fruitful basis of a relationship might lie in Australians being able to learn from the Israelis about farming in desert environments.  Oddly enough, even though Australia is in the middle of the water, it has very little fresh water reserves, and is currently suffering from draught and water shortage.  The Israelis might prove pretty damned handy to the Australians in this regard.  And, of course, the Australians have leggy blondes and beer, and plenty of nice sandy beaches for Israeli tourists.

Israel has worked with South Africa on many military and armaments programs in the past.  Noted Raviv and Melman in “Every Spy a Gentleman:”

“Israel sold guns and larger weapons systems to the South Africans, but even more helpfully granted them licenses to make their own versions of Israeli armaments.

Armscor and other South African companies produced a missile boat identical to Israel’s Reshef, itself modeled on the ships the Israeli’s seized from Cherbourg [the French port]; the Cheetah, nearly the same as the Kfir fighter bomber, which was based on the stolen Mirage plans obtained by Lakam; and, Scorpion, a sea-to-sea missile indiscernible from Israel’s Gabriel.

It was from Simontown base in September 1979 that a group of South African ships set out toward the southwest in a highly secret operation.  A few days later, a Vela satellite run by the U.S. national security agency detected a bright flash over the south Atlantic—matching the signature of a nuclear explosion.  The Carter administration suspected that it was the test of a South African bomb, presumably with Israeli involvement, and scientists said it appeared to have been a compact device—impressively “clean,” they said, with hardly any radioactive fallout and therefore difficult to detect after the detonation.”  Pages 344-45, “Every Spy a Gentleman.”

In terms of strategic military considerations, I see no reason why the relationship between Israel and South Africa described above could not be the case again.  And, a thoughtful reader, as I know you are, will read those few paragraphs over several times.  And, will remember, that it was de Gaulle’s France that built the Israeli reactors at Dimona under the noses of the International Atomic Energy Commission, the United Nations Security Council and United States intelligence, to extract the full measure of irony from them.  But, as these paragraphs paint the full picture of Israel’s ability to survive in a harsh world then, and so should they give light upon what it will take for Israel to survive in a harsh world now.—  Israel must do everything in terms of its absolute self interest in order to survive, and this includes “borrowing” freely from its neighbors to meet it strategic defensive needs for arms and weapons, and it must act in concert with any nation state which can help it, regardless of the state’s international standing: in 1979, South Africa was an “Apartheid” state, an international pariah,  and if Nelson Mandela was not then in jail, he was soon to be.

Let us next consider some more unlikely prospects for liaison with Israel, in which Israel might seek some measure of protection from a hostile world.  I must confess to a poverty and paucity of imagination with regard to these states, because they do not present the obvious advantages as does liaison with India, but there might be some advantage to be mined from association with them, because they are former strategic, political and philosophical adversaries of the United States.

China.  China has endless possibilities.

Russia.  Let us now consider Russia.  Russia was the United States’ biggest adversary, when Israel and the United States were allies.  As a consequence, Russia and Israel were adversaries.  (Remember, it was not always so.  In the first years of Israel’s existence, her intelligence agencies especially did not view the Russian and Israeli relationship as inherently antagonistic.  Socialists were socialists, after all.)  Russia also wanted to project power in the Mediterranean, and tried to gain power by making the Arab states her client and proxy states, also making Israel Russia’s adversary, as the Arab states have always sought Israel’s destruction.

This remains the case, as the Arab fervor and blood lust to destroy Israel seems to gain momentum rather than lessening.

To the extent the Soviet “remnant” tries to cozy up to the Arab states, Russia will remain Israel’s adversary.  But what if the American initiative with the Muslims and the Arab states bears geopolitical fruit and drives a wedge between the Russians and the Arabs?  What if America so ingratiates, grovels and crawls her way into Arab hearts that she blocks the Russian drive into the Middle East, and supplants the Russians as the patrons and giver of welfare bounty to the Arab states?

In that case, if Russia is cut off from the Arabs, and no longer fosters, finances or aids and abets the Arab efforts to destroy Israel, does Russia remain inherently antagonistic and adversarial to the interests of Israel?  After all, the Israeli’s are far better socialists than the Russians ever thought of being, and the descendents of Israeli leftist radicals who fled Russia and Eastern Europe because of the pogroms and Jewish repression, are more doctrinally pure communists than Putin and his thugs, who are warmed over nationalists.

Pray consider this.--

The American switch to Arab/Muslim interests has a not so subtle geopolitical thrust to it, and that thrust is to thwart the Russian geopolitical drive into the Middle East.  Next, it might be seen as ambitious enough to envision preventing Russia dominating the oil resources of the former  –stan provinces, and of the oil reserves on the Caspian Sea, and perhaps by extension to preserve western gains in the Ukraine, Georgia and the Caucuses.  For all that I know, it may even presume and intend to protect & buffer Romania, so far might be its vision.  There may even be a hope, perhaps a bit forlorn, to prevent a link up of Soviet interests with Iranian geopolitical interests in the Middle East: that is not farfetched, for a goodly number of Middle Eastern states might view a Russian and Iranian linkage just more than a little bit askance  Which gives one pause to reflect: if the Russians want to cozy up with the Muslims that much, why haven’t they given more to Iran by way of missile technology, instead of just building them a nuclear reactor they might have expected the Israelis (and at one time the U.S.)  inclined to bomb out of existence at some point.  Think about that I a moment.  Maybe the Russians do not want the Arab Muslim messing around in the –stans that much, or even Persian Muslims, for that matter.  Maybe that is why they didn’t give the Iranians any missiles?

I am not sure it is entirely plausible, but the geo-political thinking might have gone like this in the brain of a Condi Rice or Nicolai Burns or some other State Dept. geek’s head, keeping in mind it is very hard to imagine the mental processes of a Nick Burns or Condi Rice.  But, their thinking might be approximately as follows.--  (Russia & Iran. My bad.  The Persians don’t really want the Ayatollah’s  & the Dwarf running things.  Lemme see.  Let’s dump the Israeli’s, they are a pain to protect, a pain in the butt, and go the 1.4 billion Muslims thingie, and make nice nice all over the region.  Let’s undercut the fundamentalist Muslim’s drive to extend their control from the confines of the Middle East, and make nice and make friends, and get the radical regime in Teheran, which is on its last tethers, get it dumped, and make nice nice with the nice Iranian people, and we’ll just cut the Russians right out of the region.  Poof.  In the mean time, we will support and motivate the –stans to fight the Russian resurgence, and we’ll let the demographic tide of Islam sweep over Russia, too.  By that time, the Russians will have exhausted their oil reserves, and the t.b. and syphilis and declining birth rate will leave them ripe for the Islamic demographics to take over, really, in effect, just to move in to all the vacant apartments left by the declining birth rate and tuberculosis deaths, and deaths from the alcohol pandemic.  By that time, the nukes will have rotted in the silos, and the economy will be in shambles, and the Muslims will come in and complete the process of transforming the country into a total shit hole.  We take out the Russians, we take out the Iranian Ayatollahs, we will make the Iranian people love us by giving them lots of cheap watermelon, and our only competitors in the world are the Chinese, the Japanese having vanished from the earth.  And, all we gotta do is dump the Israeli’s.)-- I think the geopolitical thinking might go, or might have gone, something like that. 

Say it works.  Stranger things have happened.  (Like the above paragraph, for instance.)

Say the U.S. elbows the Ruskies out of the Middle East, the price, merely the betrayal of a trusted friend.  A small price, indeed, compared to fighting or standing on principle.

But, say it works.

Why, then, are the Israelis beholden to us?  Why, if circumstance and interest dictate it, should the Israelis not team up with the Russians?

What in the world, say the Israelis were to consider such a preposterous thing, would the Russians possibly receive from the Israelis that would be of any interest to them?

Well, how about all of the same benefits she could also confer on India?  What if, for instance, the Israelis were to be able to help the Russians keep the Iranians out of the former Soviet  –stans provinces?  Think that the Russians might be interested in Israeli anti-missile missile technology?

What of additional benefits?  Israeli medicine possesses some of the finest research and clinical facilities in the world, and Israeli medicine has some of the finest public health facilities in the world.  Russian medicine is medieval by comparison.  Russia suffers from several very serious public health issues, including a tuberculosis epidemic, and a public drinking problem that is quite literally staggering.  Think the Russians might be interested in nano weapons research, given the fact that the Israelis are leaders in nano tech and nano materials fabrication, in the entire world?  Ya think?

And, a coalition of Russia, India and Israel would present a formidable challenge to the Chinese, surely a matter of some interest to the Russians, and Indians alike: the Russians would dearly love someone to help with the Chinese, and the Indians would dearly love someone to help with the Chinese, and Israel could very well be the tie that binds, for all of their common interests.  And Israel, might just be entirely happy to receive whatever help it could as against Muslim majority nation state aggression (don’t you just love reading that phrase), and be happy to receive help in combating Islamic terrorism.  It just kind of fits together, when one thinks about it.  And, it might be a matter of some interest to the Russians, to find someone who might help them economically against the United States and China, now that the U.S. and China have tied their economic and monetary interests so close together.  From the Russian perspective, it would give them an additional ally against the United States, in some circumstances, especially were India in an active mode of ejecting American interests, military and economic, from the Indian Ocean.  It does just kind of fit together, does it not?

This would be just deserts for the United States, for having put Israel under Obama’s bus, with so many others.

Not to mention one other little thing.--i think that the Israelis have a precious asset that the Russians might be terribly interested in, for which they might give Israel access to various items of particular strategic interest to the Israel.

Intelligence.

Now, there is no doubt but that U.S. intelligence agencies and the State Department are absolutely riddled by Soviet infiltrators, moles, and sympathizers of every leftist ideological stripe, and that there is a good chance that Soviet/Russian leaders have access to a lot of information as readily as U.S. leaders, and may formulate policy more readily.  But, if there is anyone on earth that exceeds the Russians in their penetration of U.S. intelligence, and in their knowledge of its workings, it is the Israelis.  We worked with them, we shared with them, for years: what the Americans know, the Israelis know.  And, the Israelis know how the Americans got it, now, don’t they?

We have betrayed the Israelis.

Why should the Israelis, in the name of geopolitical gain aimed at their own self preservation, not betray us?  Cash, grocery coupons, air defense missile systems, ground defense missile systems, scientific data and research, weapons information that the Soviets have stolen from the Americans, the Germans, the French and the English, …. , all of these things should seem to me reasonably accessible to the Israelis in return for what the Israelis could tell the Russians about us.

And we deserve it, because the Obama administration and the leftist radicals who now control our country and our institutions, which warp our very social fabric, have sold the Israelis down the river in exchange for a night in a cheap motel with the Harlot which is the Soul of Islam.  That is to say, I see no particular gain long term in the association sought with Islam, in terms of culture, science, ethics, philosophy, or religious heritage: it is a matter done solely to lower temporarily the price of watermelons and oil, … , and, of course, to advance the cause of Barrack Obama’s religion of choice, that being Islam.

We have sold the Israelis down the river, and they owe us nothing, given this betrayal.

If Israel can figure a geopolitical rationale for cozying up to the Russians and aiding the Russians in opposing our geopolitical goals, in any manner consistent with Israeli interests, then the Israelis should do so.  Pure and simple.

Conclusion.  Condi Rice, and Nicki Burns, and even that fat phony Colon Powell, and the even fatter phony Madeline Albright and the 34 resident genius’s who came up with "Changing Course," and Obama and the brain dead Pelosi and Reid, and the pederast Barney Frank, never thought these matters through to these kinds of surmises and conclusions, did they?  They just figured that the Arabs would swallow the Israelis whole, and the matter would be done with.

And, quickly.

 But what if the Israelis have a little luck, some grit, and are stubborn, and finally fight, … , well, then, they will be like that proverbial fish bone in the throat, very hard to swallow, indeed,  … , for the Arabs or anyone else.  What if the Israelis are not destroyed?  If Israel goes on to forge new strategic and diplomatic alliances, as imagined and considered here, she may emerge from the whole fracas far stronger than she ever was, and she may be essential in helping the Indians emerge as a very major world power.  Together, India and Israel figure to present an awesome combination of power, wealth and technological expertise.  And, in league with a Russia not beleaguered by the pressure of Islamic expansion or Jihad, might even present a constellation of power, and ability to project power sufficient to supplant the role that the United States seems hell bent for (Obama’s) election to abandon in the world.

Why, it would be ironical indeed if the partner the United States threw so callously out the cabin door to the wolves, came back around to remind us that we were short sighted and ungrateful?

Do you like apples, you radical leftist commie bastards who occupy the United States government?  Well, how do you like them apples?  The little “liability” you have thrown so callously down the crapper, in your estimation, may very well prove to be the “asset” that helps fuel the emergence of the world’s next super power, … , one that quite eagerly may rival and, indeed, supplant an idiotic United States of America.  Israel may turn out to be as valuable to India as she was to the United States.

I know of no other nation on earth that has acted so heedlessly, so precipitously, so incautiously and with a design as oblivious to the lessons of history, to abandon power rightfully won.  And to betray stalwart friends.  In the case of spurning Israel we have committed both sins at once.  What an oddity that we should endure every backstabbing inflicted by the French, and stand with them, but that we should throw a loyal and supportive friend to the wolves?

We shall pay.  Someday, the sooner the better, Obama & Pelosi & Reid & the pederast Frank will get their just desserts for such foolhardy rashness.  For such effrontery to the hard lessons of history.  They are idiots to the bone, every last one of them, including Condi and Nick, who set the stage, and they shall deserve what they get.

I guess providence has balanced the scales for the beneficence of the Founding Fathers, … , we have yet to see the destruction and havoc wrought by our radical friends, but we will.  It will not be pleasant to contemplate, nor to have to live through.

Personal.  Now, I am a simple lad from Eastern Oregon.  Born & raised & nurtured in the U.S. of A.  And I never could have dreamed that I would advocate the interests of another country over my own,[10] … , but, that was before I realized that my country has sold me out, abandoned me to a lonely belief in values now derided and dismissed as outmoded, and pursued policies and goals which are inimical to the values and beliefs to which I have adhered, to which I still adhere, and which I believe the values of my forefathers.  (In that regard, I feel more than the usual degree of kinship to Israel: Obama has betrayed me as fully as he has Israel.) 

I think the values that remain Israel’s are those that remain mine.  For this I support Israel, because I think Israel is that last best hope for democracy and the judo Christian ethos.  My country has abandoned those values and aspirations in its policies, foreign and domestic, and indeed, I believe that the government of my country is so antagonistic to them that it will try to destroy the exercise of those values by its citizens.

It is for me to take my country back, and to help likeminded persons to do so.  This paper is a small part of that effort.

In the meantime, I advocate for Israel as against those who have perverted what it means to be American, and against those who have perverted what it used to mean when America extended her hand in friendship.  Those who now exercise the reins of government are betrayers and they are usurpers, and I advocate against their policies and the policies of the government, if by advocating for Israel it means to do so.

John Jay @ April 26, 2009.

---

[1] "I say this clearly: I do not accept the Jewish State, call it what you will," [Mahmoud Abbas] said at a preliminary conference of the Palestinian Youth Parliament in Ramallah.

[2] For fiscal year 2008, Boeing reported net earnings of $2.7 billion dollars.  I do not know the gross earnings figure, but it would be considerably larger.  http://www.fleetbuzzeditorial.com/2009/01/28/boeing-q4earnings/ .  Israel’s economy could support a similar economic entity, especially a company’s like Boeing, which is configured for aircraft production sold the world over.

[3] I will later make the case that Israel also develop her own naval yards for building her own naval force.  The states of Connecticut, Virginia and Massachusetts have large shipyards, and they make a lot of the military vessels for the United States navy.  Their economies are not out of proportion to the Israeli economy.  For instance, for calendar year 2008, Connecticut had an economy of $216,266 millions, Massachusetts of $351,514 millions, and Virginia of $382,000 millions, more or less. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_GDP_(nominal).  The figures for the various nations of the world were taken from charts compiled by C.I.A. and  United Nations, the figures at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal). Certainly, the cost associated with manufacture and maintenance of the U.S. military forces are greatly in excess of the costs associated with the construction of an Israeli navy, and an upgrade of the Israel strategic air forces contemplated herein.  It will not, however, essential for her survival, and the expense must be borne.

[4] Both the B-52 and B-1b remain in U.S.A.F. service, though both are long in the tooth, and though both are serving far longer than anyone ever considered.  The B-1b is quite a plane, and it is liked by its aircrews.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-1_Lancer .  Both planes are fine exemplars of the strategic bomber, and both are design capable of delivering heavy conventional payloads, or nuclear armed cruise missiles, or of dropping nuclear bombs from high altitude.  They are still very flexible airframes.  The B-1b has an operational range of about 3,000 miles without refueling.

[5] A B-52 has an admitted operational range of nearly 9,000 miles without refueling.  http://www.fas.org/programs/ssp/man/uswpns/air/bombers/b52.html

A B-1b has an admitted operational range of about 3,000 miles without refueling.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-1_Lancer .

[6]

Armament: Two RAM launchers; two NATO Sea Sparrow launchers; three 20mm Phalanx CIWS mounts (two on LHD 5-8); four .50 cal. machine guns; four 25 mm Mk 38 machine guns (LHD 5-8 have three 25 mm Mk 38 machine guns).

Aircraft: 12 CH-46 Sea Knight helicopters; 4 CH-53E Sea Stallion helicopters; 6 AV-8B Harrier attack aircraft; 3 UH-1N Huey helicopters; 4 AH-1W Super Cobra helicopters. (Planned capability to embark MV-22 Osprey VTOL tilt-rotors).

[7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-22_Raptor  Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston, Chief of the Australian Defence Force, said in 2004 that the "F-22 will be the most outstanding fighter plane ever built. ...” It should be noted that resident Obama has chosen to cancel the F-22 Raptor program.

[8] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Strike_Fighter.  On April 6, 2009, secretary of defense Robert gates announced that the military services would buy 2,443 of the joint strike fighters, the F-35 Lightning II.

[9] http://www.nationalreview.com/buckley/wfb200603031339.asp .  I wonder at Bill Buckley’s take in the matter, given the issuance of “Changing Course” by the U.S.-Muslim Engagement Group, announcing Israel’s betrayal and casting off, now wonderfully referred to as “being thrown under Obama’s bus?”

[10]   “Our Country, in her intercourse with foreign nations, may she always be in the right; but, our Country, right or wrong.”  Stephan Decatur.  I was raised with that saying, never would I have thought to have questioned its wisdom, … , but, never did I think the values and beliefs I was raised with would be under such siege, either, by those who control the government of the United States.

george bush will be prosecuted for war crimes over my dead body. period.

george bush will be prosecuted for war crimes over my dead body.  period.  so ends this blog post.  so starts civil war.  i am feeling a bit prickly over this, so my attitude is, bring it on.  i am ready.  just call me one of those crazy right wing extremists, oh, yeah, baby.

 p.s.  the same goes for dick cheney and donald rumsfeld.

mr. peabody's pet boy sherman ... the bullwinkle show ...

you may turn to herodotus for ancient context, or perhaps will and arial durant’s compendiums for appropriate analogies, by which to gain context and insight into the swirl around us.  as for myself, i much prefer the concision of  jay ward, who aired “peabody’s improbable history” along with the further absurd adventures of rocky the flying squirrel and bullwinkle (the flightless) moose, on rocky and his friends, and then the bullwinkle show. (http://www.toonopedia.com/peabody.htm)

it is a simple matter, really.

to my mind, “peabody’s improbable history” provides the most appropriate metaphor to explain barrack hussein obama and his sponsors.  the first episode, found here on u-tube, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YunO4Wc8E28,  explains mr. peabody’s need for a boy to share his life, and how peabody came to acquire his pet boy, sherman.  peabody goes on to explain that his penthouse apartment was hardly a place to raise a rambunctious boy, who needed to run free, so he invented his “way back” time machine as something to keep sherman entertained, and presumably as a way to keep him from peeing on the carpet and chewing up the furniture in little bouts of pet angst and separation anxiety.

as peabody explains at the close of the episode, running a far too short 5:02 minutes in length, “every dog needs a pet boy.”  and, so it is with the radical left, and their newly elected exponent, b. hussein obama.  he needs them, and they, most assuredly, need him to give form to their various ambitions and needs.

every movement needs a popular exponent.  marxist thought’s first great popularizer was vladimir lenin, or “vlad the impaler” as i like to call him, and then later the droll wit of joseph stalin, or “joe the impaler” as i like to call him.  these impalers, … , er, excuse me, popular exponents, are to put the sometimes arcane wonderments of an ideology, capable of being accessed by only very, very smart ideologues, into terms that the rest of us are capable of understanding, such as “move over there against the pock marked portion of the cobble wall,” or, “pay your taxes and keep your fucking mouth shut about it,” … , you know, those sorts of things.

people like obama, and sherman before him, give form and substance, direction and purpose, to those thoughts and ideals which remain inchoate without administration, or, in this particular case, … , without an administration.

at about 52 second into the u-tube film of the first episode peabody explains that the “way back” machine is his pet boy sherman’s, and he whistles to sherman, saying “her sherman, here boy,” and as sherman comes to him, he says “shake,” and sherman mutely extends his hand and obediently shakes, and then he says to sherman, “say hello,” to which sherman responds, looking at the camera and the audience, “hello,” with a vacuous stare which informs us forever, that he is none too bright.  the pleased peabody, looks to us, and says, “smart as a whip, isn’t he.”  i have owned a lot of dogs, but never a sarcastic one.  oh, he is potty trained, and polite enough, and capable of being a harvard law review editor-in-chief, but he just doesn’t read his lines very well, and he falls flat on his face when he is off script. 

and, it is a pretty good metaphor for much of obama’s history, for just as it didn’t take sherman much of a performance to garner peabody’s accolades of “smart as a whip, isn’t he,” it hasn’t taken too much by way of demonstrable performance from obama to win similar accolades of smart as a whip from his handlers and promoters, his fans, and in the case of “his father frank,” his erstwhile pimps.

for, alas and alack, sherman was always a bit of a bumbler, and though capable of speech, he really doesn’t ever say much of anything clever throughout the entire peabody series.

and, i am beginning to expect that this may foretell obama’s presidency, as well.

he just hasn’t done very well when he goes off script, or when he loses his place at the teleprompter.   he hasn’t fared well exchanging quips with jay leno, and so far most of his set pieces have put as much egg on his face as klieg lights.

this first episode has so many wonderful metaphors, apropos of obama.  at about 1:48 minutes & seconds, peabody is explaining how he happened to pick sherman as his boy.  it starts when he sees sherman being beaten by thugs, and peabody says, “my heart went out to him, i am always pulling for the underboy,” even though he knows that sherman is less than perfect, “… he wasn’t at all what i [was] looking for, … “ but that he is taken by sherman’s big brown eyes.  so, sherman is snapped from seeming obscurity into prominence, a matter very close and dear to the fortunes of obama, as well: it seems as though at all stages in his life, unforeseen benefactors appear to do him favors.  private schools, trips to pakistan while an obscure student, transfers from a college in which his performance is lackluster, to say the least, to a prestigious university, and then the al mansour and percy engineered admittance to harvard.  sherman was no less lucky, to be plucked up by peabody, soldier of fortune, and for doing really no more than obama did to deserve it.

and, so, the radical left has learned somewhat to its chagrin, i might imagine, that sherman, … , er, excuse me, b. hussein obama is not at all everything that it was looking for, either.

this may present something of a problem, because as time wears along and the euphoria of the election wears off, barrack obama will have to learn how to govern.  and, just as the first 30 or so pre-called plays run by bill bilichick run out, well, about 30 plays into the game, and then the patriots have to call the rest depending upon time and tide and circumstance, and the ebb and flow of the game, so will obama have to call the plays out from underneath he careful scripting and scrutiny of his handlers.

he will be, as every bridegroom eventually is, called upon to perform outside the sweet glow of the honey moon.  on his own devices.

he has some advantages.

the radical left is committed, if not exactly to him, then to its vision of a collectivist america.  so, pointy headed bureaucrats and pompous academicians, and fatuous news media types, and credulous students remain assiduously zealous, faces upturned and eyes in rapture at the messiah.  but, this is rapidly disappearing, as he has made alarming political gaffes, and from the front running position he has enjoyed since the election.  less famously, but more substantively, he has not handled the aftermath of the roughshod passage of the stimulus package, he has not handled the tea-baggers very well, and he has made stunning miscues with international leaders.

he has failed, moreover, to win the backing of several rather important components of successful rule, here in america.  these two components also stand as major impediments with regard to his patently obvious desire to impose socialist rule, and permanent socialist rule, upon america.

no. 1 impediment to his effectual rule.  in an institutional sense, though he exercises control over most of the federal bureaucracy, and it will do largely his bidding as he does in the main their socialist bidding, he has failed to capture the allegiance of the military.  and, furthermore, he looks very  “positioned” never to enjoy its enthusiastic support.

the reason is quite simple.  it is very hard to make institutional cowards out of brave men, though rep. murtha (d., penn.) and wesley clark, candidate for pres., soon to join the company of john c. fremont and george mcclellan as obscure & failed candidates for president, are the obvious exceptions that prove the rule.

the rescue of the good civilian merchant marine captain from pirates shows the vast chasm of values, perceptions, and the observance to higher callings other than personal ambition between a scheming narcissistic president, and those men on the waves and on the ground that have been trained to make steadfast, firm and on the spot decisions of life and death, and duty and honor, and who have committed their lives and honor to same.  while obama preened and schemed to extract diplomatic advantage in the hostage situation, the navy command on the spot, and the seal team who executed the rescue, basically ignored the chain of command from obama’s whitehouse and executed the rescue of the good captain on their own dimes. 

obama has, moreover, in league w/ gates, sliced the funding of the military, at a crucial juncture in which new weapons systems needed to be developed, a fact lost on obama and his ideologues, but not lost to the military.

it appears that he is not to be, and he never will be, trusted by the rank and file of the u.s. military, and i doubt that he will ever bring it fully to heel, no matter how many clark’s he may stuff into the pentagon or ripe theatre command posts.  the u.s. military, and the state national guards, remains, in my opinion, vast bulwarks of strength against the institution of a socialistic and communistic system upon our society, and against the imposition of tyranny.

see previous articles in this blog, regarding the thought of hamilton, madison and jay, in this regard, on the role of the military and the state militias as a protection against usurpers.

no. 2 impediment to his effectual rule.  the people do not like him, and do not trust him, and he fears us.

he has not captured the affection and respect of those who voted against him.  such people remain very apprehensive about his governance, and very protective of their liberties.

in yakima, washington i attended a tea bag rally.  after prayers to open the event, which prayers, by the way, included the president and our leaders and hope for divine inspiration for them, one thing was very obvious.

the people of this country will not give up their guns.  although the public rhetoric has not come to this point, in private and in small conversations, the people will resist any effort to confiscate their guns or curtail their gun rights.

these people are extremely distrustful of obama.  and, they are extremely wary of the attempts of the radical leftist elites to graft european socialism upon people thoroughly enamored of the free market system.  i had mistakenly thought that there was not much intellectual adherence to the theories of free market enterprise and personal initiative left in this country.  boy, howdy, was i wrong.  in yakima, washington i listened to audience member after audience member troop to a microphone, broadcasting out over local radio station k-hit, and after admitting to never going to rallies and never speaking before audiences, ably and eloquently explain the benefits of free markets, free enterprise, and hard work and individual initiative.

i have to admit to having been quite humbled and very moved by witnessing this, and while this was going on, much conversation took place between friends in the audience: this is, after all, small town america.

i saw a sign that said it all.--  “i love my country, but i am very afraid of my government.”

there is another segment of the populace that obama has lost, and that is a growing number who feel they were gulled, and that they elected a pig in a poke, and they are coming to regret it.  they are beginning to see his true dimensions as a socialist, and they do not like what they see.

and, they are beginning to understand with frightening clarity just how much they, and the american way of life, are despised and reviled by obama’s extreme and radical leftist base.

and, he has revealed himself a muslim, and people do not like this.  it is not because he is muslim.  it is because he favors islam to the detriment of america, and to the detriment of americans.  they will not forgive him this.

no. 3 impediment to his effectual rule.   he fears the people.

say what you will about the murderous thug, saddam hussein,  he was not afraid to go before an armed crowd, even one waving guns in the air, and firing bullets in the air.

can you imagine obama doing this?  no, as a matter of fact, you cannot.

obama and his stalwarts live in fear of the very public whose desires they say they will express, whose individualism they say they have been given an historical imperative to collectivize.  obama says historical process guides him, to which the people say bunk!, and he sees and fear “right wing extremism.”

i am afraid that mr. peabody was bound to live in disappointment of his pet boy sherman, as sherman would remain “not at all what [peabody] was looking for.”  and, i am afraid that obama’s handlers are going to be mightily disappointed in obama, as obama is never going to be very much outside of his scripted game plan, and appears to me to be unable to win over anyone in the hurly burly that is democratic and republican politics.  obama will propound the agenda of government bureaucracies and agencies that share his views on the leftist agenda he is to advance, … , after all, they formulated them on his behalf.

but, just as “hello” was about all sherman could muster when given the command to speak, i don’t think obama will prove to be much more capable of speaking or planning or advancing an agenda on his own.  after all, his forte has been to smile pleasantly and smugly, say something obtuse, and then exit, “stage left,” as yogi bear used to say to boo boo the bear.  obama had the bully pulpit of the editorship of the harvard law review, and wrote nothing, neither advanced nor propounded any social or political agenda: his wife had more wherewithal in this respect than obama.  he has never advanced legislation.

you will forgive me the observation, but his most successful enterprise has been to advance himself as a good black man to front the agenda’s of others.  right now he serves soros, ayers and al mansour, but sooner or later he has to go on his own.  i am beginning to think there is not much behind the smile that he wishes to advance.  he did not as a lawyer, he did not as a u.s. senator, and i think perhaps he will not as president.

except, he has shown his hand as a proponent of islam.  and, i do not think that he can pull that off.

peabody selected sherman as his pet boy, because sherman possessed the virtue of being a boy.  sherman never grew up, never became much.

obama had his virtues, in the eyes and perceptions of his handlers and pimps.  other than an uncanny ability to imitate the vapid and vacant stare into the future mastered by mussolini, which obama has down pat, obama has not yet shown much in addition to being a wonderful vessel of the demographic and social hopes of the soft hearts of america.

i suspect that he will not be much more than that projection of the hope for a black president. 

he has, to this point, made a career of advancing the purposes of others, including those purposes of ayers the radical, or al mansour the black nationalist and virulent anti-semite, the tool of the o.i.c., of the radical leftist arab apologists in the state department.

but, he has not shown much of himself.

i suspect that we shall all find out about obama, as mr. peabody found out about sherman, that though he had brown eyes and was presentable in a vague & vacant sort of way, there really isn’t too much else to show.

the first episode ends, with peabody observing, “no doubt about it, every dog should have a boy.”

does this mean i do not think that obama is dangerous, or that he does not present a threat to the united states.  oh, no, it does not.

what it means, is that while obama will do his damage in the fields of foreign policy, and while i think he will try to sell us down the river to the arab and o.i.c. interests in the united nations, and while i think he and his radical leftist friends in congress will attack our gun rights, and will attempt to abridge our rights of free speech and association, … , while i think he will try those things, … , i hardly think him any more as an irresistible force, or an implacable opponent.

i think him, in short, a mediocre man who has been dealt an extremely strong hand, but who will find a way to dissipate his considerable early advantage.  i think, therefore, that we have to fight him hard on every front, and not curry his favor, as it is not worth gaining in the long run.  we have to wear him down, absorb his momentum, and then turn to the task of defeating him.

and, if he does manage some of his goals, such as legislation to take our guns, or our free speech rights, we have to fight him with arms in the street, unto our deaths if necessary.  but, i think we can defeat him.  he is, fortunately, far less than the man the left needed to seal the deal and take institutional control of the country.

you know what is coming.  just as mr. peabody said of sherman, so will soros, ayers and the others say of obama, “he is not everything [we were] looking for.”

well, no doubt about it, george soros, bill ayers, the pink ladies, the daily kos, all the rabid, ravening hungry for power souls have their boy, … , really, almost everything they could have asked for in a boy.  he is a rabid socialist.  he is a muslim.  he is an anti-semite.   he and joe biden will do everything they can to dismantle the world to which the united states via diplomacy and power gave and lent lasting peace, and, from which, no doubt, the united states extracted considerable power and wealth.  the left think that they have the boy who will do all this for them.  as above, i think they will be disappointed.

i think they will find, that b.hussein obama turns out to be a light heavy, and not a genuine heavy weight, and that as a light heavy he will fare poorly in the clinches, and that he will lack the knockout punch which might have delivered the united states into the clutches of soros, ayers, and the pink ladies, and given them the imposition of communist rule that they wanted so badly.

close, but no cigar.

the question is, will he be able to rule for them, in such a manner that their hopes are gratified.  their hopes will be gratified, only in the case that obama, at some point, is capable of speaking and acting off the teleprompter and away from the script provided for him by others.

i personally am coming to believe that he cannot.

i think that i shall share mr. peabody’s disappointment in sherman.  i shall be overjoyed at george soros’s disappointment in obama.

i think that we will take our country back.  we may have to fight and die for it in the streets, but i think that we shall prevail.

i do not know if we can save israel.

 

john joseph jay, 04.20.2009

 

rumors of early demise may have been exaggerated

oops.

just as i sent the memorial service notice out, fox news announced the rescue of the ship's captain and the killing of three of the pirates and the capture of the fourth:  the pirates cannot be too dead, as far as i am concerned.

good news.

apparently the captain of the u.s.s. bainbridge got tired of the f.b.i. negotiator on board, and sent in a seal team or perhaps some handy u.s. marines.  i suppose we shall all find out.

it will be interesting, i suppose, to watch how obama "sells" this development to the muslim "world," as evidence of u.s. concerns over the precious & tender & to be coddled muslim psyche.

but, a little egg on the face for me, and a great big smile for an well taken action by the u.s. navy, the captain/commander of the bainbridge having done the right thing despite "policy from on high."  kudo's for the captain, and a pain in the patoot for me, having to send out notice of a bit of a retraction.  laughing.

that's all right.  it's good news, and decisive action to be endorsed and cherished.  go navy!!!!

burial at sea, united states prestige

memorial services at al-obama mosque, formerly the national cathedral,commemorating the death of u.s. naval power lost at sea off the coast of somalia, to be announced.  officiating, in an act not usually extended to the executioner of a military force, will be resident of the united states, hussein obama, who shall share his prepared remarks on the demise of american hegemony, entitled, "and about time."

attendance at the celebration of the deceased will be limited to those of the muslim faith, the first 15 rows of the mosque reserved for united nations officials and diplomats of arab states.  the mood inside the mosque is expected to be festive. 

non-muslims in dhimmitude are asked to view the services on closed circuit televisions, stationed in appropriate places at the far end of theparking lots, if space permits, and after payment of a subjugation tax, nominal and amounting to only a small %-centage of earnings.

further details available at the saudi embassy, formerly the site of the united states department of state.  scheduling is flexible, the resident's schedule under some constraints to accommodate the building on new minarets on the resident's residence, formerly known as the white house.