Obama pressed to get tough on Iran over nuclear program Israel’s advocates mount campaign ahead of meeting

http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/world/2012/03/04/obama-being-pressured-toughen-stance-toward-iran-over-nuclear-program/REhzMEHBYJ1Q0ghmcLGDZK/story.html


Obama pressed to get tough on Iran over nuclear program

Israel’s advocates mount campaign ahead of meeting

By Mark Landler, New York Times, March 04, 2012

WASHINGTON - On the eve of a crucial visit to the White House by the prime minister of Israel, that nation’s most powerful US advocates are mounting an extraordinary public campaign to pressure President Obama into hardening US policy toward Iran because of its nuclear program.

From the corridors of Congress to a gathering of nearly 14,000 US Jews and other supporters of Israel this weekend, Obama is being buffeted by demands that the United States be more aggressive toward Iran and more forthright in supporting Israel in its own confrontation with the country.

While defenders of Israel rally annually at a meeting of the pro-Israel lobbying group, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), this year’s event has been supercharged by a convergence of election-year politics, a deepening nuclear showdown, and the often-tense relationship between the president and the Israeli prime minister.

Obama and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will speak to the group, known as AIPAC, as will the three leading Republican presidential candidates, who will appear via satellite from the campaign trail on the morning of Super Tuesday. Republicans have seized on Iran’s nuclear ambitions to accuse Obama of being weak in backing a staunch ally and in confronting a bitter foe. [Republicans are pressuring obama to go to war with iran to only benefit israel, which could lead to WWIII if Russia and China are drawn into this illegal (under International Law) attack on Iran, A SOVEREIGN NATION AND NO THREAT TO THE U.S.]

The pressure from Congress is also mounting. A group of influential senators, fresh from a meeting with Netanyahu in Jerusalem, has called on Obama to lay down sharper criteria, known as “red lines,’’ about when to act against Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

‘It’s not just about the Jewish vote and 2012.’

Senator Lindsey Graham South Carolina Republican



“We’re saying to the administration, ‘You’ve got a problem; let’s fix it, let’s get back on message,’ ’’ said Senator Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican, who was in the meeting with Netanyahu and said the Israeli leader vented frustration at what he viewed as mixed messages from Washington. [This is openly inserting israel's influence into America's internal affairs and the political campaign for Presidency of the United States!!]

“It’s not just about the Jewish vote and 2012,’’ he said. “It’s about reassuring people who want to avoid war that the United States will do what’s necessary.’’

To give teeth to the deterrent threat against Iran, Israel and its [REPUBLICAN] backers want Obama to stop urging restraint on Israel and to be more explicit about the circumstances under which the US itself would carry out a strike.

In an interview published Friday, Obama reiterated his pledge to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon - with force, if necessary - and ruled out a policy of accepting but seeking to contain a nuclear-armed Iran. The Israeli government, he said, recognizes that “as president of the United States, I don’t bluff.’’

American Jews are anything but monolithic. More dovish groups, such as J Street, try to make a case against a preemptive Israeli strike. But for now, AIPAC will set the tone for debate on the Iranian nuclear threat.

Obama would not lay down new red lines on Iran, even if he discusses them with Netanyahu, administration officials said. And he is not ready to accept a central part of Israel’s strategic calculation: that an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities would be warranted to stop it from gaining the capability to build a nuclear weapon, rather than later, to stop it from actually producing one.

In the interview, Obama warned Israel of the consequences of a strike and said that it would delay but not prevent Iran from acquiring a weapon. He also said he did not know how the US public would react.

Israel’s backers said they believed that a majority of [THE DUMBED DOWN] Americans would back an Israeli strike against Iran. But polling data paints a murky picture: While close to 50 percent of Americans say in several polls that they would support Israel, a slightly larger number say they would stay neutral. In some polls, there is strong support for diplomacy.

[AN ILLEGAL ATTACK ON IRAN BY ISRAEL AND/OR THE U.S. WILL SEAL OFF ALL OIL COMING OUT ALL OF THE MIDDLE EAST AND WOULD EXCELLERATE THE CONFLICT TO INCLUDE CHINA AND RUSSIA. THE MIDDLE EAST IS A HUGH POWDER KEG WITH A VERY VERY SHORT FUSE WITH ISRAEL INTENT TO LIGHT THE MATCH.

THE PRICE OF OIL WILL SPIKE TO HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS A BARREL.]