Is it now that the USA has to send envoys to China to issue Israel's threats? And some people are having a hissy fit about Obama bowing to the Japanese head of State? If the threat is from Israel, at whom is the threat directed.

"George says to Frank, 'Look, if you don't go tell Jack that we're liable to blow up Henry if Frank doesn't help make Henry do what we want, then we are going to have to blow up Henry, and YOU are going to be responsible.??"

"Oh, dear," says Frank, "I'd better go deliver that threatening message to Jack so we won't be responsible for starting blowing up Henry and starting WWIII?" Blalaaaatz.

'US warned China that Israel could bomb Iran'

Two senior officials from the White House, Dennis Ross and Jeffrey Bader, made a trip to China on a "special mission" to garner support in Beijing over the Iranian nuclear program, according to a Thursday report in The Washington Post. The officials visited China two weeks before US President Barack Obama arrived in Beijing.

Dennis Ross.
Photo: Ariel Jerozolimski [file]

SLIDESHOW: Israel & Region | World The officials reportedly carried the message that if China would not support the US on the issue, Israel would be likely to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities. The paper quoted the officials as saying that Israel saw the issue as "an existential issue," and that "countries that have an existential issue don't listen to other countries."

They stressed that were Israel to bomb Iran, the consequences for the region would be severe.

The efforts seemed to have yielded results, according to White House officials quoted in the report, as the six world powers, including both China and Russia, put together a resolution critical of Iran's nuclear program earlier this week.

RELATED
World powers readying Iran resolution
ElBaradei: 'Iran not cooperating'
The development was significant as it groups Russia and China with the four Western powers - the US, Britain, France and Germany - in unified criticism of Iran's nuclear program. Russia and China have acted as a drag on Western calls for tougher action against Iran.

While the board passed an IAEA resolution critical of Iran in 2006 with the support of all six world powers, subsequent attempts by the West to get backing from all 35 board nations foundered on resistance from Russia and China.

US President Barack Obama shakes hands with Chinese President Hu Jintao after a joint press conference at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing earlier this month.
Photo: AP [file]

While any board resolution is mostly symbolic, it does get reported to the UN Security Council. Beyond that, unified action in Vienna could signal that both Russia and China may be more amenable to a fourth set of Security Council sanctions on Iran than they have been in past years.

The draft urges Iran to open its nuclear program to wider perusal by the IAEA, they said. As well, it calls on Iran to answer all outstanding questions on that enrichment facility, comply with UN Security Council demands that it suspend enrichment and further construction of the plant, and stop stonewalling an IAEA probe of allegations it tried to develop nuclear weapons.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1259010987363&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

China's Backing on Iran Followed Dire Predictions
>>>>>>>>
Iran, which insists that it wants to harness nuclear power only to make electricity, this week acknowledged feeling new pressure from Russia over its expanding nuclear network. A top military commander, Brig. Gen. Mohammad Hassan Mansourian, told state-run Press TV that Russia had reneged on supplying promised military technology "due to pressure form the Zionist lobby and the Americans."

The visit to Beijing last month by the senior White House aides was described as part of a broader effort by the Obama administration to isolate Iran. In making their case to China, administration officials warned that a nuclear Iran not only would raise the risk of a regional conflict, higher oil prices and even interrupted supplies, it could also trigger a surge in nuclear proliferation.

The Chinese were told that "this could shake the entire framework of the international nonproliferation regime," said the official who was familiar with the lengthy analysis Ross laid out.

Countries such as Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Egypt could start their own nuclear programs, the Chinese were told. "And once Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Turkey go, what's left?" the official said. The implication again was clear: Japan, China's biggest competitor for influence in the region, could go nuclear as well, the official said.

(Can you say "Domino theory?" Can you say, "Those who don't learn from history are destined to repeat it?" Can you say, "Scare the hell out of the idiots worked for GW, why argue with success?" Who is actually threatening whom? Look at what we are doing, not what we are saying. Listen to the "they might, may, could, intend, think, plan, are suspected, are working toward, are conjectured to....." Look at what IS, and look at what is being stressed as threat? Who is actually threatening whom? Who needs to be acting in defense? Who is under threat of attack and the punishment of restrictions and condemnation? Who is being demeaned? Who is being denied equal protection under international law? Who is being targeted for hatred and destruction? Who is being bullied, and who is doing the bullying?)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/25/AR2009112504112.html

jd

I hope you will accept my lack of support for Israel's methods and practices in connection with their observable practices toward neighboring peoples and nations. My support for Israel, which was total for twenty years or so, began to wane in the 70's and 80's. At the present time, I can find little in Israel's public actions to support other than their demand that the rocket attacks against their civililan population cease.

I am too tired, at this time in my life, to go back over all of the extensive studying, researching, translating, of the history of the "wiped off the map" comment. I will simply tell you I, personally, after much study, became convinced that those words were never actually used as has been popularly reported. I have become convinced that there was a comment made, and, taken out of context, the exact comment was distorted deliberately to provoke. As to who deliberately distorted it first, I have come to no conclusion.

Iran is under threat of attack from both Israel and the USA. Iran also has a right to protect itself. Lebanon has also been under threat and actual attack from Israel, and has been powerless to defend itself. The Palestinian territories are still under occupation by Israel and have been repeatedly attacked, and have no power to defend themselves. Iran, and we, are aware by actual action that Israel WILL attack and attempt to destroy as much as possible other nations. So far, we have not seen Iran attack its neighbors, or occupy its neighbor's territory. In the Iraq/Iran (or Iran/Iraq) war, it was Iraq that invaded Iran, and, at that time, Iraq was ally to the USA. And Iraq used the same poison gas on the Iranians as it did on the Kurds. Iraq remained our ally at the time it gassed both the Kurds and the Iranians.

From my perspective, based upon past performance and behavior by Israel, the USA, Iran and other Middle Eastern countries, Iran has as much right to have nuclear power, and even nuclear weapons as has Israel, Pakistan and India. I would prefer a totally non-nuclear world, but our nation will never permit that.

I also do not support China or North Korea. I do not support Columbia. I do not support the governments a whole bunch of countries. It isn't just Israel. And, like you, Sooz, I also am unsupportive of a whole bunch of American foreign policy. I despise our arrogance and bullying. I suspect our greed and lust for power. I resent that we, who are supposed to govern ourselves, have elected representatives who have become so easily servile to monied, religious, or ideological interests.

I hope I may remain a member.

jd