One of the most common phases being uttered by AIPAC to congressional offices this week are the words, "Assad's massive use of chemical weapons".
Bandar has reportedly agreed that Israel can call the shots but that the air assault will be led by the US and involve roughly two dozen US allies including Turkey, the UK and France. The German weekly "Focus" reported on 8/26/13 that the IDF's 8200 intelligence unlit bugged the Syrian leadership during the chemical weapons attack last week and that Israel "sold" the incriminating information to the White House.
A group from Israel arrived in Washington on 8/26/13. It included the Director of the Political-Security Staff in the Defense Ministry, Jaj. Gen. (res) Amos Gilad, Director of Planning Branch Maj. Gen. Nimrod Shefer and IDF intelligence Research Department Direcotr Brigadier General Ital Brun. After some intense discusisons, the shared some of their tapes with US officials.
The Bandar/AIPAC arguments being, pushed by this delegation and being spread around capitol hill as part of "Israel sharing its sterling intelligence" can be summarized as follows:
The US must avoid half measures to pursue a limited punitive
response to the CW use. What is needed
is a sustained Bosnia style bombing campaign until Bashar al-Assad is removed
from office. Giving in to that temptation would be a mistake.
The use of the CW affords President Obama an, underserved opportunity to
correct his errant Middle East policies.
As Isreal's agent, Robert
Satloff of the Washington Institute for
Near East Policy ( WINEP) is telling anyone who is willing to listen, "Obama's
deep reluctance to engage in Syria is clear to all. This hesitancy is part of
his policy to wind down U.S. involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan and his
championing of the idea of "nation building at home." It is not
understandable and to the millions of Americans who see Syria as a heaven-sent
contest between radical Shiites and radical Sunnis, it is unwise and inappropriate.
"
According to the Saudi's," the Obama administration now faces Bashar al-Assad's
regime and its Iranian sponsors who believe they can put a stake through the heart
of U.S. power and prestige in the region by testing the president's "red
line" on the use of chemical weapons (CW). " WINEP is arguing in a memo
just issued, " For Assad, large-scale use of CW serves multiple ends -- it
demoralizes the rebels, underscores the impotence of their external financiers
and suppliers, and confirms to Assad's own patrons that he is committed to
fight to the bitter end. For the Iranians, Assad's CW use makes Syria -- not
Iran's nuclear facilities -- the battlefield to test American resolve."
For Bander and his Zionist collaborators, the key issue is not whether Obama
authorizes the use of American force as a response to Syria's use of CW.
Rather, the key imperative is that the U.S. use whatever force in necessary to
achieve regime change and choose the next regime assuring that it will be
friendly to Israel.
WINEP and AIPAC are arguing that If the US military action is designed to only
punish Assad for violating the international norm on CW," it will merely have
the effect of defining for Assad the acceptable tools for mass killing --
perhaps only the acceptable quantities of CW to use at any given time -- and
will have little impact on the outcome of the Syrian conflict; in fact, it
might just embolden Assad and his allies."
Bandar has told Congressional friends who he has known for decades, that if
American military action must be designed to alter the balance of power between
the various rebel groups and the Syrian/Iranian/Hezbollah alliance? This will require a wholesale change in U.S.
on-the-ground strategy to supply and train well-vetted opposition militias.
For Israel and its agents, the worst of all is victory by the Assad/Iranian/Hezbollah axis, which a brief but fiery barrage of cruise missiles is liable to bring about. A global power thousands of miles away cannot calibrate stalemate to ensure that neither party wins; we have to prioritize the most negative outcomes and use our assets to prevent them.
The Bandar-Zionist project is still not irreversible. The Pentagon and especially Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey, are very concerned and have threatened to resign in protest. For they realize that there is a grave risk that the Syrian response will lead to a clash with one of its neighbors, a US ally. Any scenario is possible from the moment that the first missile leaves American ships in the eastern Mediterranean.
Sources in Iran and Syria has advised this observers that they expect the US bombing to commence within 72 hours.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
