Leaked Details on Israeli Strike?

[LongBlade]

Leaks have recently surfaced indicating that Israel might transit via Azerbaijan in order to attack Iranian nuclear facilities.

Some folks accuse the Obama administration as being the source of those leaks.

Quoting unnamed senior US diplomats and military intelligence officials, a lengthy article in Foreign Policy magazine asserts that "Israel has recently been granted access to airbases on Iran's northern border."

"The Israelis have bought an airfield," a senior administration official is quoted as saying, "and the airfield is called Azerbaijan."

Why would US officials be talking about this? Likely to slow down any rush to war in an already volatile region, some speculate.

Source: http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/did-us-leak-israeli-plans-azerbaijan-base

[Jarhead0331]

It is stuff like this that makes the attack on the USS Liberty more justifiable.

[LongBlade]

I don't think it will be anything so dramatic.

The timing of the strike will be in September. Late. Just enough for gas prices to become the October Surprise. It will be the departure gift to an unappreciative president.

[son_of_montfort]

Yikes, we had 34 soldiers die in that attack. Lets hope that isn't viewed as a justified response here.

[Jarhead0331]

I know...my point is that the USS Liberty was most likely attacked by Israeli forces in 1967 because it was a US intelligence gathering vessel spying on Israeli military communications and movements in the middle of a life and death war with three of its enemies.  The Israeli's knew that the US might leak any intelligence gathered by the Liberty in order to help shape the outcome or alter Israel's diplomatic/political position.

 

[Jarhead0331]

Yikes, we had 34 soldiers die in that attack. Lets hope that isn't viewed as a justified response.

They were sailors...not soldiers.  And I do believe that the attack was in many ways, justifiable.  Note, I said "justifiable" not "justified."

[son_of_montfort]

I'm not sure I understand the distinction between sailors and soldiers here. I was simply meaning "members of our armed services." At any rate, violence as a response would be very bad. Given that Israel excused the Liberty incident as a mistake and paid a large indemnity, the diplomatic justification was fairly shaky at the time, too.

The tensions between all three sides - Iran, Israel, and America - don't need to be exacerbated. I agree this is a dangerous game for the administrations (both of the US and Israel) to play.

[Jarhead0331]

I'm not sure I understand the distinction between sailors and soldiers here. I was simply meaning "members of our armed services."

It makes a big difference to the military bubbas.  If you meant "members of our armed services," you should have said that, rather than just getting it wrong!  ;)

Seriously though, it shows a level of respect and understanding.   

At any rate, violence as a response would be very bad. Given that Israel excused the Liberty incident as a mistake and paid a large indemnity, the diplomatic justification was fairly shaky at the time, too.

It was absolutely a dangerous gamble.  But someone, clearly at the highest level of Israeli government, made a determination that the potential damage caused by intelligence leaked by the US to Israel's enemies outweighed the potential damage caused by a limited strike on a Us naval asset.  And guess what? They were right, because the US government did everything they could do to avoid fallout, as well, and cover this affair up.  Israel made very calculated decisions, I believe, in considering the importance of Jewish support to President Johnson in getting re-elected during the Vietnam War, which was becoming ever more unpopular.  Israel knew that Johnson could not afford another foreign affairs debacle. 

In any event, the diplomatic justification was not shaky.  It was just simply a lie.  There is no question that the hours long attack by both aviation and naval forces in broad daylight was no mistake.

The tensions between all three sides - Iran, Israel, and America - don't need to be exacerbated. I agree this is a dangerous game for the administrations (both of the US and Israel) to play.

I'm not suggesting that the Israel should attack the US.  I'm only suggesting that current US intelligence leaks of Israeli military posturing, intentions and capabilities, show us the rationale for what was the most likely provocation of the Liberty incident. 

[Centurion40]

I'm not sure I understand the distinction between sailors and soldiers here.

Seriously??!!  How about Airmen?

[LongBlade]

I'm not sure I understand the distinction between sailors and soldiers here.

Seriously??!!  How about Airmen?

Relax. You start the back nine in fifteen minutes.

[Bison]

I'd be more inclinded to believe the leak was a directed leak by the Adminstration to expose and return Israel to a defensive posture again.

There is more than just the Iran-Israel-US triangle to consider.  You also have a more agressive Turkish government in the region and a much, much more anti-Israel government in Egypt.

[son_of_montfort]

Seriously though, it shows a level of respect and understanding.

There was no disrespect intended. Just remember, for the period I study, we call them "seamen," which is far less respectful sounding, IMHO.

Bison, good points.

I'm not sure that Israel's foreign policy decisions pose a path that is best suited to benefit America. The political hedging going on here is fairly reminiscent of the 60s, and I think the thing to take away from the above discussion is that hedging like this often has unforeseen negative consequences.

[Jarhead0331]

Seriously though, it shows a level of respect and understanding.

There was no disrespect intended.

There is no doubt in my mind that disrespect was not intended.  But take the point to heart, veterans and those on active/reserve duty will be irritated by the oversight.  If you don't believe me, try calling a Marine a soldier to his face, and see how he responds.

Just remember, for the period I study, we call them "seamen," which is far less respectful sounding, IMHO.

Not going to argue this point. 

I'm not sure that Israel's foreign policy decisions pose a path that is best suited to benefit America. The political hedging going on here is fairly reminiscent of the 60s, and I think the thing to take away from the above discussion is that hedging like this often has unforeseen negative consequences.

Israel's policy decisions have always been guided by one principle and one principle only...Israel will do what is best for Israel.  There is no doubting this. 

[Bison]

If the leak is real, it's sole purpose was to remove any advantage Israel had in a pre-emptive strike and discourage it.

[Jarhead0331]

If the leak is real, it's sole purpose was to remove any advantage Israel had in a pre-emptive strike and discourage it.

I don't think anyone is arguing that point.