"To whom can the State of Israel turn?" published in the Windsor Star!

My latest article was published today in the Windsor Star. This is the first time I have been published in a Canadian newspaper. I am very honoured to be published on the Windsor Star's pages!

Update: The original article is no longer hosted on the Windsor Star website, but can be read on World Assessor.com by clicking here.

Thank you to everyone for reading my work!

To Whom Can Israel Turn?

By: Robert D. Onley

Israel has always been an isolated nation. Except for the United States, few countries openly allied themselves with the Jewish State after 1948, and even fewer nations are willing to do so today.

The reality in late 2009 is that an overwhelming majority of the world is openly hostile to Israel – or at least vehemently opposed to Israel’s policies concerning Palestine. This hostility was especially evident following Israel’s defensive actions during Operation Cast Lead.

However, today even Israel’s historic ties with the United States are in question. Recent polls show that just 4% of Israelis believe President Obama to be “pro-Israel,” a figure in stark contrast to the 88% of Israelis who felt President Bush was “pro-Israel.”

Much of Israeli pessimism centres on President Obama’s demand for a complete halt to settlement activity in the West Bank. At a surface level, Israeli distaste for Obama’s demand is understandable. This is true because a complete settlement halt represents an untenable strategic concession at a time when Israel’s enemies are aggressively gearing up for another war against Israel.

Consider recent high-stakes incidents to appreciate Israel’s sense of abject isolation. On November 3, Special Forces from the Israeli Navy peacefully boarded an Antiguan-flagged ship 100 miles off the coast of Israel. Upon inspection, the ship was found to contain over 400 tons of weapons, including guns, grenades, ammunition and over 2700 missiles, all bound for Hizbullah and Syria.

The ship’s documentation clearly indicated the weaponry originated in Iran, providing further indictment of the Iranian Islamic Republic’s unfettered support for terrorism across the Middle East. In this instance, the ship’s condemnable contents also gave visceral credibility to the literalness of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s calls for the destruction of Israel.

Israel’s weapons find is disturbing on its own. Compounding the virulent implications of the discovery was Hamas’ test of an advanced missile with a 35+ mile range just two days prior. That Hamas’ would brazenly test such a far-reaching instrument of terror sent tremors throughout the Israeli Defence establishment, as the missile proves Hamas has the ability to strike the outskirts of Tel Aviv.

The test also highlights how weapons smuggling is thriving despite Cast Lead and emphasizes that the IAF’s continuing efforts to destroy tunnels between Gaza and Egypt are not enough to permanently stop such malevolent activities. Further military action on the ground is clearly required.

Moreover, the discovery of such a massive arms shipment bound for both Hizbullah and Syria also underscores a disturbing new strategic reality for Israel, positioned so precariously in the heart of the Middle East.

General (ret.) Uzi Dayan, the former Head of Central Command and head of Israel’s National Security Council, noted recently that in Israel’s next war “all Israel will be one front.” Dayan’s statement reflects the probability that future battles will see missiles rain down across Israel, launched from all sides.

Mere days after General Dayan’s sobering warning, Syrian President Bashar Assad suggested Syria may return to “resistance” in order to regain the Golan Heights, should peace talks again fail. It is perplexing that Assad also declared it Syria’s “patriotic duty” to return to armed struggle – given his statement came less than one week after Israel’s discovery of the enormous Iranian munitions shipment bound for Syria. Rather than downplay the inference therein that Syria is gearing up for war with Israel, Assad instead openly announced Syria’s hostile intentions.

Perhaps these turbulent developments are unsurprising. Perpetual rumblings about an impending collapse in Israeli-Arab relations were given substance by the debacle over the Goldstone Report, Turkey’s rejection of Israel in favour of Iran and Syria, and the return of clashes and Palestinian conspiracies over the Temple Mount. The attempted Iranian weapons delivery will only further rock the Israeli-Arab peace boat.

While ostensibly still protected under the nuclear umbrella of the United States, Israel’s most vocal ally today is actually Canada. Under the leadership of Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Canada has steadfastly supported Israel since early 2006. Harper continues to actively denounce Ahmadinejad’s provocations, reinforce Israel’s right to exist at the UN’s assorted 'hate-fests' and lead the moral charge internationally in Israel’s defence.

Unfortunately Canada is in no position to militarily assist Israel should war break out soon. Thus Israel’s lack of well-armed and willing allies leaves many Jews consigned to fate, and clinging to faith in the One who promised safety, security and prosperity to Israel all along. As throughout her lonely history, Israel is today forced to look up and turn to God above.

Robert D. Onley

Whose Side is Russia On?

While Obama pursues a world free of nuclear weapons, Russia continues to deliver slaps in the face to American peace initiatives. In the world of international relations, it is no accident that as pressure builds against Iran, it is Iran's greatest ally - Russia - that is reminding the world of its powerful influence over the Middle East. This at the same time as Barack Obama painfully seeks an exit from the region after 8 long years of war in Iraq and Afghanistan. However, rather than suggesting peaceful alternatives to a nuclear Iran, Russia is boldly declaring new military powers, including the pre-emptive use of nuclear weapons.

Such a declaration is disturbing, if not surprising. A mere three weeks ago, Russian Prime Minister Dmitri Medvedev agreed with Barack Obama and the rest of the United Nations Security Council members at the G20 Meeting in Pittsburgh, on the need for the pursuit of a world "free of nuclear weapons". As genuine as the initiative is, there is no mistaking that both Russia and the US will always possess nukes. Nonetheless, the "nuke-free world" idea at the very least offered hope for continued stability between the major powers and a reduction of tensions between the West and Russia.

Therefore, the report suggesting Russia's pre-emptive use of nuclear weapons -- which was released yesterday as negotiations with Iran resumed in Vienna -- comes across as a tremendously provocative move by the Kremlin. In as many words, Russian Presidential Security Council chief Nikolai Patrushev is warning the Western powers against taking any further aggressive steps toward pressuring Iran to halt its nuclear program. Their words are also inherently destabilizing. What could possibly be gained from reminding the world of Russia's pre-emptive right to use nukes at such an uncertain time as this? While professing a nuke-free world, Russia is seen defending the world's sole nuclear-aspirant -- Iran -- by reinforcing Russia's right to the pre-emptive use of nuclear weapons in the defence of Russian interests.

Russia's pre-emptive reminder may as well have come from the public relations department inside Tehran. While Iran is perhaps still a few months away from physically possessing a nuclear weapon (some reports suggest a far shorter timeline), the fact that Russia delivered such a bold statement in the midst of negotiations serves as a "pre-emptive" rhetorical attack against Iran's enemies, namely Israel, the United States and the United Kingdom. The Russo-Persian message is simple: mess with Iran and you will feel Russia's wrath. As a rebuke, it would be equally provocative to suggest that Russia might unleash tactical nukes against Israel, Iraq, or US troops in the region - but if such horror has not been contemplated by Putin and Medvedev, why would Russia remind the world as such?

There is one nation shuddering under this clammer among the major powers - Israel. The Jewish State is caught squarely in the middle of the Iranian nuclear question, threatened existentially by Iran's nuclear program, with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu often reminding the world of his nation's willingness to take unilateral action against Iran's nuclear program should negotiations fail. But with the release of Russia's pre-emptive nuclear strike policy, the ultimate question for Israel becomes this: would Russia pre-emptively strike the Jewish State if Israel were to unilaterally bomb Iran? Perhaps more realistically, would Russia authorize its military, allied with Iran, to unleash counter-attacks against Israel in response to Israeli pre-emptive strikes on Iran's nuclear sites?

Russia's policy indicates precisely this dystopian reality. The proposed doctrine would allow for the use of nuclear weapons "to repel an aggression with the use of conventional weapons not only in a large-scale but also in a regional and even local war," Patrushev was quoted as saying. He further stated that a government analysis of the threat of conflict in the world showed "a shift from large-scale conflicts to local wars and armed conflicts." Precisely which nations are likely to be the scene of local wars in the very near future? Both Israel and Iran. The probability of future conflict involving Israel is growing daily, as nations - including Turkey most recently - are aligning against Israel in an effort to squeeze the nation into making concessions in the peace process. At the same time, this strategic re-alignment also unites Arab militaries against Israel, encircling the Jewish State.

Waiting in the wings, and supplying many of the Middle East's armies with advanced missiles and weaponry, is Russia. These weapons deals mean that if Israel were to take defensive action against her enemies - be they in Lebanon, Gaza, the West Bank, Syria, or most likely, Iran - the probability of a Russian response against Israel grows exponentially. At the furthest extreme is a nuclear attack against Israel by Russia, which - as incredibly preposterous as it sounds today - may not seem so extreme once Israel has delivered precision strikes against Russia's billion dollar investments inside Iran's assorted nuclear enrichment facilities. Even if Russia did not resort to pre-emptive nuclear strikes, their very doctrine of pre-emptive action suggests Russia is prepared for almost-as-lethal non-nuclear military alternatives.

These are dire circumstances for global stability. For a world that a mere decade ago seemed on a path toward peaceful globalized prosperity, the situations in the Middle East today are unequivocally dragging the world closer to conflagration than ever before. With Barack Obama at the helm of the world's preeminent military power, the likelihood of American military action against Iran, or the containment of Russia in the protection of Israel, is dramatically diminishing, if not yet non-existent. Thus the concurrent likelihood of unilateral Israeli military action on Iran is rapidly approaching. Russia has now declared her disturbing willingness and blatant intentions to protect Iran at all costs - even advocating nuclear warfare. How will the rest of the world respond when the Iranian nuclear crisis reaches its grand finale? The clock is ticking.

Robert D. Onley
---------------------------------------------------------------
Headlines to Track:
BreitBart - Report: Russia to allow pre-emptive nukes

Tensions Between Turkey And Israel Escalate

Iranian FM: We Won't Stop Uranium Enrichment

Iran Mourns Suicide Bomb Victims


Articles to Read:

A Lesson in Unintended Consequences for Our President

Why A Month Matters: Don't Let Iran Stall Even For A Month

Rights Watchdog, Lost in the Mideast

New Battle for Iraq

The Russia-Iran Paradox

By: Robert D. Onley

Intel leaks, defections and outright disinformation are dragging the Iranian nuclear crisis into an unprecedented stage of uncertainty, with growing concern in Israel about Russia’s role in provoking instability. A week after the Geneva summit, the ever furtive Russian Bear is practically directing the UNSC’s moves with increasing leverage over both the United States and Iran. This comes after the revelation that Russian scientists are assisting Iran’s development of nuclear weapons, and is made possible given President Obama’s intractable positions in a wobbly Iraq and a withering Afghanistan. Together this has given Russian Prime Minister Putin powerful sway over the Iranian nuclear crisis.

All of these emerging factors, delivered practically rapid-fire following the Oct. 1 Geneva summit, highlight what are obvious issues in Iran’s “peaceful” nuclear story. Indeed, however optimistic Iran’s recent good-will gestures may seem, this optimism is misguided and ignorantly damning. Put bluntly, Iran’s nuclear pursuit has been nothing but a convoluted concoction of deceit. To borrow a phrase from Netanyahu’s now famous speech at the UN on September 25^th, the belief that Iran’s nuclear program will be proven peaceful is wrong - “dead wrong.” The problem for Israel is that to casual international observers, Iran appears to have come to its senses and may even relinquish its uranium enrichment powers to a third-party nation.

Such a move has been deceptively calculated by the Iranians. Which nation immediately (and seemingly out of the blue) offered to enrich Iran’s uranium? Once again, it was Russia. Surely Iran would not permit a single inspection of its top-secret Qom enrichment facility if the underground complex was in fact engineered specifically for the weaponization of nuclear materials. Armed with yet more “peace” credibility found in the form of highly sensitive nuclear assistance by none other than Russian scientists, Iran has been allowed to perform another daring about-face on nuclear policy.

Israel must be critically aware of Russia’s meddling on both sides of this sordid nuclear tale. While professing to desire a nuclear-free Iran, the reports this week that Russian scientists are assisting Iran with the development of nuclear weapons proved otherwise. Whether these scientists were sent by the Kremlin or were simply private citizens taking jobs in Iran, the fact is that Russia was certainly aware of their presence in Iran. Russia was also crucially conscious of the highly contentious work the scientists were likely achieving in Iran.

This is perplexing, when Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his cohorts have for years declared, unequivocally, that the Iranian nuclear program is for entirely peaceful purposes. When evidence to the contrary arose in light of the Qom revelation, suddenly Ahmadinejad is seen allowing inspections and denying allegations that the Iranian government had kept Qom a secret. Could it be that Russia’s offer to enrich uranium has given Iran a perception of blanket immunity from further international consternation? Little else explains Iran’s bold new “openness”. The Russian-Iranian paradox thus deepens.

The tragic reality that emerges from this Russian-Iranian set-up is that even the most thorough UN and IAEA “inspections” of Iranian nuclear facilities are unlikely to expose these glaring paradoxes in the Iranian nuclear story. After just one session of negotiations in Geneva, suddenly all of Ahmadinejad’s hateful pronouncements of his deadly intentions against Israel are brushed aside by the IAEA’s fantasy of somehow monitoring Iran’s nuclear facilities – all with Russian support.

This plainly does not add up. Neither does Russia’s offer to enrich Iran’s uranium to 19.75%, a paltry quarter of a percent below the weakest weapons grade standards for high enriched uranium. An agreement like this would effectively provide a legal shortcut for Tehran to then pursue even higher enriched uranium back on Iranian soil after Russia has done the initial dirty work. Meanwhile the rest of the Middle East’s aspiring nuclear powers – Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria and even Iraq – are being told to rest easy while Iran ‘goes nuclear’ under the ‘scrutinizing’ eyes of the IAEA.

The very fact that Iran just recently revealed its secret facility at Qom highlights another missing link in Iran’s “peaceful” nuclear story. For Iran to have designed, built and hid the Qom facility for so long implicates its very illegitimate, malevolent nature - this is self-evident. But for Iran to then declare, once more, that this top-secret, hardened, buried-deep-underground-uranium-enrichment facility is actually peaceful as well – dramatically showcases the overwhelmingly deceitful nature of the entire Iranian Islamic Republic. Put simply, Iran’s entire nuclear story doesn’t add up. The P5+1 must always contextualize this with any cooperative efforts that Iran may now be professing.

Nonetheless, compounding the Iranian nuclear crisis are the “unfettered” inspections of Iran’s secret uranium enrichment facility at Qom set to begin next week. With their announcement, the world body practically let out a collective sigh of relief, knowing Israel was blocked from potentially taking military action against Iran - at least in the interim. Meanwhile the IAEA could not be happier, with Director Mohamed El Baradei even callously shifting the world’s focus onto Israel by labelling the Jewish State the “number one threat to the Middle East.” This is a shamefully disturbing tactic of a supposedly apolitical international agency.

Intelligence agencies have known of Iran’s malicious intentions for years, if not decades. Iran’s covert efforts to procure highly sensitive nuclear and weapons materials – including, recently, possible navigation microchips designed for missile guidance systems, shipped from Canada – highlight the very fact that no matter what Iran professed to be the case about its nuclear program (and continues to profess), none of their statements were true, nor are true today. Quite the opposite, Iran is still pursuing the rapid development of both the world’s most lethal weapons technology in nuclear weapons, as well as the missiles to deliver them, all in flagrant defiance of the international community.

After making obvious attempts to deceive the rest of the world for nearly 30 years, why would Iran suddenly change tactics just before reaching the pinnacle of its nuclear program – ‘the Bomb’? Perhaps because Iran is aware that its relationship with Russia will almost certainly guarantee its success barring any US or Israeli attack on its facilities. It is shocking then, that despite entering negotiations with Iran and agreeing to inspections of the Qom site (there are certain to be others), US President Obama still holds some illusion of belief that somehow the Iranian nuclear program will be made peaceful, or that the West will be capable of containing Iran’s nuclear technology for peaceful ends.

This is simply fanciful on the part of Obama. Iran will never, under any circumstance, allow forces from the “Great Satan” to control any aspect of their most prized technological achievement. Even forces from the European Union will be viewed with highly skeptical Iranian eyes. Hence Iran’s reflexive and continued turn to Russia for logistical support for weaponization.

The world can have no illusions about Iran’s intentions. This author has repeatedly warned about the deadly seriousness of Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons. If the West backs off Iran and agrees to let the theocratic Islamic Republic ‘go nuclear’, the world must be made painfully aware of the impending consequences. Not only will Israel’s enemies Hamas and Hizbullah be protected under an Iranian nuclear umbrella, but so too will any future militant group which Iran supports.

Thus the final paradoxical pieces in the Iranian nuclear saga are this: if Iran is about to “peacefully” go nuclear, why be so hell-bent on propping up terrorist groups like Hamas and Hizbullah? Why draw further negative international attention and condemnation if Iran is only pursuing peaceful nuclear energy? Clearly Iran’s “peace” story is a farce. So too is Russia’s relationship with Iran if Russia truly wants a nuke-free Iran. As a result, Israel may soon be forced to unilaterally stop Iran, and Russia will be very, very angry if Israel does so. The decision before Israel today is thus one of undeniably apocalyptic proportions.

"Netanyahu's Message to the World" published by the Israel National News!

I was just published for the 5th time by the Israel National News.

Click here to read "Netanyahu's Message to the World"

Thanks to everyone who reads my work and leaves feedback.

Special thanks to the Israel National News for publishing my work!

Cheers,

Robert D. Onley

Netanyahu's Message to the World

By: Robert D. Onley

In his “Quds Day” speech on Friday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad sealed the fate of Iran’s nuclear program by proving to the world that he is a delusional leader bent on inducing an apocalyptic war in the Middle East. As if to impale negotiations set to start October 1^st, Ahmadinejad stated, “The existence of the Zionist regime is an insult to human dignity,” and continued by describing “the myth of the Holocaust”, all to cheers of “death to Israel.” By doing so yet again, Ahmadinejad leaves Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu with no choice but to strike Iranian nuclear facilities.

All of the major powers are furiously preparing contingency plans should talks with Iran drag on into oblivion, or more than likely, outright fail. Foremost among the nations making such plans is Israel, with Prime Minister Netanyahu carefully watching what will transpire while justifiably keeping one finger on the pre-emptive strike trigger. This precarious position means Netanyahu must prepare statements justifying Israel’s impending actions, albeit without revealing Israel’s hand. As unnecessary as such statements may seem given Ahmadinejad’s abhorrent behaviour, Israel’s intractable position requires bulletproof scrutiny and well-crafted presentation.

Thus far Netanyahu has openly and repeatedly stated Israel`s preparedness in forcibly stopping the Iranian nuclear program, however what he has not publicly discussed is the inevitable Iranian response to a unilateral Israeli attack. Given there exists a tremendous likelihood that Israel`s pre-emptive attack against Iranian nuclear facilities will precipitate an enormous wave of counter-attacks from both Hizbullah and Hamas, it is pertinent that Netanyahu make equally bold assertions of Israeli sovereignty in the face of such Iranian malevolence. The Goldstone Report highlighted the absurd standard to which Israel is held by the international community. As a result Israel cannot be caught committing further “war crimes” should the Jewish nation be forced to act defensively, as it soon will.

Therefore, Benjamin Netanyahu must state absolutely clearly to the world two critically interlinked realities: Foremost, Israel is ready to and will destroy Iran`s nuclear weapons program should negotiations with the West fail after October. Second, any group that seeks to retaliate against Israel for its pre-emptive actions against Iran -- be it al-Qaeda, Hizbullah, Hamas, Syria, or any combination of the above -- will similarly experience a crushing, unflinching Israeli military response. Only by publicly addressing the reality and history of Iranian proxy counter-attacks will Israel preserve any sense of tactical legitimacy with the world community.

While this may seem like a fruitless effort to save face from the reflexively anti-Israeli United Nations, it is a necessary piece of statesmanship for what is inarguably a war-ready Netanyahu government. Recent history provides obvious examples of the battles Israel might soon be fighting once again following potential strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. The Second Lebanon War against Hizbullah and this year’s Operation Cast Lead with Hamas were separate, distinct wars of specified purpose and generally controllable length. However if Hizbullah and Hamas were to begin launching retaliatory rockets toward Israel on direct Iranian orders, or for ostensibly Iranian ends, then Israel will be compelled to respond just as it did in 2006 and 2009.

The timing of these missions against Hizbullah and Hamas, be they immediately following the Iranian nuclear mission or in the violent weeks that are sure to follow in Israel, are the determinable variables that Netanyahu must address publicly in coming weeks. Netanyahu must make logical connections between Israel’s undesirable geographical position – squashed between two terrorist entities both harbouring the goal of destroying Israel – and Iran’s blatant support of both terror groups combined with the pursuit of nuclear weapons. The reality of the utterly lethal relationship therein is what will give Netanyahu even the tiniest shred of credibility with a roiling world community following Israeli strikes on Iran.

It remains to be seen how exactly the UN will pin blame on Israel for a broader war, in the wake of clearly failed negotiations with Iran that result from a Russian veto at the Security Council, compounded by weak-kneed Obamian diplomacy. Netanyahu’s “secret” trip to Moscow last week highlighted how deep Israel’s distrust of Russia is, after Russia attempted to smuggle advanced S-300 anti-air missiles to Iran aboard the Arctic Sea. This high-stakes incident, stopped only by Israeli agents, dramatically emphasized Russia’s overt support of Iran’s nuclear program and Russia’s similar disregard for Israel’s existential security concerns. That Obama topped the week off by scrapping former President Bush’s eastern European missile shield also showcased Obama’s frightening lack of foresight and the likelihood that the US will not, under any circumstances, prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, despite all public pronouncements.

For all of the nonsense that Israel must put up with geopolitically, Netanyahu also has the never-blinking eye of the international media ready to spit back at him. What Netanyahu’s government cannot allow to happen - though the media is almost guaranteed to portray it as such - is for the predictable Hizbullah and Hamas counter-attacks against Israel to be somehow viewed by the world as equally legitimate, given Israel’s “attacks” on an “innocent” Iran. Yes, some Middle Eastern governments like Saudi Arabia will secretly cheer when they see Iran’s nuclear sites destroyed. But the mood on the streets will be much different, with protests against Israel sure to be ignited and promoted by those same governments across the region.

Netanyahu’s job today is thus to aggressively define the terms of future battles in order to recast the coming fight for what will be a very angry world community. These efforts will also instil fear inside the hearts and minds of Hizbullah and Hamas fighters who have certainly already received directions from Iran about what to do after Israel strikes. If these same fighters perceive Israel to be steadfastly engaging in deliberate, defensive action against her enemies despite their latent threats of retaliation, Netanyahu will have made an unequivocal statement about Israeli resolve, and will have effectively manifest the will of the Jewish people for self-preservation.

There can be no illusions about the total seriousness of this matter. It is not said lightly that Netanyahu must begin telling the world that Israel will take matters into its own hands, as a result of the abject failure of the world body. Regardless of one’s personal beliefs, the vitriol emanating from Tehran is as pure of a manifestation of evil intentions as has been since the Holocaust that Ahmadinejad so callously denies. No other world leader but Ahmadinejad is addressing public crowds and delivering such shocking, backward and downright disturbing interpretations of history, all packed with lucid implications of worse events to come.

In order to thwart any chance of Ahmadinejad achieving his frighteningly Holocaust-like dreams, both the man and his nation’s covert nuclear weapons program must be resolutely destroyed. No nation on earth can declare surprise at Israel’s ensuing actions against Iran if talks fail and no other major power steps up to protect Israel. By addressing the outstanding concerns above, Netanyahu will be well prepared to adamantly defend his people from the Iranian threat – a threat which surpasses all others combined throughout the history of the Jewish State. It is nonetheless shameful but unsurprising that Israel is the nation forced to prevent a second Holocaust. History certainly has a peculiar way of repeating itself.

Robert D. Onley

"Israel Alone" published by the Israel National News!

My latest op-ed "Israel Alone" was published on Wednesday by the Israel National News and can be read here.

Thanks for reading!
-Rob

70 Years Later: Israel Alone

By: Robert D. Onley

On September 1st, 1939, exactly seventy years ago today, the world knew little of Hitler’s threats against the Jewish people, and less still of the evil that would result from his invasion of Poland to start the Second World War. Indeed Nazi Germany’s aggressive military posturing against Austria and Czechoslovakia in the late 1930’s effectively concealed Hitler’s dream of a “Judenrein” Europe and hid what would eventually become the most ruthless campaign of murder, genocide and violence seen in human history.

Truly it was not until at least 1945 – when the war ended – that the rest of the world understood and saw the absolute venom Hitler unleashed upon Jews in particular. While there were rumours, suspicions and even aerial photographs of the death camps that ended so many lives, it was not until these death camps were opened that the world’s leaders witnessed the sheer, unadulterated evil that humanity was capable of organizing in the modern age.

Today, numerous threats are facing the Jewish people and their homeland Israel – threats that bear undeniable resemblance to those that similarly preceded the Second World War. However unlike in 1939, today the malicious, delusional desires of Israel’s enemies are being publicly, blatantly and aggressively spread across the world, emanating specifically from the Islamic Republic of Iran, and enacted by its proxy armies Hamas and Hizbullah. Thus for those who intrinsically hate the Jewish people today, instead of having to hunt for Jews scattered across numerous nations throughout Europe as Hitler did, a large number of Jews can be found “conveniently” in one location – Israel.

This “convenience” means that once again, unlike in 1939, their latent and literal threats toward Israel are clearer, more definitive and disturbingly deliberate than ever could have been the case during the Third Reich. While Hitler’s “Final Solution” was ultimately kept secret until the 1942 Wannsee Conference, the leaders of Iran today share a public desire to see Israel “wiped off the map”, and have for several decades. The veracity of Iran’s threat to Israel is embodied by Iran’s repeated military parades of enormous Shahab-3 missiles draped with the words “DEATH TO ISRAEL” and “DEATH TO AMERICA.” These same missiles could quite literally be nuclear-tipped within the coming months.

As such, while U.S. President Obama and the EU actively pursue what are perceived to be “long overdue” negotiations with Iran this September, it is with an incredibly critical and cynical eye that Israel must view any supposed “progress” set to emerge from these talks. After years of blatant proof of Iran’s evil intentions, virulent threats toward Israel, and covert military nuclear development, Israel holds much legitimate pessimism for any “progress” the Iranians might package for the West inside further layers of deceit.

Imagine Adolf Hitler meeting with Neville Chamberlain at Munich in 1938 once again, but this time with the meeting hall decorated with enormous banners that read “DEATH TO THE JEWS” and “JUDENREIN EUROPE” - only to have Chamberlain emerge from his talks with Hitler to somehow announce “peace for our time” nonetheless. The lunacy of such an outcome – when the warning signs and banners were so visible before even entering negotiations – would have led many to question the wisdom of negotiating with Hitler in the first place.

With the unfair advantage of hindsight, we know today that Chamberlain was at the least a bit naive and that Hitler was a liar. However Chamberlain did not have enormous banners that plainly and grotesquely stated Hitler’s goals when he entered into negotiations. In contrast, Western leaders, diplomats and concerned Israeli defence planners have had a panoply warning signs about Iran’s true intentions - signs that should stand the hairs up on the necks of any official possessing serious visions of finding a compromise with Iran this month.

No, Ahmadinejad is not exactly Hitler and Iran today is certainly not the military machine that 1938 Nazi Germany was, if one directly compares the two. What is true of this comparison however - and inarguably so - is that the threats toward Israel that have already emerged from Iran are far more menacing than Hitler’s ever were, given Iran’s ongoing defiant pursuit of nuclear weapons technology and its already far-reaching missile capability.

It has been said that what Hitler took six years to accomplish against the Jews in World War Two, Ahmadinejad could make happen in less than six minutes with a single nuclear-tipped missile launched from Iran. Others, including this writer, have argued that a more accurate time-frame might be just six seconds, were Iran able to smuggle a nuclear weapon to Hamas in the Gaza Strip for use directly against Israel.

U.S. defence planners, intelligence officers and the State Department may shrug at the sight of “DEATH TO AMERICA” banners hung on Iranian Shahab-3 missiles as generic anti-American bluster, but their Israeli counterparts simply cannot do the same for Iran’s “DEATH TO ISRAEL” monikers - not when every single Israeli military facility is within striking distance of those same Iranian missiles. This is not to mention the entire physical landmass of Israel which remains subject to random rocket attacks from Iran’s Hamas and Hizbullah proxies.

As such Iran’s anti-Israel rhetoric – be it from President Ahmadinejad, Ayatollah Khamenei, or various other crazed Iranian leaders – is not viewed by Israel the same way that the United States or the EU might more ‘idealistically’ interpret it. Neither still are Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s repeated statements that the ‘end is coming for Israel’, evidenced by his “World Without Zionism” conference, his multiple Holocaust denials and his purported desire to “wipe Israel off the map”, as the former Ayatollah Khomeini stated.

To top-off the absolute legitimacy of Israel’s worst fears about Iran, Ahmadinejad’s fanatical ravings about the coming “Hidden 12th Imam” at the UN General Assembly in September 2007 provided stark proof that Iran’s leaders mean what they say, no matter how insane and provocative. Would any other national leader step on to the world stage to declare that the end of the world is coming, and that they expect it to happen “in the near future”?

Why then does President Obama entertain the prospect that Ahmadinejad might suddenly change his apocalyptic preparations for the supposed "return of the Hidden Imam"? Particularly after Iran’s election fiasco and its suppression of protests, any dreams of reining in the reckless Iranian Republic should have been dashed for good. Obama’s September 15th deadline for Iran to agree to negotiations could bear fruit for concerned Israelis hoping against hope, but Israel should not hold its breath.

Ultimately it is the ruthless lethality of a single nuclear weapon, and the potential for its random, indiscriminate use against Israel, which is precisely why Israel - and Israel alone - must be prepared to act defensively in eliminating the Iranian nuclear threat. For if the United States stalls, and Obama pleads for more time and patience on Iran, the nuclear timeline will pass and Israel will be left with no choice but to unilaterally stop Iran.

Not since 1939 has a threat to the Jewish people been so obvious, so particular and so lethal. In light of the Jewish people’s tragic past, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu recently stated that the lesson of the Holocaust is that evil must be “nipped in the bud”. But just as the world held out hope for peace after the Munich Agreement in 1938, so too it might this September after negotiations with Iran.

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu cannot be assuaged by American and Iranian pleasantries. Seventy years after Hitler began his attempt to wipe them out, the Jewish people have the advantage of hindsight and the ghastly lessons of history to make the dreaded decision that will preserve Israel’s future today. This future is why Israel will fight, even if it means fighting alone.

Robert D. Onley

"Gates Goes to Israel" published on the Israel National News - July 28, 2009

My latest op-ed was published today by the Israel National News and can be read here: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/8946

I am tremendously honoured to be published by the INN in Israel, and hope to continue my work with the INN team as I enter law school this fall.

In my op-ed I discuss the necessity for the American diplomatic team to focus on the Iranian nuclear question given the immediacy of the problem, and leave the recent settlement spat alone for a while.

Check it out and leave any feedback!

Gates Goes to Israel

US Defence Secretary Robert Gates will make a brief 6-hour trip to the Holy Land this week to meet with Israeli officials to discuss settlement activity, US-Israeli relations and the enigma of the Iranian nuclear crisis. Along with Gates will be US mid-east envoy George Mitchell, National Security Advisor James Jones and the venerable Dennis Ross.

Gates’ all-star American diplomat team packs considerable punch to potentially push Israel into supporting President Obama’s aggressive peace plan. However no matter who negotiates on either side, in the realm of international relations, progress and history are rarely made in a single meeting when two nations are not united to resolve the same issue.

This statement has been more evident throughout the tragic course of the Israel-Palestine dispute than in any other conflict, with Israel and the Palestinian Authority perpetually disagreeing on the most foundational elements of a peace agreement. In many cases, Israel and the United States have similarly disagreed on how best to approach the final-status peace deal, or on brokering a regional foreign policy problem.

Today the US and Israel find themselves locked at yet another impasse, this time with the world openly siding with President Obama in calling for an abrupt halt to settlement activity as a precondition to peace negotiations. Over the last week voices from around the globe –from Russia, Germany and France– called on Israel to immediately stop settlement activity in the eastern Jerusalem neighborhood of Shimon Hatzadik.

Rebuffing these cries, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu boldly declared, “Our sovereignty in Jerusalem is indisputable... I wish to make this clear - the united Jerusalem is the capital of the Jewish people in the State of Israel.” He continued, saying Israel “cannot accept the idea that Jews will not have the right to live and purchase in all parts of Jerusalem.”

Netanyahu’s statement strategically attempted to close the settlement door in a deft effort to dictate this week’s agenda with the US. However with Gates leading the incoming American diplomatic team, Netanyahu’s open defiance of international demands to halt settlement activity has the potential to embitter the American position on settlements and distract US attention away from Israel’s greatest concern – Iran’s rapidly-progressing nuclear program.

For Israel, the cold, calculated reality is this: a settlement spat threatens only to delay Obama’s dream of a peace plan during his term – Netanyahu knows this. Conversely, further delay in dealing with Iran’s nuclear program threatens to one-day-annihilate the entire State of Israel while pumping nearly forty percent of the world’s oil supply through a trembling Iranian nuclear guillotine. At the same time, a final-status peace deal is only good so long as Israel still exists to be a part of it – this final point is what keeps Netanyahu up at night.

The contrast in the relative immediacy of the two issues could not be starker. Even with a settlement halt, Netanyahu recognizes the multitude of physical military threats and intractable security dilemmas literally on each of Israel’s short borders. Israeli defence officials have clearly considered the odds that Hamas will continue to fire rockets from Gaza and that Hezbullah will keep stocking up on long-range missiles for a future battle in Israel’s north – settlement freeze or not.

Israel’s recent past provides damning evidence for this inevitability. In 2004-5, under the persuasion of then President Bush, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon completed a unilateral withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Gaza Strip along with the evacuation of Jewish settlements there in the greatest test of the “land for peace” and “settlement freeze” initiatives ever seen. The violent failure of these plans in Gaza over the last five years and the resultant rocket attacks from Hamas provide tangible evidence for Israeli leaders to ‘delay’ today’s settlement freeze push from the US and other nations.

Israeli leaders such as Prime Minister Netanyahu and Minister of Foreign Affairs Avigdor Lieberman have witnessed multiple international Mid-East peace initiatives miserably fail over various timelines and many agonizing decades – once again regardless of the status of Israeli settlements. Thus while the world pushes the US through back channels to hammer Israel into stopping settlement activity yet another time this week, the issue barely registers a pulse in Israel’s top defence circles when compared to discussions on how best to halt Iran’s nuclear program.

As such, unless the Americans actively and purposefully engage Israel’s legitimate concerns about Iran’s nuclear program and drop their recent aggressive posturing on the Israeli settlement issue, the entire US diplomatic trip risks aggrandizing relatively inconsequential settlement issues while blindly ignoring the far more menacing and pertinent danger lurking deep within Iran.

No one would suggest the US is entirely ignoring the Iranian nuclear issue. However while President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton make public calls for “negotiations without preconditions” with Iran, progress has been painfully slow for Israelis watching from a land within striking distance of Iran’s Shahab-3 missiles. Obama and Clinton’s foot-dragging also seems to strangely ignore the proximity of Iran to 130000+ US troops in neighbouring Iraq.

The sad reality is that the nuclear timeline is running out fast for the United States or any other nation with hopes of actually negotiating with Iran. Moreover Iran’s defiance of calls for a transparent re-count of their blatantly fraudulent June 12 election once more showcased the immense likelihood of unsuccessful negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program.

Yet despite Iran’s obstinacy and a ticking clock, the world body’s unanimity and adamancy on halting the construction of 20 Israeli apartment buildings will undoubtedly bring tremendous heat on Israel to acquiesce to the Obama all-star team’s demands this week. This intractable focus on Israeli settlement activity delegitimizes Israel’s internal anxiety over the on-going Iranian enrichment of uranium by shifting the focus back on Israel at the worst possible time.

In recent weeks many critical observers have been quick to suggest that the two issues are inextricably linked – that if only the West could persuade Israel on a settlement freeze, then a solution to the Iranian nuclear program might be found as part of a deal. For Israel, this is simply not plausible – one does not follow the other. Nonetheless the US, Russia, France and others continue to unduly press Israel on an entirely separate issue of marginal short-term consequence.

It is perhaps no surprise then that over the last two weeks Israel has quietly -yet publicly- moved two warships and a nuclear submarine through the Suez Canal to the Red Sea, in preparation for potential surgical strikes against Iran’s assorted nuclear targets. The strategic movement of powerful Israeli naval assets is a potent statement to the incoming US Defence Secretary that Israel will continue with its military plans no matter what Gates might bring to the discussion table.

The naval maneuver is also an overt statement that the settlement question is a non-issue for the Israelis at this point in history. Given Israel’s legitimate primacy of focus on the Iran issue, the same should be so for Gates and the rest of the US diplomatic team. It is Iran’s nuclear program – and not Israeli settlements – that must be the US’ sole priority while in Israel; not simply to appease the Israelis, but to act in the United States’ own national security interests as well.

President Obama may grumble with disapproval at this rejection of his hallowed demand for a settlement freeze. What is ignored is that the planet will be a much safer place to begin final-status peace negotiations when the frightening nuclear program of the world’s most fanatical, terror-sponsoring regime in Iran is multilaterally stopped once and for all. Israel should not be forced to halt Iran’s nuclear program by herself; shame on us all when it comes to that point nonetheless.

Robert D. Onley

Published again! "Shameful Insanity in Iran" on the Israel National News

My latest article "Shameful Insanity in Iran" was published today by the Israel National News.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/8900

Thanks to everyone who read my article here and offered critical insights for the final version!

Shameful Insanity in Iran

Amid the scenes of Iranians bravely and peacefully protesting the results of last week's blatantly rigged election, on Friday Iranian Ayatollah Ali Khamenei had the audacity to address his nation and blame the "Zionist-affiliated media [for] falsely portraying [the] political situation." This, in a world where even the most aggressive attempts by the Iranian government to block Internet, television and cell phone use all miserably failed to prevent thousands of protesters' high-resolution pictures, videos and news articles from reaching the outside world. The Ayatollah should be ashamed of his ignorance, while Israel and the West should prepare to act as Khamenei's goons are beginning to crack down on their fellow Iranians.

What the Ayatollah shamefully ignored is that the so-called "Zionist media" could not have falsely portrayed the Iranian protests, nor did anyone or any global entity have to do so mischievously. Instead it was and is Iran's own populace which continues to broadcast their nation's defining moment - proudly, defiantly, and peacefully for the whole world to see, using Twitter as their newest digital vehicle. In fact, equipped with its daft, geriatric leaders, the world's sole Islamic Republic finds itself all alone in ignoring the digital media revolution transpiring on their own youth-filled streets.

Unlike in 1979, Iranian students today are armed with the latest nigh-unstoppable technological means of instantly sharing their courageous message, and are doing a better job than any mass-scale misinformation campaign could ever have. Indeed, in an increasingly pervasive digital world, Ayatollah Khamenei's finger-pointing at the "Zionist media" is strikingly retro in its vague, generic ugliness. It is as if the Ayatollah does not understand that almost every cell-phone today is equipped with picture and video camera capability and thus any moment, anywhere, can be instantly recorded and shared with the world.

As a further indictment of the Ayatollah's age and fleeting competence, the re-anointment of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is the least forward-thinking, purely short-term decision for the life of the Iranian theocracy. But in spite all of the obvious problems that Ahmadinejad represents to the world around Iran, Khamenei appears at this time more comfortable with the 'devil he knows' in his pal Mahmoud. Alternatively, while Mousavi is no political outsider to Khamenei --having served as Iran's Prime Minister from 1981-1989 during the horrifying Iran-Iraq War-- his alleged 'reform' platform may ultimately scare the Ayatollah away from giving him the presidential reins of power.

Again this uncertainty suggests that Khamenei's ultimate authority and intellectual supremacy may be crumbling inside the Iranian theocratic machine. Certainly some of Iran's political leaders have by now questioned Khamenei's wisdom in castigating an overwhelming majority of young Iranians, most of whom are now valiantly opposing the regime's oppressive actions. These are also the same young Iranians that will begin assuming positions of influence within the country over the next decade, learning the ropes of power to one-day-soon remove their clearly foolish political elders.

In my article published Tuesday entitled “The Inevitable Iranian Crisis", I suggested that if the Ayatollah's were calculating longer-term, then Mousavi was a more logical candidate for Khamenei to hand-pick to lead the Iranian nation. Nonetheless, in an effort to condemn the West, blame the "Zionists" and reinforce his rapidly withering grip on 'supreme' power, Khamenei has chosen a comfortable fate that tragically will only lead to future conflict, internal instability and more destitution for the Iranian populace. It may also lead to his deposal.

This is an outcome that Mousavi's supporters can most definitely foresee. The current vigor and enthusiasm displayed by the young 20-something crowds in calling for the replacement of Ahmadinejad will eventually give way to the cold, jobless financial and social realities of living in an increasingly sanctioned nation. Some might disagree and suggest that their dire physical situation will instead lengthen their protests and strengthen their movement. Either way, the protesters' resolve is being put to the ultimate test.

Further, as Iran's leaders relentlessly pursue nuclear capabilities --with all of the resultant questioning over its flagrantly covert nature-- these same young Iranians can see the potentially cataclysmic conflict that just might explode over Ahmadinejad's stubborn defiance of international demands to halt nuclear enrichment work. This issue presents a paradox for Israeli and Western policymakers, as the Iranian nuclear program is seen as a ray of technological hope and national pride for these same repressed Iranians, but is nevertheless a frightening tool wielded in the hands of Ahmadinejad, Khamenei and even Mousavi.

Accordingly Ahmadinejad's vile rhetoric will more than likely increase over the next few months as his re-anointment solidifies his belief that Allah has selected him to hasten the return of the 12th "Hidden Imam". In speech after speech this fanatical, Holocaust-denying national president has made clear his fundamental belief that Allah alone has placed him where he is to lead the world into the Islamic Apocalypse. If only Iran had the venomous weapons capability to ignite such a conflict, Ahmadinejad might soon be in paradise and the Persian and Israeli sands aglow with the soft green tinge of a fresh nuclear missile exchange.

This is not "Zionist" here say, Western hyperbole or underhanded slander against Ahmadinejad, but rather a factual account of Ahmadinejad and Khamenei's utterly twisted 'End Times' worldview. One need only watch Ahmadinejad's sub-titled speeches on YouTube (particularly at the UN General Assembly in September 2007) to uncover these disturbing truths about Iran's newly re-anointed, nuclear-weapons-seeking president. The terrifying realities should serve as a stark backdrop to the violent crackdown on protesters and to the Iranian Regime’s last-ditch efforts to maintain absolute power. This is a regime that will seek survival at all costs in order to soon fulfill their perceived apocalyptic destiny.

How then, does the West support such a repressed society against their loathed regime, while simultaneously putting an abrupt stop to that regime's contentious, rapidly-advancing nuclear program? How is it possible to engage the Supreme Leaders of Iran on the single most dangerous, volatile and lethal weapons technology, when the same men so proudly defy international calls either for a new election or at the very least an open, transparent recount of the votes?

This dilemma is so patently confounding that warning sirens should be blaring in the heads of any Western diplomat seriously considering "negotiations without preconditions” with the Iranian Islamic Republic. Any shred of credibility that Iran's "Supreme Leaders" may have possessed (and there was little even before this election) has now been incinerated in the fires of Ayatollah Khamenei's intransigence, ignorance and ignominy. If anything, these future nuclear negotiations should have more preconditions than ever before to ensure that any potential resolution on Iran’s nuclear program is actually adhered to, respected and enforced.

Israeli leaders would be wise to take note of this intellectual quagmire, and ultimately prepare for worst case scenarios. Israel is caught in the crosshairs of this international morass as a negotiable bargaining chip, while literally being caught in the crosshairs of Iran’s avowed proxy armies Hamas and Hizbullah. With a whole generation of young, freedom-yearning Iranians depending on the West's support during their current leader's shamefully insane moment, Prime Minister Netanyahu must stake Israel’s position and stick to it with unrelenting determination.

Further the protesters’ vivid pictures and Twittered accounts must speak far louder than Ayatollah Khamenei's failing attempts to shut them up. Iranian students are to be encouraged to continue aggressively seeking professions that will provide the experience and personal skills needed to lead Iran out of its dark days today, into a brighter future alongside the rest of the international community. As an emblem of peaceable democracy in the region, Israel too can join with these Iranian students to leverage their potential futures against their leaders’ delusional nuclear dreams. Israel --and the Iranian students-- have few other options at this contentious time.

The Inevitable Iranian Crisis - now published!

Just received the word that my article "The Inevitable Iranian Crisis" posted here below was published by the Israel National News.

Check it out: "The Inevitable Iranian Crisis" by Robert D. Onley on Israel National News

The Inevitable Iranian Crisis

In spite of Ayatollah Khamenei’s recent call for an inquiry into the Iranian ‘election’ results, and in spite of the potential for ‘reform’ embodied by Mir Hossein Mousavi, Iran and Israel are racing toward explosive armed conflict over Iran's covert - yet utterly flagrant and defiant - pursuit of nuclear weapons capability. Today, while the Iranian populace collectively and legitimately 'holds its breath' with regard to their nation’s electoral future, the depressing reality at the international level is that the Israeli-Iranian nuclear crisis will continue to deteriorate, and rapidly so.

Iran's president may change, however it is the Ayatollahs above Iran’s next president – be it Ahmadinejad or Mousavi – that remain Iran’s unchangeable, authoritative supreme leaders. Certainly the Ayatollahs cheered for one candidate or the other during the recent presidential campaigns, with Ahmadinejad’s re-election bid undeniably funded by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei et al. These are predictable variables in an unpredictable world.

However there can be no mistaking the chess-playing nature of Iran’s supreme leaders. The Ayatollahs are fully cognizant of the sheer social power that the appearance of change can bring to the overall mood of society, particularly with a people as young, impressionable and downtrodden as Iran’s. Indeed, U.S. President Obama’s election in November shook the world’s attention to this impressively powerful social force, with his hypnotic “Yes we can” mantra

bringing millions of Americans to their feet to support America’s new awe-inspiring leader.

A Facade of Change

In Iran, while the stakes may not be as electorally significant, the facade of historic change by ‘electing’ a ‘

reformer’ such as Mir Hossein Mousavi may be just the trick needed for the longevity of the Ayatollahs Islamic theocracy and for the continuing development of a certain highly sought-after Iranian weapons capability. As such, Ayatollah Khamenei's call for an ‘inquiry’ into the presidential election may represent

the first move in a carefully crafted plan to create this appearance of change and bide Iran’s time.

The simple reality is this: if Iran is to ever fully and properly develop nuclear weapons, the Ayatollahs must be unquestionably conscious of how detrimental Ahmadinejad has and will become to Iran’s secret nuclear program. There is no arguing that Ahmadinejad has isolated the Iranian regime, made a mockery of the evil of humanity by denying the Holocaust, all while simultaneously dragging their enemy Israel into armed conflict with its proxy ar

mies, first with Hezbollah in Lebanon in 2006 and most recently with Hamas in Gaza in January 2009. International focus on Iran went from marginal uncertainty in 2005 to outright condemnation by 2009.

More critically, the Ayatollahs also know that perhaps just another few months are needed to procure enough enriched uranium for multiple nuclear bombs. The world’s leading intelligence agencies are after precise knowledge as to how many nuclear weapons Iran might already have, or might soon have. Israel knows that the existence of any Iranian nuke holds the key to the Israeli response, or not, and knows that while Iran undergoes dramatic electoral upheaval and protest, the Iranian nuclear machine is quietly churning out more uranium in the background. Meanwhile the Ayatollahs simply nod with approval and smile.

'Invisible' Diplomatic Timeline?

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s overt hints that Israel is prepared to ‘defend itself’ through pre-emptive action against Iran’s nuclear program patently suggests that Israel knows time has essentially run out, regardless of how many potential nukes Iran might possess. For Netanyahu, there is no ‘invisible’ one-year timeline, one which President Obama appears to envision. Obama’s fanciful diplomatic talk is but a further distraction in an already strung-out ‘negotiation’ process with Iran that spans many agonizing years.

Moreover, if Iran is still a full six months away from having the uranium for just one bomb, Iran’s uranium enrichment capacity will nonetheless continue to exponentially increase so long as more and more centrifuges are made operational in those very same six months. Thus for Israel, not only is Obama’s one-year negotiation ‘timeline’ ludicrously brief, the overall Iranian nuclear crisis ‘timeline’ is also shrinking faster for the world with each passing day and with each shiny new centrifuge.

Who Best For the Islamic Republic's Future?

Imagine then, Iran’s Ayatollahs sitting somewhere deep inside Tehran, debating which candidate to hand-pick to lead their nation into sole possession of Middle Eastern nuclear stardom. The basic, unavoidable question facing the Ayatollahs is this: which Presidential candidate will deceive the West long enough so that we (Iran) can finally develop multiple nuclear weapons – one to test and the rest to immediately deploy into ‘service’? The Ayatollahs answer for their next President just might be: “Anyone but Ahmadinejad.” Khamenei’s electoral ‘inquiry’ will reveal the depth of Iranian foresight.

As the world’s most-loathed and disturbed fanatic, President Ahmadinejad represents all of the blatant contingencies that will likely provoke a conflict with Israel sooner rather than later. Of course, this conflict is exactly what the Ayatollahs one-day desire as part of the return of their “Hidden Imam” – but war is not desired until Iran has developed multiple nuclear weapons and more importantly a nuclear deterrent combined with first strike Shahab-4 nuclear missile capability.

In light of this apocalyptic Iranian dream, the ‘election’ of an opposition candidate in Iran such as Mir Hossein Mousavi will not be a surprising result of the inquiry, as it will actually provide the necessary pomp, delay and circumstance for Iran to launch immediate, ‘full disclosure’, ‘peaceful’ nuclear negotiations with the Americans, thus ultimately gaining precious time for nuclear weapons and missile development.

At that point, Israel will be pressed so hard by all corners of the world to not launch preemptive strikes against Iran, that any action undertaken by Israel – even if limited to smaller isolated tactical strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites – will instantly ignite a horrifying barrage of missile attacks against Israel from Hezbollah, Hamas and more than likely from Iran itself. These missiles – particularly those launched from Iran – could already be tipped with a crude nuclear device assembled from Iran’s first batches of highly enriched uranium. This is to say nothing of Syria’s possible involvement, and their alleged nuclear and chemical weapons program. These are the unpredictable variables of living in the world’s most deadly region.

No Alternative Options

The lone unresolved determinable variable is therefore the frightening decision for Israel’s top political and military leaders to either undertake such defensive military strikes against Iran, or to instead accept an enemy Iranian capability that could erase the Israeli land in the blink of an eye. To leave Iran’s nuclear program unchecked is to ensure Israel’s future destruction in some form or another. This is also to abandon the dreams of Israel’s descendants to the Holocaust-denying delusions of Iran’s apocalypse-inducing leaders.

These are brutal, objective realities. There are no other enemies on earth more determined to eliminate their target

than Israel’s virulent, hate-filled, purely evil foes in Hezbollah, Hamas and Iran. Indeed even across the entire

globe today, only the State of Israel is subject to a tangible level of hate which literally threatens the actual, physical existence of Israel as its citizens - and the world - knows it.

If there is one country and one leader wholly and entirely justified in resolutely eliminating an existential threat today, that country is Israel and that leader is Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Let the world not be distracted by the ‘potential’ for ‘electoral change’ in Iran; instead let Israel’s leaders remain focused, well prepared and courageously set to embark on an undesired yet unavoidable military mission that will inarguably change the course of world history. The United States has shown it will not do this for them; thus Israel cannot fail at its lonely, crucial hour.

Robert D. Onley - Copyright 2009

♦ Welcome to The World Assessor ♦

In a world increasingly overflowing with answers and yet devoid of logical explanations, there exist relatively few outlets for pertinent insights into contentious topics. Whether scouring the internet or your local newspaper, conflicting accounts of critical stories can create confused pictures of genuinely international issues. Often it seems any given global problem can be broken down into two simple possibilities: Is the answer this? Or is it that? How about global warming, or global cooling? Israel, or Palestine? Both?

The World Assessor seeks to address issues in a clear, informative and incisive manner, to provide both enlightenment and a challenge to the reader. There will be obvious positions, slants and opinions, delivered to you without shame, without holding back and without totalitarian political correctness to save face. Indeed if one cannot assess current events without boldly standing behind their beliefs, what is the point of telling others what you think?

My name is Robert D. Onley and I welcome you to The World Assessor. Please join me for what I know will be an exciting journey through the events of our times. I cannot promise that you will always agree with me, and I definitely won't always agree with you. But if you leave this blog with even the slightest questioning of your own careful considerations about world events, then I have done my job. With that, let's begin; the world awaits.