In every generation: Guardian advances historically familiar refrain that Israel is ‘beating war drums’

The United States has long regarded Iran as the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism.  

Most recently U.S. officials blamed Iranian sponsor Hezbollah for a deadly suicide bombing in Bulgaria that killed five Israeli tourists

Indeed Iran backs many such Islamist groups – including the Lebanese Shiite militants of Hezbollah (which Iran helped found in the 1980s), which has an arsenal of 60,000 rockets aimed at Israel. The U.S. Defense Department estimates Iranian support to Hezbollah at roughly $100 million to $200 million annually.

They also provide financial support and training to Palestinian terror groups like Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – groups which have killed Israelis in terror attacks and fired thousands of rockets into Israeli communities over the years.

And Iran is suspected of providing training and arms to Taliban fighters in Afghanistan, including “small arms and associated ammunition, rocket-propelled grenades, mortar rounds, 107mm rockets, and plastic explosives.”

Iranian leaders have also openly declared that their forces were “propping up Syrian President Basher Assad’s murderous regime”. Members of the Iranian Qods Force are helping Assad fight the rebels. “We are proud to defend Syria, which constitutes a resistance to the Zionist entity,” Jafari told reporters.

Additionally, a semi-official Iranian religious institution announced it was increasing the reward to $3.3 million for anyone who acts on a fatwa and murders British author Salman Rushdie.

Most disturbingly, a website with close ties to Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khomenei recently outlined why it would be religiously acceptable to kill all Jews in Israel – a doctrine, as reported by the Mail Online, which details why the destruction of Israel and the slaughter of all its people would be legally and morally justified, and in accordance with Islamic doctrine. [emphasis added]

As the Washington Times reported:

“The article, written by Alireza Forghani, a strategy specialist in Khomeini camp, is now being run on most state-owed conservative sites, including the Revolutionary Guard’s Fars News Agency, showing that the regime endorses the doctrine.”

The government approved essay on Fars News Agency (seen here, which is in Farsi, though you can read it via Google Translate) cites the last census showing Israel has a population of 7.5 million, of which roughly 5.8 million are Jewish. Then it breaks down the districts with the highest concentration of Jews, indicating that three cities (Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and Haifa) contain over 60 percent of the Jewish population that Iran could target.

So, Iran is perhaps the largest exporter of terrorism on the planet, supplies terror groups with deadly weaponry to use against Israeli civilians, sends arms, as well as their own soldiers, to Syrian to kill and brutalize the population, and has issued a fatwa of sorts on the lives of six million Jews.

If you were to think that this sound like an aggressive, militaristic, malevolent regime which is constantly beating the drums for war, you’d be wrong. At least according to the Guardian.

The Guardian’s security correspondent, Julian Borger, published the following on Sept. 4:

The opening passage sets the tone for the piece:

The odds against an Israeli military strike on Iran in the next few months appear to be lengthening, and perhaps the strongest evidence comes from none other than Binyamin Netanyahu, the man who has beaten the war drums loudest over the past few months. [emphasis added]

The moral inversion is simply stunning. 

Netanyahu, along with other Israeli leaders and the citizens of the state, are not beating the drums for war, but merely acting as any responsible state would in the face of an Iranian regime promising the Jewish state’s annihilation (while developing the nuclear means to do so), and engaged in proxy wars against the state on its norther and southern borders.

Such rocket attacks, which have killed, injured and terrorized thousands of Israelis, along with belligerence threats by their top leaders – which include calls to genocide – are more than a cause belli, but represent acts of war, and most nations on the receiving end of such aggression would have launched retaliatory strikes long ago.

Indeed, how many missile attacks from its northern or southern border, by terror groups committed to its destruction, would the United States absorb before retaliating and neutralizing the threat? 

Further, recall that in October 1962 the U.S. was prepared to launch a major military assault upon discovering that Cuban and Soviet governments had built bases in Cuba for a number of ballistic nuclear missiles with the ability to strike most of the United States.  The U.S. deemed it unacceptable, demanded that the Soviets remove the missiles and initiated a naval blockade of all Soviet ships.

The Soviets, sensing American resolve, and aware of the massive might of the U.S. military, eventually backed down and removed all nuclear weapons from Cuba.

President John F. Kennedy swore an oath to protect and defend the United States from all enemies, and his decisions during those tense 13 days in October were thoroughly consistent with his duty to protect his nation. Most of the world, it should be noted, was squarely behind the U.S. response to the dangerous Soviet gambit 100 miles from American shores.

Unlike the U.S., however, Israel is not a world superpower, so must be much more judicious in both its diplomatic maneuvering (soft power) and its potential use of force (military power) to neutralize the Iranian threat.

In June of 1967, when Prim Minister Levi Eshkol was debating with his cabinet how best to respond to a massive build up of 230,000 Arab troops   and thousands of tanks on Israel’s porous borders – buttressed by threats of annihilation form Arab leaders in Cairo, Damascus, and Baghdad – U.S. President Johnson told Eshkol, who was still hoping for U.S. military help to prevent a war, rebuffed Israeli requests for military aid and diplomatic approval for an Israeli preemptive attack on Egypt.

Though Israeli military officials were convinced they couldn’t absorb a first strike by the combine Arab forces amassed along their borders, and that their only hope for survival was a such a preemptive attack, Eshkol received a cable from President Johnson warning against such an Israeli attack, warning that “Israel will not be alone unless it decides to go it alone.”

In the early hours of June 5, Israel acted, destroying the Egyptian Air Force on the ground in a matter of hours, and gaining a stunning victory over the combined might of Egypt, Jordan, Syria (and smaller contingents from other Arab states) in six days of fighting.

Israel, under Eshkol, was concerned about public opinion, and the need not to unnecessarily alienate their U.S. ally, but his overriding concern was the survival of the Third Jewish Commonwealth.

Similarly, today, Israel doesn’t have the luxury to outsource their defense to another country, nor concern themselves too much with disapproval, and sanctimonious outrage, expressed by diplomats and intellectuals safe in their New York and London salons.

If Jewish history has taught us anything it’s that when our enemies threaten us with destruction they should be taken at their word; that we must be masters of our destiny; there is nothing noble, moral or righteous in Jewish victimhood; and we simply can not surrender to the dangerous vices of resignation, fatalism or moral vanity.

Though in every generation there are those who seek our destruction, in this generation we have the military means to prevent such malevolent designs, and, if need be, Israel won’t hesitate to exercise that power.

54 replies »

  1. If there were genuine democratic elections in Iran, I bet that the Palestinian question and all the anti-Semitic rhetoric would become a minor issue.

    • CIF Watch forgot to add that Iranians are used to kidnapping young children and drinking their blood.

      This article is a joke.

      • actually, according to Iranian/Arab antisemitic propaganda, it’s the Jews who drink blood.

        btw, is are any facts about this post you wish to challenge?

        • This article will be printed and shown in journalism schools to show students what not to do. There is not a single credible source to back what’s written. it’s a mere compilation of cliches.

          “So, Iran is perhaps the largest exporter of terrorism on the planet, supplies terror groups with deadly weaponry to use against Israeli civilians, sends arms, as well as their own soldiers, to Syrian to kill and brutalize the population, and has issued a fatwa of sorts on the lives of six million Jews.”

          Really? Can we please have a source for this? or is this just wishful thinking?

          • Which “journalism” schools do you want to adress? The Nazi schools are all closed down, or do you mean those of the Islamic Republic of Iran?

      • The fact that the facts in this article about Iran piss you off (I have no idea why that is the case, but so be it) obviously doesn’t make it a joke, and everyone who reads this is going to be fully aware of that.

        • Nat’s view of the world is immature and solipsistic. You can’t expect such a one to realise and accept that we might think and react differently from him.

      • Cifwatch really forgot to add some important points:

        1. In Iran being gay is punishable by death by hanging the culprits publicly on cranes.
        2. Adulterer females must be stoned to death by the mob publicly
        3. Being affiliated with the Bahai religion is punishable by death.
        4. Being affiliated with any non-monotheistic religion is punishable by death.
        5. Being in the secular democratic opposition is the short and direct way to being tortured, raped and killed by your Revolutionary Guard friends without even the slightest attempt to put them on trial.
        6 etc.

        • Peter,
          everyones favorite torture technique in Iran seems to be sodomy rape by broom handle or baton. This is done until the victim looses their mind. And all for the Mahdi!
          On the imperialist ( war drum ) front Iran is sodomizing Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, the Yemen and Afghanistan and of course its Gimp numero uno Lebanon. All in the name of a more just socialist Islamic world order. That’s because Western women are just hussy’s and waste money on make up.

      • “This article is a joke.”

        Nat in that case I look forward to reading your detailed refutation of the article.

        That is if you can spare the time from writing about your ‘conquests’ in Beirut’s nightclubs. Now that is definitely a joke!

        • “Nat in that case I look forward to reading your detailed refutation of the article.”

          Gerald, that’s the easy way to get rid of him.

      • Nat: “This article is a joke.”

        Well, perhaps if you were strung up on an Iranian gallows we could all join in with your sense of humour.

  2. On a general note about the article:

    … the dangerous Soviet gambit 100 miles from American shores.

    Hang on. The US already had nuclear missiles stationed in Turkey, i.e. a country bordering the USSR.

    The above is the kind of comment that compromises this website’s given mission statement, i.e. solely about anti-Semitism and anti-Israel rhetoric.

    • Pretz,

      Again, you miss the point.

      By the way, Israel does not have missiles or troops on the border of Iran.
      Were you even around during the Cuban missile crisis? I seriously doubt it.

      • “By the way, Israel does not have missiles or troops on the border of Iran.”

        Do you imagine that there are no Israeli nuclear missiles targeted on Teheran?

      • Israel does not have missiles or troops on the border of Iran

        Yes – any other bleedingly obvious information you wish to impart?

        So what’s your point?
        And what point am I apparently missing?

        • And what point am I apparently missing?

          Seems to me you are missing every relevant point in the article pretz – as ususal…

          • If there are so many relevant points you say I’ve missed, then you’ll surely have no problem listing a few.

            • Sorry pretzel I as a mental midget I can’t explain something so complicated like the content and main point of a very simple article to a widely perspectived genius like yourself.

              BTW your stupidity and thickness is simply embarassing.

            • So you are unable to list the “relevant point s” I have apparently missed.

              Just be honest – you support the anti-goy posters here.

              Re. “stupidity and thickness”- that’s your bigotry speaking there.

      • Venezuela reputedly has powerful Iranian missiles sited so that they can hit the south of the USA. Although this is in the public domain no one seems to be very concerned. I wonder what JFK would have done about it had it happened during his presidency?

  3. The above is the kind of comment that compromises this website’s given mission statement, i.e. solely about anti-Semitism and anti-Israel rhetoric.

    So bringing up a historical fact in order to prove the anti Israeli agenda of the Guardian is not fair? Is it against the Quensberry rules? Sometimes your own posts generates the feeling that your thinking processes are -how to say it not too bluntly.. – simplistic and primitive?

    • Thank you Peter. That was the point I was about to bring up with the man who calls sensible, informed commenters “mental midgets” and “bigots.”

      • Name me ONE “sensible, informed commenter” here who I have wrongly called a mental midget or bigot.

        Just one.

        You seem a reasonable chap otherwise. Why are you going out of your way to defend scumbags who bring down the reputation of this website?

        • Pretzelberg,
          I’ve mentioned before that I believe you’re are a bit trigger happy.
          It’s fine for you to have differences of opinion with other people, but I think you call people out sometimes with reckless abandon.

          • I “call people out sometimes with reckless abandon”??

            @ Jeff and the people recommending the above post: what if someone were to call you a Nazi?
            Would you just shrug it off as a “difference of opinion”?
            Or would you rightly call them a scumbag?

            Let’s have less of the hyopcrisy – and less of the bigotry.

            • I don’t think you’re a Nazi. That’s ridiculous. But I do think that you fly off the handle a bit too easy sometimes which makes you a target, resulting in many of the insults you do receive. Not always. Sometimes. (And I’m not excusing anyone else). If you practice refuting arguments, concentrating on the argument, and save the name calling for more special occasions, I think you’d find a reduction in the number of insults which fly your way. That’s just my opinion.

              • But I do think that you fly off the handle a bit too easy sometimes

                How would you like it if someone called you a Nazi?

                I think you’d find a reduction in the number of insults which fly your way

                Because of the anti-goy bigots?

          • And why do you always criticise me – and never e.g. peterthehungarian?
            I get it. He’s Jewish and I’m not. That’s why.

            Shame on you all.

            • “I get it. He’s Jewish and I’m not. That’s why.”

              No. That’s not why. I couldn’t give a fig about your religious, ethnic, or national background.

    • simplistic and primitive??

      On the contrary. It’s simply about a wider perspective. Something you clearly don’t have.

      As for primitive – it’s you who supports backward caveman-like tribalism.

      • Ah the wider perspective… Very clear pretzel. You explained everything to us mental midgets…
        Thank you very much.

        • I never called you a mental midget. Or do you consider yourself addressed when I talk about the cowardly numbskulls who automatically vote down my posts and support bigots like Daniel?

          • pretzel this dialogue became pretty boring and as I said embarrassing. I give it up. You are a combination of Platon, Einstein, Spinoza, Hawking and Maxwell, your perspective is wider than the Milky Way and we poor tribalists are hungry to hear your eternal wisdom – but not now.

            • My aggression is directed not towards you, Jeff, or other reasonable posters here.

              It is against bigots like Daniel (thankfully now a persona non grata here!) – and those who would defend them.

              And how would you like it if someone called you a Nazi?