The First Part of This Post Is Serious...The Rest, Less So

I have long been a believer - in the sense of admitting the eventual reality rather than wishing for the reality - that Iran and Israel will be at war in the near future. They, at least, will be the principal combatants but of course there is the potential for a wider war.

It should be obvious by now to most sensible observers that Iran is building nuclear bomb capability and nothing short of military action can stop that now. The Israelis know this which is why they elected the most decisive and hawkish politician on their scene to govern. There were several reasons to believe that Israel might be restrained from taking military action against Iran nuclear capability development. The main reason was that the United States would not like it and in exchange for holding off the US was prepared to stand by Israel against Iran come any eventuality. That is now gone. The US of course still wants Israel to stand down but instead of offering its protection and big brother embrace come what may, we've insulted them slapped them in the face and all but turned our back on them. The Israelis don't believe the Obama administration will lift a finger to help them, and why would they with a major US military official publicly spitballing about shooting down Israeli jets if they were to bomb Iran. Then there were the lesser, but still sticky, issues of the Straits of Hormuz and the Iranian population. I speculated that these don't really enter into the calculus anymore. There is plenty of oil in storage outside the Gulf to survive for a time if Iran tries to cause trouble. And nobody believes that the Iranians will rally around their government anymore. As for the Iranians, the time is perfect for them too. The US-Israeli alliance is at its weakest in decades with a naive, Israel-hating leftist in the Oval Office; and, as a practical matter, the US military is stretched thin cleaning up two previous military engagements.

OK. That sets the stage from my perspective. Now I turn it over to others. Read Glick and watch Whittle. Is the picture coming into focus? Good, I think this is all a serious and a rational concern after you think it all through.

Now, here is where I am going to go off the deep end a little, but, well, it's Friday and Fridays are always good for a little conspiracy theorizing, or 'thought experiments' as I like to call them. If you watch the Whittle report, General Vallely cautions on the potential for a wider war and insists that (I am paraphrasing) "it is imperative that we get the Obama administration on board with helping Israel and containing this should it happen." Why would he say this? Naturally because clearly the Obama administration ain't on board. But more interesting to me, I think Vallely knows something about the tension between the military and the administration on this right now. I have heard, through my sources who don't talk loosely or lightly, some pretty outlandish speculation that there are those inclined within high US military command that could (not intent but inclined, not would but could, as in depending, maybe, and I'm hedging 'til the cows come home here) deploy US military assets in assistance to Israel in the absence of such a command from President Obama. Yes, it is crazy but the danger is so great, the implications so vast, and the viewpoints so at odds that, well, who knows. One source has even told me that in such a scenario, the US military would act and give Obama the opportunity to say he went along after the fact so as to keep civil order here at home and preserve the appearance of legality. I, of course, dismissed this when I first heard it, despite my respect for my interlocutor, but Vallely's comment caused me to do a double take, raise my eyelid a tad, and say "Hmmmm." So there is something for you to ruminate on over a nice Cabernet tonight. (And if you really get toasted, throw in the computer-driven stock market crash and this and mix it all around!)