moonbattery logo

Sep 04 2012

Obama Will Not Back Israel in War With Iran

The maniacal regime in Iran has been waging a one-way war against the United States since 1979, killing many Americans over the years by terrorism. Given our lack of leadership, the only thing that stands between Iran and nuclear weapons is Israel. But if Israel takes action, it can expect no help from the USA. From the Israeli newspaper Yediot Ahronot, translated by The Blaze:

The message that the U.S. conveyed to Iran via the most sensitive secret channels is unequivocal: if Israel attacks, we won’t stand behind her and we won’t be drawn into war.

In recent days, senior American administration officials turned to their Iranian counterparts via two countries in Europe which act as a back-channel during times of crisis. They made clear to the Iranians that the U.S. does not intend to be sucked into a campaign if Israel decides to strike unilaterally and without advance coordination [with the U.S.], and they said that they expect from Iran that it will not attack strategic American targets in the Persian Gulf.

Obama’s Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey confirms that he will not be “complicit” if Israel attempts to do something about Iran’s nuclear weapons program.

For all intents and purposes, remaining neutral in a fight between Israel and an expansionist Islamic regime means siding with the latter. Obama did warn us, even before his potentially catastrophic election, that he would “stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”

Voting for Barack Hussein Obama was not just treason against the United States, or even Western Civilization. An act that grossly irresponsible is treason against the entire human race, as we will see when the mullahs acquire their nukes and inevitably use them on behalf of their evil god.

On a tip from bHussein.

29 Responses to “Obama Will Not Back Israel in War With Iran”

  1. realitysliberalbias says:

    … I suppose this is the part where the voice of reason points out that if Iran were to use a single nuke, the entirety of their country would be four feet of black glass about 17 minutes later?

    Even the insane religious crazies aren’t that crazy. And everybody knows it. We don’t need another pointless war in a sandbox country; it is enough to know that both Israel and the US have enough real weapons to reduce their entire fanatical regime to vapor. And certainly will if need be. No need for troops, no need for anything beyond the certainty of immediate, total annhilation.

    (And as long as I’m being the Voice of Reason – who’s gonna pay for your presumed ‘yet another war’ if His Mittness were to win? The answer certianly ain’t taxes on the wealthy, so lemme guess – all the sudden deficit spending isn’t so bad after all. Riiiiight. Nothing like intellectual consistency, eh?)

    Love me some retarded people with a poor sense of pattern recognition.

  2. QuietMan says:

    I never imagined anyone who could make me miss Wesley Clark, but Marty Dempsey surely does….

  3. […] nuclear weapons is Israel. But if Israel takes action, it can expect no help from the USA. […] Moonbattery Tags: back, Iran, Israel, Obama Posted in Pundits | No Comments […]

  4. dr. theo says:

    Reallyliberalbias said: Even the insane religious crazies aren’t that crazy. And everybody knows it.

    Well, no they don’t. They believe that Allah will protect them by sending the Mahdi to retore a worldwide caliphate. They believe this can only happen by provoking a war with Israel. The Israelis know this and that is why Israel will have to intervene before Iran has a deployable nuclear weapon. What you call a “voice of reason” sounds more like a voice of naivete.

  5. Ghost of FA Hayek says:

    Reallyliberalbias said: Even the insane religious crazies aren’t that crazy. And everybody knows it.

  6. dan says:

    Reallyliberalbias said: Even the insane religious crazies aren’t that crazy. And everybody knows it.

    With no exaggeration : it would only take one nuke to
    wipe out most of Israel with the blast effect disregarding the uncontrollable fires and radiation….it’s not that big of a place….
    take out portion of a country that small would cripple the rest so badly that it would be unable to function.

  7. realitysliberalbias says:

    … and yet if Iran were to do it, they would be gone. Not after years of sanctions, or an endless, pointless drone war, but in a half hour… gone forever. No calipate. No future at all. Just a smoldering hole in the desert.

    It is not even in question. Israel would do it regardelss of the US. They have bombs (we gave them to Israel in the 60s) and clearly would not hesitate to remove Iran from the world – forever. Iran knows this.

    Remember the Cold War and Mutually Assured Destruction? Same deal. Nobody pulls that trigger, because the consequences are catastrophic. The mullahs are clearly retarded, but just as clearly don’t want to ‘rule’ over a crater full of radioactive vapor. Especially since they themselves would also be radioactive vapor. Makes the ‘ruling’ thing a bummer.

    You guys ever take that step back and ask yourselves why you are afraid of quite literally everything, regardless of how remote or unlikely? It must be exhausting…

  8. Alphamail says:


    My sense of pattern recognition sees you as just another frayed colorless thread in the anti-Zionist cloak.

    I like how you conjur a self-serving scenario, discuss war needs and spending, declare yourself the god of reason, and then slam the few people who could ever take you seriously – but have yet to even read your rant – as retards and intellectually inconsistent.

    Do your mental masturbations require vaseline?

  9. realitysliberalbias says:

    @Alpha –

    While I didn’t actually call anyone a retard – except the mullah-types who are clearly retarded – I am happy to color you with that brush, bud. I assumed you could read… but maybe that was a poor assumption.

    So – feel free to respond. How exactly would you and your Mittness go about starting yet another war while decreasing taxes and spending? What exactly do you see as a better more effective solution/deterrent than our own – far more numerous and powerful – nukes? If you agree with the poster’s statement about a lack of leadership (presumably meaning Obama’s), how, exactly, do you see the US engaging in a presumptive war with Iran while also maintaining the (fictitious) GOPspeak about how bad deficits are?

    Which is it? I am standing by, waiting for you to tell me how exactly you would go about handling this situation. Show me your real leadership, guy.

    (Riiiight. You’ve got nuthin. As I so rightly assumed. Amazing how I did that, eh?)

  10. M.Wilson says:

    And yet, I guarantee that if the scenario he describes were to happen this very same person would adamantly oppose nuking Iran out of fear of triggering a nuclear war. Or because nuking Muslims is oppressive, or it would harm the lush Iranian environment, or some silliness like that.

    I, however, have no qualms with using WMDs in the interest of defending ourselves or our allies. Since we’re on the subjects of nukes and the budget, how about I launch some weapons of math destruction.

    Did you know that just under two thirds (around 60-66%) of our government’s budget is entitlement spending, while the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (labeled “overseas contingency operations”) constitute 1/7 of our Defense budget, or roughly 3% of the total Federal budget?

    The gist of this is that crippling government dependency is costing us the equivalent of twenty Wars on Terror. We could feasibly declare war on the entire Middle East and it would still cost us less than Social Security alone. Meanwhile, since roughly 1/3 (somewhere around 30-33%) of our budget is deficit spending, merely cutting entitlements in half would instantly balance the budget. Ending the wars that the Left tries to blame for the national debt would have a laughably small impact, reducing deficit spending to 27-30% of the total budget. To top it all off, by reducing productivity entitlements also shrink the tax base, which means that they hit us on both sides of the balance sheet.

    As for the common leftist fallacy that advocating defense is a sign of fear, that is so patently untrue as to nearly constitute slander. The man who defends himself has no need to fear any aggressor, it is the pacifist who spends his days looking over his shoulder in fear of those more belligerent. The lion fears none in his domain, but the dove lives ever in fear of the hawk.

    Peace through Strength.

  11. dr. theo says:

    Well said, M. Wilson. Reallyliberalbias just doesn’t believe the Muslims when they say that they intend to destroy Israel and then kill all the infidels and take control of the world for Allah. Not only do they say it, they act on it daily. But Reallyliberal doesn’t believe it. He believes only in what his superior intellect conceives. There can be no MAD policy if one side is eager to die for Allah.

  12. TrickleUpPolitics says:

    Pro-Israel Language Removed From Democratic Party Platform

    Israeli Officials See Gap With U.S. Widening Over Iran

    But just three days ago, Drudge reported:
    White House claims ‘cooperation with Israel has never been closer’

    As for realitysliberal bias who claims we have more and stronger nukes:



  13. Alphamail says:

    A nice response from M.Wilson to “lackofreality @ 9:52”


    realitysliberalbias says:

    “…..Remember the Cold War and Mutually Assured Destruction? Same deal.”

    “…..afraid of quite literally everything…”


    No way.

    Nothing “mutual” about Iran and the Muslims…..or moderate.

    This is not the cold war. It is not communism. It is not Marxism. It is not Western/Eastern conventional thought. This is not one country against another. It is not skin color, politics, nationalism, and it is not centrally located in a Washington, Moscow, or Tehran – the mindset is profoundly global.

    These religious fanatics are on a mission to control the earth and without question they have declared that intent. Israel and the US are merely stumbling blocks on the way to a Caliphate.

    They are best represented in the microcosm by wearing suicide belts. In the macrocosm they are one big global family happy to self-destruct in pursuit of their self-professed goal.


    It took tens of thousands of Neville Chamberlains and mindless acquiescing robots like you to allow Stalin, Mao, Tojo, Pol Pot and others their slaughters.

    Those rulers didn’t announce their intentions ahead of time.

    Ahmadinejad has.

    Without you, he can’t succeed.

  14. Steve says:

    Who is this (realitysliberalbias) that darkeneth counsil by words without knowledge? For some reason Israel doesn’t buy into this guy’s argument. It’s written to go from the presence of a foolish man with thou perceivest not in him the lips of knowledge, and this guy knows not what he’s talking (writing in this case) about.

  15. Jodie says:

    Obama so longs to be the one who divides Jerusalem:

    “Several pro-Israel sections of the 2008 Democratic Party platform have been removed from the 2012 platform—on Jerusalem, Palestinian refugees, and Hamas. The new platform represents another shift by the Obama Democrats toward the Palestinian position on key issues in the peace process.

    For Jerusalem, the new platform has been brought into line with the Obama administration’s policy of not recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and supporting its division. Jerusalem is unmentioned in the 2012 document, whereas the 2008 and 2004 Democratic Party platforms declared “Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel…It should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths.” The Obama administration’s refusal to recognize Jerusalem has been a point of significant controversy in recent months.”

    The good news is that this will hasten the return of Jesus Christ:

    “The Lord Comes and Reigns

    14 A day of the Lord is coming, Jerusalem, when your possessions will be plundered and divided up within your very walls.

    2 I will gather all the nations to Jerusalem to fight against it; the city will be captured, the houses ransacked, and the women raped. Half of the city will go into exile, but the rest of the people will not be taken from the city. 3 Then the Lord will go out and fight against those nations, as he fights on a day of battle.

    Zechariah 14:1-3
    New International Version (NIV)

  16. Clingtomyguns says:

    When they get the bomb, Hussein Obama, if reelected, will test out realitysliberalbias’s claims that the Mullah’s mean us no harm. In the meantime, I am sure Barry won’t mind if the Mullah’s deploy their ships near the US coast.

  17. Alphamail says:

    Jodie says:

    My how things change in the evil hearts of men and how prophetic is Scripture.

    The unbelievers think Israel was formed in 1948 by an influx of outsider Jews, when in fact 90% of them had already lived in that area for millenia.

    Two thousand years ago and almost a century before Islam, a supreme ruler of Persia (Iran) helped rebuild the walls of a conquered Jerusalem.

    Here’s what that Iranian ruler thought of Israel then.

    “This is what Cyrus king of Persia says: ‘The Lord, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth and he has appointed me to build a temple for him at Jerusalem in Judah. Anyone of his people among you – may his God be with him, and let him go up to Jerusalem in Judah, and build the temple of the Lord, the God of Israel, the God who is in Jerusalem.'”

    Ezra 1:2-3 (NIV)

    Neither Obama nor Ahmadinejad will recognize Israel.

  18. YANKEE says:

    You no longer need intercontinental missiles to nuke your enemy. Iran can bring a bomb into the U.S. on one its flights using diplomatic immunity.

    Obama is outsourcing our defense to the Israelis because our Code Pink President is reluctant to take military action. To Iran, we’re still the Great Satan and Allah wants us dead.

    Obama really is the Jimmy Carter of our time. Sad.

  19. 762x51 says:

    And yet Jewish Americans still support Obama. Why would they even be attracted to a Him in the first place? The last time a National Socialist Dictator was put in power in a nation where Jews lived it didn’t work out too well for them.

    Jewish Americans who vote for Obama are voting for their own destruction as well as voting to end the entire human race.

  20. realitysliberalbias says:

    For fucks sake. Can a single one of you chimps READ?

    My contention – a totally reasonable contention, I might add – is that Obama is making a decision to count on our ability to completely annhilate them if need be, instead of starting yet another war in a sandbox country.

    Now, His Mittness, and many of you people, make loud noises about how Obama has ‘run op the deficit!’, and how ‘any government spending is an abomination!’ and whatever else. You want a balanced budget? OK. You want another war in the desert? Uh… OK, but those two can’t happen at the same time. We’ve spent $7 trillion so far in Iraq/Afghanistan… that amount would pay off half of our debt. Lump sum. Blammo.

    So… lets hear it. I want to see some real “leadership” from the yammering-moron classes here. Which is it? Do we care anbout fiscal responsibility, or do we want to go to war again? Is America best served by declaring war on anyone who looks at us funny, regardless of their actual ability to affect us in any way? What would YOU do if you were making these decisions?

    I’m waiting…

  21. AC says:

    We have not spent $7 trillion in the sandbox. We have spent somewhere in that ballpark on defense since 9/11, most of which was scheduled to be spent anyway. The marginal costs of the wars are indeed an excessive burden on America’s producers, who aren’t responsible for the well-being of ungrateful, anti-American barbarians, but those costs aren’t breaking the budget like entitlement Ponzi schemes, bailouts, or legions of entitled stampers.

  22. Jodie says:


    You know it!

    It’s funny that they completely ignore the fact that Israel was founded in 1948 as a homeland for Jews from all parts of the world.

    I have a set of encyclopedias that I like to refer to from 1975. These things were common knowledge back then – it’s amazing how much of the truth has been replaced since then.

  23. realitys liberal bias says:

    Well AC, this is where is gets hard. Your “facts” are quite simply wrong, but I know that no amount of factual reality will at any point intersect with thte world you live in. We are at an impasse.

    And the angel of democracy weeps.

  24. AC says:

    This nation isn’t a democracy.

  25. M.Wilson says:

    I like how my post doesn’t seem to exist to him, and he tiredly repeats talking points that I soundly refuted at 9:57 am.

    But allegedly we’re the ones that can’t read. 😉

  26. Tchhht!!! says:


    “My contention – a totally reasonable contention, I might add – is that Obama is making a decision to count on our ability to completely annhilate them if need be, instead of starting yet another war in a sandbox country.”

    Dinesh D’Sousa make a case in 2016 that Obama intends complete nuclear disarmament for the United States with a view toward a nuke free world or to place the United States in a weak position militarily. Think Iran and others will follow suit? I think your contention is full of holes. Liberals believe that if guns are taken away from law abiding citizens gun crime will go down??? Same difference here. Oh, and be sure to call me some names if you decide to reply. I wouldn’t want to think I wasn’t dealing with a true liberal.

  27. son of a preacher man says:

    “This nation isn’t a democracy.”


  28. George Mason says:

    i don’t care what you print here…push come to shove Obama WILL back Israel. He has to. The tribe put him into the White House, and they can take him out.

  29. Mary says:

    Exactly George Mason.

Alibi3col theme by Themocracy