There is nothing wrong with an Israeli Prime Minister doing his utmost to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, even if it offends the sensibilities of the American president. A nation that has experienced the world's worst genocide just 70 years ago has not just a right but an obligation to take seriously any existential threats that loom against it.
Iran is a genocidal regime. It has stated on countless occasions that it will destroy and annihilate Israel. And it is now building the doomsday weapons that can translate rhetoric into action.
For years Iran has been hell-bent on developing nuclear weapons. The Obama administration's strategy to engage the Islamic tyranny in talks has produced no demonstrable results. Unfreezing Iran's financial assets has only emboldened the brutal regime in continuing its genocidal rhetoric against Israel and disgusting human rights abuses.
While the administration indulges Iran's stalling tactics, Iranian centrifuges continue to spin. And with every minute that Tehran gets closer to realizing its diabolical nuclear dream, the civilized world inches closer to its peril. And this is especially true of Israel, which sits in the crosshairs of Iranian rage.
Iran is running out the clock. According to the IAEA, Iran already has 13,397 kilograms of Uranium enriched to 3.5 percent Uranium-235. If they use all 9,000 of their reactors at Natanz, the Iranians could enrich this further to the weapon-grade level of 90 percent Uranium-235 in just over a month and a half. And, if Iran's close ally North Korea can serve as an example, they absolutely will.
The consequences of Iran obtaining a nuclear bomb are catastrophic -- for Israel, the Middle East, and the entire freedom-loving world. Israel would be under existential threat and would have its hands tied in any dealings with Iranian proxies such as Hamas, Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihad. The Middle East would be instantly destabilized, with a nuclear arms race certain to take off. And with the rogue state wielding end-of-days capabilities, the entire world would be forced to witness all levels of Iranian belligerence, virtually unable to intervene.
With so much at stake, it seems that the last thing we should be concerned about is offending President Obama. The American president is human just like the rest of us. He can be wrong. He can make mistakes, just like the rest of us. He does not enjoy the divine right of kings. He is not infallible. And if he is offended by being second-guessed by the leader of a nation that had more than a million children gassed to death seven decades ago, he'll get over it.
The implications of a nuclear Iran for the world are far greater than such simple considerations as the wounded ego of the leader of the free world or a breach of diplomatic protocol.
I do not envy the position of Prime Minister Netanyahu. He lives every day with the realization that if he errs in the confrontation with Iran the consequences for his people are catastrophic, devastating, and irreversible. History will hold him completely accountable for his failure to protect Israel.
Now, when it comes to launching a military strike against the Iranian nuclear apparatus, we can argue that perhaps the risks of something going horribly wrong are simply too great. Many have already said so. But can the same argument really be made of a speech delivered to the United States Congress by invitation of the House Speaker? What are the terrible consequences that would ensue that should prevent the Prime Minister of Israel going before the United States Congress to call for increased sanctions against Iran?
News reports are now saying that Obama administration officials are threatening serious consequences for Israel and the Prime Minister because of this breach of protocol. In fact, Ha'aretz just quoted an anonymous U.S. official as saying that "Netanyahu spat in our face... there will be a price." I had no idea that Al Capone worked in the administration.
Such mafia language is beneath aides to the president of the United States. I, for one, have become fatigued with the continuous threats issued to the press by "undisclosed sources" in the administration against Israel.
Is it not unseemly for America to continually issue anonymous threats against it staunchest ally, especially when the rest of the world is going to hell in a hand basket?
Perhaps the Obama administration should threaten President Bashar Assad to stop slaughtering his people in Syria and actually, this time, do something about it. Perhaps President Obama should threaten devastating and immediate consequences for ISIS leader Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi should he continue to kill Western hostages with impunity, rather than the just the airstrikes that have not stopped the vile beheadings. Perhaps officials of the Obama administration can focus their energies on occasionally mentioning the words "Islamic terror" rather than continually threatening the sole democracy in the Middle East with "consequences."
Israel is not America's threat. Why President Obama despises Netanyahu so deeply is beyond me. Can the explanation really be that Bibi doesn't accord Obama sufficient respect? Even if that were true, it would explain why Obama dislikes him. But not why he positively despises him, seemingly more than almost every other world leader.
Regardless, the Prime Minister of Israel is not elected principally to understand the mindset of the American president. He is elected first and foremost to defend a nation that has experienced more hatred, more torture, more bloodletting, and more wholesale slaughter than any nation on earth. That Prime Minister has the responsibility to do everything in his power to protect the Jewish people in Israel from a nuclear annihilation.
One holocaust is quite enough.