Scribbler David Rothkopf floated a suggestion Oct. 8 from within the Obama administration — we know who put it there — that Obama should revive his sagging poll numbers after losing last week's debate, by openly working with Israel towards a U.S.-Israeli joint strike against Iran. "Even some of the president's supporters have told me privately that they wonder about his commitment AND THAT OF THE U.S. MILITARY to taking action against Iran," Rothkopf writes in "Foreign Policy" magazine. [Emphasis added.]
According to sources close to the ongoing US-Israeli discussions on this project, "the action that participants currently see as most likely is a joint U.S.-Israeli surgical strike targeting Iranian enrichment facilities. The strike might take only 'a couple of hours' in the best case and only would involve a 'day or two' overall, the source said, and would be conducted by air, using primarily bombers and drone support. Advocates for this approach argue that not only is it likely to be more politically palatable in the United States but, were it to be successful — meaning knocking out enrichment facilities, setting the Iranian nuclear program back many years, and doing so without civilian casualties — it would have regionwide benefits. One advocate asserts that it would have a 'transformative outcome: saving Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, reanimating the peace process, securing the Gulf, sending an unequivocal message to Russia and China, and assuring American ascendancy in the region for a decade to come.'"
In short: "Try it,— you'll like it!"
"Given the progress that the Israelis and the administration seem to have made in the past couple of weeks," Rothkopf concludes, "it may be that the easiest way for the Obama team to defuse Romney's critique on Iran is simply to communicate better what options they are in fact considering. It's not the size of the threatened attack, but the likelihood that it will actually be made, that makes a military threat a useful diplomatic tool. And perhaps a political one, too."
It's clinically indicative that Rothkopf doesn't even find it necessary (or relevant?) even to mention any claim that Iran is trying to develop a nuclear weapon.
To identify the author: David Rothkopf is a vapid chatterer and all-purpose guru; he is a dumbed-down version of the New York Times' Thomas Friedman, author of "The World Is Flat." Here is a sample of Rothkopf's wisdom from "In Praise of Cultural Imperialism?" Foreign Policy, Number 107, Summer 1997. "Culture is not static; it grows out of a systematically encouraged reverence for selected customs and habits. Indeed, Webster's Third New International Dictionary defines culture as the 'total pattern of human behavior and its products embodied in speech, action, and artifacts and dependent upon man's capacity for learning and transmitting knowledge to succeeding generations.' Language, religion, political and legal systems, and social customs are the legacies of victors and marketers and reflect the judgment of the marketplace of ideas throughout popular history."
Just the empty vessel for the Queen's project of thermonuclear war within weeks.