OBAMA LEARNS FROM IDF
By Aluf Benn
Israel’s critics in the United States portray it as a strategic burden. They argue that during the Cold War there was value in cooperating with the Israel Defense Forces, which gave the Americans useful information on Soviet weapons systems used by Arab armies. But the Soviet Union collapsed and all the value Israel offered to U.S. national security evaporated with it.
These critics are wrong in a big way: The U.S. military effort against Al-Qaida and the Taliban is based on a doctrine developed by Israel. The IDF was a global leader in targeting terrorists from the air. When Israel embarked on its assassinations policy in the summer of 2001, the United States condemned it. Several weeks later the Twin Towers were brought down in a terrorist attack and Washington’s approach changed. Instead of condemning Israel, the Americans simply copied its methods, foreign sources say. Unmanned combat air vehicles (UCAVs), armed with missiles, started being used to kill terrorists, first in Yemen and later in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
U.S. President Barack Obama has proved to be an enthusiastic student of the doctrine of targeted killings, even more than his predecessor George W. Bush. According to the New America Foundation, between taking office in January and early October, the Obama administration authorized 42 UCAV strikes. Bush authorized 40 such attacks during his three final years in office.
Six senior Taliban and Al-Qaida figures were killed in Obama-ordered operations, as were some 450 others. Judge Richard Goldstone would be advised to note that a quarter of those killed were civilians, while the rest were low-grade fighters. The assassination three months ago of Baitullah Mehsud, the leader of the Taliban in Pakistan, also killed 11 civilians, including his sister and father-in-law, much like the Israeli bombing that killed Salah Shehadeh along with his relatives and neighbors in 2002.
Human rights groups have warned that the United States is violating international law, but the Obama administration is not particularly moved by this. According to The New Yorker, CIA chief Leon Panetta has described the UCAV attacks as “the only game in town.” American antiterrorist experts with close ties to the administration told Jane Mayer, who wrote the article in The New Yorker, that the United States has no more-efficient weapon against Al-Qaida. The Pentagon has been accelerating its procurement of UCAVs and is cutting down on its development of manned fighters.
Palestinian eyewitnesses and human rights groups have claimed for several years now that the IDF has been using UCAVs in its aerial operations in the Gaza Strip. The UCAV is the West’s response to suicide bombings and terrorist rocket attacks by Islamist groups. It can be described as the Jewish mother’s aircraft: the operator sits far from the front and combat is sterile. There are no sirens, no blood, no smell of gunpowder and corpses, and most of all, no risk to the attacker and no casualties on that side.
A debate has been raging in the United States on whether it is appropriate to use a weapons system that does not expose its user to the horrors of battle. There are also concerns about the inherent appeal of robot warfare; at first the attacks are only against senior terrorist figures. Success encourages the lowering of standards to include lesser-grade targets until UCAVs are used every time there is a sign of the enemy or information about the presence of a wanted terrorist on the ground. The number of sorties has risen, and with it the number of civilian casualties.
It would be interesting to know if Obama, who is due to decide on the future of the war in Afghanistan, knows from whom the Americans have learned the modern doctrine of antiterrorism warfare, and whether he is grateful to the IDF.
It is perfectly appropriate.
Comment by Michael Ejercito — November 5, 2009 @ 9:08 pm
The following comment may be deemed off-topic, but (IMHO) it is so important that I hope the breach of etiquette will be forgiven.
Bill Clinton’s wife Whatshername gave an interview to the Arab TV station al Hurra. As reported in the State Deprtment official site
http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2009a/11/131353.htm
she was asked:
” Saeb Erekat has said if America cannot get Israel to implement a settlement freeze, what chance do Palestinians have of reaching agreement with Israel on permanent status issues? Can you give the Palestinians and the Arab states guarantees regarding these issues? ”
She answered:
“President Obama has gotten more before negotiations ever started out of Israel than anybody has ever gotten, more than was ever asked for before. So I think everyone should take a deep breath and say, look, what is our goal here? Is our goal to end a few hundred settlements or a few thousand more units? Or is our goal a Palestinian state? And I think if we keep that in mind, we’ve actually made some progress along that way, even though not everybody is satisfied with it. But nevertheless, do we want to say, oh, well, that’s not good enough?” (emphasis added).
Imagine this woman boasting that The Kenyan has succeeded in squeezing a major ally to the point of suffocation! These words should be thrown in her face forever and ever.
Comment by Joseph Norland — November 5, 2009 @ 9:20 pm
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by JewPI News, Aryeh ben Avraham. Aryeh ben Avraham said: #Israpundit OBAMA LEARNS FROM IDF: By Aluf Benn Israel’s critics in the United States portray .. http://bit.ly/3pcs4P [...]
Pingback by Tweets that mention Israpundit » Blog Archive » OBAMA LEARNS FROM IDF -- Topsy.com — November 5, 2009 @ 9:28 pm
I can’t think of a more absurd debate. The idea that anyone would oppose a weapons system on the grounds that it does NOT pose a risk to our soldiers is a crackpot.
Comment by Laura — November 5, 2009 @ 11:38 pm
Norland:
Pure hyperbole. It is not the American pressure squeezing Israel to the point of suffocation. It is the ever expanding unofficial boycott of Israeli products exported to Europe and other jursdictions that are beginning to create economic problems. Just as South africa was forced to change course through economic pressures, over time Israel will be be similarly faced with no alternative but to alter its policies with regard to the much hated occupation.
Comment by h peskin — November 7, 2009 @ 3:57 am
Oh Peskin you asshole read this:
Norway: Israel boycott a flop
Survey among large food chains shows no reduction in sales of Israeli products
Ynetnews
Published: 01.22.06, 19:37 / Israel Business
Responding to the survey results, consumer researcher Eivind Jacobsen said Norwegians do not have a tradition of boycotts, the Norway Post said. Jacobsen also noted most of the Norwegian imports from Israel consist of components for electronics and IT, as opposed to fruits and vegetables.
Recently, the Socialist Left Party in Norway said it will not drop the planned boycott of Israeli products, despite the harsh criticism leveled at Finance Minister Kristin Halvorsen, who voiced her support for such move.
Elsewhere, the Norwegian parliament in the Sor-Trondelag region decided to boycott Israeli-made products recently and to forbid the sale and purchase of Israeli goods.
The boycott calls in Norway, which have been criticized both in Norway and by outsiders such as the Anti-Defamation League, are believed to be related to anti-Israel sentiments and perceptions that Israel oppresses the Palestinians.
Norway: Socialists maintain Israel boycott
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3198325,00.html
Are EU boycotts against israel working
Comment by yamit82 — November 7, 2009 @ 2:42 pm
Oh, Peskin;
Exports from Israel 2009:
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/133969
Minister Steinitz also noted that Israel’s exports rose 20%, on an annual basis, in the third quarter of this year.
HOW IS CANADA DOING DING BAT?
Comment by yamit82 — November 7, 2009 @ 3:25 pm
Yamit: My information are from from very reliable parties, Israeli trading companies based in Canada and are referring to to the last 3 months. It pertains to curent retail purchasing trends of Israeli consumer goods in most of Europe. The Gaza operations could easily effect how the E.U. views Israel’s next application to upgrade their status in the common market. This is critically important to Israel’s future economic growth.
You might not be worried but those who are involved in Israel’s business community are certainly worried.
But we all ask ourselves, who the hell is Yamit and what relevance does he have to Israel’s future?
Comment by h peskin — November 7, 2009 @ 6:00 pm
H. Clinton’s entire interview should be read at:
http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2009a/11/131353.htm
Clinton is speaking throughout to impress the Muslim audience with just how much faith Pres. Obama has in the peace process, in Mahmood Abbas and with arrogance and smugness offers as proof of that, the signficance of concessions wrung out of PM Netanyahu.
Joseph is right to characterize H. Clinton’s words as he has. Those who are supportive of Israel ought to be livid with H. Clinton.
Comment by Bill Narvey — November 7, 2009 @ 8:00 pm
Peskin #’s 5&8, I agree generally with your statement that economic boycotts harm Israel, though the jury is out on just how much,
What I do want to know from you is:
1. Do you support the various boycotts by nations and various organizations, be they Muslim or Palestinian sympathizing organizations, of Israeli products and those companies that do business with Israel?
2. When you say the “hated occupation” does that mean that you are against Israel’s continued occupation of the West Bank?
3. As you know UNSC 242 speaks of Israel going out of territories (not necessarily all) as part of an overall negotiated peace deal with the Arabs (not the Palestinians).
There are those at Israpundit, myself included who hold the view that so long as there is no peace deal, Israel is in lawful occupation. We also hold the view that it is the Arabs and the Arabs that came to identify themselves as Palestinians, who are virtually solely responsible for failing to negotiate in good faith for peace and that indeed whatever steps have been taken by the Arabs/Palestinians in furtherance of that goal have been undermined by Arab and Palestinian lies, empty promises and agreements or intransigent maximal demands that Israel could not possibly agree to without committing suicide.
Do you agree with my statement and if not, in what respect? If you fault Israel in part or in whole, be precise in making your case.
Comment by Bill Narvey — November 7, 2009 @ 8:02 pm
Peskin a new European Anti Muslim Campaign about to into go into effect:
The Slogan is: Fuck Muslims buy Israeli!!!
Comment by yamit82 — November 7, 2009 @ 9:15 pm
Yamit:
Always appreciate your scholarly intelligent views. It is so illuminating.
Comment by h peskin — November 8, 2009 @ 12:56 am
I knew you would.
Comment by yamit82 — November 8, 2009 @ 12:54 pm