Israel feels that the US has stalled striking Iran (or blocking Israel) for too long and Iran is now "5 minutes to midnight" close to nuclear weaponizing- and waiting 'til after November would be disastrous. Obama tells Netanyahu that if Israel waits 'til after the election, if he wins, he will stop blocking them and back them in the aftermath. But should Netanyahu trust Obama, who has arguable the worst administration regarding Israel in memory? Iran would surely like Obama (whom they perceive as weak) to win another term, because they doubt his mettle to strike directly or support Israel if it does. And if the apocalyptic ayatollah regime manages to develop nuclear weapons within the next 7 months, it will be too late for Israel. The regime is known to be so messianic that they are willing to endure an Israeli counterstrike- if it would mean eradicating Jewish control over the Holy Land. But Obama will not act, nor permit Israel to act to avert this potential nuclear armageddon against Israel (and perhaps the US) to ensure his re-election.
Iran Lists War Aims Against Israel Michael Rubin in Commentary 04.01.2012
A leading U.S. analyst who returned from talks with the Israeli leadership reported that the Obama administration was accused of staging a campaign to undermine Israel. The analyst, Robert Satloff, said Washington was also blaming Israel for the rise in global crude oil prices, deemed as harming the U.S. economy.
“I cannot underscore how deep and visceral the [Israeli] comments of the leaking that came out of Washington were,” Satloff, executive director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said.
In late March, several reports were published by leading American newspapers and journals [including Foreign Policy: Israel-Azerbaijan ties could expedite Iran strike] that questioned Israel’s military capability.
One report asserted that Israel was developing a strategic relationship with Azerbaijan to pave the way for air strikes on Iran. On March 31, a U.S. official told the Israeli news web site, Ynet, that the administration was not responsible for the story on Azerbaijan.
“The United States is leaking information to the media in order to avert an Israeli strike in Iran,” Israeli military analyst Ron Ben-Yishai said.
“It is blatantly clear that reports in the past week alone have caused Israel substantive diplomatic damage, and possibly even military and operational damage.”
For his part, Satloff, who met “virtually everybody in the Iran debate,” said the Israeli leadership also saw the administration as blaming Israel for the sharp rise in U.S. gasoline prices. He said Washington attributed
the higher prices to “Israel’s posturing” on Iran.
“They (the Israelis) think the Iranians should be held responsible for the higher gasoline prices,” Satloff said.
In an address to the Institute on March 27, Satloff referred to Obama’s meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in early March. During the Netanyahu visit to Washington, Obama asserted that Israel was justified in taking decisions to ensure its defense in face of Iran’s nuclear threat.
“Real deep [Israeli] consternation at the highest level at what they saw after the prime minister’s visit to Washington as leaks that came out of the capital designed to undercut the President’s commitment to the right of Israeli independent sovereign action,” Satloff said.
Why Did the Administration Leak the Israel-Azerbaijan Story? Jonathan S. Tobin | @tobincommentary4.03.2012
Israel is not the threat, Mr. Obama. Iran is!
The Obama administration appears to be conducting a campaign of leaks to the media to stop Israel from attacking Tehran's nuclear program. It seems Obama fears an Israeli military strike more than he fears Iran achieving nuclear-weapons capability.
The Obama administration appears to be conducting an organized campaign of public pressure to stop Israel from attacking Iran’s well-developed nuclear-weapons program. So intense is this effort, and so determined is President Obama to succeed, that administration officials are now leaking highly sensitive information about Israel’s intentions and capabilities into the news media.
The president’s unwillingness to take preemptive military action against Tehran’s nuclear efforts has long been evident, notwithstanding his ritual incantation that “all options are on the table.” Equally evident is his fixation to ensure that Israel does not act unilaterally against Iran, a principal reason why Washington’s relations with Jerusalem are at their lowest ebb since Israel’s 1948 founding.
Indeed, the only conclusion to be drawn from Mr. Obama’s actions and rhetoric is that he fears an Israeli military strike more than he fears Iran achieving nuclear-weapons capability. . . .
One can assume with some confidence that Iran was not focused on the risk of Israeli bases in Azerbaijan, so hearing about it from US administration sources is a gift almost beyond measure. And one can also confidently assume that if that leak is not enough to make Israel bend its knee, more public revelations directed by the White House are only a matter of time.
Even now, Obama advisers could be revealing additional information to other governments behind closed doors. Perhaps we could ask Dmitri Medvedev. Not only is this not the way to treat a close ally facing an existential challenge, it is directly contrary to America’s national interests. Israel is not the threat, Mr. President: Iran is.