War On Terror: Is It Really About Protecting Israel?
- 2
- Add a Comment
On March 12, 2007, Vice President Dick Cheney delivered his update on the Iraq War to a packed house attending the 2007 Policy Conference hosted by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. In the speech, at the Washington Convention Center, Cheney criticized lawmakers opposing the war.
Cheney, the former adviser for National Security Affairs, was in a comfortable setting, because, according to Philip Zelikow, a member of President Bush’s Presidential Foreign Intelligence Board, Cheney’s war was never about U.S. national security. The United States began its war with Iraq to protect Israel.
After all, “Why would Iraq attack America or use nuclear weapons against us?” Said Zelikow. “I’ll tell you what I think the real threat (is) and actually has been since 1990 – it’s the threat to Israel.” Zelikow would know. He had a security clearance above that of top security; he wrote policy; he is Jewish, and he acknowledged, “This is the threat that dare not speak its name.”
Americans are dying and spending hundreds of billions of dollars for the national security of another nation. The proof is endless, but our media “dare not speak its name.” So while I acknowledge that many Christian Americans believe it is our duty to protect Israel wouldn’t it have made more sense to wait until Israel was actually attacked? After all, I don’t see Israel’s military fighting the war in Iraq but rather it is our young men and women who have their lives on the line. If this is indeed the case it is time for Israel to step up and fight along side of us or for us to bring our troops home and allow the Middle East to continue fighting like they have done since before the time of Christ.
Tags: war on terror, iraq war, israel, military lives on line, zelikow, jews, christian americans, dick cheney

2 Comments
marc klink
May 1st, 2007
at 7:53am
This is one time we disagree. I know of the threat that Iraq poses to Israel, but also know that Israel is perfectly capable of ‘kicking butt and taking names’ on their own. [6 day war, 1967] I personally believe that the impetus for the war in Iraq was the attempt on Bush 41. When Bush 43 got into office, the 1st order of business was to avenge this attempt on his father’s life. [They tried to kill my daddy, let’s get ‘em!]
reflections
May 1st, 2007
at 9:39am
Dear Marc
I agree that the real reason for the Iraq War was Geo jrs vendetta. I have been listening to others opinions, however, and wonder how much of the support from other controlling interests could have been used as an impetus to actually strike out first. Like others most powerful people have their own agendas that they will use any means to achieve especially if they can remain to appear merely supportive. So, when Zelikow suggests that one of hte reasons was a desire to protect Israel perhaps he knew of a powerful force supporting Bush who would also get something they wanted out of the War. It is possible that both elements were involved, howbeit, from different controlling interests. Have a wonderful day and it was good to hear from you again. Jackie