followers for your support of Israel.

And who decides if Israel attacks Iran without being "forced"? If it attacks for other reasons, like to defend its monopoly on nuclear weapons in the area, or to distract attention from its long illegal occupation of Palestinian territory?

the american people and their representatives, on a bi-partisan basis, support israel in all her efforts to thwart the illegal nuclear weapons program of the shia terror entity.

"...the Senate passed a **non-binding** resolution... "... in a legitimate act of self-defense..." - and who will decide if it is "legitimate" or not? Them or us?

Always here to save your ass if the fight goes too heavy. Patron & benefactor.

The incumbent president wants to appeal the poll-ban on Mr. Mashaei, his current chief of staff. In 2008 Mr. Mashaei -then vice president- faced hard criticism from the hardliners when he said: “No nation in the world is our enemy, Iran is a friend of the nation in the United States and in Israel, and this is an honor. We view the American nation as one with the greatest nations of the world.” (see ynetnews-report 07.19.08) Perhaps the despised incumbent president wasn't that anti-Israel as everyone thought.

22 May 2013 Last updated at 13:01 More centrifuges fitted at Iran's Natanz plant, says UN - Iran has installed hundreds of new centrifuges at its Natanz plant, the UN's atomic agency says in a report.

Sanctions don't work and never will. The Mullah don't care about their people and will never abandon their ambitions. Unless they are forced to do so.

nevertheless...

American bunker busters are on their way....

Dour talk, but you & every other Israeli will breathe a mighty sigh of relief, and clutch at that Yankee life preserver. There will be a heavy price to be paid in return to the American saviors though.

(End)

That's good to know, Barak Ivan Obama.

Some are so gullible. The senate resolution is non-binding and as such has no real meaning. They did not provisionally resolve to go to war. In fact, they did nothing more than what Obama has said repeatedly. Currently there is no nuclear threat from Iran. They are not building a bomb. The only thing that has bi-partisan support for anything in the US is Israel. So they voted a non-binding resolution. The sky being blue when the sun is shining might win some votes, too. But that is not a war declaration on the moon. They occasionally have to vote on something to make it look as if they care about something.

If Israelis think this is anything more than empty rhetoric, they will be deeply shocked when the US throws Israel to the wolves after it attacks Iran. While the congress critters are bought and paid for by Israel, the American PUBLIC has zero interest in any more war. If Israel attacks Iran, the us economy will be hit hard overnight and the Americans will be extremely angry at Israel and any congress critters that don't backpedal real quick. As far as any further sanctions - it is NOT going to happen because the US has deeply angered Russia and China who will block any more sanctions.

If anyone has hidden agendas for using Israel as a proxy to attack Iran it is the west, the US and Britiain more specificaly. The petrodollar is being threatened and is under tremendous pressure from the likes of Iran not playing ball with the banker elites. Israel has been chosen by the global elite money masters (evil bastards) to attack Iran and take the blame for their hidden motives and agendas. This has been documented and reported by insiders from within the Bilderberg group that have leaked the plans to the alternative press.

that are on the way from the Russians to Assad? Will they back Israel if Russia joins Syria, Hezbollah, Hamas and the Palestinians in a final push to destroy Israel and the Jewish people? Israel is the United States' staunchest ally but, when it comes to the push, will there be reciprocity? I doubt it and I am sure that the majority of the good folks in the USA will prefer to bury their heads in the sand while many will side with the Arabs!

An intelligent posting. But one hidden agenda does not exclude another, in fact all actors are probably influenced by considerations which they hide or at least downplay, nicht wahr?

WITH US AND THE REST OF MANKIND. UNFORTUNATELY WE AND THE REST OF THE HUMAN PEOPLE ARE STILL BEING THREATENED BY THE CRIMINAL REGIME IN TEHRAN WHICH BELONG TO THE FOLLOWING OF "islam", WHICH HAD CAUSED VERY MUCH WAR/CRIME SINCE THE 7TH. CENTURY. LET US ABOLISH "ISLAM'', TO BE "islam"FREE. HEALTH, SECURITY AND PEACE TO US ALL AND HUMANITY ON OUR GLOBAL PLANET OF EARTH AMD BEYOND,.

Despite what the Israel-haters and anti-Semites write here (Cameron, Chris Munich, et al), this IS a clear American vote of support for Israel. 99-0 votes are unheard of today in the US Senate. It is true that the American public is NOT seeking involvement in another Middle Eastern conflict today... but they do know what countries in the region are reliable and strong allies. The Amer public and the US Congress know that Iran is an ugly threat - and they certainly support any country with the capability and cayonnes to take on the criminal Ayatollahs ... A non-binding res may not be worth a lot - but a 99-0 vote is still worth something and is appreciated. The unequivocal message is that the US and Israel DO stand together. Sorry Cameron & other losers. GOD BLESS AMERICA AND GOD BLESS ISRAEL !

There is no reason to insult people with terms like Israel-hater or anti-Semite if they oppose Zionist policies which are aggressive and probably, in the medium term, unsustainable. Thinking that military force is the answer to all your problems must engender contervailing forces in your neighborhood. No one denied that the Senate vote indicated political support for Israel, by the way. The "reliable and strong ally" was not much help in the two wars the US conducted against Iraq, was it? Whether the US is prepared to accept the disadvantages of the link with Israel forever must be an open question.

nothing. Israel, the jewish homeland, will stand until the end of time, defended by its brave jewish people, and by Hashem its creator.

This would be a surprise to atheists like Herzl, and also to the Nazis who committed awful crimes against the Jewish (and other) people, without noticing much divine intervention. This may be a distasteful point to make, and I take no relish in it. But such triumphalist stuff cannot go unanswered.

... to Israel in today's Middle East as a "strong & relaible ally" for the US? Saudi Arabia? Egypt? Pakistan? Iraq? Libya? While no allies can be in 100% concurrence on all issues (see US and Britain in WW II), Israel and the US have far more in common than not. If Israel is willing to take on its share of the Iranian threat in the region, that ultimately does the US no harm. In the current struggle between the Free World, the world's dictatorships (Russia/ China) and violent Islamic militarism, there are precious few countries willing to openly stand with America; Israel is one of the few - and the US Senate recognizes that.. As to your assertion that Israel (and the US) overly rely on military force... I can't speak to the degree of whether that is accurate or not.... But I have no illusion of reality in the Middle Eastern jungle (read "Syrian civil war"). Where would Israel (or any other pro-Western nation) be in the region without sufficiient military power? Also to your assertion of Israeli reliance on military force, exactly what are Iran and Russia providing to the Assad regime in Syria? This seems to have escaped your notice.

this resolution soond like a desesperate one ! as the report of Dr Colin Kahl, even military option... won't succeed to do anything that a bite delay in iranians nuclearization.... there is nothing US can do short of a full scall invasion and decade occupation, that can prevent a nuclear iran, and this is somthing the US can simply not do ! they haven't the mean, is that simple. as Dr Kalh nothiced, GET READY FOR NUCLER IRAN

Israels policies are defensive, and sometimes a good defense is a good offense. Who attacked whom in 1948? 1956 (nationalising the canal was an act of war)? 1963 (don't give me that garbage that Israel should have waited to be destroyed given all the threats)? 1973? You want Israel to put down its arms in favor of people who came with the Muslim conquest, a few thousand years after the Jews? People who refused to be called Palestinians...until the 1960's? The arch of Titus demonstrates the Roman defeat of the Jews. Ever wonder why the arabs aren't mentioned? Or why Judea is called Judea and Arabia is called Arabia? Ever heard that if the arabs would put down their weapons, there would be peace, but if Israel would put down its weapons it would be destroyed? Ever read the Hamas or Hezbollah charters? (BTW: Israel was asked not to respond to Saddam's rockets. Not hitting back is more difficult than responding.) You have your head so far in the sand you don't even know it. Or do you? These may be distasteful points to make, and I take no relish in it. But your ludicrous stuff cannot go unanswered. You are blind to facts.

I am under no obligation to propose an alternative "strong and reliable ally" in the Middle East for the US, since I am not the one who asserted the existence of such a thing. No more than someone who does not believe in fairies has to propose alternative charming little creatures with wings. My criticism of Israel's over-reliance on military force is not based on ignorance of the fact that others use it, as you (rhetorically) suggest, but on the idea that those who rule by the sword... (you know the rest). The term "blowback" is used to indicate that making enemies can be detrimental to your interests. Before Israel invaded Lebanon, Hezbollah did not exist. Obama just tried to justify the use of drones, so he is obviously aware of criticism here.

There seems little point in trying to address the parts which are simply a totally one-sided representation of history, or pure indignation, or insults. This does not leave much, but there is one point. The idea that having lived in a place at some historical period, where the remoteness of that period somehow counts in favor of the claim, is an argument for ownership of land. If this were applied generally, there would be enormous changes to the world population distribution. Most of the US population would have to be deported, the Celts would take over large parts of Europe etc etc. Or if you want to apply it only to Israel, perhaps you could explain why it is not applicable elsewhere?

Jews have always lived in that part of the world. That is why there are Egytian Jews, Syrian Jews, etc. The Jews who came in the 1800's were not the first Jews there; they joined others. If you feel that is not reason enough, then the Jews have earned the right to a country. They learned arabic and dressed like arabs in order to live in peace with those arabs who lived there. They were attacked and killed...and so defended themselves. What of those Jews kicked out of the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem in 1948? What of the arabs that were asked to come by Jordan to take their place so they couldn't return, and did take over the Jewish Quarter? Does your world history begin in 1948? What of all the agreements, specifically those agreed to in 1948 with Jordan, that the arabs didn't keep? What of the arabs rejection of Jews, let alone Israel? History does not give a clean slate. Your avoidance of many of my points by "There seems little point in trying to address the parts which are simply a totally one-sided representation of history..." doesn't say much for your arguments. You want a totally one-sided representation of history, insults, etc., read the "Palestinian" history [that officially began in the 1960's]. They say that the Temple never existed? That the holocaust didn't happen? And those are not a totally one-sided representation of history, insults, etc.,? Your avoidance of facts is ludicrous. Read some history, then post.

You do seem to be very indignant about something, and challenge me on subjects where you have no idea of my opinion. This forum is not the place for going into detail, nor is your insulting manner conducive to reasonable discussion. Some of the main points of a less one-sided history of the area can be found here: http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/downloads/truth