October 3, 2009
Obamic Options 001
The first in a sporatic but unbounded series of questions about how our current president might respond to sundry stimuli, whether plausible or peculiar.
Note that I don't ask these questions to elicit an attack on Barack H. Obama but rather to probe the possibilities -- what might he actually do in each situation, given various constraints?
- Obama is not suicidal;
- He may not be particularly bright, but he's certainly not mentally retarded;
- He is not a Twelver;
- He is not a James Bond villain;
- He is not a fatalist;
- He believes he is a good guy doing right for the world, if not this particular country;
- He has several aides who are very knowledgeable and skillful in their fields who can make suggestions or help with strategic planning.
Today's question 001:
Suppose Iran has a working nuclear bomb in the near future (less than five years from now). Suppose that against all sanity, it uses the bomb against Israel in a way that clearly points back to Iran. Suppose Israel launches a sustained retaliatory air attack on Iran (not using nuclear weapons) which continues for many days.
What would Obama do and why?
- Join Israel's reprisal attacks, or at least aid them;
- Remain neutral, neither helping nor hindering Israel;
- Condemn Israel's reprisals, but make no move to stop them physically;
- Attempt to militarily interdict or even shoot down Israeli jets crossing Iraq to attack Iran;
- Some other response (specify).
Today's corollary 001a:
The same scenario as above, except Iran does a much better job disguising its own complicity in the nuclear attack on Israel; we all believe that Iran did it, but they managed to wipe off all the fingerprints.
What would Obama do and why? Does it make a difference that we can't prove Iran's guilt in an international tribunal?
For both questions, please be as realistic as possible, taking into account our current capabilities and how Congress, the American people, and the rest of the world might respond, and how that could affect how President Obama responds.
Hope to hear from you soon!
Hatched by Dafydd on this day, October 3, 2009, at the time of 11:06 PM
TrackBack URL for this hissing: http://biglizards.net/mt3.36/earendiltrack.cgi/3940
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Obamic Options 001:
» Extradition Indecision - Obamic Options 005 from Big Lizards
John Hinderaker adds a chilling but disturbingly plausible appendix to the end of a Power Line post by Scott "Big Johnson" Trunk. The post examines the likely effects of trying Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and other high-profile terrorists in civilian court;... [Read More]
Tracked on November 15, 2009 6:03 PM
» Would He Ever Announce It? Obamic Options 007 from Big Lizards
Today's episode of Obamic Options is somewhat a corollary to Obamic Options 4, linked at the end. The explosion of the gas pipe in Middletown, CT triggered my cerebral susurration, as my thoughts softly whispered, but what if it was...?... [Read More]
Tracked on February 8, 2010 3:52 AM
The following hissed in response by: Mackay
The One would do nothing except give speeches at the UN.
The following hissed in response by: snochasr
I suspect he would be urging another Kofe Klatch at the UN, urging restraint on both sides while claiming that "his plan" for peace in the Mideast would have worked, if Bush hadn't messed it up so badly, and Republicans wouldn't have spread so much disinformation.
Too many people seem to insist that all players on the world stage-- Iran and Obama in this instance-- are rational actors. Iran clearly is not. Obama can be bright but still not rational in the useful sense, and I suspect that is true.
The following hissed in response by: Stephen Macklin
I think the administration would publicly take a this is not our battle position and do nothing to either help of hinder the Israeli response.
If the response went on "too long" Washington would start calling for restraint.
Privately, I think the primary reason Israel would not respond in kind would be a threat from from the White House to rescind their hands-off stance if Israel went nuclear.
The above hissed in response by: Stephen Macklin at October 4, 2009 7:09 AM
The following hissed in response by: Heather
I think he would mount a military offensive, just as Pres. Carter unsuccessfully attempted the rescue of American hostages. President Carter at least had a few years under his belt as a junior officer. President Obama does not, nor has he surrounded himself with voices he trusts that also have the military acumen that he needs. Because of his profound lack of military understanding, his military operation would end about as successfully as President Carter's did.
The following hissed in response by: MDr
Initial response to (Iran nukes) - Obama will denounce Iran, ask for restraint from Israel. He will avoid using "inappropriate" in his characterization.
Response to Israel's counter attack; Day 1 - He'll first ask Israel to take only measured responses; waiting all the while, to see how the rest of the world responds.
Day 2 - Europe's votes are in; overwhelmingly condemning Iran, and nary a peep about restraining Israel. Obama is shocked; he was expecting a EuroShield to allow his next step - ramping up constraining Israel. Obama failed to realize that a nuclear threat that can reach out and touch them, would pull any ostrich's head out of the sand. WH secretly asks MSM to focus on the destruction & suffering in Iran.
Day 3 - The Third World's escalating condemnation of Israel has not only balanced Europe's position, but tipped the scale in Obama's mind. They are afterall whose favor he's curried. Obama ramps up his rhetoric against Israel; stopping just short of "demanding" a cessation.
Day 4 - Obama finally demands Israel stop and calls for an emergency meeting of the UN, and requests that he be the keynote speaker.
Throughout Obama/US do nothing to overtly/covertly hamper Israel's military operation (stopping re-supply efforts, etc). He's neither stupid nor suicidal, but the US will abstain on a UN censure of Israel.
The following hissed in response by: Steven Den Beste
He would condemn but not interfere. Obama isn't living in the real world; he's living in an ideological paradise. His faith in the power of diplomacy approaches the religious and he thinks every problem can be talked out.
So his reaction to the scenario would be the same as his reaction to everything: "Can't we talk about it?"
The above hissed in response by: Steven Den Beste at October 4, 2009 5:42 PM
The following hissed in response by: Steven Den Beste
Oh, one other thing: once all the shooting stops, and it is widely considered to be a catastrophe, then the Obama administration will try to blame it on George Bush.
The above hissed in response by: Steven Den Beste at October 4, 2009 10:16 PM
The following hissed in response by: Dick E
I think we will all be in a better position to assess Obama’s probable reaction to the scenarios you propose once we know for sure his answer to General McChrystal’s request for more troops in Afghanistan.
If, as I suspect, the Omigod’s support for the Afghanistan effort (and for armed conflicts generally) was and is hollow, we’ll start the steady march to pull defeat from the jaws of victory. In this event, an Iranian nuke lobbed at Tel Aviv, plus the expected Israeli response, would mean lots of condemnation -- primarily aimed at Israel -- and little if any action.
Contrarywise, if all or most of the general’s troop request is granted, it will be instructive to watch exactly how this plays out: What does the Great Oracle say, how much hemming and hawing is involved, what do the presidential advisers say, etc. (Will we learn, for example, that Afghanistan -- the only pre-approved conflict -- is the only one we are allowed to support in any way?)
The following hissed in response by: Geoman
Which option involves the most talking and preening by Obama, but accomplishes the least? I choose that.
The following hissed in response by: Stan Peterson
Mr. Obama would demand an UN investigation and condemnation of the perfidious people who did this. If and when they can be caught, indicted, and convicted, in a court of Law.
In the meantime, this instigator of the Second Holocaust will prove to the Jewish liberal idiots that voted for him that he "Cares" about Jews. He will dispatch the US Navy to rescue some Jewish boat people refugees floating in the Mediterranean.
Just like the Democrats did to our other former "allies" in Vietnam. He will ask Congress to allow the US to give them Sanctuary and citizenship,and resettle them in metropolitan New York City.
Just in time to let them join the 10 million US citizens and the Worlds greatest concentration of Jews disappear in a nuclear bombing of NYC.
He will then address Congress and ask for a Declaration of War for a period of 60 days. Just about how long the Democrats fought to defend the 3000 Democrats of the 4000 US citizens who died on 9/11. After all, you can't wage war in an "unwinnable morass" lasting more than 61 days, as that is the length of the attention span of Democrat elites...
Fortunately, the Iranians wil be out of bombs for a year, and with a loss of 10,000,000 million vaporized Democrat voters, the party will be swept from office. Then a day after inauguration Iran and every other Arab military base and capital will cease to exist. The new president wil then say: "If you can't identify who did it, well than apply the Saladin motto, that the Arab World will fully understand. "Kill them all; and let Allah sort them out." ".
Post a comment
Thanks for hissing in, . Now you can slither in with a comment, o wise. (sign out)(If you haven't hissed a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Hang loose; don't shed your skin!)
© 2005-2009 by Dafydd ab Hugh - All Rights Reserved