Americans are protesting in the streets with sufficient vigor to irritate the elite. The brutal response of police combined with the hostility of various mayors makes that pretty clear. And since the elite has, in the three years of recession and unemployment done little to rein in banks or clean up the economic mess, unless something changes, the protests seem likely to get worse.
Internationally, the U.S. is back on its heels in Iraq, which is showing a degree of independence that must be embarrassing to the imperial crowd (though it could of course be considered an achievement by a democracy that wanted to lead by example rather than brute force). Meanwhile, Israel's diplomatic position in the world is ever so slowly crumbling, the U.S. has seen Somalia slip totally out of its grasp, the Arab Spring made the U.S. look irrelevant (even worse than being hostile), Iran's influence is spreading, Lebanon is lost, Turkey is disenchanted, and Afghanistan is a slow-motion disaster. China sits grinning in the distance like the Cheshire Cat.
Is it possible that the President facing, simultaneous domestic and international messes that are steadily getting worse, might be tempted to surrender to the vociferous Israeli lobby and sacrifice U.S. national security to A) satisfy the demands of elite extremists ruling Israel for war against Iran to distract Israeli voters from the Palestinian issue and B) to distract U.S. voters from the combined domestic and international messes?
Is it possible that American voters will be tricked once again by the images of pinpoint bombing--this time no doubt accompanied by not-so-pinpoint mushroom clouds--into an emotional outburst of zenophobia and unearned trust in their leaders?
Iran &Israel's Armageddon Option? [IsraCast 10/30/11.]Report: U.K. preparing for military strike on Iran nuclear facilities [Haaretz 11/2/11.]
IAF chief must save Israel from futile attack on Iran [Haaretz 11/2/11.]
Netanyahu trying to persuade cabinet to support attack on Iran [Haaretz 11/2/11.]
Well, just consider this: in Israel, the idea of nuclear aggression against non-nuclear Iran is being loudly debated by the thinking public. In the U.S.--the country that must give permission, do most of the fighting, and pay the bill for any such insanity that may be implemented--of course no one is saying anything. Mentioning such things in public would, after all, be rude. Israel and the U.S. "share values;" the two are a "team." So to question publicly an Israeli plan, even if promoted to meet some special agenda like getting reelected or distracting the world from Israel's war against the Palestinian people, even if the plan may end up crippling U.S. national security, well...if we publicly discussed such a plan, we just would not be "team players."