Obama is distancing the USA from Israel because they are too keen to attack Iran.The USA at this stage realises that it is too dangerous to attack Iran because Russia has warned them that they will not let another Lybia style attack happen again.Iran will thump Israel in a conventional war and if Israel uses nukes,it will suffer from the nuclear fallout.Israel needs US support to attack Iran.

Obama at this stage is quite happy to fight this war using proxies,corruption,subversion and propaganda.

There is no proof that Iran is developing nukes but we know Israel has at least 200.

We had all hope that Iran will not be attacked because high oil prices will worsen the Depression begun in 2008 and possibly bring Russia and China into this conflict.

This is a classic example of a problem without a solution.
When this type of problem exists there are only two possibilities.
Either a climb down by one side or war.

A climbdown by Israel means evacuation to other countries.
A climbdown by Iran is impossible by moslems due to religious dogma and behaviour problems.

As neither of these climb downs are acceptable, then either the status
qua continues or it is war.

Thats it !

I believe a Middle East war is almost inevitable.
Exactly when is the only question; and yes, it could very well eliminate any oil sales or shipping from that part of the world!
And indeed, economically cripple all those economies like ourselves, who are far too reliant on Middle East sourced oil!
America is basically bankrupt; given it has been spending 1.1 trillion a year more than it collects as revenue, for decades!
The Saudis funded the first gulf war, and the credit card the second.
Say what you will, but the symbiotic economic relationship between China and the US, will almost certainly keep China on the sidelines as a spectator.
Moreover, it has more to fear from an expansionist next door neighbour, Nuclear armed Russia?
And China has no interest in either Iran or Syria; albeit Russia has.
Israel has submarines, quite capable of launching nuclear warheads, and is likely to use them if it's asked to go alone.
Moreover, there are contingency plans to deal with fallout? i.e., very high yield tactical nuclear weapons, with just a mile of ground zero impact, and, dropped when favourable winds carry any fallout away from Israel?
Every Israeli home has a shelter and contingency supplies?
Moreover, Israel may be confronting a use it or lose it type scenario, particularly with regard to Iran, who continues to pursue a nuclear capability.
We could be self sufficient in our own liquid energy supplies!
We have, I believe, huge and untapped resources to our immediate north!
These same resources in use, produce in total numbers, 75% less carbon emission, than fully imported highly refined fuels!
Have we locked these probable possibly massive hydrocarbon reserves away, to please the environmentalists, or the oil cartels, who'se bottom lines would be unbelievably savaged by any significant new and relatively easily recovered huge new finds?
Rhrosty.

There is a competition developing: between Israeli-propagandist Julie and Israeli-propagandist, the Singer!

Both contestants are lawyers and both are sycophants of imperial Israel and the imperial U.S. as well as supporters of the ultra-rightwing, Crazy Benny..., I'm sorry, Mr Netanyahu.

Of course, both Julie and the Singer align themselves with both sides of Australian politics who cheer Israel on no matter how many war crimes it commits or how many U.N. Resolutions it ignores.

It is difficult for Australians to get reliable information about Israel because most of the Australian media either promote Israel and/or won't carry news which puts the Israelis in a bad light.

Israel could well become the spark that sets the Middle East alight but Julie and the Singer want everyone to believe that Iran alone is to blame.

When the nukes start falling, don't worry, there will be plenty of blame to go around.

And Julie and the Singer are near the top of the list!

Rhosty,
Actually we do not get much oil from the middle east, but as oil is as
they say fungible, it won't matter where we get it from, everyone would
be at the same disadvantage.
China gets a very large amount of its oil from Iran but it would make
arrangements to get all the oil it needs from Russia.
That together with the Gulf would cut off Europe.
Indonesia no longer has any export capacity, so we would be dependant
on Vietnam, if we were not outbid.
Rhosty said;
We have, I believe, huge and untapped resources to our immediate north!

Well I hope so, but are they real, and just how big ?
Further more in such a scenario, will the capital be available to
develop such a field. Remember if the situation was as Rhosty suggests
our capital markets would have collapsed.
Could we afford the ten years it would take to survey and develop
such a new field ?
This just another reason our politicians should be seriously examining
the reports for which they have already paid.

David G,

Did we read the same report?

The one I read presented facts, but nowhere in that report could I find that Julie Bishop had made any alignment with the policies of Israel or the U.S.

Instead of an emotional response to her article, please try to understand that the facts she has presented are given for perusal, not necessarily a political stance. After all she is also shadow minister for foreign affairs, and we should appreciate that she is doing her best to further our understanding of this region.

As Bazz commented in his post, there appear to only be two alternatives, and this does not please either side.

If it weren't so tragic, I would find it amusing that Jews and Palestinians allow religion to rule over politics. Especially if as history suggests, they have a shared heritage

I agree with Rhosty. I believe a Middle East war is almost inevitable. And nuclear weapons will certainly be used. Concerns about this where expressed in the 1960s by UK by Middle East Scholars taking part in the Anti nuclear demonstratons organised by the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmanent (CND) and by Bertrand Russel in his book “Can Man Survive”.

Today the world is sitting on an economic time bomb which if it explodes will be the trigger for war between Israel and Iran. If the GFC is brought under control that merely postpones war which may be caused by other arab states poking their nose it.

Its a Catch 2 situation. And Julie Bishop's concern is appreciated but the poo will hit the fan in a nuclear war. Julie should keep her nose out of this given Abbots pro Israel stance.

@worldwatcher. One of the problems with Ms Bishop's presentations is that they are not "facts" as you would have it. Rather, she presents a viewpoint and a very selective one at that. She seems incapable of actually learning from the evidence. One example (and there are many) is her constant repetition of the phrase, or variation thereof, of Iran's "nuclear programme". What programme is this exactly? It has twice been the unanimous view of all 16 US intelligence agencies that Iran does not have a nuclear weapons programme. Yet Ms Bishop persists in advancing the Israeli view that such a programme exists.

As David G and others have frequently pointed out, Israel is a major nuclear weapons armed power, but that is never acknowledged, even tacitly, by Ms Bishop.

Iran is a signatory to the non-proliferation treaty and everything it is doing is in accordance with its obligations under that treaty. Israel is not a signatory and what it does is manifestly not in accord with the obligations of treaty signatories. Again there is a stunning silence from Ms Bishop.

The sanctions regime which Australia enthusiastically embraces is inevitably leading to death and suffering for millions of ordinary Iranians. The sanctions time is based on the lie that Iran has a nuclear weapons programme. Again, silence from Ms Bishop.

If and when she shows she has some actual knowledge of what is really going on she might justify her status as opposition foreign affairs spokesperson. Until then her arguments have little or no credibility.

Julie,

there are a couple of factors not mentioned that will prevent an attack by Israel.
Iran has drone technology. Iran have missiles capable of targeting Israeli cities with conventional warheads.
Any attack by Israel on Iran will be met with rockets raining down on Israeli cities. And we all saw how quickly the gutless Israelis backed down after rockets reached Tel Aviv and Jeruselum during it's recent capitualation to the Gazans.
We also saw how impotent the US was in the peace talks which were dominated by the Egyptians. The end of the blockade of Gaza and the cessation of the murders of Hamas leaders. Neither of those things could ever have occurred had the US and Israel dominated the peace talks.

And Btw lets not forget Hamas is the elected government of all the Palestinians. It received more support than Abbas but due to non recognition by Israel and the world 'leaders' Hamas has never been able to undertake it's elected function. Abbas has become an impotent puppet of Israel and its supporters.

Things have already changed in the mid east. It no longer matters who is elected in Israel. It's only power card now is it's nuclear aresnal... which it has indicated it will use. If it undertakes that action it will be condemned by the entire world ... including Australia and it's leaders.

So Ms Bishop “is doing her best to further our understanding of the region” and we do not know that she has “made any alignment with the policies of Israel or the U.S.”

We could have a rough guess though, couldn't we?

Ms Bishop is sufficiently pro-Zionist that she once, as Shadow Foreign Secretary, accused her own country, without any supporting evidence that she was willing to reveal, of forging the passports of other countries. This was in defense of Israel’s alleged forging of Australian passports for which Israel received a rare reprimand from the Australian Government, although merely to point out to them that this was not the action of a friendly country.

US Intelligence sources inform us that Iran is nowhere close to having nuclear weapons. We also know that Israel has at least 200 warheads (possibly 400) and “crazy Benny” as its leader, hell-bent on initiating yet another attack on a neighbouring country.

Back to the US. Stop supplying Israel with arms and money and tell it that a single democratic secular state west of the River Jordan would ease a lot of tensions.

Did not the UN Atomic Inspection group report that they were not given
unfetted access to Iranian facilities. If I remember correctly they
reported that Iran was processing uranium beyond the point needed for power reactors.
I don't think that is something that could be just brushed aside.

That would not just make Israel very nervous.

The Iranians are coming! the Iranians are coming!

It is as comical as it is untrue. But “The Countering Iran in the Western Hemisphere Act”, which as of Dec. 28 is an official US law, is not meant to be amusing. It is riddled with half-truths, but mostly complete and utter lies.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article33520.htm

The main reason why the West is so apologetic and uncritical about Israel is their close ties and influence in Western Banking and financial markets.They have enormous influence over the US Congress via AIPAC and many other lobby groups.

Israel and its associates are dragging the planet towards a major conflict with Russia and China.We are the main aggressors via the military industrial complex that Dwight Eisenhower warned us about in the early sixties.Ross Gittens wrote an article a week ago called "The Four Business Gangs that Run America" This quote from Eisenhower was mentioned in the context that these business gangs have far too much power and no one or country with the exception of Russia and China will stand up to them.

Iceland refused to accept austerity and poverty that these criminal banking cartels are imposing on us.The British Govt labeled them a Terrorist State.Iceland is now beginning to prosper with their own Govt Banks and sovereignity.

The closing of the straits of Hormuz becomes a diminishing factor as the geopolitical environment changes with the iminent decoupling of America and others from middle eastern oil. This oil dependence has been the greatest factor in the 'west' involvement in Middle East politics. Soon, when Iran threatens or actually does close the straits, the US gulf fleet can just sail home and say 'so what'.

Agree with Bazz; looks like the two alternatives.

Like Worldwatcher, I wonder if I read the same article here as some others.

It is not generally realised that the US does not get much of its oil
from the Gulf states. It gets its imports from West Africa,
Sth America and Canada.
No, if Iran closed the Hormuz Strait the US fleet would have to reopen
it as one barrel not delivered is one out of everyone's bowsers.
Oil is fungible, a shortage anywhere is a shortage everywhere.
if the Strait was closed for say a week, I would bet the next week we
would have petrol rationing. We have about two weeks on the sea and
one week in terminals and two days in service stations.
Saudi Arabia is the world's second largest oil producer. Cut it off
and we would be in real trouble.
They have a Red Sea terminal but it could not supply all that much.
We get our petrol & diesel from Singapore and oil from Vietnam.
Shell in Sydney has closed as has the refinery in Melbourne.
Caltex at Kurnell closes later this year.
We could keep going for about three weeks, but experience overseas
shows that if the Strait was closed today, the service stations would
be empty tomorrow.

Bazz if there was an oil shortage and rationing,people would soon convert to gas.We have lots of gas here.Also during WW2 when there were fuel shortages,people used coal burners to power their engines.

It would be good for our economy if we all used gas because most of the money would stay here rather than going offshore.

Yes, I agree Arjay, we should be using the CNG that we have.
In the case of the Hormuz Strait closure it would not be relevant
because it will take several years to convert the car & truck fleet.
There is another problem with it, and that is we may not have enough
money available to do the conversion and build the infrastructure.
The US has realised that they cannot afford to change to gas.
The one thing that they and we could do would be to change the trucks
to CNG and equip the truck stops with CNG.
However for cars, forget it.