Looking for His glorious appearing! Titus 2:13

U.S. Repeals Propaganda Ban, Spreads Government - Made News to Americans
Jul 17th, 2013
Daily Newsthecable.foreignpolicy.com
Categories: Today's Headlines;Contemporary Issues

For decades, a so-called anti-propaganda law prevented the U.S. government's mammoth broadcasting arm from delivering programming to American audiences. But on July 2, that came silently to an end with the implementation of a new reform passed in January. 

The result: an unleashing of thousands of hours per week of government-funded radio and TV programs for domestic U.S. consumption in a reform initially criticized as a green light for U.S. domestic propaganda efforts. So what just happened?

Until this month, a vast ocean of U.S. programming produced by the Broadcasting Board of Governors such as Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, and the Middle East Broadcasting Networks could only be viewed or listened to at broadcast quality in foreign countries. 

The programming varies in tone and quality, but its breadth is vast: It's viewed in more than 100 countries in 61 languages. The topics covered include human rights abuses in Iran, self-immolation in Tibet, human trafficking across Asia, and on-the-ground reporting in Egypt and Iraq.

The restriction of these broadcasts was due to the Smith-Mundt Act, a long-standing piece of legislation that has been amended numerous times over the years, perhaps most consequentially by Arkansas Senator J. William Fulbright. 

In the 1970s, Fulbright was no friend of VOA and Radio Free Europe, and moved to restrict them from domestic distribution, saying they "should be given the opportunity to take their rightful place in the graveyard of Cold War relics." 

Fulbright's amendment to Smith-Mundt was bolstered in 1985 by Nebraska Senator Edward Zorinsky, who argued that such "propaganda" should be kept out of America as to distinguish the U.S. "from the Soviet Union where domestic propaganda is a principal government activity."

Zorinsky and Fulbright sold their amendments on sensible rhetoric: American taxpayers shouldn't be funding propaganda for American audiences. So did Congress just tear down the American public's last defense against domestic propaganda?

BBG spokeswoman Lynne Weil insists BBG is not a propaganda outlet, and its flagship services such as VOA "present fair and accurate news."

"They don't shy away from stories that don't shed the best light on the United States," she told The Cable. She pointed to the charters of VOA and RFE: "Our journalists provide what many people cannot get locally: uncensored news, responsible discussion, and open debate."

A former U.S. government source with knowledge of the BBG says the organization is no Pravda, but it does advance U.S. interests in more subtle ways. In Somalia, for instance, VOA serves as counterprogramming to outlets peddling anti-American or jihadist sentiment. "Somalis have three options for news," the source said, "word of mouth, al-Shabab, or VOA Somalia."

This partially explains the push to allow BBG broadcasts on local radio stations in the United States. The agency wants to reach diaspora communities, such as St. Paul, Minnesota's significant Somali expat community. "Those people can get al-Shabab, they can get Russia Today, but they couldn't get access to their taxpayer-funded news sources like VOA Somalia," the source said. "It was silly."

Lynne added that the reform has a transparency benefit as well. "Now Americans will be able to know more about what they are paying for with their tax dollars -- greater transparency is a win-win for all involved," she said. And so with that we have the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012, which passed as part of the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act, and went into effect this month.

But if anyone needed a reminder of the dangers of domestic propaganda efforts, the past 12 months provided ample reasons. Last year, two USA Today journalists were ensnared in a propaganda campaign after reporting about millions of dollars in back taxes owed by the Pentagon's top propaganda contractor in Afghanistan. 

Eventually, one of the co-owners of the firm confessed to creating phony websites and Twitter accounts to smear the journalists anonymously. Additionally, just this month, the Washington Post exposed a counter-propaganda program by the Pentagon that recommended posting comments on a U.S. website run by a Somali expat with readers opposing al-Shabab. 

"Today, the military is more focused on manipulating news and commentary on the Internet, especially social media, by posting material and images without necessarily claiming ownership," reported the Post.

Pentagon: Iran will Soon Have Nuclear Missiles Capable of Striking U.S.
Jul 17th, 2013
Daily NewsYnetNews
Categories: Today's Headlines;Contemporary Issues

A Pentagon report states that China, Iran and North Korea are aggressively developing nuclear missiles capable of striking the United States and proliferation among these nations of technology is rife, the British newspaper Daily Mail reported Friday.

The Department of Defense report, the findings of which were first published by the Washington Times, confirms the assessment of US intelligence agencies that Iran is set to test an intercontinental ballistic missile as early as 2015. 

"Iran has ambitious ballistic missile and space launch development programs and continues to attempt to increase the range, lethality, and accuracy of its ballistic missile force," states the assessment produced by the Department of Defense's National Air and Space Intelligence Center. 

The report also determines that the number of Chinese land-based nuclear missiles able to hit the US "could expand to well over 100 within the next 15 years" and that North Korea has already deployed its new road-mobile intercontinental ballistic missile, or ICBM, known as the Hwasong-13. 

"North Korea has an ambitious ballistic missile development program and has exported missiles and missile technology to other countries, including Iran and Pakistan," says the assessment, which was released this week. 

Rep. Michael Turner, an Ohio Republican and a member of the House Committee for Armed Services, said in response to the report "For too long the Obama administration has allowed our missile defense program to languish when they should have been working to prepare for these imminent threats." 

In March, China announced it was to increase military spending by 11.2% this year in response to US President Barack Obama's Asian 'pivot.' 

China announced a 10.7% increase in military spending to $114 billion in March, the Pentagon report said. Publicly announced defense spending for 2012 was $106 billion, but actual pending for 2012 could range between $135 billion and $215 billion, it said. 

According to the Daily Mail, US defense spending is more than double that, at more than $500 billion. Asian neighbors, however, have been nervous about Beijing's expanding military, and this double-digit rise could reinforce disquiet in Japan, India, Southeast Asia and self-ruled Taiwan, which China considers part of its territory.

Obama has sought to reassure Asian allies that the United States will stay a key player in the area, and the Pentagon has said it will "rebalance toward the Asia-Pacific region."

One Third of Israeli Jews Want Temple Rebuilt in Jerusalem, Poll Finds
Jul 17th, 2013
Daily Newshaaretz.com
Categories: Today's Headlines;The Nation Of Israel

Right-wing organizations devoted to the Temple Mount are buoyed by a new poll they commissioned finding that 30 percent of Israeli Jews support rebuilding the Jewish Temple on the site.

When the poll, commissioned by the Joint Forum of Temple Mount Organizations, asked Israeli Jews, "Are you for or against erecting a Temple on the Temple Mount?" 30 per cent answered in the affirmative, while 45 percent were against and 25 percent said they were not sure.

Among the numerous Temple Mount organizations that initiated the survey, activists are pleased. he results, they believe, show a strengthening of public perception that the Temple Mount is Judaism's holiest and most important site.

The survey was released ahead of next week's Tisha B'Av Jewish day of mourning for the destruction of the First and Second Temples.

Pressure groups

The last few years have seen changing attitudes to the Temple Mount among the national religious and ultra-Orthodox sectors.

There are currently dozens of movements working to change the status quo at the holy site. Some are reconstructing ceremonial objects used in the Temple in the past, while others are making practical preparations for its rebuilding, including a renewal of animal sacrifice. Others deal in political lobbying and in encouraging Jews to visit the Mount.

A growing demand gathering political support is for the status quo on the Mount to be changed so Jews will be able to pray there. The police currently prohibit Jews from praying on the Mount, fearing an outbreak of violence.

Among religious Jews questioned in the survey, 43 percent supported the construction of a Temple, compared to 20 percent among the ultra-Orthodox and the national ultra-Orthodox, and 31 percent among secular Jews.

The survey was financed by a fund called the Israel Independence Fund, and was conducted with 523 Israeli Jewish participants.

"Attempts to distance the People of Israel from its holiest site have failed," said Yehuda Glick, spokesman for the forum of Temple Mount organizations that commissioned the survey.

"State authorities should pay attention to what the nation has said, demanding the imposition of the state's sovereignty on the Temple Mount."

Putting the issue on the agenda

Yet Tomer Persico, a researcher of religions who is studying these movements, dismissed the survey's import.

"How does this commit you to anything when you answer that you are in favor of building the Temple? It doesn't imply that you mean for this to happen right away. [But] without doubt, the survey does indicate that these movements have succeeded in placing the issue on the public's agenda."

The survey further found that among the Israeli Jewish public there is a strong majority (59 percent ) that favors the demand to change the status quo on the Mount. The survey asked whether "the state should enforce an agreement on the Mount, similar to one that exists in the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron, which is shared by Jews and Moslems." Only 23 percent of respondents answered "no" to this question.

Analysis of the survey's results shows a significant change in attitudes among the national-religious public.

While visiting the Mount used to be taboo, 68 percent of religious respondents in the current survey said they would like to come to the site "as part of a visit to Jerusalem." Sixty percent of secular Jews answered the same way, while only 20 percent of ultra-Orthodox respondents expressed such a wish.

In response to a question over whether the state should enforce the right of Jews to pray on the Mount, 70 percent of religious participants answered affirmatively, while 22 percent objected. In all, 48 percent of respondents agreed with such a move.

However, despite the changing attitude to the Mount, the Jewish public still considers the Western Wall to be the faith's holiest site - 66 percent singled out the Kotel for this distinction, compared to 29 percent who chose the Temple Mount.

Obama uses EU to Confront Israel With Tough Interlinked Choices: Borders or Nuclear - Armed Iran
Jul 17th, 2013
Daily Newsdebkafile
Categories: Today's Headlines;The Nation Of Israel

It doesn’t take a political genius to see how US Secretary of State John Kerry’s arrival in Amman Tuesday, July 16, for his sixth bid to bring Israelis and the Palestinians to the table, ties in with the new EU anti-Israel funding guidelines published on the same day. To avoid a head-on clash with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, the US president has loosed the Europeans in full cry against Jerusalem and its policies. European Union foreign affairs executive Catherine Ashton chairs the international negotiating forum with Iran. And so, the EU has given Tehran a broad wink that it is worth its while to come to a fresh round of nuclear diplomacy while Israel is kept on the run in the settlements-cum-borders dispute.  

Israel is further weakened by its own internal political difficulties.
The third Netanyahu cabinet is painfully shorthanded of ministers for dealing with foreign diplomacy and national security affairs. In the absence of a foreign minister, shackled with a new cabinet which took office in February, and beset with a reshuffle of his close aides, the prime minister is obliged to carry himself most of the burden for key decisions on the essential business of state.

When he decides not to decide on any issue, that issue is shuffled into the pending tray to await his attention - and of late, this is happening too often.
Netanyahu is taxed currently with keeping tabs on the conflict close to Israel’s borders in Egyptian Sinai, the threatened spillover of the Syrian war – only part of which reaches the public – and the approach of a nuclear Iran, which he admits is dangerously close to consummation. Every few weeks, he is put on the spot for fast decisions by US Secretary of State Kerry’s peace drive.
It is no wonder that Netanyahu drops some of the balls he is juggling.
The last ball to slip out of his hands was the new European Commission’s new guideline for the alliance to distinguish between the state of Israel and territories outside the 1967 Green Line for the purpose of co-funding projects and grants.

This guideline is grounded in the EU’s fixed determination that East Jerusalem, Gaza, the West Bank and the Golan were illegally occupied by Israel after the 1967 Arab-Israel war. The “settlements” housing more than a half a million Jews are likewise deemed illegal. Therefore, from Jan. 1, 2014, any Israeli entity seeking European project funding or grants will be obliged to declare it has no connection, direct or indirect, with a “settlement.”
There is nothing new about this determination. The European Union has for years boycotted goods manufactured in settlements and demanded that Israel exporters label their products with the source of manufacture. Ever since 1967, the UK has withheld pensions and allowances from British expatriates living outside the Green Line until they relocate to addresses London deems kosher.
And that is only one of many examples.

However, the new guidelines have exacerbated the rift between Brussels and Jerusalem and signal a further deterioration. If in future every Israeli firm is required before every financial or business transaction with Europe to disassociate from EU-proscribed Jewish communities, then bilateral trade, whose volume has climbed to 40 billion euros, will gradually decline, with as much economic fallout for Europe as for Israel.

Israel’s prime minister responded fast and hard to the new EU guidelines with a bitter broadside for what he sees as outside interference in the definition of Israel’s borders, in a manner which compromises direct Israel negotiations with the Palestinians. Direct negotiations are the only way to define those borders, he stressed, and the EU measure had the effect of tilting them in the Palestinians’ favor.

Netanyahu was particularly incensed by the EU dropping its bombshell on the day John Kerry arrived in Amman to pick up his mission for reviving the peace track, which he interrupted empty-handed earlier this month.

Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon greeted Kerry’s arrival by eulogizing his mission, accusing the Palestinians of burying it by sheer obstructionism.  Ya’alon no doubt followed the line set by the prime minister.

Kerry spent five hours talking to Palestinian Authority chairman Mahmoud Abbas Tuesday night, in yet another effort to melt his insistence on Israel meeting his preconditions for a meeting.

By Wednesday morning, the US Secretary had not yet arranged to meet Israeli officials this time round.

Israeli policy-makers understand that Washington is dodging a showdown with Netanyahu by using the Europeans to clobber his policies at a moment of internal weakness in Jerusalem. Now they realize they must brace urgently for the next chapter in the Obama campaign: Ashton will build on the EU steps to get a fresh round of world power-Iranian nuclear negotiations underway by persuading Tehran that Brussels, with Washington’s backing, is in full flight of a diplomatic campaign for cutting Israel down to size.

By pulling the wires behind the European campaign, the Obama administration is after three goals:

1. Persuading Tehran to return to international diplomacy on its nuclear program by diminishing Israel’s leverage.
2.  Confronting Israel with diplomatic isolation on an issue of prime importance to its security, i.e., the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran, unless the Netanyahu government agrees to concessions to the Palestinians on final borders.
3. Warning Netanyahu that his failure to toe the Obama line on the Syrian conflict and the Egyptian army coup will cost Israel dear. Instead of lining up with what is seen in the region as an ineffectual Washington, Israel struck out on its own to play ball with regional forces on the move, the Arab rulers of the Gulf and the Egyptian army. The US president has used the European Union to make sure Jerusalem understands that he too will pursue his own game - and it will be at the expense of Israel’s interests.

Obama Quietly Gives Himself Power to Seize Internet
Jul 17th, 2013
Daily NewsNewsmax
Categories: Today's Headlines;Contemporary Issues

Another late-Friday afternoon release from the White House — this one on how agencies should communicate with the public in emergencies — has Internet privacy advocates crying foul over a possible power grab.

The executive order — “Assignment of National Security and Emergency Preparedness Communications Functions” — was released last Friday in the late afternoon. The Friday before, the White House issued data showing that its payroll had increased 14.1 percent over the last year of the Bush administration.

President Barack Obama’s new order outlines procedures for government agencies to follow in preparing plans so they can communicate with “the public, allies, and other nations” should a national crisis occur, CNBC reports.

Essentially, it says the government can take control of private telecommunications technology, presumably including those used for the Internet, for government communications in an emergency.

“Under the Executive Order the White House has … granted the Department [of Homeland Security] the authority to seize private facilities when necessary, effectively shutting down or limiting civilian communications,” wrote the Electronic Privacy Information Center in a blog post.

This is what has Internet privacy advocates worried. They say the document represents a power grab on behalf of the federal government, CNBC reports.

They’re particularly concerned about language like this, from section 5.2(e): “The Secretary of Homeland Security shall … satisfy priority communications requirements through the use of commercial, Government, and privately owned communications resources, when appropriate.”

But White House officials told CNBC that the order does nothing more than update existing authority dating from a 1984 executive order signed by Ronald Reagan to reflect modern communications technology.

Let the Headlines Speak
Jul 17th, 2013
Daily NewsFrom the Internet
Categories: Today's Headlines;Contemporary Issues

Pa. man gets 8 1/2 years in terror promotion case
A western Pennsylvania man whom authorities called a "homegrown, radical extremist" was sentenced Tuesday to 8 ½ years in prison for helping lead an Internet forum that promoted terrorist attacks against American military and civilian targets.  

Is Netanyahu Turning Left?
With Syria and Egypt aflame, why is U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry returning to the Middle East for his sixth visit since February to focus on more Israeli-Palestinian shuttle diplomacy?  

Seven errant Syrian mortar shells land on Israeli side of Golan
Seven mortar shells apparently fired during battles between the Syrian army and rebels on the Syrian side of Golan Heights landed in Israeli territory on Tuesday morning. The shells hit an area that is primarily traversed by Israel Defense Forces vehicles and personnel. Israeli residents of the Golan Heights were not given any special guidelines or procedures to follow.  

Netanyahu responds to EU: Israel will not tolerate external edicts on our borders
Israel's relationship with the European Union has reached unprecedentedly strained level. After a hasty and urgent meeting at his bureau on Tuesday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu released a statement blasting the European Union over its decision to condition future agreements with Israel on the latter's recognition of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights as occupied territories. "We will not except any external edicts on our borders," Netanyahu said in a scathing response.  

Fugitive Edward Snowden applies for asylum in Russia
Fugitive US intelligence leaker Edward Snowden has applied for temporary asylum in Russia, officials say. The Federal Migration Service confirmed he had completed the relevant paperwork at Moscow's Sheremetyevo airport, where he has been for the past three weeks.  

UN says Syria refugee crisis worst since Rwanda
The conflict in Syria has caused the world's worst refugee crisis for 20 years, with an average of 6,000 people fleeing every day in 2013, the UN says. UN refugee chief Antonio Guterres said refugee numbers had not risen "at such a frightening rate" since the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. He was speaking to the UN Security Council, which also heard that 5,000 people are being killed each month.  

Seized N Korean ship: Cuban weapons on board
Cuba has admitted being behind a stash of weapons found on board a North Korean ship seized in the Panama Canal. The Cuban foreign ministry said the ship was carrying obsolete Soviet-era arms from Cuba for repair in North Korea. The ship was seized by Panama last week after "undeclared military cargo" was found hidden in a shipment of sugar.  

Iran dissidents in Iraq, accused of rights abuses, slam UN envoy
The outgoing U.N. special envoy to Iraq on Tuesday accused the leaders of an Iranian dissident group at a camp in Iraq of human rights abuses, an allegation the movement dismissed as baseless and potentially dangerous for the exiled dissidents.  

Israeli Minister Mobbed By Palestinians on Temple Mount
Jul 17th, 2013
Daily Newsdebkafile
Categories: Today's Headlines;The Nation Of Israel

Scores of Palestinians shouting Allahu Akbar mobbed and threatened Israel’s Deputy Foreign Minister Zeev Elkin when he and a party paid a visit to Temple Mt. Wednesday morning. Elkin said he had not come to pray but to commemorate a departed friend. All the same, he was forced to leave the shrine for lack of police protection. The minister accuses the police of falling down on their duty, which is to protect visitors of all faiths at the holy sites.

Churches Fear Lawsuits Over Gay Weddings
Jul 17th, 2013
Daily Newsfoxnews.com - Todd Starnes
Categories: Today's Headlines;Contemporary Issues

Joe Carr believes a day is fast approaching when pastors will be charged with hate crimes for preaching that homosexuality is a sin and churches will face lawsuits for refusing to host same-sex weddings.

It’s just a matter of time,” said Carr, the pastor of Waynesville Missionary Baptist Church in Georgia. “What’s happening in Europe – we’re going to see happen here and we’re going to see it happen sooner rather than later I’m afraid.”

And that’s why the congregation will be voting next month to change their church bylaws – to officially ban the usage of their facilities for gay marriages.

“We needed to have a clear statement,” Carr told Fox News. “It’s to protect us from being forced to allow someone to use our facilities who does not believe what we believe the Bible teaches.”

“These facilities may only be used for weddings that adhere to the Biblical definition of marriage and are solely reserved for use by members and their immediate family members,” the amended bylaws read. “These facilities may not be used by any individual, group, or organization that advocate, endorse, or promote homosexuality as an alternative or acceptable lifestyle.  This policy also applies to birthday parties, reunions, anniversaries, wedding or baby showers, etc.”

The church also included a passage to protect their pastor noting that he is not obligated to perform any wedding ceremony that would cause him to violate his conscience or conviction.

“Under no circumstances is the pastor to officiate, participate, or endorse any wedding ceremony that violates the belief and teaching of this church body in accordance with the Bible,” the statement read.

Even though Waynesville is a small community, Pastor Carr said he fears they could be taken advantage of by gay rights activists trying to “intimidate us.”

And Waynesville Missionary Baptist Church isn’t alone in their fears. Hundreds of churches around the nation are considering similar changes to their constitutions and bylaws as a result of the Supreme Court ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act.

Alliance Defending Freedom, a religious liberty legal organization, has already provided churches with sample bylaws that define marriage.

“I think we’re in a day where every church needs to have a statement in its bylaws of its doctrinal beliefs on marriage and sexuality,” attorney Erik Stanley told Baptist Press. “This is a proactive approach that churches can take to head off any claims of discrimination in the future, should they occur.”

Greg Erwin, an attorney who represents the Louisiana Baptist Convention, said it’s hard to speculate on what impact the Supreme Court ruling could have.

“It would seem that the law now is that churches do not have to perform marriages that violate its beliefs,” he told The Baptist Message newspaper. “However, if a church rents out its facilities for weddings to anyone but same-sex couples, then a court could find that the church is discriminating in violation of law by only refusing to rent to homosexuals.”

Many Louisiana pastors said the changes are sad, but necessary.

“It’s a shame that we have to vote on something like this,” said Paul Dabdoub, pastor of Ridge Memorial Baptist Church. “But for protection, it is a must.”

But Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, told Fox News that’s not necessarily true.

Apocalyptic Threats Cannot be Hoped Away: Iranian Nukes Must be Stopped
Jul 17th, 2013
Daily NewsIsrael Today - Noah Beck
Categories: Today's Headlines;Contemporary Issues

President Obama's Middle East policy has been an ever-worsening train wreck because it lacks credibility and strategy, as Egypt, Libya, and particularly Syria, have shown. And the region is about to get much worse, unless Obama exercises resolute leadership on the most important global security issue of this generation: Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons.

In a commerce-critical region where “might makes right” and only the strong survive, Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons could have catastrophic consequences for the Middle East and beyond. The resulting dangers potentially include: (i) nuclear proliferation, as other Mideast countries feel threatened into pursuing their own nuclear programs; (ii) the transfer of nuclear materials from Iran – the world's chief sponsor of terrorism – to terrorist organizations and/or rogue states; (iii) bolder attacks by Iranian terror proxies (Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, etc.) protected by Iran’s nuclear umbrella; and (iv) an even more belligerent Iran that flexes its nuclear arsenal to: export its radical Islamic ideology, acquire disputed territories and resources from neighboring countries, and/or undertake actions like blocking the Strait of Hormuz to increase the price of oil.

As Israel’s Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, recently told CBS News’s Face the Nation, the Islamic Republic is now dangerously close to a nuclear capability. Because Iran has stockpiled about 190 pounds of 20% enriched uranium, Iran is just 60 kilograms – potentially just weeks – short of crossing the nuclear “red line” that Netanyahu set in his speech before the UN last September.

Unfortunately, Obama has signaled no urgency over Iranian nukes. Perhaps he hopes for a negotiated settlement to the issue, now that Hassan Rouhani, a so-called “moderate,” was elected to assume Iran’s presidency next month. But hope is not a strategy with the Iranian regime. Rouhani has been linked to the 1994 terrorist bombing of an Argentine Jewish community center that killed 85 people, and has boasted about how he manipulated nuclear talks with the West about a decade ago to expand Iran’s nuclear program. More importantly, Iran's foreign policy is set by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has banned concessions to the West. Indeed, Fereydoun Abbasi-Davani, the head of Iran’s atomic energy agency, made it clear last Friday that Rouhani's election will have no impact on Iran's nuclear enrichment activities.

Obama must also recognize that the sanctions against Iran have demonstrably failed. The Islamic Republic has skillfully outmaneuvered them, as shown in a leaked U.N. report detailing 11 instances of Iran violating sanctions, including attempts to acquire materials for its atomic program. Reuters published an expose outlining how Iran exploits sanctions loopholes to import ore from Germany and France that could be used for making armor and missiles. More importantly, the Iranian nuclear weapons program has never once stopped because of sanctions. The only time that Iran ever suspended its nuclear program was after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, when Iran briefly feared that a U.S. attack was imminent.

Obama's Iran policy has thus far failed to produce any credible deterrent. It's time for Obama to build on the lead of Canadian Foreign Minister John Baird, who warned last month that Iran only has only a few months to demonstrate to the West that it is serious about a negotiated solution to the standoff.

Israel doesn't have the luxury of treating its red lines the way Obama has treated the one he set for Syria's use of chemical weapons; that means that the volatile Middle East of today could become far more engulfed in war and instability. Netanyahu's latest message may be the canary in the coalmine giving its final warning, so Obama should provide bold leadership on this critical issue before it's too late. New Jersey-sized Israel survives only by the strength of the military force that it projects. Critical to that deterrent is making good on its threats, as Israel did with its destruction of the Iraqi and Syrian nuclear programs, in 1981 and 2007, respectively, and its ongoing surgical airstrikes to prevent Syria from transferring game-changing weapons to Hezbollah.

Given such exploits, isolationists might wonder why the U.S. should bother; let Israel bear all of the costs and risks of eliminating the Iranian nuclear threat for us, goes the thinking. But the nuclear program in Iran is far more dispersed, hardened, and distant than what Israel neutralized in Iraq and Syria. Iranian nukes are truly vulnerable only to U.S. military capabilities. Expecting Israel to do the job is like a heavyweight-boxing champion asking his featherweight friend to defend him against the approaching middleweight champion. Such cowardly tactics needlessly endanger the featherweight ally, but – more importantly – there is a good chance that the middleweight won't be fully neutralized and will feel far more emboldened to attack the heavyweight after he concludes (alongside the rest of the world) that the heavyweight is just a paper tiger.

Iran can already attack U.S. interests across the Middle East and Europe. And as early as 2015, Iran could develop and test ballistic missiles that could strike the continental U.S., according to a Pentagon report released last week ("2013 Ballistic and Cruise Missile Threat Assessment"). Obama can wait for the U.S. to be drawn into war with a nuclear-armed Iran, or he can proactively address the threat before Iran acquires nukes. But he cannot hide from the threat or hope it away. Obama must lead – before Iran’s nuclear recalcitrance forces Israel's hand, with potentially apocalyptic consequences.