Do as I say, not as I do

The Israeli regime has showed its true colors once again, by making threats to attack others without provocation -- a simple act of aggression:

Israeli Minister Warns Iran Strike Is Possible - ABC News: "Israel's defense minister warned on Tuesday of a possible Israeli military strike against Iran's nuclear program and rejected suggestions the Jewish state would be devastated by an Iranian counterattack.

Ehud Barak spoke a day before the United Nations' nuclear agency was expected to release a critical report on the Iranian program. The report is expected to implicate Iran in bomb building and erase any doubts about the nature of the program, which Iran says is designed to produce energy, not weapons."

Imagine if the Iranian PM had declared that Iran was being driven to attack Israel because it objects to Israel's nuclear weapons program. Not the bogus translation which is frequently repeated about "wiping Israel off the map," but a specific threat to attack Israeli military and strategic installations.

The Israelis would be jumping up and down, and the US would be in the UN security council proposing the most bellicose resolutions against the Iranian regime imaginable.

That would never fly, obviously. Nor do the Iranians make such threats, since they are never taken as idle bluster. Rather, depending on who's speaking, the threat of an attack is usually considered an act of war.

Still, the US can piously condemn the Iranians for their nuclear program while they and their Israeli pit bull make saber-rattling a daily affair, in preparation for the inevitable main event.

While the Israelis accuse the Iranians of bad intent, its the Israeli government that will be the one that attacks -- guaranteed. And when it does, it will be the Iranians who are condemned for not being sufficiently deferential to their masters in Tel Aviv and Washington.

The only hope is that Russia and China make such a move costly for the West. As this seems like only a remote possibility, one can assume that an attack will go down, and that once Netanyahu makes up his mind, there's no turning back. No wonder Sarkozy can't stand him.

As for Iranian counter-attacks, they really don't have much firepower compared with their nemesis, which in spite of all the protestations of vulnerability is armed to the teeth and backed up by US firepower, which guarantees no significant military response. About Iran's worse gambit, as far as the West is concerned, is if the Strait of Hormuz is closed for any length of time, which drives fuel prices up to crippling levels.

If the Iranians are serious at all about making this gambit painful for their antagonists, they'll go for where it hurts the multinational oligarchs the most -- in the wallet!