Ah yes, nicely put, eevrnyoe.

…any disruption of the free flow of comremce through the Persian Gulf is a very grave threat to all of us and a redline for the US. Was he saying that a nuclear-armed Iran was not a red line for America?The defense secretary then offered the opinion that sanctions and diplomatic pressure were working to isolate Iran. DEBKAfile's Middle East sources emphasize that he would not find a single informed politician, general, intelligence official or economist in the region who agreed with him. Just the reverse: the region's leaders and international financial community report that the Islamic Republic has overcome sanctions with remarkable success and they have not slowed down its nuclear progress by a second.The US would safeguard Israel's security, said Panetta, but Israel has a responsibility to pursue shared goals (with the US) – to build regional support for Israeli and United States' security objectives. He was referring to the US offer of a security shield in return for Israel's pursuit of shared goals. The only trouble with that offer is that when it was put before Saudi Arabia, the Gulf Emirates, Turkey, Egypt and Jordan, they agreed to pursue only certain shared goals – but not those affecting their national security, especially on the Iranian question, which they preferred to address by developing their own independent nuclear options. Therefore, the US shield on offer would be very limited.His assumption that if Israel could persuade the Palestinians to sit down for peace talks and if it reached out to Turkey, Jordan and Egypt, relations would instantly improve, is just as fallacious.Perhaps Panetta has not heard that Mahmoud Abbas stands by his year-long refusal to face Israel across any damned tables and only this week tried to manipulate the Middle East Quartet into forcing Israel to accept an indirect track.Neither does he address the anti-Israel posture adopted by the rulers of Egypt, Turkey and Jordan to persuade their people of their affinity with the Islamist forces rising in the region, like the ultra-orthodox Salafis of Egypt.Neither Israel, nor any of the mainstream Arab governments accept the Obama-Panetta proposition that time will magically temper the extremism of the Islamist regimes. They have before them the example of a former Democratic president, Jimmy Carter, who made the same argument 32 years ago for the West to dump the shah and welcome Khomeini's ayatollah regime. It is time for Jerusalem to state clearly to the Obama administration that there is no way to reconcile Israel's essential security needs with the rejection of a military operation to cripple Iran's nuclear program; or to promote the rise of Islamist forces in the Arab capitals neighboring on the Jewish state and at the same time hold Israel to account for not reaching out to them.Israel must put its cards on the table, after Panetta put his, by saying: I understand the view that this is not the time to pursue peace, and that the Arab awakening further imperils the dream of a safe and secure, Jewish and democratic Israel. But I disagree with that view. Screw the Obama administration, screeeeeew them.