Among the many predictions I made about Governor Sarah Palin before her convention speech was this highly contrarian one:
Palin May be Israel's Best Friend Ever
A close reading of the Gibson interview shows that she has made what may be the strongest pro-Israel statements ever by a potential American leader:
GIBSON: Let me turn to Iran. Do you consider a nuclear Iran to be an existential threat to Israel?
PALIN: I believe that under the leadership of Ahmadinejad, nuclear weapons in the hands of his government are extremely dangerous to everyone on this globe, yes.
Here, Palin expresses the entire point of this blog--that the war against Israel is really a part of the war on the free world.
GIBSON: So what should we do about a nuclear Iran? John McCain said the only thing worse than a war with Iran would be a nuclear Iran. John Abizaid said we may have to live with a nuclear Iran. Who's right?
Gibson didn't mention that
Joe Biden reportedly told Israeli leaders that they would have to live with a nuclear Iran.
PALIN: No, no. I agree with John McCain that nuclear weapons in the hands of those who would seek to destroy our allies, in this case, we're talking about Israel, we're talking about Ahmadinejad's comment about Israel being the "stinking corpse, should be wiped off the face of the earth," that's atrocious. That's unacceptable.
Here Palin is presenting the best quote she can in order to get listeners to side with Israel against those who hate her.
GIBSON: So what do you do about a nuclear Iran?
PALIN: We have got to make sure that these weapons of mass destruction, that nuclear weapons are not given to those hands of Ahmadinejad, not that he would use them, but that he would allow terrorists to be able to use them. So we have got to put the pressure on Iran and we have got to count on our allies to help us, diplomatic pressure.
GIBSON: But, Governor, we've threatened greater sanctions against Iran for a long time. It hasn't done any good. It hasn't stemmed their nuclear program.
PALIN: We need to pursue those and we need to implement those. We cannot back off. We cannot just concede that, oh, gee, maybe they're going to have nuclear weapons, what can we do about it. No way, not Americans. We do not have to stand for that.
GIBSON: What if Israel decided it felt threatened and needed to take out the Iranian nuclear facilities?
PALIN: Well, first, we are friends with Israel and I don't think that we should second guess the measures that Israel has to take to defend themselves and for their security.
GIBSON: So if we wouldn't second guess it and they decided they needed to do it because Iran was an existential threat, we would cooperative or agree with that.
PALIN: I don't think we can second guess what Israel has to do to secure its nation.
GIBSON: So if it felt necessary, if it felt the need to defend itself by taking out Iranian nuclear facilities, that would be all right.
PALIN: We cannot second guess the steps that Israel has to take to defend itself.
Over and over, Palin offers Israel carte blanche in doing what it needs to do to defend itself and for its security. If she is serious, this overturns much of current American policy in terms of pressuring Israel to dismantle checkpoints and to make "goodwill gesture" releases of jihadist prisoners. All of these undermine Israel's security. Do not be distracted by the fact that she said this in response to questions about a nuclear Iran. Her answers are categorical principles, not specific.
More importantly, this logically overturns the long-standing American policies of pressuring Israel to relinquish land for peace, and to stop settlement activity. Israel has historically argued that this territory have a vital security role, a contention that Palin should logically not second-guess.
Furthermore, Palin drew about as strong a line as a national politician has ever made in opposing the Global Jihad:
SARAH PALIN: In order to stop Islamic extremists, those terrorists who would seek to destroy America and our allies, we must do whatever it takes, and we must not blink, Charlie, in making those tough decisions of where we go and even who we target.
