By Schmoel Yitzhak
I'm from Missouri -- SHOW ME! -- Harry S. Truman, American president and formerly U.S. Senator from Missouri.
President Truman merely was echoing a theme that had become his home state's unofficial theme. Roughly translated into the normal American lexicon it comes out "Don't believe it until you see it"
And that's precisely what Israel's position must be in terms of "friends" who'll support it in a crisis. Or, to put it another way, there isn't a nation in the world -- with the notable exception of Canada -- that can be trusted to immediately come to Benjamin Netanyahu's aid should Israel be threatened with extinction.
Oh, sure, cheery homilies will echo from the White House and the State Department but in real time nothing will be done -- and the record so far proves this to be the case.
In 2009, for example, when Iranians were revolting against the ayatollahs dictatorship, there was every reason to believe that the rogue in Tehran could actually be overthrown. But the rebels needed help and when their S.O.S. was transmitted to Washington it was tabled. "No problem; nothing will be done," was the tacit response from America.
Meanwhile, the Iranian anti-government demonstrators chanted on the streets of their capital, "Obama, are you with us or with the regime?"
They could have been paraphrasing Harry Truman -- their theme being, "We're in big trouble, show us that you care!"
True to his administration, Obama reacted with silence, turning his back on the valiant protestors at a time when American intervention could successfully have dissolved the rogue regime.
Trust Washington? Are you kidding!
Last month when endless rocket barrages traumatized the South of Israel, beleaguered Jews had reason to demand, "Obama, do you care about us?"
While thousands of Israeli children were forced to stay in bomb shelters and schools were closed as rockets were launched from heavily-populated civilian areas in Gaza, did the Administration in Washington denounce the Arabs, condemn Hamas while encouraging a much heavier retaliation from Bibi?
Of course not. If Obama wouldn't support the Iranian protestors why would he support the Jews in Southern Israel who were suffering as no Americans ever suffered from an enemy on their home front.
Writing in The New Republic, Yossi Klein Halevi described the President's behavior vis-a-vis Iran as "The worst moment of his presidency."
Halevi: "Obama's silence (in 2009) was a historic missed opportunity. So is his current inaction on Syria, Iran's most important ally. There appears to be no strategic coherence in his Middle East policy. Why, for example, help bring down Qaddafi, as odious as he was, after he had abandoned his nuclear program and his support of terrorism -- while allowing Assad a free hand?"
Judging by Washington's ostrich-like attitude toward Assad's endless massacres, one would surmise that the killings were taking place on some distant planet, out of sight, out of range and of no consequence to the habitues on Pennsylvania Avenue. Syria's Assad is Iran's premier proxy yet the administration is treating Assad as if the blood being spilled is whipped cream.
Syrian rebels could well be saying, "Obama, are you with us or with the regime?" So far, the answer has been the same silence the Iranian anti-government demonstrators got three years ago.
What has Obama shown us? He erroneously believes that lasting peace can be achieved at the price of yielding to terrorism or trying to appease murderers.
Iranian President Ahmadinejad denies that the Holocaust ever happened. He is the same madman who denied that any Muslim terrorists attacked America on 9/11. Furthermore, he said that anyone who supports Israel "Will burn in the fire!"
Meanwhile, Obama tries to convince Bibi that sanctions will deter a nuclear Iran hellbent on destroying Israel. That would be fine in a theoretical world where sanctions really do work. But in the world of 2012, sanctions are as effective as cotton candy.
"Obama's goal," says Halevi, "hasn't been so much to deter Iran but Israel."
Perhaps there is time -- precious little -- for sanctions to bring Iran to its knees.
Perhaps Emanuele Ottolenghi of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies does have a sanction solution. He suggests: "A complete United Nations-imposed oil embargo enforced by a naval blockade, as well as total diplomatic isolation."
Theoretically, it might work. But we have been shown that Obama needed THREE YEARS to put in place sanctions which, so far, have been useless.
That kind of time is no longer available as the Iranians race to build the bomb.
It would be much more effective if Obama stepped to the plate and unambiguously told Ahmadinejad that America -- in support of Israel -- is willing to inflict devastating harm!
Were that to happen, the ayatollahs would think twice about moving ahead with their nuclear program and, for a change, the world -- especially Israel -- would be relatively safe for democracy.
When dealing with the Arabs, history has shown that Harry Truman's theme must be applied: SHOW ME!
That theme also must be applied to Obama and his fallacious format for victory.
Until someone does, nobody -- no nation -- can be trusted to save Israel; with the exception of the Israelis themselves.