The U.S. will support a possible Israeli preemptive strike against Iran

The Resolution 65, so named because it approved the same day that Israel celebrated its 65 years of independence, is the result of the vote, decided unanimously by the Foreign Affairs Committee of the U.S. Senate, which recognizes the right of Tel Aviv has lead a preemptive strike against Iran and indicates that the White House a duty to provide all the help possible ally, not only military but also diplomatic. It is a first step to be established by a vote of the entire Senate, but such approval is taken for granted, thanks to the strong support of leaders of both parties. The meaning of this resolution is that if Israel will be forced to choose the military option on the grounds of self-defense, the United States will have to provide their full support in the form of aid political, economic and military to ensure the existence of the Jewish state. As stated by resolution adopted by the Commission of the U.S. Senate contains discounted items, which are repeated in an official way, but also contains a dangerous encouragement to independent assessment of the Israeli Iranian threat. Quite different is now the evaluation of the behavior that must be followed for a possible Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear sites. Except in the case of unconditional military support, which has always been contemplated as a forced choice, however, one thing to be forced to intervene, even unwillingly, to support the state of Israel who chooses independently a preemptive strike, while a very different thing is enshrined in a political way to have this address, which leaves in Tel Aviv an obvious freedom of choice, which the U.S. must meet. By analyzing the behavior of Obama, about the issue, which has favored a diplomatic approach pre-eminently, relying on the instrument of sanctions, which were tightened gradually and has never gone along with the Israeli prime minister, seen as too reckless, the resolution adopted could open a rift with the legislative body and part of the same Democratic Party, which has contributed in a major way, by the affirmative vote, approval of the measure. But this is only a hypothesis, the recent Obama's trip to Israel has be all in favor of the state of Israel, even in the relationship with the Palestinians, which have been reserved only phrases fact, despite the obvious violations in the matter of settlements in territories of the West Bank. What it seems is that Obama should resign ourselves to a solution that has never convinced. This may be an obvious choice given the poor results obtained by the sanctions that have blocked the technological advances of progress towards the bomb Iranian nuclear engineers. Having reiterated a truism well known in the world, namely that the United States will give their unconditional support to Israel, so official, opens the door to a huge range of responsibilities. Until now, Israel, where, besides the government also the majority of public opinion is in favor of a preemptive strike, was limited only by the action of the American president, which at times seemed to not even provide a support, a fact that seemed more than another an idle threat, in the case of choosing the military option. There was, that is, a freedom of action of the highest office in America, which was not limited by any official pronouncement by the legislative bodies of the state. Now, on the contrary everything changes, Israel is given a range of unprecedented decision. Difficult, however, that this autonomy is to be understood as a subordination of Washington to Tel Aviv, it seems, however, that this decision is matured in the presence of new facts, which could lead to politically express an assertion so decisive. Also weighing may have been the evolution of Syrian civil war where they are taking more and more power the Islamic militias and also developments in theocratic sense of the Arab Spring, as well as the aforementioned technical progress of Tehran. At this point there is to expect the opening of a conflict in the region of the Middle East? Certainly the chances of this happening increase greatly and also the investments the U.S. military, where substantial investments have been earmarked for the Iron Dome anti-missile system, further indicate that the odds are rising sharply. Should, however, be analyzed, which will be the consequences for the U.S. entry into such an undertaking. A war between Israel and Iran, if the intent of Tel Aviv has to be fought primarily by the strength aeronautics, does not rule out an Iranian choice to take, however, to be fought on the ground. A direct use of American troops in the Middle East would have a huge impact on American society, just freed from Iraqi and Afghan fronts. Despite this, the upper echelons of U.S. policy are now oriented to face a conflict which, among other intentions, you may delete the theocratic regime in Tehran, liable to be behind the resurgence of Islamic action in different areas of the world. Reduce to a minimum the Iranian nuclear capability could reopen the internal crisis, previously drowned in blood, and bring Iran into a ball closer to the West.