The Washington Post reports: "Israeli forces have carried out an airstrike against a shipment of sophisticated missiles bound for the Lebanese political and military organization Hezbollah, officials in Washington, Lebanon and Israel told reporters Saturday. . . .
"Lebanese authorities and residents had already reported unusually intense Israeli overflights during the previous 48 hours, suggesting the warplanes may have struck their target from Lebanese airspace."
Israeli planes reportedly struck again Sunday outside Damascus.
So much for the suggestion by critics of stronger U.S. action that Syria's anti-aircraft system is formidable. It seems someone in the Israeli government took a not-too-subtle swipe at the Obama administration's equivocating on Bashar Assad's use of chemical weapons.
"Israeli officials described the missiles targeted in the Friday strike as 'game-changing' weapons, according to the Associated Press. They said they were not chemical weapons, but advanced, long-range, ground-to-ground missiles."
Translation: When Israel draws a red line, it means it.
Not only does the Israeli action contrast with the U.S. government's fecklessness, but it also raises the issue of whether the United States would prefer Israel police the Middle East.
It is unbecoming for a superpower to let little Israel take on the Iranian surrogates. It will likely unnerve our allies elsewhere and embolden foes in other parts of the world.
As for the Middle East, when a U.S. president is this passive and unwilling to act in accordance with his words, the West and the Sunni states can take comfort knowing that Israel is there to rein in the mullahs and their surrogates.