Members MsGuy Posted March 1, 2015 Members Posted March 1, 2015 I understand why Bohner extended the invitation to speak. Republicans have been working for decades to make support for Israel a wedge issue to split off Jewish Americans from the Democrats. But Israel and its American supporters (as opposed to pols who find it useful to be seen to support Israel) have been careful to avoid this trap. For several years, Netanyahu has been winking and nodding to American Jews that they should support the Republican party but openly challenging a sitting Democratic American president in this way is completely over the top. The Democrats are furious; serious people in Israel are horrified. AdamSmith and lookin 2 Quote
Members MsGuy Posted March 2, 2015 Members Posted March 2, 2015 Even before he makes his speech, a Republican affiliated PAC is using Netanyahu's trip to run attack ads against Hilary Clinton and wedge open a split in the Democratic party. Quote
AdamSmith Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 Even before he makes his speech, a Republican affiliated PAC is using Netanyahu's trip to run attack ads against Hilary Clinton and wedge open a split in the Democratic party. At a glance, this looks only slightly more likely to have its intended effect than Republican efforts to court the Hispanic vote. MsGuy 1 Quote
Members MsGuy Posted March 2, 2015 Members Posted March 2, 2015 One could argue that the intended effect of Bibi's trip is to put 2 or 3 extra Likud MKs in the Knesset in furtherance of his efforts to squeek back into office one more time. Similarly one could argue the intended effect of the attack ads is to raise the profile of the PAC and draw in more donations. One could even argue that the intended effect of Boehner's invitation in the first place was to boost his shaky hold on the Speakership. Against such weighty matters what matters trivia like the Israeli-American strategic partnership or sabotaging international efforts to force Iran to delay developing nuclear weapons? AdamSmith 1 Quote
Members lookin Posted March 3, 2015 Members Posted March 3, 2015 How Gerald Ford did it, forty years ago: In the continuing Arab-Israeli conflict, although the initial cease fire had been implemented to end active conflict in the Yom Kippur War, Kissinger's continuing shuttle diplomacy was showing little progress. Ford considered it "stalling" and wrote, "Their [israeli] tactics frustrated the Egyptians and made me mad as hell." During Kissinger's shuttle to Israel in early March 1975, a last minute reversal to consider further withdrawal, prompted a cable from Ford to Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, which included: "I wish to express my profound disappointment over Israel's attitude in the course of the negotiations ... Failure of the negotiation will have a far reaching impact on the region and on our relations. I have given instructions for a reassessment of United States policy in the region, including our relations with Israel, with the aim of ensuring that overall American interests ... are protected. You will be notified of our decision." On March 24, Ford received congressional leaders of both parties and informed them of the reassessment of the administration policies in the Middle East. "Reassessment", in practical terms, meant to cancel or suspend further aid to Israel. For six months between March and September 1975, the United States refused to conclude any new arms agreements with Israel. Rabin notes it was "an innocent-sounding term that heralded one of the worst periods in American-Israeli relations". As could be expected, the announced reassessments upset the American Jewish community and Israel's well-wishers in Congress. On May 21, Ford "experienced a real shock", seventy-six senators wrote him a letter urging him to be "responsive" to Israel's request for $2.59 billion in military and economic aid. Ford felt truly annoyed and thought the chance for peace was jeopardized. It was, since the September 1974 ban on arms to Turkey, the second major congressional intrusion upon the President's [foreign policy] prerogatives. The following summer months were described by Ford as an American-Israeli "war of nerves" or "test of wills", and after much bargaining, the Sinai Interim Agreement (Sinai II), was formally signed on September 1 and aid resumed. AdamSmith and MsGuy 2 Quote
Members MsGuy Posted March 3, 2015 Members Posted March 3, 2015 Thank you for the information & the link, lookin. I did not know that about the Sinai negotiations. lookin 1 Quote
Members lookin Posted March 3, 2015 Members Posted March 3, 2015 Neither did I, MsGuy. Neither did I. I found it when I went a-googling to see if any other countries had an organization like AIPAC so effective at influencing U. S. foreign policy. I got sidetracked and have not got my answer yet. What I found instead was an example of how 'normal' it now seems for Israel to be actively shaping our policies in the Middle East. You speculated that the purpose of Netanyahu's visit may be to add a few seats for Likud in the Knesset, and I'm wondering if he might also be trying to add a few seats for Likud in the U. S. Congress. AdamSmith 1 Quote
AdamSmith Posted March 3, 2015 Posted March 3, 2015 As noted previously, will be fascinating to see how the Israel elections play out in the shadow of Bibi's late shenanigans. Heartening to be reminded by the U.S. House's current contortions over DHS funding that rightwing bullying does not always necessarily carry the day. Quote
Members RA1 Posted March 3, 2015 Members Posted March 3, 2015 Indeed it will be interesting. Also left wing bullying does not necessarily carry the day. Best regards, RA1 MsGuy 1 Quote
Members lookin Posted March 4, 2015 Members Posted March 4, 2015 Also left wing bullying does not necessarily carry the day. Unless maybe it's the day you can afford your first health insurance. Or the day you get coverage for a preexisting condition. Or the day you don't get kicked out of the army 'cause you're gay. Or the day you marry your boyfriend. Or the day you can finally understand your credit card bill. Or the day your minimum wage job pays a little better. Or the day you can stop dodging ICE. And maybe another day or two I'm forgetting. Quote
Members RA1 Posted March 4, 2015 Members Posted March 4, 2015 All of those things come with a price. Some are priced in dollars and some in other things. We all need to decide if the price is right. Best regards, RA1 MsGuy 1 Quote
Members lookin Posted March 4, 2015 Members Posted March 4, 2015 All of those things come with a price. Some are priced in dollars and some in other things. We all need to decide if the price is right. Oh, Darling, cheer up. Not every cynic will be a fan. He knows the price of everything and the value of nothing. Quote
AdamSmith Posted March 4, 2015 Posted March 4, 2015 Netanyahu Feeling Like Trip To US To Start World War III Went Pretty Well NEWS IN BRIEF Politics Politicians ISSUE 4839 Sep 28, 2012 NEW YORK--Following his speech to the United Nations General Assembly this week, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced Friday that he is "pretty satisfied" with his trip to the U.S. to instigate World War III. "All in all, I think I accomplished my goal of pushing humanity toward the brink of complete and utter annihilation," said Netanyahu, adding that his implicit calls for international military action against Iran, which would ultimately escalate the conflict to an Armageddon-level of death and destruction, went "fairly well." "I think I did a good job laying the groundwork for a nuclear holocaust that will kill billions of people and eventually end the world as we know it. Sounded like everyone really liked it, too." When reached for comment, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told reporters that he was "equally happy" with his own efforts to nudge the world slightly closer to a full-blown apocalypse. http://www.theonion.com/articles/netanyahu-feeling-like-trip-to-us-to-start-world-w,29732/ Quote
Members MsGuy Posted March 5, 2015 Members Posted March 5, 2015 Does it seem to anyone else that Netanyahu's speech was at least as much about demanding regime change in Iran as it was about criticising the nuclear program negotiations? Quote
Members RA1 Posted March 5, 2015 Members Posted March 5, 2015 I am not sure how any "progress" with Iran can be made without a regime change there. Ditto, the US. Sorry to say. Best regards, RA1 Quote
Members MsGuy Posted March 5, 2015 Members Posted March 5, 2015 Good point, RA1. But I would bet good money that you would be reluctant to support US regime change if it were foisted on us through armed intervention from abroad. You might even be inclined to dig up that cache of guns you've got buried out back. I suspect that most Iranians would react the same however much they might dislike the Ayatollahs. Quote
Members lookin Posted March 5, 2015 Members Posted March 5, 2015 I am not sure how any "progress" with Iran can be made without a regime change there. Ditto, the US. Sorry to say. Best regards, RA1 That's what I was beginning to think - that he's looking for a regime change in the U. S. I'm sure he'd like regime change in Iran, but I think he'll get it by seeing a saber-rattling Republican president elected in 2016. The guy who set up his speech to Congress is Israeli Ambassador to the U. S., Ron Dermer, who is pals with Sheldon Adelson. I think they all share an interest in getting a president elected who would 'advocate' regime change in Iran. Perhaps Netanyahu just wanted to start prising the saber out of the sheath. Quote
AdamSmith Posted March 5, 2015 Posted March 5, 2015 And again, last time we meddled in Iran, we got rid of their elected leader and gave them the Shah. Which eventually got us the Ayatollah. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blowback_%28intelligence%29 Quote
Members RA1 Posted March 5, 2015 Members Posted March 5, 2015 Isn't a lot of this "our dictators vs. their dictators"? As far as fostering democracy, I don't think they can spell it, never mind define it. Some of the time we seem to have the same problem. I am not much in favor of saber rattling and even less in favor of war. Should we just let the Middle East alone and see what happens? I would be much more in favor of this IF they were using sticks and stones. Unfortunately, they are not. Even though radioactive gasoline will burn just fine in automobiles, keeping radioactive clouds away from the rest of the world is not possible (Russian and Chinese ability to control the weather notwithstanding). Best regards, RA1 Quote
Members MsGuy Posted March 5, 2015 Members Posted March 5, 2015 As far as fostering democracy, I don't think they can spell it... What...there's no spell check in Farsi? How barbaric. Clearly we need to intervene them right back to the (sticks &) stone age. Quote
Members RA1 Posted March 5, 2015 Members Posted March 5, 2015 Now, you are talking. Best regards, RA1 MsGuy 1 Quote
Members MsGuy Posted March 5, 2015 Members Posted March 5, 2015 Alternatively, it might be another case of everything looking like a nail... :tongue: Quote
Members MsGuy Posted March 16, 2015 Members Posted March 16, 2015 Here's an interesting article on the new Arab Israeli United List and it's place in Israeli politics. Latest polls show the United List polling about 13 seats in the Knesset which would make them the 3rd largest party. By comparison Likud is polling about 22 seats and Labor is polling about 26 (out of 110 total seats). lookin 1 Quote
Guest callipygian Posted March 17, 2015 Posted March 17, 2015 I've just lit a digital menorah, in the hopes that Benjamin Netanyahu's "too early to call" deceleration of victory, will result in, at least, an embarrassing hanging-chad moment for him. Benjamin Netanyahu, is not of and for his people's future and peace. He is of his own, one's self; and an old and failed out-reach of power which has failed not only his own people - but the people of the vested world for Israel peace. Benjamin Netanyahu is not a vehicle to peace. He is a vehicle to continued war, continued death, continued suffering and continued stage-craft politicking. Quote
Members lookin Posted March 18, 2015 Members Posted March 18, 2015 Perhaps he will form a coalition government with the Republican Party. I think it will be some years before we get back our independent voice in the Middle East.Interesting that Saeb Erekat lost no time vowing to go to the ICC, which Palestine joins on April 1st.I was hoping Israel would get a Prime Minister who could make friends as well as enemies. Instead it looks like we're all in for another few years with the Big Cheese. MsGuy 1 Quote
