Angry over Israeli's planned speech, Dems hope to limit harm

[Morch]

It appears as if Netanyahoo and the Republicans would like to see this escalate into something more serious than taking out Iran's nuclear program.

Hogwash. It is pretty obvious that they want to put a stop to Iran's nuclear program before it is too late and that is the end of it. Israel has done it in Iraq and Syria already, without further aggression, and the whole world was thankful in retrospect.

Most level headed estimates are that even a successful attack will not totally eliminate the threat, but rather push the deadline 5+ years forward. Iran is not Iraq and it certainly ain't Syria. Different ballgame.

[louse1953]

The quicker both parties cut Israel loose the better it will be for USA.

[Ulysses G.]

It appears as if Netanyahoo and the Republicans would like to see this escalate into something more serious than taking out Iran's nuclear program.

Hogwash. It is pretty obvious that they want to put a stop to Iran's nuclear program before it is too late and that is the end of it. Israel has done it in Iraq and Syria already, without further aggression, and the whole world was thankful in retrospect.

Most level headed estimates are that even a successful attack will not totally eliminate the threat, but rather push the deadline 5+ years forward. Iran is not Iraq and it certainly ain't Syria. Different ballgame.

Five years is five years more to stop them completely. People said the same thing about Iraq and 33 years later, no nukes. Sometimes you have to just give it your best shot. There are never guarantees when it comes to this kind of thing.

Edited February 8, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[Morch]

aside any personal differences Obama might have with Netanyahu there are foreign policy issues involved here.

firstly, there is a national election in Israel in three weeks, this Congressional address will boost Netanyahu's and his parties prospects,

Secondly , Netanyahu is an outspoken opponent of Obama's policy to negotiate with Iran over it's nuclear program, and sanctions and I am sure he will take this opportunity to undercut Obama's policy in his speech

and thirdly it is a calculated attempt for political upmanship for political gain, with disregard of US interests.

Obama and his administration have every right to be upset wit all three of the above points

and thirdly it is a calculated attempt for political upmanship for political gain, with disregard of US interests

OK so for 40 odd years US interests did not include Iran becoming a Nuclear power. Now it is in the US interests that Iran become one! Really?

Yet having got rid of nuclear missiles from Cuba, The US was incapable of making peace with a small island 90 miles of it's coast for more than 60 years and counting!

right now I'm wondering what is in the US interest?

This is really the failure of US politicians and the disfunction of the US government body as a whole. Netanyahu has got in the middle of that fight between Democrats and republicans. What he has to say about Iran becoming Nuclear is very much in the interests of the US Just not it's President!

are you kidding me?

the negotiations with Iran are so that Iran does not pursue ambitions for developing nuclear weapons capability.if indeed they have such ambitions, guaranty that that nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only, and bring Iran back in to the family of nations .

Netanyahu is opposed to any such negotiations and want's them to fail,that's part of the problem with his invitation to address the congress, with out Obamas approval.

Why is it so difficult to understand the following concept?

Inviting Netanyahu to address Congress, undercuts Obama's ability to successfully negotiate a nuclear weapon free Iran it is sending a message to the Iranians that the American government is not united in this goal.

Well, not as if the Iranians themselves aren't speaking with more than one voice on these issues. Some of their disagreements are genuine, some played for better bargaining positions. Same can be applied for the USA - not hard to imagine how the whole Netanyahu speech could be played in this context.

[Morch]

It appears as if Netanyahoo and the Republicans would like to see this escalate into something more serious than taking out Iran's nuclear program.

Hogwash. It is pretty obvious that they want to put a stop to Iran's nuclear program before it is too late and that is the end of it. Israel has done it in Iraq and Syria already, without further aggression, and the whole world was thankful in retrospect.

Most level headed estimates are that even a successful attack will not totally eliminate the threat, but rather push the deadline 5+ years forward. Iran is not Iraq and it certainly ain't Syria. Different ballgame.

Five years is five years more to stop them completely. People said the same thing about Iraq and 33 later, no nukes. There are never guarantees.

That's a very simplistic view of things, and ignores how events turned out for Iraq in the years following the attack.

[Ulysses G.]

No nukes 33 years later. Do you have a crystal ball about the future of Iran and the rest of the Middle East? It looks very uncertain to me.

Edited February 8, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[Morch]

No nukes 33 years later. Do you have a crystal ball about the future of Iran and the rest of the Middle East? It looks very uncertain to me.

No crystal ball, but then I also do not think that what worked at specific point in time will bear the same effectiveness at another situation. If things are uncertain, then following the same course of action is not necessarily always the wisest default choice.

[Ulysses G.]

Maybe, but letting Iran get nukes is the worst possible choice possible and -IMO - that is the way it is heading.

[dexterm]

This whole Netanyahu speech to Congress undermining the elected President and any Iranian deal is all about making sure Israel remains the sole country in the Middle East with nuclear weapons. If Iran gets nuclear weapons it will create a nuclear deterrent just as it does with every other country in the world who have them, and will maybe make Israel think twice about attacking its neighbors, which it feels it can do with impunity at the moment.

Then one day when peace descends, perhaps both can disarm.

[Morch]

This whole Netanyahu speech to Congress undermining the elected President and any Iranian deal is all about making sure Israel remains the sole country in the Middle East with nuclear weapons. If Iran gets nuclear weapons it will create a nuclear deterrent just as it does with every other country in the world who have them, and will maybe make Israel think twice about attacking its neighbors, which it feels it can do with impunity at the moment.

Then one day when peace descends, perhaps both can disarm.

I'm sure that Saudi Arabia does not quite agree with this view.

[sirineou]

aside any personal differences Obama might have with Netanyahu there are foreign policy issues involved here.

firstly, there is a national election in Israel in three weeks, this Congressional address will boost Netanyahu's and his parties prospects,

Secondly , Netanyahu is an outspoken opponent of Obama's policy to negotiate with Iran over it's nuclear program, and sanctions and I am sure he will take this opportunity to undercut Obama's policy in his speech

and thirdly it is a calculated attempt for political upmanship for political gain, with disregard of US interests.

Obama and his administration have every right to be upset wit all three of the above points

and thirdly it is a calculated attempt for political upmanship for political gain, with disregard of US interests

OK so for 40 odd years US interests did not include Iran becoming a Nuclear power. Now it is in the US interests that Iran become one! Really?

Yet having got rid of nuclear missiles from Cuba, The US was incapable of making peace with a small island 90 miles of it's coast for more than 60 years and counting!

right now I'm wondering what is in the US interest?

This is really the failure of US politicians and the disfunction of the US government body as a whole. Netanyahu has got in the middle of that fight between Democrats and republicans. What he has to say about Iran becoming Nuclear is very much in the interests of the US Just not it's President!

are you kidding me?

the negotiations with Iran are so that Iran does not pursue ambitions for developing nuclear weapons capability.if indeed they have such ambitions, guaranty that that nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only, and bring Iran back in to the family of nations .

Netanyahu is opposed to any such negotiations and want's them to fail,that's part of the problem with his invitation to address the congress, with out Obamas approval.

Why is it so difficult to understand the following concept?

Inviting Netanyahu to address Congress, undercuts Obama's ability to successfully negotiate a nuclear weapon free Iran it is sending a message to the Iranians that the American government is not united in this goal.

Well, not as if the Iranians themselves aren't speaking with more than one voice on these issues. Some of their disagreements are genuine, some played for better bargaining positions. Same can be applied for the USA - not hard to imagine how the whole Netanyahu speech could be played in this context.

Sure, many voices in the US and more than one in Iran, but I think we all agree that undercutting the moderate voices, in the US or in Iran is not a desirable goal

[Jay Sata]

Just look at the mess created by Bush and Blair with Saddam's so called weapons of mass destruction.

[mania]

I do not think anyone (publicly, at least) have a clear idea of how close Iran is to developing nuclear warhead capability. Doesn't mean that there is no threat, or that the two other threat components are not bad enough by themselves, but no need to get too carried away with scaremongering. Its a wee bit more complicated than stuffing da bomb inside the tip of a rocket.

This exact same scaremongering has been going on for over a decade now.

Each time more news or pressure is applied it is usually a card played to either divert attention

from something worse or score election points.

Anyone can search & see the stories from 2005 or before

Edited February 8, 2015 by mania

[Jingthing]

The quicker both parties cut Israel loose the better it will be for USA.

Sure thing, throw Israel under the bus. It wouldn't be the first time the USA has thrown Jews under the bus. I don't think it will ever happen again ... but Americans are free to lobby for that if that's how they feel.

[Morch]

are you kidding me?

the negotiations with Iran are so that Iran does not pursue ambitions for developing nuclear weapons capability.if indeed they have such ambitions, guaranty that that nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only, and bring Iran back in to the family of nations .

Netanyahu is opposed to any such negotiations and want's them to fail,that's part of the problem with his invitation to address the congress, with out Obamas approval.

Why is it so difficult to understand the following concept?

Inviting Netanyahu to address Congress, undercuts Obama's ability to successfully negotiate a nuclear weapon free Iran it is sending a message to the Iranians that the American government is not united in this goal.

Well, not as if the Iranians themselves aren't speaking with more than one voice on these issues. Some of their disagreements are genuine, some played for better bargaining positions. Same can be applied for the USA - not hard to imagine how the whole Netanyahu speech could be played in this context.

Sure, many voices in the US and more than one in Iran, but I think we all agree that undercutting the moderate voices, in the US or in Iran is not a desirable goal

*posts removed to allow reply*

I don't know that "moderate" always means the same thing for everyone, so not sure its a good term. Netanyahu's (or if some wish, Boehner's, or Adelson's) move is bad not in as much as it undercuts the current USA negotiation efforts, but as making the partisan divide in USA politics even worse, and as being detrimental to long term Israeli interests. It is sheer hubris to imagine that Netanyahu's rhetoric will be key in effecting the outcome of the talks.

What I was getting at, though, was that even such instances can be used by the USA negotiation team to leverage the Iranian side (with no contradiction to being upset with Netnayahu) - "Guys, we really wanna make this work, but you see how things are with Congress and that Netanyahu, give us something to show the folks back home". Very crude way of putting it, for sure, but just to get the idea across.

[Morch]

I do not think anyone (publicly, at least) have a clear idea of how close Iran is to developing nuclear warhead capability. Doesn't mean that there is no threat, or that the two other threat components are not bad enough by themselves, but no need to get too carried away with scaremongering. Its a wee bit more complicated than stuffing da bomb inside the tip of a rocket.

This exact same scaremongering has been going on for over a decade now.

Each time more news or pressure is applied it is usually a card played to either divert attention

from something worse or score election points.

Anyone can search & see the stories from 2005 or before

Well, not all of it is scaremongering. Iran could be pretty close to developing a nuclear device, and a delivery system, so the threat is real. My point was simply that the last bit, a marriage between bomb and missile is, if reports are to be believed, a bit farther off issue. That Netanyahu also uses this, constantly, as an election crutch, sure - less certain how that is received by now.

[mania]

What I was getting at, though, was that even such instances can be used by the USA negotiation team to leverage the Iranian side (with no contradiction to being upset with Netnayahu) - "Guys, we really wanna make this work, but you see how things are with Congress and that Netanyahu, give us something to show the folks back home". Very crude way of putting it, for sure, but just to get the idea across.

I agree but at the same time it seems to me anyway it is never enough...for Israel

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction

In 2012, sixteen U.S. intelligence agencies, including the CIA, reported that Iran was pursuing research that could enable it to produce nuclear weapons, but was not attempting to do so.

The senior officers of all of the major American intelligence agencies stated that there was no conclusive evidence that Iran has made any attempt to produce nuclear weapons since 2003

And before the chorus of...Oh but they are so much closer now starts...I will say if Israel acts alone & decides to

unprovoked other than their own claims bomb a sovereign nation then they deserve what they get from it.

You earlier mentioned if not the US who could they turn to? Russia, China?

I think if they did such a thing both Russia & China would side with Iran

Sadly that leaves the country I hold a passport to once again in the unenviable position they are even now in.

I am not saying throw Israel under the bus but make it clear to THAT side also where the lines are drawn & who has always

stood by them even when counterproductive to our own country & no other super power would.

Edited February 8, 2015 by mania

[sirineou]

Well, not as if the Iranians themselves aren't speaking with more than one voice on these issues. Some of their disagreements are genuine, some played for better bargaining positions. Same can be applied for the USA - not hard to imagine how the whole Netanyahu speech could be played in this context.

Sure, many voices in the US and more than one in Iran, but I think we all agree that undercutting the moderate voices, in the US or in Iran is not a desirable goal

*posts removed to allow reply*

I don't know that "moderate" always means the same thing for everyone, so not sure its a good term. Netanyahu's (or if some wish, Boehner's, or Adelson's) move is bad not in as much as it undercuts the current USA negotiation efforts, but as making the partisan divide in USA politics even worse, and as being detrimental to long term Israeli interests. It is sheer hubris to imagine that Netanyahu's rhetoric will be key in effecting the outcome of the talks.

What I was getting at, though, was that even such instances can be used by the USA negotiation team to leverage the Iranian side (with no contradiction to being upset with Netnayahu) - "Guys, we really wanna make this work, but you see how things are with Congress and that Netanyahu, give us something to show the folks back home". Very crude way of putting it, for sure, but just to get the idea across.

Post removed to allow reply.

Sure, generic terms are only useful for generalizations

I dont pretend to really know the game played. I just offer an opinion, it is conceivable that am wrong and if I am it will not be the first time.

I think this invitation of Natanyahu is a message to the Iranians that Obama is a lame duck, and anything he negotiates,

would not be implemented when he is gone. This in my opinion would give the moderated in the Iranian side pause for thought, should they stick their neck out or should they wait and see how things play out in the US.

They are simply undercutting Obama's position.

[Jingthing]

Even worse case scenario, whatever that was, that was a long time ago. Now the USA is close friends with Germany and Japan ... and really get real has never been at war with Israel (and never will be).

Back to topic. Obsession with the Liberty incident is totally idiotic and totally irrelevant.

[Publicus]

Perhaps they should listen to what he has to say first. There's plenty of time to get angry afterwards.

I don't think they are angry about what he has to say, but about the processes used to invite him to speak.

but I like your suggestion, is that a policy we should apply to all world leaders or just Israeli?

The three branches of government are separate but equal.

Congress has the right to invite whomever they wish to address their body. Why should they get the permission of the Executive Branch to invite a speaker?

Using your logic, the Judicial Branch might need to request input from the Legislative Branch as to which cases the SCOTUS should hear.

Following that same train of thought, the Executive Branch perhaps should have consulted the Judicial Branch to see if the many Executive Orders and Memoranda were Constitutional before the President signed them.

None of that happened nor is it required.

We've been over this point repeatedly but the right sector politicians don't get it, can't get it.

The Congress is free to invite anyone it wants to speak before it. That is not an issue, this is not the issue.

The only issue is that the president is in charge of foreign policy. It says so in the constitution and the Supreme Court has said it says so in the constitution.

The Congress has invited the leader of a foreign government to speak formally before it in a joint session of the House and the Senate in direct opposition to the foreign policy of the United States.

Making the matter worse, the foreign PM will not be on an official state visit to the United States. Making matters yet worse, the president was not consulted in the invitation or in the nature of the foreign PM's address to the Congress.

The Congress is not authorized, empowered, enabled, to have its own foreign policy.

These facts are the separation of powers.

[chuckd]

Yeah, I know since you have made that same exact post too many times already.

Have one of your alleged sources seen a copy of Netanyahu's speech? Maybe he's going to try and sell Tel Aviv as a resort location.

To the best of my knowledge nobody on this forum has any idea what he might address in his speech...and we won't know until he delivers it.

The fact remains Boehner had every constitutional right to invite him to speak and he has every right to deliver that speech.

Obama's got his panties in a twist about being slighted so he throws a temper tantrum reminiscent of a ten year old.

End of story.

Edited February 8, 2015 by chuckd

[sirineou]

Yeah, I know since you have made that same exact post too many times already.

Have one of your alleged sources seen a copy of Netanyahu's speech? Maybe he's going to try and sell Tel Aviv as a resort location.

To the best of my knowledge nobody on this forum has any idea what he might address in his speech...and we won't know until he delivers it.

The fact remains Boehner had every constitutional right to invite him to speak and he has every right to deliver that speech.

Obama's got his panties in a twist about being slighted so he throws a temper tantrum reminiscent of a ten year old.

End of story.

the content of Netanyahus speech is irrelevant, we are all very aware of his agenda, it is his agenda that is relevant

would we not abject to Ahmanidejan addressing the congress because we would not know the content of his speech?

Maybe he would try to sell beach front property in Iran?

we know his agenda and that's enough for as.

[up-country_sinclair]

I hate to say it, but this is yet another "win" that Republicans have handed to President Obama. You know he's smiling every time he opens a newspaper or turns on the TV because it's all about Netanyahu and Speaker Boehner and whether or not what they're doing is acceptable. I wouldn't be surprised at all if his poll numbers go higher in the days and weeks to come. And now that Netanyahu has seen the writing on the wall and decided to throw the Speaker under the bus, the President is probably holding his sides from laughing so hard.

When are Republicans going to learn that they need to focus on jobs, trade deals and genuine infrastructure projects if they want the American public to support them?. This whole thing reeks of "politics as usual", and in my opinion, the American people are more than tired of that.

And by the way, I have to admit that I am surprised at how many American posters on this thread have revealed themselves to be "Israel-firsters".

Edited February 8, 2015 by up-country_sinclair

[Publicus]

This stuff about waiting to hear what he will say is baloney no matter how the right wing and the Republicans they control in the Congress slice it.

We'll see if the heat gets strong enuff for Bibi to find something else that's pressing on the day, March 3rd. Or maybe he will speak and try to sell waterfront property on the West Bank instead.

This fiasco is further proof John Boehner is the worst speaker in history, an unmitigated disaster from the ridiculous government shutdown to the absurd 50-something votes against Obamacare to his frivolous lawsuits against the president instead of legislating and so much more. Boehner can only aspire to mediocrity as the leader of his party in the House and as speaker.

Boehner is a ringmaster, not a speaker of the House.

Anti-Defamation League Urges Benjamin Netanyahu To Cancel Congress Speech

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is scheduled to speak before Congress on March 3, but there's a growing chorus of voices calling on him to cancel the appearance. The latest organization to issue this call? The Anti-Defamation League, a U.S.-based international organization dedicated to fighting anti-Semitism.

Abrahm Foxman, the group's national director and a leading voice in the Jewish community, told The Jewish Daily Forward that the controversy over Netanyahu's speech is unhelpful. He added that Netanyahu should stay home.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/07/anti-defamation-league-netanyahu_n_6636420.html

[Jingthing]

If this speculation is true, it certainly thickens the plot.

The American President and his Democratic Party have disclosed recalcitrance to meet Netanyahu and be in the audience of his speech. This is forcing Netanyahu into a corner. Netanyahu may perceive that his only option is a military strike of the nuclear sites of Iran. President Obama has previously stated that Israel has the right to defend itself. So Netanyahu may address Congress to inform them of the forthcoming strike. He may offer the ultimatum, “either you the Americans do it, or we the Israeli’s will do it.” He may even be there to explain it after it has taken place.

http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/israel-is-poised-to-strike-iran/

[NeverSure]

Can You explain why USA needs Israel ? And by the USA, I mean taxpayers not religious nuts or shareholders.

I don't understand your point.

Sometimes you do something just because it's the right thing to do and not because you "need" anything, right? OK, maybe you don't but some of us do.

[metisdead]

Off topic posts and replies have been removed.

[beechguy]

I hate to say it, but this is yet another "win" that Republicans have handed to President Obama. You know he's smiling every time he opens a newspaper or turns on the TV because it's all about Netanyahu and Speaker Boehner and whether or not what they're doing is acceptable. I wouldn't be surprised at all if his poll numbers go higher in the days and weeks to come. And now that Netanyahu has seen the writing on the wall and decided to throw the Speaker under the bus, the President is probably holding his sides from laughing so hard.

When are Republicans going to learn that they need to focus on jobs, trade deals and genuine infrastructure projects if they want the American public to support them?. This whole thing reeks of "politics as usual", and in my opinion, the American people are more than tired of that.

And by the way, I have to admit that I am surprised at how many American posters on this thread have revealed themselves to be "Israel-firsters".

It may be the other way around. If the Democrats are this concerned about a speech, how worried would they be, if Obama took some meaningful action, such as reducing or removing aid from Israel? Obama's got nothing.

[Naam]

Bibi is coming to discuss the danger posed by Iran. I for 1 am a little sick of obama pandering to the mad mullahs.

Bibi plans to present his usual boring BS

[webfact]

related topic:

Israeli leader faces pressure to cancel US Congress speech
By JOSEF FEDERMAN

JERUSALEM (AP) — A national leader's appearance before the U.S. Congress is usually a source of pride and unity. But Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's planned trip to Washington — opposed by the White House and many Democrats — has Israel in uproar.

Full story: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/798758-israeli-leader-faces-pressure-to-cancel-us-congress-speech/