The president of the United States is looking after the national security interests of the United States.

Iraq is off topic but in passing to say the US needed to withdraw all forces because the Iraqi government would not agree to the requisite Status of Forces Agreement of US forces there.

There is no 10-year deal at this point in time because rumors are not facts. The P5+1 and Iran are continuing to negotiate.

“The policy is Iran will not get a nuclear weapon,” Secretary of State John Kerry said earlier Tuesday. “And anybody running around right now, jumping in to say, well, we

don’t like the deal, or this or that, doesn’t know what the deal is. There is no deal yet.”

| The Times of Israel http://www.timesofisrael.com/white-house-denies-10-year-freeze-deal-in-works-with-iran/#ixzz3T7CaKIkp

People opposed to a negotiated agreement offer no peaceful alternative course of action. The opposition to a P5+1 and Iranian nuclear agreement want to stop the negotiations, end them, terminate the negotiations. Yet those opposed to negotiations have no alternative plan they have said would lead to a peaceful resolution of nuclear power and energy in Iran.

The people opposed to a negotiated agreement have no alternative to it. Certainly not a peaceful alternative to a negotiated agreement. What is the peaceful alternative to no negotiated agreement? What is the alternative to a negotiated agreement?? If there's no negotiated agreement, then what???

The president of the United States is looking after the national security interests of the United States.

So naive if you really believe that!

You can't negotiate with someone who has no intention of abiding by any agreement. Interesting that while Obuma is negotiating with Iran, Iran was busy blowing up a mockup american aircraft carrier. Iran still thinks of the USA as the great satan.

Do you really let people like that attain nuclear capablities?

The peaceful alternative to ending negotiations without an agreement is.........

...................................................................................................................................................

.........................................................................................................................................................................................

The president of the United States is looking after the national security interests of the United States.

Iraq is off topic but in passing to say the US needed to withdraw all forces because the Iraqi government would not agree to the requisite Status of Forces Agreement of US forces there.

There is no 10-year deal at this point in time because rumors are not facts. The P5+1 and Iran are continuing to negotiate.

“The policy is Iran will not get a nuclear weapon,” Secretary of State John Kerry said earlier Tuesday. “And anybody running around right now, jumping in to say, well, we

don’t like the deal, or this or that, doesn’t know what the deal is. There is no deal yet.”

| The Times of Israel http://www.timesofisrael.com/white-house-denies-10-year-freeze-deal-in-works-with-iran/#ixzz3T7CaKIkp

People opposed to a negotiated agreement offer no peaceful alternative course of action. The opposition to a P5+1 and Iranian nuclear agreement want to stop the negotiations, end them, terminate the negotiations. Yet those opposed to negotiations have no alternative plan they have said would lead to a peaceful resolution of nuclear power and energy in Iran.

The people opposed to a negotiated agreement have no alternative to it. Certainly not a peaceful alternative to a negotiated agreement. What is the peaceful alternative to no negotiated agreement? What is the alternative to a negotiated agreement?? If there's no negotiated agreement, then what???

The president of the United States is looking after the national security interests of the United States.

So naive if you really believe that!

You can't negotiate with someone who has no intention of abiding by any agreement. Interesting that while Obuma is negotiating with Iran, Iran was busy blowing up a mockup american aircraft carrier. Iran still thinks of the USA as the great satan.

Do you really let people like that attain nuclear capablities?

Who can blame the Iranians when the USA has left all options on the table to destroy their nuclear program, with Netanyahu urging them on to do so in Congress. They’d be stupid not to plan for that contingency.

The USA’s so called most loyal ally in the Middle East, Israel, has repeatedly spied on USA and hasn’t just fired on mock up US warships, the Israelis have treacherously attacked a real US warship killing 34 US service personnel and injuring 171.

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

http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/specialseries/2014/10/day-israel-attacked-america-20141028144946266462.html

And ironically, the whitewash investigations into that attack never got as far as Congress where Netanyahu is headed next week, determined to undermine Obama and lead USA into yet another unnecessary war.

With friends like Israel, who needs enemies?

If Israel attacked Iran that could very well be the catalyst for the moderate Muslims to unit and to go hell bent. If you think ISIS is a problem now, wait till that happens.

The rulers of the ME arab countries (except Lebanon and Assad-Syria) dont mind Iran getting attacked as long as there wont be any blowbacks in their countries.

ISIS&Co. would love to see Iran being attacked by "the infidels".

Obama is the weakest President of modern times and did not have the practical experience or common sense required for the job.

His lack of common sense again shows through.

Anything that weakens the pro-Israel lobby in Washington is to be welcomed and applauded.

Well this will likely weaken the Israeli position. Foreign powers messing in a domestic situation is not going to sit well with the US public, I think. Questioning the trustworthiness of Obama may be justified, but questioning Netanyahu is positively necessary. He is asking the US to do its dirty work.

At this juncture in time, the US has a lot to lose and Israel has nothing to lose.

The Obama administration leaked the agreement for Israeli jets to be stationed in Azerbaijan, which is far closer to the Iranian nuclear facilities, this wasn't the only leak that compromised Israeli unilateral action. Yet the Whitehouse then had the Gall to call Netanyahu 'Chicken shit' for not attacking them. You can't have it both ways, the rift between Obama and Netanyahu was as inevitable as it was constructive based on the actions of the Obama administration.

Congress has many domestic avenues for opposing Obama, that they chose to invite Netanyahu to speak shows how seriously they view the Iranian threat, which is something that seems to completely elude the president.

When on Tuesday the new Republican-Likud party Senator from Israel addresses the joint session of the Congress which is held in the House Chamber, it is likely he will speak against the P5+1 and Iran negotiations that have been ongoing since 2012 and which appear to be near a mutually agreeable conclusion among the negotiating parties.

The Senator from Israel will likely want new and more sanctions. He's likely to say no agreement is better than a "bad" agreement.

Whether he does these things or not, Netanyahu will need to offer a peaceful alternative to the terminated negotiations he is relentless in pursuing to the end of the earth.

Has anyone who wants the negotiations killed proposed a peaceful alternative to them?

What is the peaceful alternative to a termination of the P5+1 and Iran negotiations if they were to be terminated?

What is the alternative course of action that offers a realistic prospect of a peaceful resolution of the Iran nuclear issues?

Off-topic post and replies removed.

Obama is the weakest President of modern times and did not have the practical experience or common sense required for the job.

His lack of common sense again shows through.

Weak as in not a war monger?

Weak as in not wanting to rule the world?

[

The president of the United States is looking after the national security interests of the United States.

So naive if you really believe that!

You can't negotiate with someone who has no intention of abiding by any agreement. Interesting that while Obuma is negotiating with Iran, Iran was busy blowing up a mockup american aircraft carrier. Iran still thinks of the USA as the great satan.

Do you really let people like that attain nuclear capablities?

Not if you have any common sense. At best. Obama wants to hold off Iran from developing nukes until he is out of office and then pretend that it is a foreign policy "success."

Weak as in walking softly and carrying a limp stick.

[

The president of the United States is looking after the national security interests of the United States.

So naive if you really believe that!

You can't negotiate with someone who has no intention of abiding by any agreement. Interesting that while Obuma is negotiating with Iran, Iran was busy blowing up a mockup american aircraft carrier. Iran still thinks of the USA as the great satan.

Do you really let people like that attain nuclear capablities?

Not if you have any common sense. At best. Obama wants to hold off Iran from developing nukes until he is out of office and then pretend that it is a foreign policy "success."

And therein is your answer.

Obama only wants to kick the can down the road for two more years.

The problem will still be there but he just won't have to deal with it. The Iranians are fine with that arrangement.

If your name is Barrack Hussein Obama...you do not have a lot of love for Israel...

Netanyahu is fighting for the survival of his little country nestled between hostile Muslim states...

Obama is fighting to keep the truth of the defunct nuclear deal with Iran under the radar...good luck with that...

Weak as in walking softly and carrying a limp stick.

Doesn't really look as if he's carrying a limp stick.

Have you ever seen his golf swing? Yeah, I thought not.

[

The president of the United States is looking after the national security interests of the United States.

So naive if you really believe that!

You can't negotiate with someone who has no intention of abiding by any agreement. Interesting that while Obuma is negotiating with Iran, Iran was busy blowing up a mockup american aircraft carrier. Iran still thinks of the USA as the great satan.

Do you really let people like that attain nuclear capablities?

Not if you have any common sense. At best. Obama wants to hold off Iran from developing nukes until he is out of office and then pretend that it is a foreign policy "success."

Any ten year deal wouldn't last three seeing as Saudi Arabia would see it for what it is and try to obtain its own bomb ahead of Iran, who would in turn get wind of this and break any agreement. 100% watertight and verifiably so or else don't bother.

Weak as in walking softly and carrying a limp stick.

Doesn't really look as if he's carrying a limp stick.

Photoshopped or staged

Prez Obama and the world know Netanyahu and the hard-liners in Israel, Iran, the US have no peaceful alternative to the P5+1 negotiations with Iran, that if the negotiations fail or are forced to terminate, a peace vacuum would occur and the president and the world know war abhors a vacuum.

"The White House was furious when Netanyahu's government defied Obama and announced plans to construct new housing units in East Jerusalem while Biden was visiting Israel in 2010. Additional housing plans that year upended U.S. efforts to restart peace talks between the Israelis and Palestinians."

I have said this before but herein lies the crux of the problem. I believe the dislocation of Palestinians to build these settlements has been the single biggest hindrance to any possible peaceful settlement of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. The Israelis just keep taking land and building settlements on it. They have done it in the face of administrations both Republican and Democrat suggesting that they don't do it. They have continually defied world opinion in this matter as if they are some kind of rogue state. Then they expect the US to continue with its 3 billion dollars in aid per year and expect sympathy from the world always wanting us to remember the holocaust. They are dead wrong on the settlement issue and the US and world should once and for all tell them so.

While I am no fan of Obama as I think he is over his head in international and domestic issues, I give him some credit on the Israel issue. I would not have been as diplomatic in my relations with Israel. I am interested to hear what Netanyahu has to say. However, as the same time if I was Obama and felt it was necessary, I would then give a nationwide speech rebutting what I thought to be necessary. Let the American people hear both sides and make a decision. All too often the American public is out of the loop on these issues.

anyone who doesn't think that Israel already has airspace rights over Saudi Arabia and or Jordan to attack Iran are not paying attention to the realities on the ground

Anything that weakens the pro-Israel lobby in Washington is to be welcomed and applauded.

Well this will likely weaken the Israeli position. Foreign powers messing in a domestic situation is not going to sit well with the US public, I think. Questioning the trustworthiness of Obama may be justified, but questioning Netanyahu is positively necessary. He is asking the US to do its dirty work.

At this juncture in time, the US has a lot to lose and Israel has nothing to lose.

The Obama administration leaked the agreement for Israeli jets to be stationed in Azerbaijan, which is far closer to the Iranian nuclear facilities, this wasn't the only leak that compromised Israeli unilateral action. Yet the Whitehouse then had the Gall to call Netanyahu 'Chicken shit' for not attacking them. You can't have it both ways, the rift between Obama and Netanyahu was as inevitable as it was constructive based on the actions of the Obama administration.

Congress has many domestic avenues for opposing Obama, that they chose to invite Netanyahu to speak shows how seriously they view the Iranian threat, which is something that seems to completely elude the president.

When on Tuesday the new Republican-Likud party Senator from Israel addresses the joint session of the Congress which is held in the House Chamber, it is likely he will speak against the P5+1 and Iran negotiations that have been ongoing since 2012 and which appear to be near a mutually agreeable conclusion among the negotiating parties.

The Senator from Israel will likely want new and more sanctions. He's likely to say no agreement is better than a "bad" agreement.

Whether he does these things or not, Netanyahu will need to offer a peaceful alternative to the terminated negotiations he is relentless in pursuing to the end of the earth.

Has anyone who wants the negotiations killed proposed a peaceful alternative to them?

What is the peaceful alternative to a termination of the P5+1 and Iran negotiations if they were to be terminated?

What is the alternative course of action that offers a realistic prospect of a peaceful resolution of the Iran nuclear issues?

if yours was a legitimate question and not rhetorical I will answer it for you

the Iranian military as its senior al-quds command are currently being engaged in Syria and Iraq.

theIranians are taking substantial losses in and around the Lebanese border.

They already lost two generals near the Golan border.

ISIS, which nobody wants to admit is comprised of many of the senior military commanders of Saddam Hussein's army, they fought a bitter war with Iran in the eighties that they have not forgotten.

seeing the Iranian Shiite government take over Baghdad has had their blood boiling since the US interfered.

Israel has its foreign policy being very well executed right now by the United States.

Egypt doesn't even take Obama or john kerrys phone calls.

within the next 48 hours will be at war in Libya and also Gaza.

Egypt and general forces loyal to Mar Mar Khadafi are about to join hands and defeat Isis in those areas.

Iran is already forced to import troops from Pakistan to help fight Isis in Syria Lebanon and the Golan.

the world is already actively engaged in the World War 3 and Vlamir Putin has barely budged.

the leader of Israel is addressing a joint session of Congress prior to the United States becoming engaged in full scale war.

I think there are some people here maybe don't understand that is the Congress of the United States who declares war and not the president.

we are on the brink of that declaration

When enough people of the world step away from Netanyahu’s distracting warmongering to focus on the human suffering his actions are creating in occupied Palestine, the power balance will shift. That development is long overdue.

Like Bibi, I don't have any confidence Obama is going to get a deal with Iran. But Bibi still messed things up with U.S relations and that's on him.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-so-wrong-in-confronting-obama-so-right-on-iran/

Op-ed: With the US-Israel train wreck unavoidable on Tuesday, the challenge now is to pick up the pieces and refocus on thwarting Tehran

When enough people of the world step away from Netanyahu’s distracting warmongering to focus on the human suffering his actions are creating in occupied Palestine, the power balance will shift. That development is long overdue.

Have you ever been to Gaza?

Do you know there are wealthy areas, shopping malls, gated communities, and many well to do people?

you just watch a few films of British or Al-Jazeera photo's from slums?

the greatest cities of the world have slums, no one will lift a finger to help them,

when Egypt sends laser guided missles and tank shells into gaza in the coming weeks, sparing no one,

will you stand up for the "poor people of gaza" then?

Well this will likely weaken the Israeli position. Foreign powers messing in a domestic situation is not going to sit well with the US public, I think. Questioning the trustworthiness of Obama may be justified, but questioning Netanyahu is positively necessary. He is asking the US to do its dirty work.

At this juncture in time, the US has a lot to lose and Israel has nothing to lose.

The Obama administration leaked the agreement for Israeli jets to be stationed in Azerbaijan, which is far closer to the Iranian nuclear facilities, this wasn't the only leak that compromised Israeli unilateral action. Yet the Whitehouse then had the Gall to call Netanyahu 'Chicken shit' for not attacking them. You can't have it both ways, the rift between Obama and Netanyahu was as inevitable as it was constructive based on the actions of the Obama administration.

Congress has many domestic avenues for opposing Obama, that they chose to invite Netanyahu to speak shows how seriously they view the Iranian threat, which is something that seems to completely elude the president.

When on Tuesday the new Republican-Likud party Senator from Israel addresses the joint session of the Congress which is held in the House Chamber, it is likely he will speak against the P5+1 and Iran negotiations that have been ongoing since 2012 and which appear to be near a mutually agreeable conclusion among the negotiating parties.

The Senator from Israel will likely want new and more sanctions. He's likely to say no agreement is better than a "bad" agreement.

Whether he does these things or not, Netanyahu will need to offer a peaceful alternative to the terminated negotiations he is relentless in pursuing to the end of the earth.

Has anyone who wants the negotiations killed proposed a peaceful alternative to them?

What is the peaceful alternative to a termination of the P5+1 and Iran negotiations if they were to be terminated?

What is the alternative course of action that offers a realistic prospect of a peaceful resolution of the Iran nuclear issues?

if yours was a legitimate question and not rhetorical I will answer it for you

the Iranian military as its senior al-quds command are currently being engaged in Syria and Iraq.

theIranians are taking substantial losses in and around the Lebanese border.

They already lost two generals near the Golan border.

ISIS, which nobody wants to admit is comprised of many of the senior military commanders of Saddam Hussein's army, they fought a bitter war with Iran in the eighties that they have not forgotten.

seeing the Iranian Shiite government take over Baghdad has had their blood boiling since the US interfered.

Israel has its foreign policy being very well executed right now by the United States.

Egypt doesn't even take Obama or john kerrys phone calls.

within the next 48 hours will be at war in Libya and also Gaza.

Egypt and general forces loyal to Mar Mar Khadafi are about to join hands and defeat Isis in those areas.

Iran is already forced to import troops from Pakistan to help fight Isis in Syria Lebanon and the Golan.

the world is already actively engaged in the World War 3 and Vlamir Putin has barely budged.

the leader of Israel is addressing a joint session of Congress prior to the United States becoming engaged in full scale war.

I think there are some people here maybe don't understand that is the Congress of the United States who declares war and not the president.

we are on the brink of that declaration

That leaves a lot of documenting yet to be done as the ex cathedra approach to pronouncements is reserved for positions such as pope but even he too has to issue his own Bull. The post for instance does not specify Iran, ISIL, Russia, everyone, or whomever.

News bulletin RE: I think there are some people here maybe don't understand that is the Congress of the United States who declares war and not the president.

That is pollysci 101 but it's actually learned in middle school and retaught in high school just for a good measure. You know, the Congress only can declare war but the President is the Commander in Chief and all of that ordinary knowledge.

However, focusing on the Congress and its sole power to formally declare war, nothing in the Constitution says the President must implement the war declaration of the Congress. The President can ignore the declaration because he is the Commander in Chief and as such signs orders raising and deploying troops, names military commanders, defines theatres of war directs and manages all necessary war fighting resources.

No President has ever ignored any of the eleven official declarations of war made by the Congress, but that does not say at all it cannot be done. It can be done.

The President, as Commander in Chief, can say he is deploying the armed forces in their present positions and has ordered all US forces everywhere to hold their fire. The President can advise Congress this is his best war strategy and tactics.

The President very simply does not have to implement or execute the war declaration of the Congress. That is why in each of the eleven instances Congress has formally declared war, it has done so only after the president has made a formal request to the Congress to declare war. Woodrow Wilson and FDR actually appeared before an emergency joint session to present the case for war..

The Congress can impeach and try the President but only if it is willing to take the time and the effort involved, and needless to say, if it has the support of the public, the media, civil society etc etc. Given that impeachment and trial in the Senate is inherently a political question, the chief justice could choose not to preside, thus further complicating matters if he should make that decision. The Cabinet would out of loyalty be unlikely to remove the president under the disability provisions of the 25th Amendment....given the IT presidency a president could easily dispel any such allegation anyway.

Congress can stop funding the operations of the White House, however, the President can raise private funds to operate the Executive Office of the President which includes everything in, about, related to and connected to the Office of the Presidency. The Congress can pass a law prohibiting that but that too can be circumvented by the EXOTP borrowing from the Fed which, while itself a private corporation, exists under the Federal Reserve Act which provides it its well recognized independence that translates into a great amount of Congressional immunity.

Lots of documenting to be done to support the post, yes indeed.

When enough people of the world step away from Netanyahu’s distracting warmongering to focus on the human suffering his actions are creating in occupied Palestine, the power balance will shift. That development is long overdue.

Have you ever been to Gaza?

Do you know there are wealthy areas, shopping malls, gated communities, and many well to do people?

you just watch a few films of British or Al-Jazeera photo's from slums?

the greatest cities of the world have slums, no one will lift a finger to help them,

when Egypt sends laser guided missles and tank shells into gaza in the coming weeks, sparing no one,

will you stand up for the "poor people of gaza" then?

This thread has nothing to do with Gaza. It is about USA-Israel relations and the Iran nukes program.

The president of the United States is looking after the national security interests of the United States.

Iraq is off topic but in passing to say the US needed to withdraw all forces because the Iraqi government would not agree to the requisite Status of Forces Agreement of US forces there.

There is no 10-year deal at this point in time because rumors are not facts. The P5+1 and Iran are continuing to negotiate.

“The policy is Iran will not get a nuclear weapon,” Secretary of State John Kerry said earlier Tuesday. “And anybody running around right now, jumping in to say, well, we

don’t like the deal, or this or that, doesn’t know what the deal is. There is no deal yet.”

| The Times of Israel http://www.timesofisrael.com/white-house-denies-10-year-freeze-deal-in-works-with-iran/#ixzz3T7CaKIkp

People opposed to a negotiated agreement offer no peaceful alternative course of action. The opposition to a P5+1 and Iranian nuclear agreement want to stop the negotiations, end them, terminate the negotiations. Yet those opposed to negotiations have no alternative plan they have said would lead to a peaceful resolution of nuclear power and energy in Iran.

The people opposed to a negotiated agreement have no alternative to it. Certainly not a peaceful alternative to a negotiated agreement. What is the peaceful alternative to no negotiated agreement? What is the alternative to a negotiated agreement?? If there's no negotiated agreement, then what???

The president of the United States is looking after the national security interests of the United States.

So naive if you really believe that!

You can't negotiate with someone who has no intention of abiding by any agreement. Interesting that while Obuma is negotiating with Iran, Iran was busy blowing up a mockup american aircraft carrier. Iran still thinks of the USA as the great satan.

Do you really let people like that attain nuclear capablities?

The peaceful alternative to ending negotiations without an agreement is.........

...................................................................................................................................................

.........................................................................................................................................................................................

It is noted that my above post remains blank in the areas where the posters who want the negotiations to terminate without an agreement are supposed to write in their alternative peaceful path to a nuclear Iran.

The people who support Netyanhu in opposing the negotiations have no peaceful alternative plan to deal with a nuclear Iran.

So, again, the peaceful alternative plan to failed negotiations or to negotiations terminated without an agreement is to ___________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________.

-snip-

It is noted that my above post remains blank in the areas where the posters who want the negotiations to terminate without an agreement are supposed to write in their alternative peaceful path to a nuclear Iran.

The people who support Netyanhu in opposing the negotiations have no peaceful alternative plan to deal with a nuclear Iran.

So, again, the peaceful alternative plan to failed negotiations or to negotiations terminated without an agreement is to ___________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________.

The peaceful solution is to put embargoes on Iran and let them eat sand and use sand as toilet paper until they allow the UN complete inspections of their nuclear program.

Then if Iran is found to be working on a nuclear bomb, disable, destroy and get it out of there.

Iran has long been known to support Islamic terrorists and the last thing the world needs in for Iran to have a bomb. If they get it, other countries will get it and the whole world will be in danger. You'll notice it isn't just the West that these Islamists attack. They attack each other and that could spill over to the West.

I can't believe how some people including Obama don't take this neanderthal Iranian government seriously.

Time for American Jews to decide if country or religion comes first.

I see no alternative answers or solutions involving peace coming from the Bibi camp which of course is unsurprising but also very telling how far removed from being interested in any peaceful solution Israel currently is.

On Teusday Bibi will spit and spew his usual BS rhetoric .. maybe even show another childish and stupid roadrunner bomb cartoon for effect and impact ,hopefully come March this clown will be out on his ass and Israel gets a decent leader for a change.

-snip-

It is noted that my above post remains blank in the areas where the posters who want the negotiations to terminate without an agreement are supposed to write in their alternative peaceful path to a nuclear Iran.

The people who support Netyanhu in opposing the negotiations have no peaceful alternative plan to deal with a nuclear Iran.

So, again, the peaceful alternative plan to failed negotiations or to negotiations terminated without an agreement is to ___________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________.

The peaceful solution is to put embargoes on Iran and let them eat sand and use sand as toilet paper until they allow the UN complete inspections of their nuclear program.

Then if Iran is found to be working on a nuclear bomb, disable, destroy and get it out of there.

Iran has long been known to support Islamic terrorists and the last thing the world needs in for Iran to have a bomb. If they get it, other countries will get it and the whole world will be in danger. You'll notice it isn't just the West that these Islamists attack. They attack each other and that could spill over to the West.

I can't believe how some people including Obama don't take this neanderthal Iranian government seriously.

All well and good and you'll need to talk to Bibi.

He's the one who needs to get it between the eyes with a 2x4 so I'm nominating you which is my pleasure to do cause I couldn't agree with you more (except for the last sentence ).

Exactly the kind of alternative needed, but the post would look very good in the final agreement besides, or especially and in particular.

Finally, someone comes forward who is not just hollering and hollering.

Bibi owns America

Quote "Congressmen of both parties have grovelled and fainted and shrieked their support for Bibi and his predecessors with more enthusiasm that the Roman hordes in the Colosseum".

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-difference-between-america-and-israel-there-isnt-one-10078658.html

"The White House was furious when Netanyahu's government defied Obama and announced plans to construct new housing units in East Jerusalem while Biden was visiting Israel in 2010. Additional housing plans that year upended U.S. efforts to restart peace talks between the Israelis and Palestinians."

I have said this before but herein lies the crux of the problem. I believe the dislocation of Palestinians to build these settlements has been the single biggest hindrance to any possible peaceful settlement of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. The Israelis just keep taking land and building settlements on it. They have done it in the face of administrations both Republican and Democrat suggesting that they don't do it. They have continually defied world opinion in this matter as if they are some kind of rogue state. Then they expect the US to continue with its 3 billion dollars in aid per year and expect sympathy from the world always wanting us to remember the holocaust. They are dead wrong on the settlement issue and the US and world should once and for all tell them so.

While I am no fan of Obama as I think he is over his head in international and domestic issues, I give him some credit on the Israel issue. I would not have been as diplomatic in my relations with Israel. I am interested to hear what Netanyahu has to say. However, as the same time if I was Obama and felt it was necessary, I would then give a nationwide speech rebutting what I thought to be necessary. Let the American people hear both sides and make a decision. All too often the American public is out of the loop on these issues.

Obama as I think he is over his head in international and domestic issues.

Obama makes up for his lack of experience and diplomacy in international affairs by demonizing other heads of state, refusing to work with the US Congress, and making unilateral domestic decisions to promote his own dark agenda...what a guy!