Obama, Netanyahu on collision course 6 years in the making

[daveAustin]

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.

I hope they do. The world is a mess and it could do with kicking off about now; drawing in China and India to conveniently lose at least 70% of their respective populaces (along with obligatory loss of you-know-who) to give the earth and humanity a chance. But, seriously, I guess one would really need to be an Israeli to know where these guys are coming from. To have nutcases gone by try to completely eradicate your kind, then face the same threat from a nut-job country trying to seek nuclear weapons in the present only to see your best mate attempt to appease your number one enemy would no doubt put you on edge.

[Publicus]

BREAKING: These Black Pastors Just Teamed Up to DEFY Barack Obama

A group of well-respected black pastors just made that very clear, and strongly criticized the president and the Congressional Black Caucus for snubbing Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu.

http://conservativetribune.com/black-pastors-defy-obama/

It is consistently true over time that, plus or minus a couple of percentage points, ten percent of blacks vote Republican. This was true well before 2008, it remained true in 2012, and it is highly likely to remain true going forward.

These "well-respected black pastors" are a group who have their own political views to which they are entitled, same as the second black justice to sit on the SCOTUS Clarence 'Uncle' Thomas, who was successfully nominated by a Republican president, G.H.W. Bush.

At the CPAC conference of conservative and tea party people near Washington last week into the weekend the Republican party presidential competitors had to politically kiss the rings of some of the pastors referenced in the post. These pastors may have a certain measure of respect in their communities, but they are not politically neutral or disassociated pastors. The US political right loves 'em.

These pastors are entitled to have their own political views and their views make them comfortable to be in the conservative hard right movement in the US. Look at Condoleezza 'Mushroom Cloud' Rice, Colin Powell the political general who was brought into the White House by Prez Nixon etc etc.

BROKEN

Your insults are tiresome. And quite hypocritical.

Flattery from the far right is always welcome thx as undeserving and overcooked as it may be.

The fact remains the pastors are not politically neutral so any attempt to present them as pure and as disconnected from the conservative right fails.

[NeverSure]

Back on topic. Bibi is kicking Obama's butt, and Obama and his lemmings are too daft to see it. 24 hours from now we'll start getting some polls and Obama's Dems (who have to run for reelection) will wish he had been there to greet Bibi instead of throwing his narcissistic temper tantrum.

Americans are pro-Israel. Obama had a choice. Play nice or act like a child. He's done the latter and it's going to backfire.

[NeverSure]

Just saw this...

45 minutes ago... Gallup

"Netanyahu's Favorable Rating Improves in U.S."

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- "Ahead of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech to the U.S. Congress that has strained relations between Israel and the White House, nearly twice as many Americans view Israel's leader favorably (45%) as unfavorably (24%). Netanyahu's favorable score is up from 35% in 2012. His current favorable rating ties his highest rating among the six times Gallup has measured it, spanning his three tenures as prime minister."

Edited March 3, 2015 by NeverSure

[Thaiaddict01]

just wondering for USA's roll in vietnam war, korean war, Middle east etc. Did US get anything from those like oil or anything? or USA just did it cause it's the right thing to do for the better world?

[Publicus]

Not sure if anyone saw this article:

"Why Obama's Iran Deal is a Path to War"

http://nypost.com/2015/03/01/why-obamas-iran-deal-is-a-path-to-war/

The author of the piece in the once respected New York Post is identified in the newspaper as a member of the American Security Council, a very recently organized 501© group of hard right conservatives.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/07/groundswell-rightwing-group-ginni-thomas

Shooting the messenger is for amateurs. Obama's "deal" is a path to war and that's what has thinking people riled up.

Obama has to kick the can down the road for less than two years and then any war will all be Bush's fault. Obama doesn't have to run for reelection. He can just continue to appease his muslim buddies and then blame what happens on someone else.

Obama has lost all semblance of control in world affairs. No one respects him. Putin doesn't, China doesn't, Egypt doesn't, ISIS doesn't, Syria/Assad doesn't, Venezuela doesn't, Brazil doesn't and apparently France and Germany are beginning to view him as a more of a liability than an asset.

Obama is just trying to hang on for dear life so his little pathetic legacy as America's first black president does not go down in flames. As NS stated, this is what Obama is doing with Iran. Obama knows that Putin will step in and assist Iran if he does not do something to try and smooth the situation over. The sole reason Putin is willing to assist Iran is because Putin has absolutely no fear of Obama and knows Obama is a mouthpiece that is scared to act and will do nothing.

How much longer do we have to SURVIVE until Obama is out of office? Is it two years? Foreign affairs are disaster right now and perhaps the biggest disaster we have seen since WWII. Obama is terrified to act so he does nothing but talk and sit on the fence while things everywhere are spiraling out of control.

Ukraine is far from over. There may soon be a push by rebels to take over all areas next to the sea thereby land locking Ukraine and devastating Ukraine's economy and future. China is speaking out against Obama's handling of Ukraine and Russia. India has made negative comments about Obama's handling of Ukraine and Russia.

Obama is simply trying to keep ISIS contained in the short term, but this will spiral out of control long term. Africa is a mess and Obama's solution is to welcome with open arms and an open check book more of them in to the US.

Every single aspect of the ME is destabilizing and Putin is right in the middle now to ensure it does spiral out of control because, once again, he knows Obama is immobilized by fear and will do nothing. The only question that remains is how bad will it get and will the damage be irreversible before we get a new President.

The P5+1 negotiators with Iran represent the international community of nations that is led by President Barack Obama and the ayatollahs in Tehran know this. The Iran nuclear negotiations that began with the P5+1 in 2006 have realized great success since 2012 after several years of dormancy marked by the constant exchange of lightening bolts.

Russia for all its noise and commotion in Eurasia is committed to the UN Security Council as the central global institution for preserving international peace and security. For the same reason, Beijing is twisting the arm of the ayatollahs to say yes rather than to push them to find reasons to say no. For these reasons Russia and China are united behind Prez Obama on the Iran nuclear issue which makes the ayatollahs take notice because Prez Obama is speaking for more than Tehran's usual suspects of the US, UK, France, Germany.

Netanyahu throwing his finger up to the world isolates him and discredits the hard liners everywhere, to include all the hard liners in Iran, Moscow, the US, Beijing, Israel and at discussion boards everywhere.

The Chinese foreign minister arrived in Tehran yesterday to tell the ayatollahs to sign and stamp the deal.

China's foreign minister pushes Iran on nuclear deal

"Talks on the Iran nuclear issue face a historic opportunity, and striking a comprehensive deal on schedule is the trend of the times and the desire of the people," Wang Yi told his Iranian counterpart, according to a Chinese Foreign Ministry statement issued on Monday.

Meeting later with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, Wang said he appreciated Rouhani's pledge not to develop nuclear weapons and urged Iran to push the talks process forward. "The Iran nuclear talks have reached a crucial stage," Wang was quoted as telling Rouhani.

A deal with Iran on its controversial nuclear program would help it escape from sanctions and allow more efforts to be spent on economic development, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said during a trip to Tehran.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/02/16/us-iran-nuclear-china-idUSKBN0LK05Q20150216

While a negotiated deal has yet to be finalized, the record of more than a year of intense talks demonstrates how the common interest in ensuring that Iran does not get a nuclear bomb has forged unprecedented unity among a disparate collection of nations and the U.N. The U.S. has been a leading force, along with expected partners France, Germany and the U.K., in managing the international coalition that has brought Iran to serious negotiations over its nuclear program. But the coalition has been given its unique strength by the addition of Russia and China, powers that often challenge the international status quo, but that have in this case stood together as part of the P5+1 nations. They have seen that reaching a deal with Iran advances immediate security objectives in the broader Middle East region, as well as longer-term, global nonproliferation goals. Without the help of China and Russia – in some cases against their own immediate economic interests – the strong sanctions regime that brought Iran to the negotiating table would not be nearly as effective.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2015/02/26/iran-nuclear-talks-must-be-allowed-to-run-their-course

[NeverSure]

just wondering for USA's roll in vietnam war, korean war, Middle east etc. Did US get anything from those like oil or anything? or USA just did it cause it's the right thing to do for the better world?

The US didn't take turf or oil. That's never been the goal, even if the goal was misplaced.

[Publicus]

Just saw this...

45 minutes ago... Gallup

"Netanyahu's Favorable Rating Improves in U.S."

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- "Ahead of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech to the U.S. Congress that has strained relations between Israel and the White House, nearly twice as many Americans view Israel's leader favorably (45%) as unfavorably (24%). Netanyahu's favorable score is up from 35% in 2012. His current favorable rating ties his highest rating among the six times Gallup has measured it, spanning his three tenures as prime minister."

The Gallup poll released just now was taken February 8-11 which is more than a bit strange.

The much more recent Wall Street Journal-NBC poll that shows only 30% of Americans support Netanyahu in his latest escapades was conducted Wednesday and Thursday last week, not early last month then held for release today as Gallup has now done.

Almost half of American voters oppose Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's decision to speak before Congress this week, according to an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll released on Sunday.

Forty-eight percent said that Congressional leadership should not have invited Netanyahu to the U.S. so close to the Israeli elections, while 30 percent said the invitation was fine, and 22 percent did not have an opinion on the speech.

The poll shows a partisan split on the invitation, with 66 percent of Democrats opposing the invitation and only 28 percent of Republicans opposing.

In the most recent poll, the Prime Minister has a 30 percent positive rating, up from a 24 percent positive rating a year ago.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/netanyahu-favorability-speech

http://www.ibtimes.com/netanyahu-speech-congress-gallup-poll-finds-americans-see-israeli-prime-minister-1832870

Edited March 3, 2015 by Publicus

[Ulysses G.]

The much more recent Wall Street Journal-NBC poll that shows only 30% of Americans support Netanyahu in his latest escapades was conducted Wednesday and Thursday last week, not early last month then held for release today as Gallup has now done.

That is not what it says at all. That is what YOU say. The survey was about the way that the GOP INVITED him, not about his agreeing to speak. In fact, his poll numbers were UP from a few months ago. Please stop the incessant, dishonest spin.

Edited March 3, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[Thaiaddict01]

just wondering for USA's roll in vietnam war, korean war, Middle east etc. Did US get anything from those like oil or anything? or USA just did it cause it's the right thing to do for the better world?

The US didn't take turf or oil. That's never been the goal, even if the goal was misplaced.

Goals are to help out others, that's it huh? to prevent communism from spreading, terrorism etc. nice

[NeverSure]

The P5+1 negotiators with Iran represent the international community of nations that is led by President Barack Obama and the ayatollahs in Tehran know this. The Iran nuclear negotiations that began with the P5+1 in 2006 have realized great success since 2012 after several years of dormancy marked by the constant exchange of lightening bolts.

Russia for all its noise and commotion in Eurasia is committed to the UN Security Council as the central global institution for preserving international peace and security. For the same reason, Beijing is twisting the arm of the ayatollahs to say yes rather than to push them to find reasons to say no. For these reasons Russia and China are united behind Prez Obama on the Iran nuclear issue which makes the ayatollahs take notice because Prez Obama is speaking for more than Tehran's usual suspects of the US, UK, France, Germany.

Netanyahu throwing his finger up to the world isolates him and discredits the hard liners everywhere, to include all the hard liners in Iran, Moscow, the US, Beijing, Israel and at discussion boards everywhere.

The Chinese foreign minister arrived in Tehran yesterday to tell the ayatollahs to sign and stamp the deal.

China's foreign minister pushes Iran on nuclear deal

"Talks on the Iran nuclear issue face a historic opportunity, and striking a comprehensive deal on schedule is the trend of the times and the desire of the people," Wang Yi told his Iranian counterpart, according to a Chinese Foreign Ministry statement issued on Monday.

Meeting later with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, Wang said he appreciated Rouhani's pledge not to develop nuclear weapons and urged Iran to push the talks process forward. "The Iran nuclear talks have reached a crucial stage," Wang was quoted as telling Rouhani.

A deal with Iran on its controversial nuclear program would help it escape from sanctions and allow more efforts to be spent on economic development, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said during a trip to Tehran.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/02/16/us-iran-nuclear-china-idUSKBN0LK05Q20150216

While a negotiated deal has yet to be finalized, the record of more than a year of intense talks demonstrates how the common interest in ensuring that Iran does not get a nuclear bomb has forged unprecedented unity among a disparate collection of nations and the U.N. The U.S. has been a leading force, along with expected partners France, Germany and the U.K., in managing the international coalition that has brought Iran to serious negotiations over its nuclear program. But the coalition has been given its unique strength by the addition of Russia and China, powers that often challenge the international status quo, but that have in this case stood together as part of the P5+1 nations. They have seen that reaching a deal with Iran advances immediate security objectives in the broader Middle East region, as well as longer-term, global nonproliferation goals. Without the help of China and Russia – in some cases against their own immediate economic interests – the strong sanctions regime that brought Iran to the negotiating table would not be nearly as effective.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2015/02/26/iran-nuclear-talks-must-be-allowed-to-run-their-course

You're dreaming. Iran LOVES to TALK about TALKS. It buys Iran time and makes a sucker out of Obama. Obama has gotten NOWHERE and if he gets a deal no one can trust Iran.

Apparently you're willing to trust Iran if your hero can just cut a "deal". I'm not. I want it continuously verified which so far Iran has dodged and will continue dodging as long as Hussein Obama is at the helm.

Damn. Less than two more years of this would-be King.

[Publicus]

The much more recent Wall Street Journal-NBC poll that shows only 30% of Americans support Netanyahu in his latest escapades was conducted Wednesday and Thursday last week, not early last month then held for release today as Gallup has now done.

That is not what it says at all. That is what YOU say. The survey was about the way that the GOP INVITED him, not about his agreeing to speak. In fact, his poll numbers were UP from a few months ago. Please stop the incessant, dishonest spin.

only 30% of Americans support Netanyahu in his latest escapades is what I posted.

My post is consistent with the survey findings as reported. My post includes the link to the survey and the specific news report of it, as this post does too....

http://talkingpoints...rability-speech

A poster needs to be careful in cherry picking from a post by presenting only a small part of it while excluding the rest of the post then flinging false accusations around and about while also excluding the supporting link provided in the original post.

In fact here is my original post which you call "incessant, dishonest spin."

The Gallup poll released just now was taken February 8-11 which is more than a bit strange.

The much more recent Wall Street Journal-NBC poll that shows only 30% of Americans support Netanyahu in his latest escapades was conducted Wednesday and Thursday last week, not early last month then held for release today as Gallup has now done.

Quote

Almost half of American voters oppose Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's decision to speak before Congress this week, according to an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll released on Sunday.

Forty-eight percent said that Congressional leadership should not have invited Netanyahu to the U.S. so close to the Israeli elections, while 30 percent said the invitation was fine, and 22 percent did not have an opinion on the speech.

The poll shows a partisan split on the invitation, with 66 percent of Democrats opposing the invitation and only 28 percent of Republicans opposing.

In the most recent poll, the Prime Minister has a 30 percent positive rating, up from a 24 percent positive rating a year ago.

http://talkingpoints...rability-speech

http://www.ibtimes.c...inister-1832870

[Publicus]

The P5+1 negotiators with Iran represent the international community of nations that is led by President Barack Obama and the ayatollahs in Tehran know this. The Iran nuclear negotiations that began with the P5+1 in 2006 have realized great success since 2012 after several years of dormancy marked by the constant exchange of lightening bolts.

Russia for all its noise and commotion in Eurasia is committed to the UN Security Council as the central global institution for preserving international peace and security. For the same reason, Beijing is twisting the arm of the ayatollahs to say yes rather than to push them to find reasons to say no. For these reasons Russia and China are united behind Prez Obama on the Iran nuclear issue which makes the ayatollahs take notice because Prez Obama is speaking for more than Tehran's usual suspects of the US, UK, France, Germany.

Netanyahu throwing his finger up to the world isolates him and discredits the hard liners everywhere, to include all the hard liners in Iran, Moscow, the US, Beijing, Israel and at discussion boards everywhere.

The Chinese foreign minister arrived in Tehran yesterday to tell the ayatollahs to sign and stamp the deal.

China's foreign minister pushes Iran on nuclear deal

"Talks on the Iran nuclear issue face a historic opportunity, and striking a comprehensive deal on schedule is the trend of the times and the desire of the people," Wang Yi told his Iranian counterpart, according to a Chinese Foreign Ministry statement issued on Monday.

Meeting later with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, Wang said he appreciated Rouhani's pledge not to develop nuclear weapons and urged Iran to push the talks process forward. "The Iran nuclear talks have reached a crucial stage," Wang was quoted as telling Rouhani.

A deal with Iran on its controversial nuclear program would help it escape from sanctions and allow more efforts to be spent on economic development, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said during a trip to Tehran.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/02/16/us-iran-nuclear-china-idUSKBN0LK05Q20150216

While a negotiated deal has yet to be finalized, the record of more than a year of intense talks demonstrates how the common interest in ensuring that Iran does not get a nuclear bomb has forged unprecedented unity among a disparate collection of nations and the U.N. The U.S. has been a leading force, along with expected partners France, Germany and the U.K., in managing the international coalition that has brought Iran to serious negotiations over its nuclear program. But the coalition has been given its unique strength by the addition of Russia and China, powers that often challenge the international status quo, but that have in this case stood together as part of the P5+1 nations. They have seen that reaching a deal with Iran advances immediate security objectives in the broader Middle East region, as well as longer-term, global nonproliferation goals. Without the help of China and Russia – in some cases against their own immediate economic interests – the strong sanctions regime that brought Iran to the negotiating table would not be nearly as effective.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2015/02/26/iran-nuclear-talks-must-be-allowed-to-run-their-course

You're dreaming. Iran LOVES to TALK about TALKS. It buys Iran time and makes a sucker out of Obama. Obama has gotten NOWHERE and if he gets a deal no one can trust Iran.

Apparently you're willing to trust Iran if your hero can just cut a "deal". I'm not. I want it continuously verified which so far Iran has dodged and will continue dodging as long as Hussein Obama is at the helm.

Damn. Less than two more years of this would-be King.

Iran came to the negotiating table for the first time in 2012 after the P5+1 got it excluded from the SWIFT global electronic banking system that does $6 Trillion of financial transactions daily. The exclusion included the Iran central bank.

The ayatollahs desperately need an agreement so all the sanctions can begin to be lifted, the SWIFT exclusion especially and in particular. Iran came to the negotiating table only because it needed to negotiate and because it has the immediate need of an agreement that now includes the gradual and partial lifting of the sanctions.

The ayatollahs wanted an immediate lifting of all sanctions in return for signing on but they had to give that one up due to the hilarious laughter on the P5+1 side of the table.

[Ulysses G.]

The much more recent Wall Street Journal-NBC poll that shows only 30% of Americans support Netanyahu in his latest escapades was conducted Wednesday and Thursday last week, not early last month then held for release today as Gallup has now done.

That is not what it says at all. That is what YOU say. The survey was about the way that the GOP INVITED him, not about his agreeing to speak. In fact, his poll numbers were UP from a few months ago. Please stop the incessant, dishonest spin.

My post is consistent with the survey findings as reported. My post includes the link to the survey and the specific news report of it, as this post does too....

No it isn't consistent. The survey was about the way that the GOP INVITED him, not about his agreeing to speak. The onus was on the GOP, not Netanyahu. Anyone can read the poll for themselves.

Nearly half of American voters — 48 percent — say that congressional Republicans should not have invited Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to address Congress on Tuesday without first notifying President Barack Obama

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/poll-nearly-half-americans-take-issue-netanyahu-speech-n315071

Edited March 3, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[NeverSure]

Just saw this...

45 minutes ago... Gallup

"Netanyahu's Favorable Rating Improves in U.S."

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- "Ahead of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech to the U.S. Congress that has strained relations between Israel and the White House, nearly twice as many Americans view Israel's leader favorably (45%) as unfavorably (24%). Netanyahu's favorable score is up from 35% in 2012. His current favorable rating ties his highest rating among the six times Gallup has measured it, spanning his three tenures as prime minister."

The Gallup poll released just now was taken February 8-11 which is more than a bit strange.

The much more recent Wall Street Journal-NBC poll that shows only 30% of Americans support Netanyahu in his latest escapades was conducted Wednesday and Thursday last week, not early last month then held for release today as Gallup has now done.

You can stop being disingenuous any time now.

The poll that Gallup released today is about "Netanyahu's (personal) favorable rating."

Your poll is about whether Obama should have been notified.

People could love Netanyahu and still think Congress should have been notified. Your poll doesn't show how big of a deal anyone thinks it is, just a preference of some sort.

Netanyahu has greatly improved his favorable ratings in the US and until a poll says that isn't true, you're stuffed.

[NeverSure]

New (Gallup) Poll Shows Strong American Support for Israel

Gallup Poll FEBRUARY 23, 2015

Despite the controversy surrounding Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s upcoming address to Congress, a new poll shows that American support for Israel remains strong.

According to a new Gallup poll, 70 percent of Americans view Israel favorably.

When asked who they were most sympathetic to in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, 62 percent of respondents said that they “sympathize more with the Israelis.”

"By contrast, 17 percent view the Palestinian Authority favorably, and 16 percent say that they “sympathize more with the Palestinians.”

Obama is toast.

Edited March 3, 2015 by NeverSure

[ScarpoFongness4U]

this is all choreography

Netanyahu met w Kerry to co ordinate this

Iran is being played against ISIS, the old name for Iraq

OLD IRAQ = ISIS, SUNNI, SADDAMS generals

NEW IRAQ = IRANIAN province, SHIITE slave state

WW3 is upon us, the only thing is, its over there, no here,

USA and RUSSIAN war companies are cleaning up, as war stocks are usd up

Anyone who thinks there is a rift between the US and Israel, just doesnt get it,

the USA has been following the foreig policy of Ariel Sharon,

notice, Israel is quiet as its neighbors are destroying themselves, and all the jihadi's are dying

[chuckd]

This nonsense about needing nuclear for energy is just that...nonsense.

Iran is currently third in the world with known oil reserves and second in the world with known natural gas reserves.

An "energy need" argument is silly to say the least. Iran wants nuclear to make weapons, plain and simple.

If you guys think a bunch of Chicago politicians can "play" the Mullahs of Iran into doing anything they don't want to do, let us know what medication you are on.

If anybody is being played, it's Kerry, Obama and the American people.

The Iranians cannot be trusted and will simply break any agreement they sign.

This is all merely an exercise in more of Obama's foreign policy adventures, and it will very likely end up like all the others.

[BKKBobby]

This nonsense about needing nuclear for energy is just that...nonsense.

Iran is currently third in the world with known oil reserves and second in the world with known natural gas reserves.

An "energy need" argument is silly to say the least. Iran wants nuclear to make weapons, plain and simple.

If you guys think a bunch of Chicago politicians can "play" the Mullahs of Iran into doing anything they don't want to do, let us know what medication you are on.

If anybody is being played, it's Kerry, Obama and the American people.

The Iranians cannot be trusted and will simply break any agreement they sign.

This is all merely an exercise in more of Obama's foreign policy adventures, and it will very likely end up like all the others.

Oil reserves in the OPEC countries will run out in a not too distant future when sold and used at this pace.

[Credo]

I am all for Iran having a nuclear weapon. Just get rid of the Mullah's first.

[Publicus]

The much more recent Wall Street Journal-NBC poll that shows only 30% of Americans support Netanyahu in his latest escapades was conducted Wednesday and Thursday last week, not early last month then held for release today as Gallup has now done.

That is not what it says at all. That is what YOU say. The survey was about the way that the GOP INVITED him, not about his agreeing to speak. In fact, his poll numbers were UP from a few months ago. Please stop the incessant, dishonest spin.

My post is consistent with the survey findings as reported. My post includes the link to the survey and the specific news report of it, as this post does too....

No it isn't consistent. The survey was about the way that the GOP INVITED him, not about his agreeing to speak. The onus was on the GOP, not Netanyahu. Anyone can read the poll for themselves.

Nearly half of American voters — 48 percent — say that congressional Republicans should not have invited Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to address Congress on Tuesday without first notifying President Barack Obama

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/poll-nearly-half-americans-take-issue-netanyahu-speech-n315071

only 30% of Americans support Netanyahu in his latest escapades is what I posted.

Netanyahu accepted the invitation from Boehner and it is documented the invitation was the brainchild of the Israeli ambassador to Washington. Maybe Bibi did not know that beforehand...maybe.

Netanyahu has not changed his mind about addressing the Congress despite the commotion and the furor surrounding it, which is Netanyahu's decision to consider. And the president still has not invited the prime minister to the United States for the event, which is the president's decision for him to consider.

No matter what one thinks of all of this, these are the basic facts of the controversy, which includes my reference to Netanyahu in his latest escapades.

N.B. When deleting parts of the posts of others, the poster needs to indicate deletions were made, each time, every time. I do that by inserting the following indicator: <<snip>>. The rules btw require that no substantial changes be made when quoting the post of another poster.

[chuckd]

This nonsense about needing nuclear for energy is just that...nonsense.

Iran is currently third in the world with known oil reserves and second in the world with known natural gas reserves.

An "energy need" argument is silly to say the least. Iran wants nuclear to make weapons, plain and simple.

If you guys think a bunch of Chicago politicians can "play" the Mullahs of Iran into doing anything they don't want to do, let us know what medication you are on.

If anybody is being played, it's Kerry, Obama and the American people.

The Iranians cannot be trusted and will simply break any agreement they sign.

This is all merely an exercise in more of Obama's foreign policy adventures, and it will very likely end up like all the others.

Oil reserves in the OPEC countries will run out in a not too distant future when sold and used at this pace.

Care to provide a link showing when the Iranian oil and gas reserves are scheduled to run out?

The topic isn't about OPEC's oil and gas reserves.

[Publicus]

This nonsense about needing nuclear for energy is just that...nonsense.

Iran is currently third in the world with known oil reserves and second in the world with known natural gas reserves.

An "energy need" argument is silly to say the least. Iran wants nuclear to make weapons, plain and simple.

If you guys think a bunch of Chicago politicians can "play" the Mullahs of Iran into doing anything they don't want to do, let us know what medication you are on.

If anybody is being played, it's Kerry, Obama and the American people.

The Iranians cannot be trusted and will simply break any agreement they sign.

This is all merely an exercise in more of Obama's foreign policy adventures, and it will very likely end up like all the others.

Oil reserves in the OPEC countries will run out in a not too distant future when sold and used at this pace.

If you guys think a bunch of Chicago politicians can "play" the Mullahs of Iran into doing anything they don't want to do, let us know what medication you are on.

The compulsive obsession with Prez Obama does require medication but none of the obsessives can recognize their obsession and therefore are not on the needed medicine.

Iran is negotiating with the P5+1, which are: Germany, France, Russia, USA, China, UK.

Chicago has no foreign policy nor does it want one.

Russia, China push for consensus on Iran nuclear deal

“We’ve been in close contact with the US, Iran as well as Russia and other world powers," says Cheng Jingye, Chinese ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency. "The aim for us is to facilitate each party to reach a consensus as much as possible, and China is playing a constructive role in pushing the talks forward.”

In Vienna, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and US Secretary of State John Kerry have “exchanged opinions on what steps could be made to maximally contribute to the achievement of a comprehensive settlement of the situation around Iran’s nuclear program”, said a Russian Foreign Ministry statement.

Russian President Vladimir Putin is planning to have a phone conversation on Monday with his Iranian counterpart Hassan Rouhani, Lavrov said on Sunday during his meeting with Iran’s Foreign Minister Javad Zarif.

“Tomorrow, he [Putin] plans to talk to Rouhani, the administrations are in touch,” Lavrov said.

http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/markaz/posts/2014/03/22-russia-us-tension-sabotage-iran-nuclear-deal

[Publicus]

The much more recent Wall Street Journal-NBC poll that shows only 30% of Americans support Netanyahu in his latest escapades was conducted Wednesday and Thursday last week, not early last month then held for release today as Gallup has now done.

That is not what it says at all. That is what YOU say. The survey was about the way that the GOP INVITED him, not about his agreeing to speak. In fact, his poll numbers were UP from a few months ago. Please stop the incessant, dishonest spin.

My post is consistent with the survey findings as reported. My post includes the link to the survey and the specific news report of it, as this post does too....

No it isn't consistent. The survey was about the way that the GOP INVITED him, not about his agreeing to speak. The onus was on the GOP, not Netanyahu. Anyone can read the poll for themselves.

Nearly half of American voters — 48 percent — say that congressional Republicans should not have invited Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to address Congress on Tuesday without first notifying President Barack Obama

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/poll-nearly-half-americans-take-issue-netanyahu-speech-n315071

You deleted the quote and the link I provided in my original post and you inserted your own quote and link, as immediately above.

Consequently, you and I are working from two different quotes and two different links. Which means your entire premise here is erroneous.

I wanted to point this out to you because your posts contain partial and fragmented quotes....technical and/or editing problems of some sort, no doubt.

Here is my link and the quote of my original post, both of which you deleted to instead insert your own link and quote in your post, as in the above.....

"Almost half of American voters oppose Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's decision to speak before Congress this week, according to an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll released on Sunday."

http://talkingpoints...rability-speech

So your above quoted report and its link are completely different from mine, which you'd deleted in your quote of my post.

Technical problems, I'm sure.

Edited March 3, 2015 by Publicus

[BKKBobby]

This nonsense about needing nuclear for energy is just that...nonsense.

Iran is currently third in the world with known oil reserves and second in the world with known natural gas reserves.

An "energy need" argument is silly to say the least. Iran wants nuclear to make weapons, plain and simple.

If you guys think a bunch of Chicago politicians can "play" the Mullahs of Iran into doing anything they don't want to do, let us know what medication you are on.

If anybody is being played, it's Kerry, Obama and the American people.

The Iranians cannot be trusted and will simply break any agreement they sign.

This is all merely an exercise in more of Obama's foreign policy adventures, and it will very likely end up like all the others.

Oil reserves in the OPEC countries will run out in a not too distant future when sold and used at this pace.

Care to provide a link showing when the Iranian oil and gas reserves are scheduled to run out?

The topic isn't about OPEC's oil and gas reserves.

You used Irans oil and gas reserves as a argument to say that the country doesnt need other sources of energy.

Read your own post! Chuck D, figh the... PE

Peak oil: The time when there wont be any cheap oil to be extracted.

>>>Cheap oil<<<

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil#/search

Edited March 3, 2015 by BKKBobby

[Publicus]

Just saw this...

45 minutes ago... Gallup

"Netanyahu's Favorable Rating Improves in U.S."

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- "Ahead of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech to the U.S. Congress that has strained relations between Israel and the White House, nearly twice as many Americans view Israel's leader favorably (45%) as unfavorably (24%). Netanyahu's favorable score is up from 35% in 2012. His current favorable rating ties his highest rating among the six times Gallup has measured it, spanning his three tenures as prime minister."

The Gallup poll released just now was taken February 8-11 which is more than a bit strange.

The much more recent Wall Street Journal-NBC poll that shows only 30% of Americans support Netanyahu in his latest escapades was conducted Wednesday and Thursday last week, not early last month then held for release today as Gallup has now done.

You can stop being disingenuous any time now.

The poll that Gallup released today is about "Netanyahu's (personal) favorable rating."

Your poll is about whether Obama should have been notified.

People could love Netanyahu and still think Congress should have been notified. Your poll doesn't show how big of a deal anyone thinks it is, just a preference of some sort.

Netanyahu has greatly improved his favorable ratings in the US and until a poll says that isn't true, you're stuffed.

I just corrected the other poster who today is confused and disorganized about polls, posts, quotes, links, so you might want to take a note of the fact, thx.

[Ulysses G.]

Just saw this...

45 minutes ago... Gallup

"Netanyahu's Favorable Rating Improves in U.S."

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- "Ahead of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech to the U.S. Congress that has strained relations between Israel and the White House, nearly twice as many Americans view Israel's leader favorably (45%) as unfavorably (24%). Netanyahu's favorable score is up from 35% in 2012. His current favorable rating ties his highest rating among the six times Gallup has measured it, spanning his three tenures as prime minister."

Of course

The Gallup poll released just now was taken February 8-11 which is more than a bit strange.

The much more recent Wall Street Journal-NBC poll that shows only 30% of Americans support Netanyahu in his latest escapades was conducted Wednesday and Thursday last week, not early last month then held for release today as Gallup has now done.

You can stop being disingenuous any time now.

The poll that Gallup released today is about "Netanyahu's (personal) favorable rating."

Your poll is about whether Obama should have been notified.

People could love Netanyahu and still think Congress should have been notified. Your poll doesn't show how big of a deal anyone thinks it is, just a preference of some sort.

Netanyahu has greatly improved his favorable ratings in the US and until a poll says that isn't true, you're stuffed.

Of course he is being disingenuous. He even doubled down on the spin. He was so desperate to "prove" that Netanyahu's approval numbers had not gone up - even though they did - that he found a slightly more recent poll on whether the GOP should have invited him and is pretending that they are the same subject. The funny thing is that Netanyahu's numbers went up on that poll too.

Anyway, don't expect him to admit that he was wrong. That will never happen no matter how much evidence against him there is.

Edited March 3, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[Publicus]

Welcome back.

However, that does nothing to explain or to correct the fragmenting and garbling of my posts as you misquoted them in your posts, to include quoting links in your posts that are not the same as the links I put into my posts.

Nothing.

I suggested you had technical and/or editing problems for the fractured and altered quotes that appeared in your posts.

That is what I suggested occurred in your posts.

Rather generously suggested I might say.

[Ulysses G.]

The links in your posts were to dishonest articles that supported your spin. I linked to the ACTUAL POLL that was referred to by you and in your partisan articles, but the actual content of the poll was ignored. You have referenced the poll a number of times (the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll), but it did not say what you said it did, so I linked to the real thing, so everyone could read it. Does that help?

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/poll-nearly-half-americans-take-issue-netanyahu-speech-n315071

Edited March 3, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[Publicus]

My quotes were altered without any notice they had been altered in your posts. The alterations caused my quotes in your posts to become fragmented and absent of context. The quote boxes in your posts were juggled and fragmented too, making any reply to your posts difficult to execute -- extraordinarily difficult.

Worse, your first reply to my original post containing the WSJ-NBC survey said I was "dishonest."

I reiterate that I generously suggested you had only technical or editing problems in quoting my posts which appeared in a form that caused them to become significantly reduced and disjointed.

I am still being generous about this, very exceedingly generous.

And I have no intention to extend all of this manufactured chaos any further than it has already gone up to this point.