Netanyahu win dashes prospect for a thaw with Obama

[NeverSure]

OP headline: "Netanyahu win dashes prospect for a thaw with Obama" should read "Netanyahu win dashes prospects for Obama."

America and the American people will be around long after Obama is mercifully removed from the scene.

[Ulysses G.]

And yet a word that denigrates a race (Semite) has been hijacked to be used to mean attacking Jews.

There is no such thing as a Semite "race." Semites are people that speak a Semite LANGUAGE and "anti-Semite" ONLY applies to haters of Jews. Do you even bother to read these threads that you are so active on? This has been cleared up long ago.

[Linky]

All those spouting that the Israelis have voted and it is totally a matter for them and no one else's business must also agree with Palestinians voting how they want to vote and totally respect them for that vote.

the Gazans voted for Hamas look what it got them. Indeed they can vote how they like. they voted for rockets not peace they got what the deserved.

Israel certainly did not vote for peace. They too deserve what they get.

[NeverSure]

the Gazans voted for Hamas look what it got them. Indeed they can vote how they like. they voted for rockets not peace they got what the deserved.

Israel certainly did not vote for peace. They too deserve what they get.

You don't know that.

What we do know is that you wouldn't get peace by trying to pacify terrorists.

[Linky]

the Gazans voted for Hamas look what it got them. Indeed they can vote how they like. they voted for rockets not peace they got what the deserved.

Israel certainly did not vote for peace. They too deserve what they get.

You don't know that.

What we do know is that you wouldn't get peace by trying to pacify terrorists.

Yes I'm sure the Palestinians are aware they cannot get peace with terrorists.

[Scott]

Please stay on topic.

We can dispense with the discussion about anti-Semitic. Here's from Wikipedia:

Antisemitism (also spelled Anti-Semitism or anti-semitism) is prejudice against, hatred of, or discrimination against Jews as a national, ethnic, religious or racial group.^[1][2] A person who holds such positions is called an "antisemite". Antisemitism is widely considered a form of racism.^[3]

I think we can go with that definition and stop splitting hairs on this issue.

[Jingthing]

Please stay on topic.

We can dispense with the discussion about anti-Semitic. Here's from Wikipedia:

Antisemitism (also spelled Anti-Semitism or anti-semitism) is prejudice against, hatred of, or discrimination against Jews as a national, ethnic, religious or racial group.^[1][2] A person who holds such positions is called an "antisemite". Antisemitism is widely considered a form of racism.^[3]

I think we can go with that definition and stop splitting hairs on this issue.

Suggestion for new forum rule:

Against objections to well established DEFINITIONS of English language words.

While this suggested rule would be useful 99 percent of the time to counter the obsessive twisting of the established definition of antisemitism which has probably been done on this forum hundreds of times already, it could be useful for any other cases of such repetitively annoying posting behavior regarding OTHER words.

Edited March 19, 2015 by Jingthing

[Chicog]

And yet a word that denigrates a race (Semite) has been hijacked to be used to mean attacking Jews.

There is no such thing as a Semite "race." Semites are people that speak a Semite LANGUAGE and "anti-Semite" ONLY applies to haters of Jews. Do you even bother to read these threads that you are so active on? This has been cleared up long ago.

I'm sorry, but you DECIDING something does mean it is "cleared up".

The Semites are, according to the highly authoritative Oxford Universal Dictionary, 1944 (p.1838) are the people belonging to the race of mankind which includes most of the peoples mentioned in Genesis 10 as descended from Shem, one of the three sons of Noah.

Until such times as the word SEMITE is redefined, I refuse to accept a redefinition of the word "Antisemite".

It is political correctness manufactured by Israel and Jews and nothing else.

However, in the interests of not diverting the conversation, I suggest we just agree to differ.

[Publicus]

Obama single handedly gave Bibi this election. Obama does not use soft policy, a big stick, or other tools of state craft; this administration uses criminal-like tools to manipulate, weaponize the region through third parties, employ NGOs as proxies, and actually meddle and overthrow governments directly. Netanyahu's victory was an indictment of Obama. The jews have a greater sense of realpolitik with regards to the middle east than the muslim brotherhood advised US president (sources too numerous to cite). Obama will add one more canister of fuel into the regional war he is creating in the middle east. While the immediate vehicle to conflict may be seen as this election, a broad view reveals every single issue Obama has meddled in inexorably leads to a greater likelihood of war the region. If a person has a narrow view any one issue may look explosive, but rarely is. In the middle east there are so many tinder boxes left smoking and kindling due to this administration's meddling that fairly short time will set them further ablaze- but not before he further empowers DAESH. Can anyone provide one single instance where Obama's middle east meddling has lessened the likelihood of war? Anyone? Anyone?

(Note: The recent incidents where Obama has provided aid to Israel contrary to the narrative I am suggesting above is because he has to; he has no choice)!

The post presents the continued hard right assault by the American political and rhetorical extremes against Prez Obama as if he had been on the ballot in Israel as the candidate of the Muslim Brotherhood and endorsed by ISIL.

The P5+1 nuclear negotiators are completely Ignored, as is the fact Iran is desperate for an agreement so some sanctions can be lifted now with others forward scheduled for lifting depending on Iran's good behavior.

Also ignored is that it is now Israel against the international community, which means the world, led by the P5+1 which is led by the United States.

US public approval of Netanyahu declined 7% after his speech to the congress and his disapproval increased by 14%, which indicates the beginning of a strong negative trend against him across the United States with only hard core Republicans and also extreme rightists approving of him. The international community will welcome and be encouraged by the coming policy changes the US government will implement at the UN and in the Security Council, changes directly in response to Netanyahu and his harsh, unrelenting no-solutions extremism.

The world and the United States are changing and Bibi Netanyahu's reaction is to go significantly farther to the extreme right than any Western leader considers to be responsible, appropriate, constructive.

Good bye luck with that.

You should be writing propaganda professionally ... maybe you are. Anyway, can you cite specific sites/links for your statistical assertions? Why do you always refer to anything that is not "extreme hard left" (such as Obama) as "extreme hard right"? Are you black or are you white? (rhetorical question illustrating one who cannot or refuses to see shades of grey).

As far as the "harsh, unrelenting no-solutions extremism" shouldn't you be laying that at the doorstep of the genuine extremists - you know who.

Netanyahu's Last-Minute Reversal on the Two-State Solution - The Atlantic

"Back in 2009, just three months after he became Israel's prime minister for the second time, Benjamin Netanyahu delivered what many called "an historic address." In it, Netanyahu described his "vision" of peace between Israelis and Palestinians:

There are two free peoples living side by side in this small land, with good neighborly relations and mutual respect, each with its flag, anthem and government, with neither one threatening its neighbor's security and existence.

The speech was deemed remarkable because it contained Netanyahu's first-ever call for the establishment of a Palestinian state, a statement he had resisted throughout his long and winding political career."

So much for your "unrelenting". If major policy change occurs because of his win in the election, it will because Obama is a little boy and Netanyahu is a man.

Tip: If you are going to write propaganda professionally and be successful, it might be a good idea to be a lot more subtle with your "extreme, unrelenting" terminology/phraseology.

The post and its contents are noted although the indication is that the post is substantially off topic or might even be a troll post, so I'll reasonably pass on it at this time while reserving a reply to the post more appropriately at another thread topic at another not distant time. I've saved the post for these reasons and purposes and will anyway ignore that the post focuses on an individual particular poster under the pretense of being a legitimate post that addresses issues.

[Anthony5]

Please stay on topic.

We can dispense with the discussion about anti-Semitic. Here's from Wikipedia:

Antisemitism (also spelled Anti-Semitism or anti-semitism) is prejudice against, hatred of, or discrimination against Jews as a national, ethnic, religious or racial group.^[1][2] A person who holds such positions is called an "antisemite". Antisemitism is widely considered a form of racism.^[3]

I think we can go with that definition and stop splitting hairs on this issue.

So a website which everyone can edit freely is considered an authority these days?

[NeverSure]

That sort of thing would not go down very well with an African American President.

That president has almost no power in the matter, and your racist comment is duly noted. His attempt at an end run around Congress has been discussed here at length and at best any deal he would have done with the UN would have been an agreement between him and the current leaders of Iran. It wouldn't have been binding on the next president who will be in office in less than two years.

It takes a 2/3 vote in the US Senate to ratify a treaty and that would never happen. Obama was just trying to do a handshake deal that didn't bind anyone but himself.

We can forget about Obama. He's a lame duck president who lacks the backing of Congress as has been evident.

(For any non-Americans, the term lame duck is a common term for someone in his position and time left in office.)

[NeverSure]

So Israelis can look forward to at least 4 more years of increasing isolation, worsening living standards and ultimately self destruction. With Netanyahu at the helm how did voters possibly believe they would mend fences with their chief supporter USA, and their main trading partner EU.

Israel doesn't need any fences mended. Do you think the EU would put sanctions on it? I don't but if it did the US would pick up the slack. Americans support Israel and private enterprise is happy to do business with Israel.

Congress supports Israel. Only the White House is full of The Muslim Brotherhood and that will soon be over. Congress and Bibi just ripped all of the feathers off Obama anyway. Congress and the private sector and Israel will get along just fine. They are just waiting Obama out.

Isolation? Israel is already isolated thanks to Islamists , their sympathisers, and the PC pansies in Europe.

It's the clear fact that they know they are isolated that caused the election to go as it did.

[englishoak]

Whilst I dont expect the US along with the other P5 +1 to push a deal with Iran through when the chips are down I hope some grow a spine and get it done and F Bibi

I usually get to say this about Thailand but re Bibi being chosen again I have to say this time Israel will get what it deserves and right now that is more isolation, less popularity and worsening ties with current western allies. It will also hurt Jews all around the world to be associated with this zionist warmonger and almost certainly endanger jewish lives if not worse.

Given Bibis mask is now firmly off and was forced to play his final card,its clear in black and white to the entire world, he wants no solution and this is now looking a lot like apartheid. I think Israel is going to pay heavily for this stance at this time. Everyone wants a solution but Bibi & co and nothing short of some major tragic event or military action will change opinion at this point... and thats what bothers me the most, any trouble will be directly linked and used as an excuse re the refusal of Bibi to even consider a solution because hes said so publicly, leaving hamas etc etc no alternative route but aggression. Which of course is exactly what he wants.

I do hope the P5 +1 ram the agreement through with Iran and Obama takes a harder stance than ever. Bibi is doing his best by being himself and getting re elected to help them see it.

Edited March 19, 2015 by englishoak

[Scott]

Please stay on topic.

We can dispense with the discussion about anti-Semitic. Here's from Wikipedia:

Antisemitism (also spelled Anti-Semitism or anti-semitism) is prejudice against, hatred of, or discrimination against Jews as a national, ethnic, religious or racial group.^[1][2] A person who holds such positions is called an "antisemite". Antisemitism is widely considered a form of racism.^[3]

I think we can go with that definition and stop splitting hairs on this issue.

So a website which everyone can edit freely is considered an authority these days?

Yup, in this case it is. You might also want to consider rule #10.

Here's a link: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?app=forums&module=extras&section=boardrules

[dexterm]

But on Wednesday, a senior administration official said only that the administration was evaluating its options on Security Council action and other possible responses

Perhaps the other possible responses in the OP have already begun.

Israel election: Obama criticises Netanyahu's 'deeply divisive rhetoric' – as US takes Iran and Hezbollah off terror threat list.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/israel-election-obama-criticises-netanyahus-deeply-divisive-rhetoric--as-us-takes-iran-and-hezbollah-off-terror-threat-list-10118962.html

Maybe Obama in his last 2 years in office is finally going to earn that Nobel Peace Prize, and do what should have been done years ago..support UN resolutions critical of Israel's illegal activities.

He has nothing to lose.

[JDGRUEN]

American Lawmakers Write Another Letter on Iran

Bipartisan letter, signed by 360 lawmakers, will remind Obama that sanctions relief on Iran requires new legislation from Congress.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/192911#.VQt5i4hNrCs

[JDGRUEN]

AIPAC Admonishes Obama Administration for ‘Rebuffing’ Netanyahu Efforts to Improve US-Israel Ties

http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/03/19/aipac-admonishes-obama-administration-for-rebuffing-netanyahu-efforts-to-improve-us-israel-ties/

[NeverSure]

But on Wednesday, a senior administration official said only that the administration was evaluating its options on Security Council action and other possible responses

Perhaps the other possible responses in the OP have already begun.

Israel election: Obama criticises Netanyahu's 'deeply divisive rhetoric' – as US takes Iran and Hezbollah off terror threat list.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/israel-election-obama-criticises-netanyahus-deeply-divisive-rhetoric--as-us-takes-iran-and-hezbollah-off-terror-threat-list-10118962.html

Maybe Obama in his last 2 years in office is finally going to earn that Nobel Peace Prize, and do what should have been done years ago..support UN resolutions critical of Israel's illegal activities.

He has nothing to lose.

Obama is now irrelevant. He's lost Congress including enough Democrats to stop him, and to do as they wish without his approval.

They don't approve of him at all.

[zydeco]

But on Wednesday, a senior administration official said only that the administration was evaluating its options on Security Council action and other possible responses

Perhaps the other possible responses in the OP have already begun.

Israel election: Obama criticises Netanyahu's 'deeply divisive rhetoric' – as US takes Iran and Hezbollah off terror threat list.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/israel-election-obama-criticises-netanyahus-deeply-divisive-rhetoric--as-us-takes-iran-and-hezbollah-off-terror-threat-list-10118962.html

Maybe Obama in his last 2 years in office is finally going to earn that Nobel Peace Prize, and do what should have been done years ago..support UN resolutions critical of Israel's illegal activities.

He has nothing to lose.

Obama is now irrelevant. He's lost Congress including enough Democrats to stop him, and to do as they wish without his approval.

They don't approve of him at all.

Democrats are terrified. Obama is turning them into the party of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hezbollah, and Iran''s mullahs. "Destroy Israel! Save Iran!" Try selling that slogan in the next election.

[Ulysses G.]

Everyone knows that Obama was working against Netanyahu in the recent election in Israel - interfering in their politics - and he failed dismally. He is throwing Israel under the bus out of spite, but most democrats in Congress are not going to let him get away with it.

Edited March 20, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[NeverSure]

Everyone knows that Obama worked against Netanyahu in the recent election in Israel and failed dismally. He is throwing Israel under the bus out of spite, but most democrats in Congress are not going to let him get away with it.

While I agree with you in concept, I think Netanyahu threw Obama under the bus. Obama just tried to throw Bibi under the bus.

[Ulysses G.]

Agreed. Netanyahu threw Obama under the bus out of sheer frustration with his stupid policies. He really had no other rational choice. Obama intends to throw the whole of Israel under the bus to get back at Bibi for winning the election and beating him every step of the way. Hopefully, Congress will stop him in his tracks.

Edited March 20, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[NeverSure]

Agreed. Netanyahu threw Obama under the bus out of sheer frustration with his stupid policies. He really had no other rational choice. Obama intends to throw the whole of Israel under the bus to get back at Bibi for winning the election and beating him every step of the way. Hopefully, Congress will stop him in his tracks.

Congress has stopped Obama. Look at post 106 above. After all of the moaning about the letter the Repubs wrote to Iran, now a bipartisan 360 veto - proof majority in Congress has written to Iran. They've gone clear around Obama and stopped him cold.

[Publicus]

AIPAC Admonishes Obama Administration for ‘Rebuffing’ Netanyahu Efforts to Improve US-Israel Ties

http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/03/19/aipac-admonishes-obama-administration-for-rebuffing-netanyahu-efforts-to-improve-us-israel-ties/

Here is the statement from the link to the AIPAC claim, accompanied by the link:

AIPAC asked the White House to accept the sincerity of Netanyahu’s commitment to a two-state solution, saying in a written statement “Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu strongly and clearly reaffirmed his commitment to a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”

http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/03/19/aipac-admonishes-obama-administration-for-rebuffing-netanyahu-efforts-to-improve-us-israel-ties/

AIPAC used the world "rebuff" on the basis of its absurd claim made in the linked statement that Netanyahu is sincere and that he supports a Palestinian state. Strange for AIPAC to say that given Netanyahu said he's against a Palestinian state.

Netanyahu said he's now opposed the a Palestinian state but in favor of a two-state solution.

tt seems to be the case that there are people who read AIPAC's (linked) statement without any consideration of the facts on the ground.

[Seastallion]

AIPAC Admonishes Obama Administration for ‘Rebuffing’ Netanyahu Efforts to Improve US-Israel Ties

http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/03/19/aipac-admonishes-obama-administration-for-rebuffing-netanyahu-efforts-to-improve-us-israel-ties/

Here is the statement from the link to the AIPAC claim, accompanied by the link:

AIPAC asked the White House to accept the sincerity of Netanyahu’s commitment to a two-state solution, saying in a written statement “Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu strongly and clearly reaffirmed his commitment to a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”

http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/03/19/aipac-admonishes-obama-administration-for-rebuffing-netanyahu-efforts-to-improve-us-israel-ties/

AIPAC used the world "rebuff" on the basis of its absurd claim made in the linked statement that Netanyahu is sincere and that he supports a Palestinian state. Strange for AIPAC to say that given Netanyahu said he's against a Palestinian state.

Netanyahu said he's now opposed the a Palestinian state but in favor of a two-state solution.

tt seems to be the case that there are people who read AIPAC's (linked) statement without any consideration of the facts on the ground.

Anyone that calls Netanyahu "sincere" needs to be re-evaluated as sane or not. Either that or is as much of a liar as Netanyahu himself.

Does Netanyahu really think he can thumb his nose at the Whitehouse, say whatever he wants to get elected, lie, posture, show his insincerity, and then get what he wants just by making a half-hearted attempt at appeasement? He'll get what he deserves.

[NeverSure]

AIPAC Admonishes Obama Administration for ‘Rebuffing’ Netanyahu Efforts to Improve US-Israel Ties

http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/03/19/aipac-admonishes-obama-administration-for-rebuffing-netanyahu-efforts-to-improve-us-israel-ties/

Here is the statement from the link to the AIPAC claim, accompanied by the link:

AIPAC asked the White House to accept the sincerity of Netanyahu’s commitment to a two-state solution, saying in a written statement “Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu strongly and clearly reaffirmed his commitment to a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”

http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/03/19/aipac-admonishes-obama-administration-for-rebuffing-netanyahu-efforts-to-improve-us-israel-ties/

AIPAC used the world "rebuff" on the basis of its absurd claim made in the linked statement that Netanyahu is sincere and that he supports a Palestinian state. Strange for AIPAC to say that given Netanyahu said he's against a Palestinian state.

Netanyahu said he's now opposed the a Palestinian state but in favor of a two-state solution.

tt seems to be the case that there are people who read AIPAC's (linked) statement without any consideration of the facts on the ground.

Welcome to the thread champ. Read post #106. A veto proof bipartisan 360 members of Congress has written a letter to Iran waiving off anything Obama might do. They said that they would do the deciding.

Looks like your Dems have thrown your lame duck under the bus because they'd like to get reelected.

After all of the moaning about 44 Repubs writing a letter, now over 300 more in bipartisan fashion have done the same.

Even your Dems can now see what Obama is. Why can't you?

Cheers.

[zydeco]

AIPAC Admonishes Obama Administration for ‘Rebuffing’ Netanyahu Efforts to Improve US-Israel Ties

http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/03/19/aipac-admonishes-obama-administration-for-rebuffing-netanyahu-efforts-to-improve-us-israel-ties/

Here is the statement from the link to the AIPAC claim, accompanied by the link:

AIPAC asked the White House to accept the sincerity of Netanyahu’s commitment to a two-state solution, saying in a written statement “Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu strongly and clearly reaffirmed his commitment to a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”

http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/03/19/aipac-admonishes-obama-administration-for-rebuffing-netanyahu-efforts-to-improve-us-israel-ties/

AIPAC used the world "rebuff" on the basis of its absurd claim made in the linked statement that Netanyahu is sincere and that he supports a Palestinian state. Strange for AIPAC to say that given Netanyahu said he's against a Palestinian state.

Netanyahu said he's now opposed the a Palestinian state but in favor of a two-state solution.

tt seems to be the case that there are people who read AIPAC's (linked) statement without any consideration of the facts on the ground.

Welcome to the thread champ. Read post #106. A veto proof bipartisan 360 members of Congress has written a letter to Iran waiving off anything Obama might do. They said that they would do the deciding.

Looks like your Dems have thrown your lame duck under the bus because they'd like to get reelected.

After all of the moaning about 44 Repubs writing a letter, now over 300 more in bipartisan fashion have done the same.

Even your Dems can now see what Obama is. Why can't you?

Cheers.

Not referring to anyone in particular, of course, but the sort of people who are now flooding social media and message boards about this fit very firmly into one of two categories. First, there is the anarcho-capitalist libertarians who finally see their big chance to "unmask" the vast international Jewish banker conspiracy. Second, there are the Leftist fanatics who have allied themselves with the likes of the PLO and their successors since the 1960s. This is their big chance to dress up their dreams of crushing a strong American ally. With the Left, it's mainly about the US losing face.

[NeverSure]

AIPAC Admonishes Obama Administration for ‘Rebuffing’ Netanyahu Efforts to Improve US-Israel Ties

http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/03/19/aipac-admonishes-obama-administration-for-rebuffing-netanyahu-efforts-to-improve-us-israel-ties/

Here is the statement from the link to the AIPAC claim, accompanied by the link:

AIPAC asked the White House to accept the sincerity of Netanyahu’s commitment to a two-state solution, saying in a written statement “Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu strongly and clearly reaffirmed his commitment to a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”

http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/03/19/aipac-admonishes-obama-administration-for-rebuffing-netanyahu-efforts-to-improve-us-israel-ties/

AIPAC used the world "rebuff" on the basis of its absurd claim made in the linked statement that Netanyahu is sincere and that he supports a Palestinian state. Strange for AIPAC to say that given Netanyahu said he's against a Palestinian state.

Netanyahu said he's now opposed the a Palestinian state but in favor of a two-state solution.

tt seems to be the case that there are people who read AIPAC's (linked) statement without any consideration of the facts on the ground.

Anyone that calls Netanyahu "sincere" needs to be re-evaluated as sane or not. Either that or is as much of a liar as Netanyahu himself.

Does Netanyahu really think he can thumb his nose at the Whitehouse, say whatever he wants to get elected, lie, posture, show his insincerity, and then get what he wants just by making a half-hearted attempt at appeasement? He'll get what he deserves.

You aren't apparently paying attention to current events.

[BKKBobby]

Netanyahu, just look at his facial expressions and the way he speaks, on top of the crap he actually says. Hes utterly unlikable. Unless you like a extremist "strong man", some populations in the past have been drawn to these types of leaders during certain times because of special circumstances unique to that period. When I heard Obamas speeches before he was elected the first time it gave shivers up my spine. I liked what he said and could feel that this is a good man and hoped US would get a fresh good change. US just removed Iran and Hezbollah from the terror threat list. I have a feeling Obama is on a mission to change the world for the better against the interests of Israel. While Netanyahu is sitting in the Israelis drivers seat busy with burning bridges and alienating Israel from the entire world. Netanyahu is a twofaced liar but his one true face always were visible. Israel is hopefully going to be held responsible for warcrimes in the UN. Go Obama. Hurry hurry, do as much as you can until you leave office.

Edited March 20, 2015 by BKKBobby

[Scott]

Off-topic post and replies removed.