Friday, March 2, 2012

Obama Requires Israel Not Defend Itself

Michael

In an interview with The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg, Barack Obama insisted that Israel not defend itself against a future Iranian nuclear threat. Goldberg writes:

Though he struck a consistently pro-Israel posture during the interview, Obama went to great lengths to caution Israel that a premature strike might inadvertently help Iran: "At a time when there is not a lot of sympathy for Iran and its only real ally, [Syria,] is on the ropes, do we want a distraction in which suddenly Iran can portray itself as a victim?"

Portray itself as a victim?

Barack Obama is telling the world that Israel should not take out the Iranian nuclear program because then it can portray itself as the victim? Look, I do not care if Iran portrays itself as a hot pastrami sandwich on rye with mustard and melted swiss (my personal favorite) so long as they do not attain nuclear weaponry. So, what is this nonsense?

Obama then went on to say:

The only way historically that a country has ultimately decided not to get nuclear weapons without constant military intervention has been when they themselves take [nuclear weapons] off the table. That's what happened in Libya, that's what happened in South Africa.

In other words, it has to be voluntary? We have to somehow convince Iran that it's in its own best interest not to develop nuclear weapons? Ho. Ho. Ho. Good luck with that one, guys. Does anyone really have any faith that Barack Obama can somehow talk the Iranians out of pursuing a nuclear weapons program?

It makes no sense. Whatever Barack Obama tells the Iranians they are going to want nuclear weaponry as a means of self-defense against perceived American and western aggression. To their east is Afghanistan and to their west is Iraq and both were attacked by American forces in recent years. Nothing is going to convince the Iranians that it is not in their own best interest to pursue nuclear weaponry.

Obama then went on say:

I think that the Israeli government recognizes that, as president of the United States, I don't bluff.

He doesn't bluff? What is that, some sort of veiled threat to the Iranians? What horrendous nonsense. Of course, he bluffs. All politicians bluff now and again and as a poker player I can tell you that the only time people claim that they do not bluff is when they are bluffing. Of course, only truly bad poker players claim never to bluff because no one is going to believe it, anyway.

I also don't, as a matter of sound policy, go around advertising exactly what our intentions are. But I think both the Iranian and the Israeli governments recognize that when the United States says it is unacceptable for Iran to have a nuclear weapon, we mean what we say.

Ya got that? He means what he says and he doesn't bluff. Yet, Israel must not take out Iran's nuclear program because it would make Iran look like a victim.

This has to be some of the most feeble nonsense that I have ever heard in my entire life. Vague promises. Vague threats. Nothing that can give any observer the least bit of confidence that this president is really going to prevent Iran from gaining a nuclear arsenal.

In order to think otherwise, one must have something close to a religious faith in this president which... although I recognize that many people suffer from that particular problem... I do not.

Finally:

Why is it that despite me never failing to support Israel on every single problem that they've had over the last three years, that there are still questions about that?

Jeez, the guy sounds almost petulant.

Why? Why, you ask? Here, let me help you, Barack.

You screwed up any potential for a negotiated peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians through a demand for "total settlement freeze" and then went forward to blame the Israelis for the failure, suggesting that they need to "search their souls" if they honestly wanted peace.

That was a big one.

You also helped usher in the rise of radical Islam throughout the region. By pushing for the ouster of Hosni Mubarack in Egypt at a time when you knew that the Muslim Brotherhood was waiting in the wings you helped pave the way for that genocidal organization with historical roots to Nazi Germany. Furthermore, you tell us, in one of the most ridiculous and horrendous statements from any politician in recent history, that the so-called "Arab Spring"... with its riots and rapes and murder and mayhem, and the emergence of al-Sharia throughout the region, with its oppression of women, oppression Gay people, and oppression of non-Muslims and genocidal intention toward the Jews... that we should "think of the defiance of those patriots in Boston who refused to pay taxes to a King, or the dignity of Rosa Parks as she sat courageously in her seat."

That's why there are questions about your relationship with the Jewish state.

It's because you cannot be trusted, Mr. President.

Get it?

13 comments:

  1. Questions about the Presidents relationship to the Jewish State? OHOH you better tell Shimon Peres about that because he just had this to say:

    Israeli President Shimon Peres on Thursday said that U.S. President Barack Obama is “a great president and a great friend of Israel,” and that security cooperation between the U.S. and Israel is “the best we’ve ever had.”

    http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/peres-obama-is-a-great-president-security-ties-are-the-best-we-ve-ever-had-1.416030

    But hey, what does President Peres know? I mean he has only been in Israeli Politics since the founding of the State and only been PM three times (twice elected).

    Oh and you forgot this part of the Presidents commentary to the Atlantic:

    "But I think both the Iranian and the Israeli governments recognize that when the United States says it is unacceptable for Iran to have a nuclear weapon, we mean what we say," Obama said, describing the reasons the Iranian threat was an important issue to his administration.

    "In addition to the profound threat that it poses to Israel, one of our strongest allies in the world; in addition to the outrageous language that has been directed toward Israel by the leaders of the Iranian government -- if Iran gets a nuclear weapon, this would run completely contrary to my policies of nonproliferation," the U.S. president said, adding that the "risks of an Iranian nuclear weapon falling into the hands of terrorist organizations are profound."


    I can't understand how you managed to miss those very clear statements....

    Oh yeah sorry but I can't figure out why you keep failing to include the whole quote regarding the overthrow of Tunisian Dictator Ben-Ali.

    There are times in the course of history when the actions of ordinary citizens spark movements for change because they speak to a longing for freedom that has been building up for years. In America, think of the defiance of those patriots in Boston who refused to pay taxes to a King, or the dignity of Rosa Parks as she sat courageously in her seat. So it was in Tunisia, as that vendor’s act of desperation tapped into the frustration felt throughout the country. Hundreds of protesters took to the streets, then thousands. And in the face of batons and sometimes bullets, they refused to go home –- day after day, week after week -- .

    Hey you know what... he was right that was a momentus moment and the PEOPLE of TUNISIA voted for their government whether or not you actually like it. It's this thing called Democracy. You know sometimes... it's not always what you want.

    Also, hey I guess the Israelis themselves are deluded too, I mean they prefer President Obama to all of his rivals. Oh yeah, and only 19% of them favor a strike w/out the U.S. and only 42% of them favor a strike period. Of course, unlike some here calling for "Bombs Away", they have to live with the consequences of an attack.

    I can't understand how you missed all this - was it just an oversight. I hope you will be adding this in to your analysis.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Peres is entitled to his view, but that does not mean it is right or that it closes the discussion. There are many that agree and many that do not.

      Or do you take every utterance of his as the absolute gospel?

      If "when the United States says it is unacceptable for Iran to have a nuclear weapon, we mean what we say," then what do you think Obama will actually do about it?

      Clearly, we have different views of what democracy means. Elections play a part, but there is more involved, as we have seen many times through history, when undemocratic forces are elected. In other words, some of us have higher standards in the determination than using the bare minimum.

      Delete
    2. Hi Volley,

      thanks for dropping by again.

      So, you seem to be arguing that when anti-Semitic fascists are elected... such as we saw during 1930s Germany... this is a good thing because it represents the will of the people.

      Really?

      You're OK with the rise of radical Islam, a movement that holds a genocidal agenda toward your own people, because they came to power via democratic means?

      One man, one vote, one time?

      This tells me precisely why "progressive Zionism" is no more to be trusted than the progressive movement, itself, or the Obama administration.

      You're actually justifying fascism and genocidal anti-Semitism as a good thing because of the "blessings of democracy."

      It's just unfathomable.

      Have you no instinct for Jewish self-preservation, whatsoever?

      How can you possibly be so blase about the rise of radical Islam given what they say about the Jews on a daily basis?

      What foolishness.

      Delete
    3. Michael,

      If and when Egypt's democratically-elected government takes concrete antisemitic actions and concrete actions that endanger Israel's security, I will fully support Israel's right to confront said government and protect its security and the security of the Jewish People. That determination I leave to the Israeli government.

      In the interim, I respect Egypt's democratic processes and congratulate them on joining the community of free nations. I hope that they enjoy, in perpetuity, the blessings of liberty that we enjoy here in the United States and the blessings of liberty that the people of Israel enjoy.

      Delete
  2. LOL What a surprise....

    Anyway as for this:

    Or do you take every utterance of his as the absolute gospel?

    No, of course not, but, I do think he and Ehud Barak, and Danny Ayalon know a little bit more about the security of Israel than you, I, or any of the Rightwing bloggers you like to cite. I figure that when the President, the Defense Minister and the Deputy Foreign Minister of a Nation all hold the same opinion - we should pretty much LISTEN to that opinion. Unless of course... as the diarist here says (cue dramatic music)... "They can't be trusted". Heh.....

    As to your second point... What do I think the President will do. I think he will take whatever measures are necessary to contain an Iranian threat. So far the sanctions seem to be working as well as various covert Ops. Personally I would continue along that trajectory (oh and as I note it seems the Israelis who would actually have to fight here would seem to agree with me as only 19% would support a Strike w/out the U.S. and 42% would support one with one - meaning that even the majority of Israelis, you know the people that you are supposedly trying to protect don't agree with you).

    Then come cruising in with this Nonsense about Democracy:

    In other words, some of us have higher standards in the determination than using the bare minimum.

    No... actually some of us apparently don't know what the meaning of the word "Democracy" is. But let me give you the definition to help out

    de·moc·ra·cy/diˈmäkrəsē/Noun:

    1.A system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.

    2.A state governed in such a way.


    That pretty much defines it. The people in Tunisia gave Ennahada 41%, The Seculars 14% and the Leftists 10%. So far Ennahada has not changed much and has clashed with the Salafists. So... how do you say they are not a Democracy. Even the Tunisian Jewish community seems to disagree with you as they told the Israelis to (paraphrased) "Go away and leave them be".

    But how in the world would their former leader Zine El Abedine Ben Ali be considered a force for Democracy? The revolutions spreading throughout the Arab World are not just little groups of people staging coups. These are popular movements. And no they are not all necessarily Democratic in nature - though we really have yet to see the results and won't for a few years.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are telling us, essentially, that

      1) the rise of radical Islam throughout the Middle East represents the flowering of democracy... and who are we to quibble merely because that political movement is motivated by genocidal anti-Semitism.

      And 2) Jews need to trust in Barack Obama, rather than in Israel, for the protection of the Jewish state.

      It's foolishness, VB.

      It's as if the twentieth century never happened.

      Delete
    2. I will defer to Michael with respect to your comments about democracy. (By the way, democracy is not a proper noun.)

      As for public diplomacy and the utterances of public figures in public, I apply the grain of salt theory. Even Netanyahu says in public that Obama is a friend. What else do you expect them to say?

      Rather than use what they say as proof positive, I prefer to consider it as I make up my own opinion.

      As to Iran, you said that Obama will take "whatever measures are necessary to contain," but that is NOT what he said. He said it was "unacceptable." So, I ask again, what does that mean and what might that portend?

      Delete
  3. Back to Micheal - AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA this is too funny. So supporting the transition from a dictatorship to a democracy is akin to supporting Nazi's. Dude, you are seriously off your rocker.

    This is so fucking goofy I cannot even answer it. WOW....

    Have you no instinct for Jewish self-preservation, whatsoever?

    But this, this is classic - you are lecturing me about "Jewish Self-Preservation"???? Wow, I cannot stop laughing. This might be the single most Eironic comment ever written.

    Dude, sorry, but you are a complete Goofball. Wow.... And I love how you are now considering yourself the arbitor of who can be trusted to be a "good Jew". The irony... It burnz!

    Oh yeah and

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In other words, you are that confident that Tunisia and Egypt and Tunisia and will end up being democratic states where minority rights are protected?

      Delete
  4. Michael you do realize it was a Christian nation that perpetrated the Holocaust? Right?

    This however:

    Jews need to trust in Barack Obama, rather than in Israel, for the protection of the Jewish state

    Apparently, according to you, I guess the Israeli people, Shimon Peres, Ehud Barak, Danny Ayalon, also feel this way too...

    This is comedy gold.

    ReplyDelete
  5. LOL oldschool how did you get this from what I said:

    In other words, you are that confident that Tunisia and Egypt and Tunisia and will end up being democratic states where minority rights are protected?

    Talk about misstating things. ROFLMAO

    Ok... now I am back from laughing. No that is not at all what I am saying. I know comprehension is a stretch for you (witness your commentary on my diary about voting) BUT...

    No, I don't know what Egypt and Tunisia will end up being. Everything is still new. Before I form an opinion on either of those countries wrt their democracies I would need to see how things develop. At the same time, I cannot see how I as an advocate for democracy could not herald the changes from hard dictatorship to democracy that took place. Will those countries stay democratic - maybe, maybe not. Who knows?

    As for minority rights, I am more confident in Tunisia than I am about Egypt given the history of the Muslim Brotherhood but, again, if they live up to their promises then we'll see.

    The one thing is that Egypt is still run by the Military and they have their own vested interests in many different areas including the Peace Treaty with Israel and wrt shipments of Natural Gas. So let's see what happens.

    Oh.. and as for Democracy. I just cut and pasted that from the Google dictionary. LOL You should take that issue up with them as well as with Merrian-Webster who also say it's a noun.

    See here: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/democracy

    Whoops.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why you so often need to ridicule escapes me.

      You do that also at DKos. I suggest that is why you always seem to get into fights. You bring that into the equation.

      Why not just offer your response without the childish and rude approach?

      You said: "So supporting the transition from a dictatorship to a democracy." That seemed to be saying that these states are on the way to would be a real democracy, because they held elections and the people voted for their leaders. That is how I took it.

      I am more interested that you answer the more important question I asked you, so I will repeat it:

      As to Iran, you said that Obama will take "whatever measures are necessary to contain," but that is NOT what he said. He said it was "unacceptable." So, I ask again, what does that mean and what might that portend?

      Delete