Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Obama has said that he will not meet with Israeli prime minister during his upcoming visit to US and his address to congress. Yet Onama is brokering deal to give Iran Nuclear Power.

Does this make any sense?

Seems like a bad idea to give anybody over seas nuclear power

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Obama has said that he will not meet with Israeli prime minister during his upcoming visit to US and his address to congress. Yet Onama is brokering deal to give Iran Nuclear Power.

Does this make any sense?
So let's break this down in three parts.

Netanyahu is NOT Obama's ally. Shoving aside any geopolitical concerns, there is no love lost between the two men.

Obama has zero reason to care for, support, or respect Netanyahu as a politician or person. Netanyahu's policies have not been in the interest of the United States's foreign policy goals or in Obama's interest.

Apart from refusing to reign in Israeli settlements (which time and time again forces the US into the uncomfortable position of having to bury or even veto any global diplomatic action against Israel, which makes America unpopular with...oh, basically EVERY COUNTRY THAT ISN'T ISRAEL), have you forgotten that last election Netanyahu all but endorsed Mitt Romney?* Why in the Hell would Obama meet with Netanyahu during the latter's upcoming campaign (which would be all but an endorsement for Bibi) when Netanyahu was cozying up to Romney and the Republicans then AND now? Netanyahu is meddling in American politics by addressing the Republican congress against the president's wishes, whereas by refusing to meet with Netanyahu, Obama is technically doing the proper and responsible thing by refusing to get involved in Israeli politics. I'll admit, that isn't the reason WHY he isn't seeing Netanyahu, but as pointed out above, he has damn good reason to leave the guy in the cold.

Israel is overall a pretty terrible ally, and America continues to support Israel not out of true self-interest, but out of a sense of historical responsibility and because of powerful Pro-Israel lobbying interests. If you look at the history of American-Israeli relations, you'll see that while America has given them financial, military, and diplomatic cover, they've been a liability more often than an asset in our dealings in the Middle East. During the Gulf War, America couldn't expect any overt Israeli support because even if Israel responded to a direct attack by Saddam their involvement would probably have unraveled the Arab Coalition. Before that, during the Cold War, there are a few well-documented cases of Israel spying on America, even trying to steal nuclear secrets. There's also a controversial claim (which I don't know enough about to pass off as *fact*) that during the Yom Kippur War, Israel blackmailed America into providing material aid by assembling a nuclear weapon in plain view of American satellites, with the implication that "if things go South for us, we will nuke the Arabs and maybe start World War III". As I said, it's a controversial story, but a very interesting one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ The_Samson_Option:_Israel%27s_Nuclear_Arsenal_and_
American_Foreign_Policy#Controversies

That's a lot of spin to say that a potential nuclear deal with Iran would "empower" them. I think whether or not we can negotiate a deal with Iran which would prevent them from ever building one isn't really as important as the fact that all indications say that Iran will build a nuke if they really want to (look at North Korea--that's a country much poorer, smaller, and more isolated than Iran, and they've managed to create nuclear weapons), so our best hope is to take away their incentive for building them through engagement. And even if they get a nuke Israel has something like a hundred nukes already, so I don't buy the crap about Israel needing our help.

To paraphrase the line from the end of Training Day, if the Israelis want war with Iran, they should be ready to put their own work in.

* http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/sep/20/binyamin-netanyahu-gambles-on-mitt-romney

Israel is the guy you don't go clubbing with because YOU KNOW he'll get into a fight and you'll have to back him up and end up in a drunk tank.

Originally posted by Spawningpool
Seems like a bad idea to give anybody over seas nuclear power

Yea Obama had no clue what he is doing. Iran funds terrorism and had said if they get nukes they will wipe Israel out.

Which they're obviously not going to do because Iran nuking Israel would end with Iran as glassed crater itself... as OV pointed out in the post you probably didn't read.

Omega you sound dangerous close to being anti Semitic. Care to explain how our longest standing ally is not our friend and Iran is. You sound full of shit tbh.

Recap you want to give nuked to Iran who funds terrorism and betray Israel?

Originally posted by Tzeentch
Which they're obviously not going to do because Iran nuking Israel would end with Iran as glassed crater itself... as OV pointed out in the post you probably didn't read.

What he said does not change what's happening..

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Omega you sound dangerous close to being anti Semitic. Care to explain how our longest standing ally is not our friend and Iran is. You sound full of shit tbh.

Recap you want to give nuked to Iran who funds terrorism and betray Israel?
Wow, okay, this is beneath what I expect from you.

1) There is absolutely nothing anti-Semitic about my post. That fallacy is old and harmful to everyone including Jews because it poses a false dichotomy: either you're for Israel and everything their government does or you wanted the Holocaust to happen. We need to get past this if we're going to have a mature conversation here.

2) I did explain how they're a bad ally strategically because they drain significant attention and resources, don't give back much, and present a major liability in our Middle East activities. This isn't me saying that we should abandon Israel or sever relations, only stating a fact: Israel is more burden than asset to America. They've also spied on us a lot (probably more than Iran, lol), which conservatives never like to acknowledge because it taints their rosy picture of "our greatest ally." (I'm sure the UK's collective blood boils whenever anyone calls Israel that)

3) Lol, I never said Iran was our friend. Come off that nonsense.

4) I don't want to give a nuke to Iran. I'm of the view that if Iran wants a nuclear weapon, we can't stop them short of actually invading and occupying them, an undertaking that would make Iraq look like a stroll through the park given the size and population of Iran. If it follows that we can't actually prevent Iran getting a weapon through force or coercion, then we must either accept that they will get a nuke, engage them and hope that by showing that we aren't a direct threat to them they'll see they don't need to pursue nuclear weapons, or pretend that we can actually stop them and continue isolating them until they become an even larger North Korea.

You clearly didn't read my post.

Ah so you passed my test. Because you spoke against bad behavior of Israel that must make you anti semetic. Just as I have spoken against against bad behavior of different cultures and you called me racist.

Apology accepted

can't view that article..without signing up.

Israel is one of our most valuable allies simply because of their close ties with God Himself. I realize that's difficult for an atheist to understand and I'm sure I will get some LOLs from them along with the typical atheist remark "If your god has Israel's back then they don't need us" or some similar retarded comment. I really don't give a damn what they think though. Growing number of atheists is one of the underlying problems in this once-great nation anyway.

If we turn our backs on Israel then God will likely do the same to us when we need Him. I hate bringing the subject of religion/God into the wrong forum but when people start talking trash about Israel it upsets me a little. If OV hadn't made his typical atheistic comment "Israel is a terrible ally" then I wouldn't have brought it into this forum.

And no, I'm not Jewish either.

Originally posted by Star428
Growing number of atheists is one of the underlying problems in this once-great nation anyway.

If OV hadn't made his typical atheistic comment "Israel is a terrible ally" then I wouldn't have brought it into this forum.

The US isn't about freedom of religion?

OV's comment about Israel being a poor ally had nothing to do with religion

Originally posted by Star428
Growing number of atheists is one of the underlying problems in this once-great nation anyway. Why is it a problem?

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
can't view that article..without signing up.

If you close the pop up asking to sign up you can still read the article. At least it worked for me.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Ah so you passed my test. Because you spoke against bad behavior of Israel that must make you anti semetic. Just as I have spoken against against bad behavior of different cultures and you called me racist.

Apology accepted
Those things are massively different. I'm not playing on any Jewish stereotypes in my criticism of Israel. In fact, nothing I've said about Israel has anything to do with it being a Jewish country.

There is literally nothing racist in my post, which is different from your minstrel show-like playing up of some stupid incident in a McDonalds to somehow deflect a legitimate criticism of systemic racism in America.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Israel is the guy you don't go clubbing with because YOU KNOW he'll get into a fight and you'll have to back him up and end up in a drunk tank.


It's not Israel's fault that everybody in the Middle East hates them. Israel never starts the fights.

Originally posted by Star428
It's not Israel's fault that everybody in the Middle East hates them.

I love how so no one can actually mount a counterargument to anything I've said here so they just accuse me of hating Jews or the Jewish religion even though I haven't even really mentioned Jews or Judaism in any of my critiques of Israel.
Originally posted by Star428
It's not Israel's fault that everybody in the Middle East hates them. Israel never starts the fights.
Technically speaking, Israel started it by evicting Palestinians from their lands in order to create Israel. That's not me saying that Israel shouldn't have been created, just that it could have been handled much better. Honestly I don't think Israel should have been created in the Middle East. It should have been created somewhere in Europe.

Believe it or not, I do believe that Israel has a right to defend itself, which includes military strikes on other nations in order to destroy their capacity to attack Israel, but I have a hard time backing the Israeli government when they respond to rocket attacks that wound one or two Israelis by flattening entire neighborhoods with airstrike after airstrike.

I actually LoL'd at that one. Even my friend of 20+ years father who is ex-Israel special forces and then was a narcotics officer fo years (a born and raised Israeli) has no problem admitting that many of Israel's issues is due to Israel's heavy-handedness with her neighbors at times

Israel has a siege mentality, so even when they have legitimate security concerns they end up pushing it too far, and any attempt to criticize them or support the Palestinians diplomatically is seen as an attack on the very foundation of the nation, or perceived, as the fine posters in this thread have demonstrated, as Antisemitism.

I didn't know you guys hated jews so much.

Really eye opening.

This talk about being anti-semitic makes me feel as if people didn't know 1) any jews and 2) what Israel does in the region. According to the definition of antisemitism thrown around here, a good chunk of the jewish israel population would be anti-semitic

The current government in Israel has done a lot of biting the hands of their "allies" so I would approach it with caution.

I think the most serious point of contention on this thread is about allowing Iran to be a nuclear power to some capacity, not so much because of what Iran might do themselves, but because it might push its rival nations to follow the same path and arm themselves.

Originally posted by Star428
Israel is one of our most valuable allies simply because of their close ties with God Himself. I realize that's difficult for an atheist to understand and I'm sure I will get some LOLs from them along with the typical atheist remark "If your god has Israel's back then they don't need us" or some similar retarded comment. I really don't give a damn what they think though. Growing number of atheists is one of the underlying problems in this once-great nation anyway.

If we turn our backs on Israel then God will likely do the same to us when we need Him. I hate bringing the subject of religion/God into the wrong forum but when people start talking trash about Israel it upsets me a little. If OV hadn't made his typical atheistic comment "Israel is a terrible ally" then I wouldn't have brought it into this forum.

And no, I'm not Jewish either.

Assuming god exists, you really think he/she/it would be THAT petty?

======

It isn't anti-semetic to accuse Isreal of being dicks. They've been terrible at times. I just feel bad for the people who aren't in power. They're getting a bad rap big time.

Originally posted by Star428
Israel is one of our most valuable allies simply because of their close ties with God Himself.

Are you arguing that christian countries should have reverence towards jews because they are the Chosen People? Are you implying that they are closer to God than christians? Should we assume that an authority chosen by some jews has a higher moral ground than other human authorities by default? Unless you're downright declaring that the Israel government represents God and the Jewish religion, that doesn't sound like a given to me.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Those things are massively different. I'm not playing on any Jewish stereotypes in my criticism of Israel. In fact, nothing I've said about Israel has anything to do with it being a Jewish country.

There is literally nothing racist in my post, which is different from your minstrel show-like playing up of some stupid incident in a McDonalds to somehow deflect a legitimate criticism of systemic racism in America.

What you call different is a double standard, in which I caught you and now you back pedaling away from it. Face it, you got caught being a hypocrite and fancy talk and going to bail you out.

Anyhow, did you read that article I copy/pasted for you TI?

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
What you call different is a double standard, in which I caught you and now you back pedaling away from it. Face it, you got caught being a hypocrite and fancy talk and going to bail you out.
You can't point out a single thing about any of my posts that's antisemetic and you're just trying to distract from that fact with this silly little troll dance of yours.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
You can't point out a single thing about any of my posts that's antisemetic and you're just trying to distract from that fact with this silly little troll dance of yours.

I dont agree with you, I have pointed that out..

I'd be the first to agree that Israel's policies are extremely hard handed a lot of times and that has, in turn, made them look really bad in the eyes of the world. But if you put yourself in their shoes, who could really blame then?

They live in a part of the world that practically every neighbor they have wants to see them destroyed. And they live in constant fear of terrorism. Where any sign of weakness can and will be exploited.

Remember 9/11? US got attacked once and they practically leveled 2 countries. Imagine living in a constant 9/11 world? You'd be pretty heavy handed yourself.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
I'd be the first to agree that Israel's policies are extremely hard handed a lot of times and that has, in turn, made them look really bad in the eyes of the world. But if you put yourself in their shoes, who could really blame then?

They live in a part of the world that practically every neighbor they have wants to see them destroyed. And they live in constant fear of terrorism. Where any sign of weakness can and will be exploited.

Remember 9/11? US got attacked once and they practically leveled 2 countries. Imagine living in a constant 9/11 world? You'd be pretty heavy handed yourself.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
I'd be the first to agree that Israel's policies are extremely hard handed a lot of times and that has, in turn, made them look really bad in the eyes of the world. But if you put yourself in their shoes, who could really blame then?

They live in a part of the world that practically every neighbor they have wants to see them destroyed. And they live in constant fear of terrorism. Where any sign of weakness can and will be exploited.

Remember 9/11? US got attacked once and they practically leveled 2 countries. Imagine living in a constant 9/11 world? You'd be pretty heavy handed yourself.

Someone gets it.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
I dont agree with you, I have pointed that out..
Stating disagreement isn't the same thing as refuting.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Stating disagreement isn't the same thing as refuting.

You act like its a walk in the park to be Israel. Imagine living in a world where everyone trying to take a swing at you and you have to be somewhat reserved on how you deal with it for fear of geo political ideology. Lets face it, there are more Islamic sympathizers then Israeli sympathizers.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
You act like its a walk in the park to be Israel. Imagine living in a world where everyone trying to take a swing at you and you have to be somewhat reserved on how you deal with it for fear of geo political ideology. Lets face it, there are more Islamic sympathizers then Israeli sympathizers.
No I don't. I understand they live under siege. I just don't see why we should absolve them of all guilt. And how does their situation excuse the unchecked settlement building on land that's supposed to belong to the Palestinians even according to the Israeli government's own designation?

Comments like these enrage people in Europe who are tired of seeing Israel get a pass for any abuses of the Palestinians just because they live in a "rough neighborhood," and who are accused of being "terrorist sympathizers" because they don't agree with the IDF bulldozing the houses of the families of militants.

If I said that the firebombing of Dresden in WW2 was militarily unnecessary and inhumane, would you accuse me of supporting Nazism?

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
You act like its a walk in the park to be Israel. Imagine living in a world where everyone trying to take a swing at you and you have to be somewhat reserved on how you deal with it for fear of geo political ideology. Lets face it, there are more Islamic sympathizers then Israeli sympathizers.


Yeah, and it's despicable.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
No I don't. I understand they live under siege. I just don't see why we should absolve them of all guilt. And how does their situation excuse the unchecked settlement building on land that's supposed to belong to the Palestinians even according to the Israeli government's own designation?

Comments like these enrage people in Europe who are tired of seeing Israel get a pass for any abuses of the Palestinians just because they live in a "rough neighborhood," and who are accused of being "terrorist sympathizers" because they don't agree with the IDF bulldozing the houses of the families of militants.

If I said that the firebombing of Dresden in WW2 was militarily unnecessary and inhumane, would you accuse me of supporting Nazism?


You are kidding right? Ok so 20 years ago when Israeli gave up all that great land to Palestine, they burned all the advanced farming buildings and laid waste to it..they don't wanna give it up cause Palestine will prolly just destroy it. Why give up a perfectly good building to have it destroyed.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
You are kidding right? Ok so 20 years ago when Israeli gave up all that great land to Palestine, they burned all the advanced farming buildings and laid waste to it..they don't wanna give it up cause Palestine will prolly just destroy it. Why give up a perfectly good building to have it destroyed.

You probably see that such reasoning is not really a justification for taking territory by force.

"But the mexicans were doing a poor job with it! They didn't use the factories made by US corporations"

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
You are kidding right? Ok so 20 years ago when Israeli gave up all that great land to Palestine, they burned all the advanced farming buildings and laid waste to it..they don't wanna give it up cause Palestine will prolly just destroy it. Why give up a perfectly good building to have it destroyed.

"I'm the first to admit we took this country from the indians but what were they doing with it anyway; shooting off bows and arrows and using seashells for money." -Norman Arbuthnot circa 1995

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
You are kidding right? Ok so 20 years ago when Israeli gave up all that great land to Palestine, they burned all the advanced farming buildings and laid waste to it..they don't wanna give it up cause Palestine will prolly just destroy it. Why give up a perfectly good building to have it destroyed.
Source?

Also what Rob said.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
You act like its a walk in the park to be Israel. Imagine living in a world where everyone trying to take a swing at you and you have to be somewhat reserved on how you deal with it for fear of geo political ideology. Lets face it, there are more Islamic sympathizers then Israeli sympathizers.

it doesn't help their case when they bring part of it on themselves.

lmao at Time jumping on anti-semitism instead of trying to formulate a counter-argument.

It's what the Ultra Orthodox/conservative Jews love to fall back on (the ones with the funny hair and hats to you pedestrian types), any legitimate criticism of Israel's actions and it's "You hate Jews and love Hitler" remarks.

These same Jews (that live in Israel) are the ones that claim exemption from Israel's mandatory military service on "against my religious beliefs" grounds. From what I'm told and have seen a bit of, the common Israeli does not care for them.

Originally posted by krisblaze
lmao at Time jumping on anti-semitism instead of trying to formulate a counter-argument.

If you had a clue you would read the thread and see it was a joke I played on Omega.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
If you had a clue you would read the thread and see it was a joke I played on Omega.
But jokes are funny.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
But jokes are funny.

I was mused.

Mused doesn't work like that!

bullshit, anyone that condemns Israel, condemns America.

Originally posted by -Pr-
it doesn't help their case when they bring part of it on themselves.



???


How exactly do they bring anything on themselves? They never attack anyone without provocation (except of course when they attacked the USS Liberty in 1967 because they thought it was an enemy ship-at least that's what they claimed). They have every right to be proactive in defending themselves when someone (like the Palestinians) has repeatedly terrorized, kidnapped, and killed their people. Everything they've done is justified.

Lol yea we really need to help these people.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4084183482001/iran-test-fires-new-strategic-weapon-on-last-day-of-drills/?intcmp=obnetwork#sp=show-clips

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Lol yea we really need to help these people.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4084183482001/iran-test-fires-new-strategic-weapon-on-last-day-of-drills/?intcmp=obnetwork#sp=show-clips



Hilarious how they refer to the US as "The Great Satan" as if they have any room to talk. Referring to Satan as "Great" tells you all you need to know about those despicable people.

Originally posted by Star428
???


How exactly do they bring anything on themselves? They never attack anyone without provocation (except of course when they attacked the USS Liberty in 1967 because they thought it was an enemy ship-at least that's what they claimed). They have every right to be proactive in defending themselves when someone (like the Palestinians) has repeatedly terrorized, kidnapped, and killed their people. Everything they've done is justified.

They are, obviously, entitled to defend themselves. But when someone shoves you, you don't run them over in your car.

when you can justify anything as being "self defence" and that anyone attacking you is somehow automatically anti-semetic (which is retarded), there's really no limit to how aggressive you'll be. which is what Israel tends to do.

Justified? Not at all, imo.

Originally posted by Star428
Hilarious how they refer to the US as "The Great Satan" as if they have any room to talk. Referring to Satan as "Great" tells you all you need to know about those despicable people.

That's not what they mean by "Great".

Originally posted by Star428
???


How exactly do they bring anything on themselves? They never attack anyone without provocation (except of course when they attacked the USS Liberty in 1967 because they thought it was an enemy ship-at least that's what they claimed). They have every right to be proactive in defending themselves when someone (like the Palestinians) has repeatedly terrorized, kidnapped, and killed their people. Everything they've done is justified.
I think the issue is your (and the Israeli's) definition of "provocation."

The USS Liberty is symptomatic of Israeli paranoia and heavy handedness.

We have to recognize that while Israel is still surrounded by unfriendly nations, it hasn't been a scrappy underdog for years now. There are only four nations in the Middle East who could fight the Israelis on even terms: Turkey, Iran, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia will never make trouble with Israel for three reasons: lack of incentive, their mutual partnership with the United States, and their common enemy in Iran. Turkish-Israeli relations have suffered since the flotilla incident and due to both nations being led by posturing idiots who like to project a tough guy image, but once again there's not nearly enough incentive for either to go to war. Egypt also won't go to war with Israel because of their treaty and because both nations see that their long term stability is tied to peace. Iran is the only country that might actually go to war with Israel, and if they do they don't have a common border (and both nations lack the power projection necessary to wage real war on the other's home soil), so any real open war would be an air war, which Israel would win handily.

With regards to Israel and its neighbors, the old saying about spiders applies here: they're more afraid of you than you are of them.

Im glad Omega sleeps better at night knowing Iran is getting nukes.

Delusional

Where did he say that, exactly?

Originally posted by -Pr-
Where did he say that, exactly?

Its his general not giving two fck attitude in all things politics and agreeing with everything this administration does.

Fair question: has anyone here ever lived in an area where terrorism is a real and constant threat?

does living near other ethnicities count? There was also a Wallmart close by.

Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
does living near other ethnicities count? There was also a Wallmart close by.

Dude, that's terrible. I'm sorry you had to go through that.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Its his general not giving two fck attitude in all things politics and agreeing with everything this administration does.

really don't think that's what he's been doing at all.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Fair question: has anyone here ever lived in an area where terrorism is a real and constant threat?

right now? no. in the past, yes.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
Dude, that's terrible. I'm sorry you had to go through that.

Thanks, bro. It's getting easier but i'd be lying if i didn't say it hasn't been a hard road to recovery.

You know, maybe we should just outsource all of our wallmarts to the middle east. I bet that'd solve all their problems and fix all of ours, eh? damn, someone needs to pay me for these ideas.

Originally posted by -Pr-
right now? no. in the past, yes.

How old were you then? Don't you remember the sense of uncertainty about many day-to-day routines and a strong sense of distrust and anger towards the terrorists that threaten you and your family's security? Which terrorist group was it?

Originally posted by Nibedicus
How old were you then? Don't you remember the sense of uncertainty about many day-to-day routines and a strong sense of distrust and anger towards the terrorists that threaten you and your family's security? Which terrorist group was it?

The IRA.

And no, we just got on with our lives, because we knew that if it happened, it happened. Obviously it's not as bad as ISIS, but I really don't see how this matters to the thread.

Originally posted by -Pr-
The IRA.

And no, we just got on with our lives, because we knew that if it happened, it happened. Obviously it's not as bad as ISIS, but I really don't see how this matters to the thread.

I just feel that unless you've walked in someone else's shoes, you shouldn't judge them.

Question extends to everyone in this thread, tho.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
I just feel that unless you've walked in someone else's shoes, you shouldn't judge them.

Question extends to everyone in this thread, tho.

No, but I mean who are we talking about? IS? Isreal? Iran?

Originally posted by -Pr-
No, but I mean who are we talking about? IS? Isreal? Iran?

Everyone really. Cept Isis. Those motha****as crazy.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
I just feel that unless you've walked in someone else's shoes, you shouldn't judge them.

Question extends to everyone in this thread, tho.

By that logic every judge of law should be a multiple murderer and rapist of children, just saying

Originally posted by Nibedicus
I just feel that unless you've walked in someone else's shoes, you shouldn't judge them.

Question extends to everyone in this thread, tho.

I never worked in a concentration camp...

I have.

As a tour guide.

Originally posted by Bentley
By that logic every judge of law should be a multiple murderer and rapist of children, just saying

No, but some one does have the right to a "jury of one's peers".

Netanyahu speech was awesome.

What was awesome about it?

Originally posted by Robtard
What was awesome about it?

Everything.

LoL, copout

Originally posted by Robtard
LoL, copout

Either you watched it or your didn't. Here is the speech.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/03/netanyahu-faces-dem-ire-in-wake-iran-address/

TI,

Do you think Iran wants to build nukes in order to do what? Mushroom cloud Israel or the US?

Ask yourself, what would they gain except a nuclear holocaust in return tenfold.

Also, why aren't you freaking out over NK who has nuclear weapons and actively makes threats?

Originally posted by Robtard
TI,

Do you think Iran wants to build nukes in order to do what? Mushroom cloud Israel or the US?

Ask yourself, what would they gain except a nuclear holocaust in return tenfold.

Also, why aren't you freaking out over NK who has nuclear weapons and actively makes threats?

Yes they would use them against US and Israel we are the "Great Satan"

They don't care if they die, because of radical beliefs.

North Korea does not fund terrorism. Iran does.

TI, if they didn't care about dying they would have already waged war on Israel.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Yes they would use them against US and Israel we are the "Great Satan"

They don't care if they die, because of radical beliefs.

North Korea does not fund terrorism. Iran does.

Just so I'm perfectly clear: You're convinced Iran wants nukes because its leaders hate he US and Israel so much that they would rather die along with million of their own people just to give the US and/or Israel a black-eye?

Hmm. George W. Bush named N. Korea as part of his "Axis of Evil" and claimed N. Korea funded terrorism, this happened in 2002

Originally posted by Robtard
Just so I'm perfectly clear: You're convinced Iran wants nukes because its leaders hate he US and Israel so much that they would rather die along with million of their own people just to give the US and/or Israel a black-eye?

Hmm. George W. Bush named N. Korea as part of his "Axis of Evil" and claimed N. Korea funded terrorism, this happened in 2002

Nonsense.

To?

Netanyahu: "Iran is a global threat."

I guess Israel counts as the whole world to Netanyahu.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Yes they would use them against US and Israel we are the "Great Satan"

They don't care if they die, because of radical beliefs.

North Korea does not fund terrorism. Iran does.
Lolwut? Yes they do. They sell weapons all the time to regimes you'd consider terror sponsors, thus making them terrorist sponsors in turn.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Netanyahu: "Iran is a global threat."

I guess Israel counts as the whole world to Netanyahu.


Lolwut? Yes they do. They sell weapons all the time to regimes you'd consider terror sponsors, thus making them terrorist sponsors in turn.

Wow I guess Nuclear weapons on missiles are not a world wide problem. To you I guess Iran should have nukes.

Such a disgrace that Obama would not even meet with Netanyahu.

He's more mad at Bibi for talking to Congress, then he is Putin for murdering all the Ukrainians.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Netanyahu speech was awesome.


Yeah, I liked it too.

Originally posted by Mindset
TI, if they didn't care about dying they would have already waged war on Israel.



Yeah, but they know that attacking Israel conventionally won't kill nearly as many Israelis as using a nuke would. The Israeli military is no joke compared to a pathetic country like Iran. If Iran tried a full-scale invasion of Israel they wouldn't get far before being stopped cold.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
He's more mad at Bibi for talking to Congress, then he is Putin for murdering all the Ukrainians.

Obama doesn't seem to care much about his external politics, he is offended at Netanyahu because his actions are aimed at internal politics.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Wow I guess Nuclear weapons on missiles are not a world wide problem. To you I guess Iran should have nukes.
They won't be. Iran's ambitions are regional. Even if they got a nuke, it would remain a regional problem.

And no, get off this ridiculous "Omega wants a nuclear Iran" kick. Even you don't believe that, you'll just say anything to strawman an opponent.

Originally posted by Bentley
Obama doesn't seem to care much about his external politics, he is offended at Netanyahu because his actions are aimed at internal politics.
This is what TI doesn't understand. The disgrace (which should offend ALL Americans) is that Netanyahu is interfering in American foreign policy and internal politics. I don't understand how conservatives are so myopic that they don't understand that a foreign leader just tried to hijack American policy. I mean, can you imagine if Putin addressed the congress about something as innocuous as proper lawn maintenance? Everyone would be foaming at the mouth. But because it's a supposed "ally" it's a good thing that he's using a speech to Congress to try to derail an American foreign policy initiative, sow discord between Congress and the White House, and help his own election chances back at home.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
I don't understand how conservatives are so myopic that they don't understand that a foreign leader just tried to hijack American policy.

Because 2016 is just around the corner and anything to make Obama and by extension the Democratic party look bad/weak is a win to them.

You guys think this is political, however its not. Its common sense, prevent Iran from getting nukes at all cost is the most primary concern. The deal on the table does not prevent that.

No, it's political with a capital P.

Edit: Besides, I'm not so sure what you're worried about. Anything that Iran builds that has any remote resemblance to uranium and/or plutonium weaponizing, Israel will tactical strike it out of the dessert since they couldn't give two shits what anyone else thinks. Likely with missiles secretly sent from the US as the punch-line.

Originally posted by Omega Vision


This is what TI doesn't understand. The disgrace (which should offend ALL Americans) is that Netanyahu is interfering in American foreign policy and internal politics. I don't understand how conservatives are so myopic that they don't understand that a foreign leader just tried to hijack American policy. I mean, can you imagine if Putin addressed the congress about something as innocuous as proper lawn maintenance? Everyone would be foaming at the mouth. But because it's a supposed "ally" it's a good thing that he's using a speech to Congress to try to derail an American foreign policy initiative, sow discord between Congress and the White House, and help his own election chances back at home.


What you don't understand is that most of our politicians are funded by the zionist state as well as other global governments. Sure if you look at all the Pac Money donors, it will seem its only just good old USA folks that are funding the GOP and Dems. That is a bit naive.

The fact he can address both houses of Congress and have an audience, that is some clout there. Grandstanding of course. But let's not kid ourselves, the USA is the tail of the dog, Israel is the rest of the dog.

Originally posted by SayWhat
What you don't understand is that most of our politicians are funded by the zionist state as well as other global governments. Sure if you look at all the Pac Money donors, it will seem its only just good old USA folks that are funding the GOP and Dems. That is a bit naive.

The fact he can address both houses of Congress and have an audience, that is some clout there. Grandstanding of course. But let's not kid ourselves, the USA is the tail of the dog, Israel is the rest of the dog.



Bullshit.

Originally posted by SayWhat
What you don't understand is that most of our politicians are funded by the zionist state as well as other global governments. Sure if you look at all the Pac Money donors, it will seem its only just good old USA folks that are funding the GOP and Dems. That is a bit naive.

The fact he can address both houses of Congress and have an audience, that is some clout there. Grandstanding of course. But let's not kid ourselves, the USA is the tail of the dog, Israel is the rest of the dog. http://i.imgur.com/Zd8rv0J.png

Originally posted by SayWhat
What you don't understand is that most of our politicians are funded by the zionist state as well as other global governments. Sure if you look at all the Pac Money donors, it will seem its only just good old USA folks that are funding the GOP and Dems. That is a bit naive.

The fact he can address both houses of Congress and have an audience, that is some clout there. Grandstanding of course. But let's not kid ourselves, the USA is the tail of the dog, Israel is the rest of the dog. 9hSEwy8ZORc

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
You guys think this is political, however its not. Its common sense, prevent Iran from getting nukes at all cost is the most primary concern. The deal on the table does not prevent that.
Dude, how is it not political? There's an election in Israel in two weeks and Netanyahu has basically said to Israel "Look, I got invited to address the legislature of our most important ally and I said some really strong stuff against our greatest adversary. I'm decisive, I'm tough on Iran, support my party, damn it."

If we were two years from the next Israeli election, I might call it innocuous-ish (it's still a blatant interference in American affairs--seriously, not cool), but as it is you would have to be either blind or self-deluding to not see this as a grand political statement on Netanyahu's part.

And here's the problem with Netanyahu's "common sense" position that Obama and other democrats pointed out: at no point did Netanyahu present a viable alternative to negotiations with Iran. What's the conclusion we draw from this? He says that Iran can't be negotiated with, thus it follows that he wants total capitulation on Iran's part, which could only be brought about by either much more crippling economic isolation than already exists (effectively impossible now that we can't count on Russia as a partner, and China likes to have its cake and eat it too by sanctioning Iran while also buying its resources) or military action. There's no way you could permanently (which is all Netanyahu's interested in) stop Iran from getting a nuke with air power alone. You'd need an invasion. Israel's not going to invade a country of eighty million people. So who gets the bill in that scenario? Starts with 'U' and ends with 'A.'

Originally posted by SayWhat
What you don't understand is that most of our politicians are funded by the zionist state as well as other global governments.

Yes this is true. Which surprises me why Obama and Bibi don't get along on policy.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Dude, how is it not political? There's an election in Israel in two weeks and Netanyahu has basically said to Israel "Look, I got invited to address the legislature of our most important ally and I said some really strong stuff against our greatest adversary. I'm decisive, I'm tough on Iran, support my party, damn it."

If we were two years from the next Israeli election, I might call it innocuous-ish (it's still a blatant interference in American affairs--seriously, not cool), but as it is you would have to be either blind or self-deluding to not see this as a grand political statement on Netanyahu's part.

And here's the problem with Netanyahu's "common sense" position that Obama and other democrats pointed out: at no point did Netanyahu present a viable alternative to negotiations with Iran. What's the conclusion we draw from this? He says that Iran can't be negotiated with, thus it follows that he wants total capitulation on Iran's part, which could only be brought about by either much more crippling economic isolation than already exists (effectively impossible now that we can't count on Russia as a partner, and China likes to have its cake and eat it too by sanctioning Iran while also buying its resources) or military action. There's no way you could permanently (which is all Netanyahu's interested in) stop Iran from getting a nuke with air power alone. You'd need an invasion. Israel's not going to invade a country of eighty million people. So who gets the bill in that scenario? Starts with 'U' and ends with 'A.'

You know darn well that this 10 year deal ends with them having a full nuclear arsenal..#facts

And we know Obama is dodging this as best he can and going to hand it off, kinda like all his votes in the Senate where he voted "Present"

Wake up Omega, its like you love defending the fool in the room. Is your head up your ass?

dp.

http://news.yahoo.com/ap-interview-reid-wants-congress-delay-iran-legislation-173737715--politics.html

Harry wants Congress not to do their job which the constitution clearly says is their job, but at the same time wants to allow Obama to handle the deal even though it clearly says its not his job, but congress's.

You must be an Indian, cuz you made a tp. (sorry, terrible pun)

The ten year moratorium is difficult enough as it is to get Iran to agree to, but it's a worthy goal. As it is, Iran could get a bomb in much less than ten years. You keep on ignoring my posts and coming out with one sentence replies that demonstrate you don't have much of a grasp of the issue.

Let me break it down for you: if North Korea can produce its own nuclear weapon, a country like Iran with a larger population, more resources, and relatively less onerous sanctions can certainly make their own weapon. We want to prevent Iran from getting a weapon, if for no other reason than the principle that too many countries already have them, why add to the list? In order to prevent Iran from getting a bomb, we have three possible avenues. Diplomatic, economic, or military. You and Netanyahu reject the diplomatic angle out of hand, so let's explore the other two.

Economic: what we've been doing so far. It's worked insofar as we brought the Iranians to the negotiating table, something that would have been unthinkable in 2010 when Ahmadinejad was in power. However, we've reached a point of diminishing returns with economic pressure. Oil prices have basically bottomed out, it's very unlikely that they'll get lower than they are now, so Iran's oil exports can only become more valuable as time goes on. Couple this with Russia, the wild card of the whole debacle. Russia is now facing sanctions similar to Iran's own, though not as onerous. Russian politicians have repeatedly extolled the virtues of aligning Russia with Iran. Recently they've agreed to resume a long suspended deal to sell modern air defense systems to Iran as a "take that" to the West. We can't rely on Russia to put any real pressure on Iran when Russia itself is under economic pressure from the West. It's also unlikely that China will do anything more than it's already done. Trade with Russia and China alone should be enough to keep Iran economically viable for the forseeable future. In sum: we can't cripple Iran's economy enough to force them to completely surrender to the political will of the West.

Military option: in terms of what's the most effective, full-proof way of preventing Iran from building a nuke, this is the best option. However it's also the worst option because it would be horrendously more difficult and expensive than either of the other two. Some people think a few airstrikes could shut down Iran's nuclear program. At best, it would slow it down and force the Iranians to build their research facilities deeper and deeper in the ground. To actually shut down Iran, you'd need to occupy and reconstruct the country. You'd need to get rid of the Islamic Republic, the Revolutionary Guard, the Mullahs, anyone who ever wanted to make Iran into an aggressive regional power.

In short, you'd need an invasion.

If you support an invasion of Iran, say so now and we can move on to discussing the logistics of such an enterprise.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
You must be an Indian, cuz you made a tp. (sorry, terrible pun)

The ten year moratorium is difficult enough as it is to get Iran to agree to, but it's a worthy goal. As it is, Iran could get a bomb in much less than ten years. You keep on ignoring my posts and coming out with one sentence replies that demonstrate you don't have much of a grasp of the issue.

Let me break it down for you: if North Korea can produce its own nuclear weapon, a country like Iran with a larger population, more resources, and relatively less onerous sanctions can certainly make their own weapon. We want to prevent Iran from getting a weapon, if for no other reason than the principle that too many countries already have them, why add to the list? In order to prevent Iran from getting a bomb, we have three possible avenues. Diplomatic, economic, or military. You and Netanyahu reject the diplomatic angle out of hand, so let's explore the other two.

Economic: what we've been doing so far. It's worked insofar as we brought the Iranians to the negotiating table, something that would have been unthinkable in 2010 when Ahmadinejad was in power. However, we've reached a point of diminishing returns with economic pressure. Oil prices have basically bottomed out, it's very unlikely that they'll get lower than they are now, so Iran's oil exports can only become more valuable as time goes on. Couple this with Russia, the wild card of the whole debacle. Russia is now facing sanctions similar to Iran's own, though not as onerous. Russian politicians have repeatedly extolled the virtues of aligning Russia with Iran. Recently they've agreed to resume a long suspended deal to sell modern air defense systems to Iran as a "take that" to the West. We can't rely on Russia to put any real pressure on Iran when Russia itself is under economic pressure from the West. It's also unlikely that China will do anything more than it's already done. Trade with Russia and China alone should be enough to keep Iran economically viable for the forseeable future. In sum: we can't cripple Iran's economy enough to force them to completely surrender to the political will of the West.

Military option: in terms of what's the most effective, full-proof way of preventing Iran from building a nuke, this is the best option. However it's also the worst option because it would be horrendously more difficult and expensive than either of the other two. Some people think a few airstrikes could shut down Iran's nuclear program. At best, it would slow it down and force the Iranians to build their research facilities deeper and deeper in the ground. To actually shut down Iran, you'd need to occupy and reconstruct the country. You'd need to get rid of the Islamic Republic, the Revolutionary Guard, the Mullahs, anyone who ever wanted to make Iran into an aggressive regional power.

In short, you'd need an invasion.

If you support an invasion of Iran, say so now and we can move on to discussing the logistics of such an enterprise.

Best thing you said, I agree.

You agree with what?

The invasion of Iran would add a layer of instability in a region that is currently volatile. It'd go against french interests at the very least, but I think it'd be against the West as a whole. If that's what Netyanahu is asking for, he's asking for too much.

Lol, so true:

eHWbqwh4PB0#t=121

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Lol, so true:

eHWbqwh4PB0#t=121

I'm honestly not sure what Netenyahu thought he could realistically accomplish with that speech of his.

Outside of getting re-elected I mean.

For anyone who thinks that all blacks are on Obama's side with how he snubbed the Israeli leader here is your wake-up call:



http://americanprosperity.com/the-way-this-group-of-black-pastors-defied-obama-is-shocking/



I'm glad some of them have come to their senses and have had enough of him. I'm grateful for these black pastors who realize that by snubbing Israeli leader you are doing the same thing to God Himself.


Bring it.

This belief that Israel = god worries me, tbh.

Originally posted by Star428
by snubbing Israeli leader you are doing the same thing to God Himself.

There are cases of jewish authorities offending God in the Bible. I'm sure you can tell the difference between political manipulations and the will of the Almighty.

Originally posted by Star428
I'm glad some of them have come to their senses and have had enough of him. I'm grateful for these black pastors who realize that by snubbing Israeli leader you are doing the same thing to God Himself.


Bring it.

Do you honestly believe that Netanyahu speaks for God and/or is in some fashion God's avatar on earth?