Netanyahu speech to Congress disrepectul and racist!!!

[okie52]

Wickham: Netanyahu's speech insult to blacks
DeWayne Wickham, 12:52 p.m. EST March 4, 2015
Israeli prime minister's end around Obama disrespects not only America's first black president.

On the eve of his ill-conceived address to a joint session of Congress, Benjamin Netanyahu told cheering delegates at the annual meeting of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee that he'd come to Washington to make his case against Iran, not to disrespect President Obama.

But, in fact, he has managed to do just that. The Israeli prime minister's decision to bypass the normal diplomatic protocol and accept a Republican invitation to address Congress on Tuesday is a personal affront to America's first black president.

House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Ron Dermer, Israel's ambassador to the United States, secretly negotiated the invitation, with Dermer agreeing not to let the White House in on those discussions. A more obvious act of disrespect is hard to imagine.

"This is a real in-your-face slap at the president, and black folks know it," Rep. James Clyburn, D-S.C., told me. "He (Netanyahu) wouldn't have done it to any other president."

When I asked Clyburn, the third-ranking Democrat and highest-ranking black in the House, why the Israeli prime minister would be so disrespectful of Obama, he responded: "You know why."

I think I do. By agreeing to sidestep normal diplomatic channels to address Congress, Netanyahu has become an instrument of a Republican Party that has shown an unbridled, personal disrespect for Obama, his wife and children since this black family moved into the building many Republicans apparently think is literally a white house.

Of course, Netanyahu has every right to criticize the nuclear arms deal the Obama administration is brokering with Iran. He fears it will leave Iran with the capability to produce a nuclear weapon. But Netanyahu easily could have voiced that criticism on Israeli TV, in a 60 Minutes interview or on Fox News. But his GOP handlers craved the symbolism of a foreign leader attacking Obama's foreign policy in a speech to Congress.

By plotting with Republicans to take his differences with Obama to the floor of Congress, he has angered some black leaders like no Israeli leader since former Israeli foreign minister Moshe Dayan publicly disparaged the intelligence of blacks in the U.S. Army. Back in 1980, Dayan questioned the ability of the U.S. to respond militarily to Middle East trouble spots because the U.S. Army had too many black soldiers "who have a lower education and intelligence." The U.S. Army, he said, needed "better blood and brains."

Dayan's ignorant talk drew sharp rebuttals from a wide range of black leaders, including Rep. Shirley Chisholm, D-N.Y., and then-Secretary of the Army Clifford Alexander, the first black to hold that position. According to The New York Times, 90.6% of black Army recruits in 1981 had a high school degree, compared with just 76.3% of white recruits.

Netanyahu may not have set out to offend Obama's black supporters, but that's certainly been the result. "Hell will freeze over before I attend" the prime minister's address, Clyburn said a few days before Netanyahu arrived in Washington. Other black legislators, including Rep. G.K. Butterfield, D-N.C., who chairs the 46-member Congressional Black Caucus, and Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., the legendary civil rights activist, announced weeks ago that they would boycott Netanyahu's speech.

Even more harmful, by conspiring with Boehner, Netanyahu has become a prop for the GOP's efforts to defeat Obama at every turn, no matter what the chicanery costs in American money and blood.

Last week, Susan Rice, the president's national security adviser, called Netanyahu's decision to address Congress "destructive." She was talking about relations between the Israeli prime minister and Obama — who has nearly two years remaining in his presidency. By becoming an instrument of the GOP's mean-spirited war on Obama, Netanyahu has done great harm to his relationship with the president and his supporters in Congress.

Now, Netanyahu — I believe — has a lot of blacks wondering whether Israeli voters will affirm his mistreatment of this nation's first black president when they go to the polls on March 17 to choose a government that speaks for them.

DeWayne Wickham, dean of Morgan State University's School of Global Journalism and Communication, writes on Tuesdays.

In addition to its own editorials, USA TODAY publishes diverse opinions from outside writers, including our Board of Contributors. To read more columns like this, go to the Opinion front page or sign up for the daily Opinion e-mail newsletter.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/03/02/netanyahu-insult-republican-blacks-wickham-column/24223595/.

[SoonerProphet]

Disrespectful, crass, undiplomatic, obviously. Racist, that is quite a leap.

[SicEmBaylor]

The first step toward a rational and more stable mid-east policy for the United States is ending our almost absolute alliance with Israel. Israel needs to be treated no different than any other mid-east partner, and we absolutely must normalize relations with Iran. What weapons programs Iran chooses to pursuit ought to be no business of ours UNTIL they use those weapons directly against the United States. If they use them directly against Israel, that's Israel's problem.

[BetterSoonerThanLater]

.alot of people said the same thing before getting involved in WWII..

[rock on sooner]

Boehner's stunt was/is clearly a **** you Obama move. I wonder who came
up with the idea...Boehner, Netanyahu, one or the other's aide's? This could
well hasten Boehner's demise as Speaker....geez, third in line for the prez?!
Lessee, he can't handle the Tea Party caucus, he's ticked off most of the GOP
House, McConnell apparently doesn't particularly care for his stunts..when he
is on TV, he has the body language of someone who is untrustworthy...the
Tea Party got rid of Cantor, Ryan has faded somewhat...maybe the country
will get lucky and Boehner will go away, somehow....jus my opinion...

[champions77]

The first step toward a rational and more stable mid-east policy for the United States is ending our almost absolute alliance with Israel. Israel needs to be treated no different than any other mid-east partner, and we absolutely must normalize relations with Iran. What weapons programs Iran chooses to pursuit ought to be no business of ours UNTIL they use those weapons directly against the United States. If they use them directly against Israel, that's Israel's problem.

Israel has been our most steadfast ally for decades and is the most stable democracy that exists in the middle east, and we are going to treat them the same as other countries that have been breeding grounds for terrorists that have been responsible for the deaths of thousands of Americans?

And you don't feel the need to worry about Iran until "after" they start lobbing nuclear missiles in our direction? I don't know the last time I have read anything so devoid of rational thought or common sense.

There is a really good reason that we have not had to fight a war on our soil. We take the fight to the homeland of those intent on doing us harm.

[dwarthog]

So there have been some 100+ Foreign Dignitaries address a joint session of congress. Netanyahu has done this twice before.

But, now there is a "problem"?

[rock on sooner]

So there have been some 100+ Foreign Dignitaries address a joint session of congress. Netanyahu has done this twice before.

But, now there is a "problem"?

The only "problem" is the end run around the White House and the timing...

[champions77]

The only "problem" is the end run around the White House and the timing...

When you are dealing with an egomaniac like BHO, it becomes a problem.
Most anyone having to deal with him would feel the same frustration and reach out to anyone that will listen. Netanyahu sees a soft, spineless, milquetoast President who is negotiating with a rogue Nation that has indicated a countless number of times their intentions to annihilate Israel. And we somehow think that Netanyahu is out of line and not following protocol?

[okie52]

Boehner's stunt was/is clearly a **** you Obama move. I wonder who came
up with the idea...Boehner, Netanyahu, one or the other's aide's? This could
well hasten Boehner's demise as Speaker....geez, third in line for the prez?!
Lessee, he can't handle the Tea Party caucus, he's ticked off most of the GOP
House, McConnell apparently doesn't particularly care for his stunts..when he
is on TV, he has the body language of someone who is untrustworthy...the
Tea Party got rid of Cantor, Ryan has faded somewhat...maybe the country
will get lucky and Boehner will go away, somehow....jus my opinion...

This "stunt" will probably improve Boehner's position with the pubs. The "clean" budget would have been more troublesome for him.

I really don't mind the **** you Obama after Obama has basically done the same thing to the pubs with immigration and Keystone. It was a breach of protocol but that's about as far as I'd go with it. Now whether you believe that Iran is actually close to having a nuke is another matter.

I was having a good laugh at the racial implications. I never gave it a thought until seeing this article.

[Sooner8th]

Boehner's stunt was/is clearly a **** you Obama move. I wonder who came
up with the idea...Boehner, Netanyahu, one or the other's aide's? This could
well hasten Boehner's demise as Speaker....geez, third in line for the prez?!
Lessee, he can't handle the Tea Party caucus, he's ticked off most of the GOP
House, McConnell apparently doesn't particularly care for his stunts..when he
is on TV, he has the body language of someone who is untrustworthy...the
Tea Party got rid of Cantor, Ryan has faded somewhat...maybe the country
will get lucky and Boehner will go away, somehow....jus my opinion...

You forgot drunkard...............

[Sooner8th]

When you are dealing with an egomaniac like BHO, it becomes a problem.
Most anyone having to deal with him would feel the same frustration and reach out to anyone that will listen. Netanyahu sees a soft, spineless, milquetoast President who is negotiating with a rogue Nation that has indicated a countless number of times their intentions to annihilate Israel. And we somehow think that Netanyahu is out of line and not following protocol?

Egomaniac? Laughable, you really have to stop listening to rightwingnut media. This was a breach of edict, boner and repubclians trying to get jewish money away from the democrats to republicans. You guys have been trying for years to gut democratic donor base.

[hawaii 5-0]

What I got out of Nyet and Yahoo's speech was....

"Iran is a direct threat to us so we want you to attack them ASAP."


5-0

[FaninAma]

The first step toward a rational and more stable mid-east policy for the United States is ending our almost absolute alliance with Israel. Israel needs to be treated no different than any other mid-east partner, and we absolutely must normalize relations with Iran. What weapons programs Iran chooses to pursuit ought to be no business of ours UNTIL they use those weapons directly against the United States. If they use them directly against Israel, that's Israel's problem.I assume you are not a big fan of the Book of Revelations. If Israel feels there is an imminent nuclear attack planned against them they will strike quickly and fiercely. I know you weren't around during the 7 Day War when Israel had Egypt's army surrounded in the Sinai(sp) but the world was onthe brinkof all out war. My uncle supervised the maintenance of the B-52 fleet at Tinker. There was massive mobilization of the B-52's and AWACs. I was 9 at the time and asked him why so many aircraft were flying around. He didn't answer but had a very worried look on his face. He did explain about 10 years later. I think the lack of historic perspective and overall naivette about the ME by Obama significantly increases the risk of a serious escalation of the conflict. Electing an ideologue with no leadership experience at this time in history may turn out to be a disaster. Thank you low information voters.

[hawaii 5-0]

Anyone noticed that Israel has been left alone during this latest crisis in the Middle East ?

Those ISIS terrorists don't want to incur the wrath of the Israelis.

BTW, why is it that Saudi Arabia hasn't been affected ? Are they supplying aid to ISIS ?

5-0

[FaninAma]

Disrespectful, crass, undiplomatic, obviously. Racist, that is quite a leap.Yep, the POTUS should conduct himself in a much more mature, less petulant manner. But that is his style. But you are wrong, Obama is a blatant racist.

[rock on sooner]

I assume you are not a big fan of the Book of Revelations. If Israel feels there is an imminent nuclear attack planned against them they will strike quickly and fiercely. I know you weren't around during the 7 Day War when Israel had Egypt's army surrounded in the Sinai(sp) but the world was onthe brinkof all out war. My uncle supervised the maintenance of the B-52 fleet at Tinker. There was massive mobilization of the B-52's and AWACs. I was 9 at the time and asked him why so many aircraft were flying around. He didn't answer but had a very worried look on his face. He did explain about 10 years later. I think the lack of historic perspective and overall naivette about the ME by Obama significantly increases the risk of a serious escalation of the conflict. Electing an ideologue with no leadership experience at this time in history may turn out to be a disaster. Thank you low information voters.

I was stationed in northwest Pakistan during the 7 Day War...your dad was correct to
have a worried look...there was a ton of stuff to be worried about...at every overseas
station in my field of endeavor (USAFSS) there was high alert and an inordinate amount
of electronic traffic. It was at that time I became convinced that the IDF was, pound for
pound, the finest fighting force on the planet. The Egyptians didn't have a prayer.

Having said that, I don't believe bombing Iran is the answer. What I think is more
plausible is what the P5+1 is trying to do. If Iran can be slowed, then I think the
Mossad can and would decapitate their scientific community, as has been done to
a small extent already. At least that is more desirable than more all-out war, into
which we would surely be drawn.

It is certainly obvious that Obama comes up short in a number of areas but trying
to avoid another major conflict is not one of them.

[Sooner8th]

Yep, the POTUS should conduct himself in a much more mature, less petulant manner. But that is his style. But you are wrong, Obama is a blatant racist.

You and yours are laughable. Why is it always when a democrat takes office immediately the charge of immaturity is leveled. Just another old worn out rightwingnut talking point.

[Sooner in Tampa]

^^^^^^^^^ Troll ^^^^^^^^^^^

Lying, stinking, no paragraph writing, worthless POS troll. Proven liar. Copy and paste plagiarist thief. Lowlife, ignorant scum.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Anyone noticed that Israel has been left alone during this latest crisis in the Middle East ?

Those ISIS terrorists don't want to incur the wrath of the Israelis.

BTW, why is it that Saudi Arabia hasn't been affected ? Are they supplying aid to ISIS ?

5-0
Saudia Arabia would go in there quietly, pick people up, drop them out in the vast desert and they would never be heard from again...

[FaninAma]

I was stationed in northwest Pakistan during the 7 Day War...your dad was correct to
have a worried look...there was a ton of stuff to be worried about...at every overseas
station in my field of endeavor (USAFSS) there was high alert and an inordinate amount
of electronic traffic. It was at that time I became convinced that the IDF was, pound for
pound, the finest fighting force on the planet. The Egyptians didn't have a prayer.

Having said that, I don't believe bombing Iran is the answer. What I think is more
plausible is what the P5+1 is trying to do. If Iran can be slowed, then I think the
Mossad can and would decapitate their scientific community, as has been done to
a small extent already. At least that is more desirable than more all-out war, into
which we would surely be drawn.

It is certainly obvious that Obama comes up short in a number of areas but trying
to avoid another major conflict is not one of them.

Kudos for your service. Actually it was my uncle. Neat guy. He worked a lot with General Hrzosky(has a gate at Tinker named after him.)

The amazing thing about that war was the Arab countries led by Egypt and Nasser attacked Israel first. I remember being out at Draper Lake (which is just South of Tinker) collecting rose rocks and watching aircraft after aircraft after aircraft taking off and flying over us.

I also remember the IDF commando raid on Entebbe. That was an amazing operation. I know a lot of people are pointing to the fact that Netanyahu claimed Iraq and Saddam Hussein had WMDI's and the fact that none turned up is a reason to discredit him. I think Israeli intelligence knew exactly what was going on in Iraq. I think that in the runnup to the Iraq invasion in 2001/2001 that Hussein sent most of the weapons to Syria hence Syria's large stockpile of WMDIs/chemical weapons.

Bombing Iran is not the answer. The Arab countries are going to have to figure a way to end the sectarian war going on in their culture. The west cannot do it for them. The hatred of the West and Israel is essentially attempts by dictators in the region to redirect the hatred from this sectarian conflict away from themselves and toward outside targets....and heaven knows we have done a lot of things that make that task easy.

[FaninAma]

You and yours are laughable. Why is it always when a democrat takes office immediately the charge of immaturity is leveled. Just another old worn out rightwingnut talking point.

Sorry, but there is NOTHING in Obama's background that would give me any confidence that he can deal with the ME crisis. Further, there is nothing in his background that would ever allow me to give my blessing to my son to join the military with him as CIC. He is a lightweight and he is out of his depth.

[Sooner in Tampa]

Sorry, but there is NOTHING in Obama's background that would give me any confidence that he can deal with the ME crisis. Further, there is nothing in his background that would ever allow me to give my blessing to my son to join the military with him as CIC. He is a lightweight and he is out of his depth.

But, but, but Barry killed Bin Laden!!!!

[SicEmBaylor]

.alot of people said the same thing before getting involved in WWII..

We only got involved in WWII because 1)Japan directly attacked the United States and 2)Germany declared war on us. Otherwise, we would have had no business getting involved in that war either.

[SicEmBaylor]

Israel has been our most steadfast ally for decades and is the most stable democracy that exists in the middle east, and we are going to treat them the same as other countries that have been breeding grounds for terrorists that have been responsible for the deaths of thousands of Americans?

And you don't feel the need to worry about Iran until "after" they start lobbing nuclear missiles in our direction? I don't know the last time I have read anything so devoid of rational thought or common sense.

There is a really good reason that we have not had to fight a war on our soil. We take the fight to the homeland of those intent on doing us harm.

They take billion in taxpayer funds to subsidize their military, they routinely spy on the United States, and their lobbying efforts here in the United States are disgraceful. They are not our most 'steadfast ally' by any means. No country in the middle east is responsible for the deaths of thousands of Americans -- terrorist organizations are responsible for that. Furthermore, those thousands of Americans are dead in large part because of our relationship with Israel.

[SicEmBaylor]

I assume you are not a big fan of the Book of Revelations. If Israel feels there is an imminent nuclear attack planned against them they will strike quickly and fiercely. I know you weren't around during the 7 Day War when Israel had Egypt's army surrounded in the Sinai(sp) but the world was onthe brinkof all out war. My uncle supervised the maintenance of the B-52 fleet at Tinker. There was massive mobilization of the B-52's and AWACs. I was 9 at the time and asked him why so many aircraft were flying around. He didn't answer but had a very worried look on his face. He did explain about 10 years later. I think the lack of historic perspective and overall naivette about the ME by Obama significantly increases the risk of a serious escalation of the conflict. Electing an ideologue with no leadership experience at this time in history may turn out to be a disaster. Thank you low information voters.

I don't think our foreign policy should be conducted on the basis of Biblical prophecy and, in any case, I'm not a Christian.

[champions77]

They take billion in taxpayer funds to subsidize their military, they routinely spy on the United States, and their lobbying efforts here in the United States are disgraceful. They are not our most 'steadfast ally' by any means. No country in the middle east is responsible for the deaths of thousands of Americans -- terrorist organizations are responsible for that. Furthermore, those thousands of Americans are dead in large part because of our relationship with Israel.

Those innocent countries harbor these monsters knowing full well what they do and what they're about, and if you think that there would not still be terrorists groups out there intent on killing us, even if we had no relationship with Israel, then you sir have a sad case of naivety and delusion.

Any credibility you had on this board was removed when you stated that we should not worry about Iran until they actually attack us. Most recognize it would probably be too late by then. That is a prescription for our ultimate demise.

[FaninAma]

I don't think our foreign policy should be conducted on the basis of Biblical prophecy and, in any case, I'm not a Christian.

I forgot you are a Deist. I'm not a big believer in the prophecies found in Revelations, either. But it sure is a bit spooky to see these ancient texts referring in detail to a place and scenario place that descibes an immense military showdown. It also describes how the Jewish people will be isolated and surrounded by their enemies, a process that seems to be taking place today.

And you may think that what happens to Israel won't affect you or your family but I can guarantee you that a full out attack on Israel will result in a military confrontation that will effect every man, woman and child on earth.

And if Israel thinks they are going to be annihlated they will institute their own version of mutually assured total destruction. They have over a 100 nuclear warheads and at least one long range nuclear submarine that can stay submerged for months after the initial attack.

[SicEmBaylor]

Those innocent countries harbor these monsters knowing full well what they do and what they're about, and if you think that there would not still be terrorists groups out there intent on killing us, even if we had no relationship with Israel, then you sir have a sad case of naivety and delusion.

Any credibility you had on this board was removed when you stated that we should not worry about Iran until they actually attack us. Most recognize it would probably be too late by then. That is a prescription for our ultimate demise.

I didn't say there wouldn't be terror groups if we had no relationship with Israel. I said our relationship with Israel exacerbates the issue. The other major contributing factor to anti-American sentiment and jihad is American interference in the domestic affairs of Muslim nations which is precisely what we do when we presume to dictate terms to sovereign nation. Iran is a sovereign nation with rights. Until and unless Iran uses its weapons against us, we have no standing in demanding that they not pursuit this weapon system or that weapon system. It's the height of arrogance for the United States to presume to tell a sovereign nation what it may or may not do.

There's an utterly bizarre line of thinking that just because Iran has a nuclear bomb that they intend to use it. Pakistan has yet to use theirs.

[FaninAma]

I didn't say there wouldn't be terror groups if we had no relationship with Israel. I said our relationship with Israel exacerbates the issue. The other major contributing factor to anti-American sentiment and jihad is American interference in the domestic affairs of Muslim nations which is precisely what we do when we presume to dictate terms to sovereign nation. Iran is a sovereign nation with rights. Until and unless Iran uses its weapons against us, we have no standing in demanding that they not pursuit this weapon system or that weapon system. It's the height of arrogance for the United States to presume to tell a sovereign nation what it may or may not do.

There's an utterly bizarre line of thinking that just because Iran has a nuclear bomb that they intend to use it. Pakistan has yet to use theirs.

So you are okay with Israel doing whatever they need to do to protect themselves after we leave them isolated and alone?

Pakistan isn't constantly being attacked and threatened by a bunch of religious fanatics, either.

[Turd_Ferguson]

I forgot you are a Deist. I'm not a big believer in the prophecies found in Revelations, either. But it sure is a bit spooky to see these ancient texts referring in detail to a place and scenario place that descibes an immense military showdown. It also describes how the Jewish people will be isolated and surrounded by their enemies, a process that seems to be taking place today.

And you may think that what happens to Israel won't affect you or your family but I can guarantee you that a full out attack on Israel will result in a military confrontation that will effect every man, woman and child on earth.

And if Israel thinks they are going to be annihlated they will institute their own version of mutually assured total destruction. They have over a 100 nuclear warheads and at least one long range nuclear submarine that can stay submerged for months after the initial attack.

It looked better when you typed ASSRED instead of assured. :D

[SicEmBaylor]

So you are okay with Israel doing whatever they need to do to protect themselves after we leave them isolated and alone?

Absolutely, yes.

[FaninAma]

Absolutely, yes.

Then we should have never stopped them from wiping out Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria in the 7 Day War. Once we did that we sort of put ourselves in the position of not leaving them vulnerable to the threats of these countries and their allies in the future...although it looks like Egypt is actually forming a strategic alliance with Israel to help thwart the threat of radical Islam to their country.

[SicEmBaylor]

Then we should have never stopped them from wiping out Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria in the 7 Day War. Once we did that we sort of put ourselves in the position of not leaving them vulnerable to the threats of these countries and their allies in the future...although it looks like Egypt is actually forming a strategic alliance with Israel to help thwart the threat of radical Islam to their country.

The 7 Days War was some time ago. Are we supposed to subsidize their defense in perpetuity? Now, it is a reasonable argument to point out we have likely already stopped them from taking out Iran's nuclear program -- a move that Israel is perfectly entitled to take. At some point, we need to stop doubling down on past mistakes.

[champions77]

I didn't say there wouldn't be terror groups if we had no relationship with Israel. I said our relationship with Israel exacerbates the issue. The other major contributing factor to anti-American sentiment and jihad is American interference in the domestic affairs of Muslim nations which is precisely what we do when we presume to dictate terms to sovereign nation. Iran is a sovereign nation with rights. Until and unless Iran uses its weapons against us, we have no standing in demanding that they not pursuit this weapon system or that weapon system. It's the height of arrogance for the United States to presume to tell a sovereign nation what it may or may not do.

There's an utterly bizarre line of thinking that just because Iran has a nuclear bomb that they intend to use it. Pakistan has yet to use theirs.

Sovereign nation with rights? What rights, the right to export terrorism around the world killing thousands in their path? I'm sorry but when you conduct yourself as they have done since 1979, you relinquish your rights, you no longer are a Nation in good standing, given the benefit of the doubt in world issues.

They have screamed to the heavens their intentions of destroying both Israel...and the United States for years. And some, like you and our weenie President, give them the benefit of the doubt, when their actions and our experiences with them for the last 36 years, raises a multitude of doubts.

So no, they should be treated as an enemy that you cannot trust. Trust is something you earn over time. Show us that somehow you are now different, and then we will give you some credibility.

[rock on sooner]

Then we should have never stopped them from wiping out Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria in the 7 Day War. Once we did that we sort of put ourselves in the position of not leaving them vulnerable to the threats of these countries and their allies in the future...although it looks like Egypt is actually forming a strategic alliance with Israel to help thwart the threat of radical Islam to their country.

Realizing full well this is 20/20 hindsight, given the conditions of the ME
48 years later, we should have! The Suez Canal would never be an issue,
Assad would be a camel jockey in the desert somewhere, Jordan's king would
be flying attack helicopters for Isreal, Lebanon and Palestine would still be a
gleam in Iran's eye, the Saudis tremble when Bibi burps and Iran would be
a get-out-of-jail card in the overall game of the Oil Monopoly game that the
Great Satan plays. Now, by gawd, how's that for fantasy!? Makes as much
sense as some of the nonsense in this thread.....:-)

[FaninAma]

The 7 Days War was some time ago. Are we supposed to subsidize their defense in perpetuity? Now, it is a reasonable argument to point out we have likely already stopped them from taking out Iran's nuclear program -- a move that Israel is perfectly entitled to take. At some point, we need to stop doubling down on past mistakes.
Although I like Rand Paul I am not willing to go into full isolationist mode. I still support the NATO agreement as well as our support for Japan and Taiwan in the South China Sea area.

[SoonerProphet]

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/netanyahu-and-the-hard-line-mind/

The speech on Tuesday really amounted to little more than a list of hard-liners’ unrealistic demands and their impractical alternatives to the current policy. As they see it, Iran must give up practically everything, and Iran will do this if it is put under sufficient pressure. If Iran has failed to give up everything, this “reasoning” goes, that must be only because there has not yet been enough pressure, and so they always favor more coercive measures no matter how often those measures have failed to change regime behavior in the past. They insist on demanding total capitulation from the other side, but fail to recognize that insisting on maximalist gains gives Iran every incentive to develop its nuclear program as it sees fit. Demanding capitulation from the other side naturally provokes greater resistance, and dictating terms to nationalists is typically a guaranteed way to ensure rejection of terms.

[SicEmBaylor]

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/netanyahu-and-the-hard-line-mind/

The speech on Tuesday really amounted to little more than a list of hard-liners’ unrealistic demands and their impractical alternatives to the current policy. As they see it, Iran must give up practically everything, and Iran will do this if it is put under sufficient pressure. If Iran has failed to give up everything, this “reasoning” goes, that must be only because there has not yet been enough pressure, and so they always favor more coercive measures no matter how often those measures have failed to change regime behavior in the past. They insist on demanding total capitulation from the other side, but fail to recognize that insisting on maximalist gains gives Iran every incentive to develop its nuclear program as it sees fit. Demanding capitulation from the other side naturally provokes greater resistance, and dictating terms to nationalists is typically a guaranteed way to ensure rejection of terms.

American Conservative magazine hits the nail on the head -- as usual.

[SicEmBaylor]

Although I like Rand Paul I am not willing to go into full isolationist mode. I still support the NATO agreement as well as our support for Japan and Taiwan in the South China Sea area.

Don't give me that isolationist crap. You're better and smarter than to repeat that nonsense. Rand Paul is not an isolationist. There are no isolationists in the United States, to my knowledge, and certainly none in government. Rand Paul leans toward non-interventionism while his father is fully non-interventionist.

What "isolationism" really means to the neoconservatives who repeat that lie is that non-interventionists oppose military adventurism. It's ironic to me that the same people who claim Paul is an "isolationist" are the same people who want to retain the Cuban embargo and isolate Iran.

[Eielson]

Non-intervention - No allies. Wars = self-defense. Retain diplomacy.

Isolationism - Keep all affairs of other countries at at distance (Anti-immigration, economic nationalism/protectionism, etc.)

You can thank the googles.

[olevetonahill]

Anyone noticed that Israel has been left alone during this latest crisis in the Middle East ?

Those ISIS terrorists don't want to incur the wrath of the Israelis.

BTW, why is it that Saudi Arabia hasn't been affected ? Are they supplying aid to ISIS ?

5-0

No, from what little Ive read they backing Bibi !

[olevetonahill]

Sorry, but there is NOTHING in Obama's background that would give me any confidence that he can deal with the ME crisis. Further, there is nothing in his background that would ever allow me to give my blessing to my son to join the military with him as CIC. He is a lightweight and he is out of his depth.

He does not want to win against the ISIS he is part of it!

[olevetonahill]

The 7 Days War was some time ago.
Are we supposed to subsidize their defense in perpetuity? Now, it is a reasonable argument to point out we have likely already stopped them from taking out Iran's nuclear program -- a move that Israel is perfectly entitled to take. At some point, we need to stop doubling down on past mistakes.

Yes we Should. Son I love ya but you need to get ya some LIFE experience and quit being a Dayum Politician wannbe!
We Created Israel We Need to do what it takes to Defend it!
Best I can understand is Israel DOES NOT WANT TO WIPE IRAN OFF THE MAP! Cant say that in reverse. I never Played in the sand But I did play in the rice . Grow Up , realize that Men and women die because idiots that WANNBE politicians are Making the ****ing decisions .
Oh **** I said i wernt gonna argue anymore yet here I am

Give Israel Anything and Every thing they Need , then GTF out their way!

[hawaii 5-0]

So you are okay with Israel doing whatever they need to do to protect themselves after we leave them isolated and alone?





I guess I missed that announcement. Exactly when is this gonna happen ?

5-0

[hawaii 5-0]

Give Israel Anything and Every thing they Need , then GTF out their way!



I thought we gave them the technology to build nukes.

5-0

[olevetonahill]

I thought we gave them the technology to build nukes.

5-0

May have but Just like Most LIBs you see what ya want
Ya MISSED the Part of GTF out their WAY dint ya!?

[FaninAma]

Don't give me that isolationist crap. You're better and smarter than to repeat that nonsense. Rand Paul is not an isolationist. There are no isolationists in the United States, to my knowledge, and certainly none in government. Rand Paul leans toward non-interventionism while his father is fully non-interventionist.

What "isolationism" really means to the neoconservatives who repeat that lie is that non-interventionists oppose military adventurism. It's ironic to me that the same people who claim Paul is an "isolationist" are the same people who want to retain the Cuban embargo and isolate Iran.

I didn't say Rand Paul was an isolationist. I said you were. Rand Paul has some isloationist tendencies but he is pramatic about it. I cannot see Rand Paul developing the level of antagonism with Israel's leader that the current Toddler-in-Chief has. Rand may disagree with Israel on issues but I guarantee you he would keep them out of the public's view and would not undercut Israel on the national stage. Obama's insistence on doing so only encourages Israel's enemies to not negotiate.

BTW, do you agree that Israel should not negotiate with any country or political entity that hasn't agreed to their right to exist?

[FaninAma]

I guess I missed that announcement. Exactly when is this gonna happen ?

5-0
It is just a theoretical question if we abandon Israel like Sic'em proposes.

[Eielson]

I didn't say Rand Paul was an isolationist. I said you were. Rand Paul has some isloationist tendencies but he is pramatic about it. I cannot see Rand Paul developing the level of antagonism with Israel's leader that the current Toddler-in-Chief has. Rand may disagree with Israel on issues but I guarantee you he would keep them out of the public's view and would not undercut Israel on the national stage. Obama's insistence on doing so only encourages Israel's enemies to not negotiate.

BTW, do you agree that Israel should not negotiate with any country or political entity that hasn't agreed to their right to exist?

NON-INTERVENTIONIST!!!

Dude, I googled it for you...

[hawaii 5-0]

May have but Just like Most LIBs you see what ya want
Ya MISSED the Part of GTF out their WAY dint ya!?


I think Nyet and Yahoo missed that part as well.

He's begging us to stick our nose right back in it.

Did you miss that part of his speech ?

5-0

[FaninAma]

NON-INTERVENTIONIST!!!

Dude, I googled it for you...

I realize the difference between a non-interventionist and an isolationist...thank you very much. I consider anybody who wants to have no foreign alliances an isolationist. If you simply do not want to engage in military action unless you or your allies are attacked then the term non-interventionist would be the more appropriate label.

Telling Israel they are on their own is being an isolationist or, in Obama's case, an anti-semite. Not sending troops to the ME when Israel is not under direct military attack but making sure that we would if they were is acting as a non-interventionist. I do think the alliances need to be formal agreements approved by the Senate....none of these informal agreements that Bush used in Iraq and Obama used in Libya.

[olevetonahill]

I think Nyet and Yahoo missed that part as well.

He's begging us to stick our nose right back in it.

Did you miss that part of his speech ?

5-0

Unlike Most of You Idiots I really DGAF about politics. I just like to Poke those who do with a Sharp stick :boxing:

[hawaii 5-0]

Carry on.


5-0

[Eielson]

I realize the difference between a non-interventionist and an isolationist...thank you very much.

I don't think you do...


I consider anybody who wants to have no foreign alliances an isolationist. If you simply do not want to engage in military action unless you or your allies are attacked then the term non-interventionist would be the more appropriate label.

Isolationism and non-interventionism are basically interchangeable when it comes to the military. Isolationism goes beyond military, though, and extends to migration, free trade, etc. Sic Em isn't saying to avoid as much diplomacy as possible with other countries.

I suppose you can keep calling him an isolationist if you want, but that's not the correct term.