Obama gets Israel to back off attack plans
The Israeli English-language daily Haaretz reports that the Obama administration has succeeded in restraining Israel from attacking Iran’s nuclear infrastructure:
“Israel has acceded to American demands by pledging to coordinate its moves on Iran with Washington and not surprise the United States with military action.
During a trip to Jerusalem earlier this week, CIA chief Leon Panetta informed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that U.S. President Barack Obama demanded that Israel not launch a surprise attack on Iran. The message expressed concern that Israel would cause an escalation in the region and undermine Obama’s efforts to improve relations with Tehran.
However, the content was nothing new: The Bush administration also sent tough messages to Jerusalem a year ago, including a demand that it not strike Iran. Israeli officials believe that U.S. foreign policy professionals are vehemently opposed to an Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, so this position was transmitted from the previous administration to the present one.
The U.S. expects Israel to coordinate its military actions with Washington, a condition to which Jerusalem has agreed due to its dependence on U.S. aid. Senior officials in the Bush administration testified to Congress that Israel had consulted them before deciding on its 2007 air strike on an alleged Syrian nuclear reactor. They said Israel had explained that it considered the Syrian project an existential threat and therefore had to act.”
In a separate story, Haaretz also dissects a detailed, 114-page assessment of how Israel could attack Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, conducted by Abdullah Toukan and Anthony Cordesman at the U.S.-based Center for Strategic and International Studies. I don’t know Toukan’s work, but Cordesman is a highly respected military analyst. According to Haaretz:
“One of the conclusions from Toukan and Cordesman’s study is that it is questionable whether Israel has the military capability to destroy Iran’s nuclear program, or even to delay it for several years. Therefore, if the diplomatic contacts the Obama administration is initiating with Iran prove useless, and if in the wake of their expected failure the American president does not decide to attack Iran, it is likely that Iran will possess nuclear weapons in a relatively short time. It seems, therefore, that policy makers in Jerusalem should begin preparing, mentally and operationally, for a situation in which Iran is a nuclear power with a strike capability against Israel.
This is the place to emphasize Israel’s mistake in hyping the Iranian threat. The regime in Tehran is certainly a bitter and inflexible rival, but from there it’s a long way to presenting it as a truly existential threat to Israel. Iran’s involvement in terror in our region is troubling, but a distinction must be made between a willingness to bankroll terrorists, and an intention to launch nuclear missiles against Israel. Even if Iran gets nuclear weapons, Israel’s power of deterrence will suffice to dissuade any Iranian ruler from even contemplating launching nuclear weapons against it.”
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2009 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
70 comments Add your comment
I Report :-)/ You Whine :-(
May 15th, 2009
7:38 am
Yeah but Obozo didn’t get Iran to “back down,” ewwww.
~~~~~~
Obama the Destroyer
By Quin Hillyer, AmSpec 5.15.09
If somebody were deliberately trying to undermine the very fabric of these United States, he would first vow not just to change its policies but to completely “change America,” and then would do just about everything Barack Obozo already has begun to do as president.
How do you like the looks on the faces now of the Conservatives that thought John McCain and Sarah Palin were a bad idea?
Benedict Arnold would have been a better choice than what we have now.
Susan Myers
May 15th, 2009
7:39 am
President Obama’s got it going on! You go, Mr. Prez!
RW-(the original)
May 15th, 2009
7:43 am
And yet another continuation of the Bush foreign policy. Big spender domestically too. Are we sure this isn’t W’s third term?
See y’all for the traveling music.
Later
md
May 15th, 2009
7:47 am
“Israel has acceded to American demands by pledging to coordinate its moves on Iran with Washington and not surprise the United States with military action”
Which means they will call when the planes are in the air with a “heads up”.
I Report :-)/ You Whine :-(
May 15th, 2009
7:49 am
Aahhh, yes, another “Conservative” lover of the Obozo marvels at the destruction-
The first is that Mr. Obama’s government, in all its flurry of activism, may kill the goose that laid the golden egg. This is as dreadful and obvious a cliché as they come, but too bad, it’s what people fear. They see the spending plans and tax plans, the regulation and reform hunger, the energy proposals and health-care ambitions, and they—we—wonder if the men and women doing all this, working in their separate and discrete areas, are being overseen by anyone saying, “By the way, don’t kill the goose.”
The second great fear is that the balance between those who pay taxes and those who need benefits will be left, after the great flurry, all out of whack. When this balance is deeply disturbed or distorted, when the number of those who need to take truly overwhelms those who need to make, a tipping point occurs. People become disheartened. Generations become resigned. Tiredness steps in. We will miss irrational exuberance.-Peggy Noonan.
bwa
Susan Myers
May 15th, 2009
7:50 am
Looks like the grownups are back in charge. And it feels so good! If BN and his bunch don’t behave, they’re in for a big surprise. Remember, we told you so.
ty webb
May 15th, 2009
7:58 am
Looks like Obama got Israel to continue the same “heads up” policy they had with the previous Bush administration. So I guess Obama and Bush got it going on, huh, Susan?
md
May 15th, 2009
7:59 am
Come on suzy, its easier for them to ask for forgiveness vs permission. Do you really think congress would allow cutting off funds for the only established democracy in the ME.
Big picture reality vs politics. Now, if your buddy Barry is actually in favor of the other guys dominating over there, thats a whole new ball game, and one that would be detrimental to our way of life.
Doggone/GA
May 15th, 2009
8:02 am
“It seems, therefore, that policy makers in Jerusalem should begin preparing, mentally and operationally, for a situation in which Iran is a nuclear power with a strike capability against Israel”
The first rule of warfare: “if your enemy is within your range, you are within your enemy’s range”…Israel is a nuclear power TOO.
jt
May 15th, 2009
8:03 am
“a condition to which Jerusalem has agreed due to its dependence on U.S. aid.”
Is it aid or extortion?
Doggone/GA
May 15th, 2009
8:04 am
“Is it aid or extortion?”
quid pro quo
DB, Gwinnettian
May 15th, 2009
8:25 am
Interesting links, Jay–when time permits I might plow through them and who knows, maybe even have a look at the source docs.
md says in passing:
if your buddy Barry is actually in favor of the other guys dominating over there,
Serious question md–your personal odds that this is the case?
(I’ll go first–I’d say it’s about 1:37,000…)
Wyld Byll Hyltnyr
May 15th, 2009
8:30 am
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder when it comes to Jay. The article is pretty clear that President Bush set the tone and Chief Panetta did little more than confirm that this Bush Doctrine (that which President Bush had previous established with Yisreal)would continue and remain in force now that a weak leader, President Ob-amateur, is in place.
One is left to wonder why Jay chooses to claim an Ob-amateur triumph for that which President Bush accomplished rather than covering: 1) President Ob-amateur’s pizz-backward on the Military Tribunal his ignorance led him to wrongly, as admitted by his recent actions, attack during the campaign; 2) the lie in which Speaker Pelatio now finds herself caught.
Where among us is an honest journalist who will call President Ob-amateur and Speaker Pelatio to account for their actions.
md
May 15th, 2009
8:33 am
DB,
Its that “1″ that should give you concern. I notice you didn’t use the number 0.
@@
May 15th, 2009
8:33 am
Damn! It’s starting to look like the lefties have been “Bushwacked” by Obama.
DB, Gwinnettian
May 15th, 2009
8:41 am
Its that “1″ that should give you concern. I notice you didn’t use the number 0.
Really? Really?
md, there is a one-in-something chance that Obama is a time-traveler from the 29th century, here to prevent the destruction of an insect species that would be needed for a vaccine to save the future of humanity.
So you want to give me your educated guess of an answer? or was that a genuinely stupid question I’d posed? I was just curious if you really thought there was a decent chance he wanted the “other guys” to dominate. I suspect you don’t, though, right?
Pokey
May 15th, 2009
8:43 am
So we are not to believe what Iran’s leadership says about its intentions vis-a-vis Israel? Their threats are just for public consumption??
md
May 15th, 2009
8:46 am
DB, I would think a cheerleader such as yourself would be behind your guy 100%.
ty webb
May 15th, 2009
8:49 am
Pokey,
Didn’t you get the memo. It doesn’t matter what Iran says. Israel is always wrong and the U.S. is wrong to aid her. There is no bad in the world, just the great satan, the U.S. and now that Obama is in charge, we’re still satan, just no as great a satan.
Paul
May 15th, 2009
8:49 am
Jay
Difficult situation, one where ‘perceptions’ carry more weight, perhaps, than in other situations.
Is Iran a threat and would they employ these weapons? Two questions, linked. It begins with, Iran has long maintained they have no nuclear weapons desire, that their program is for peaceful power only. Now, overnight, we accept they are going to develop and deploy nuclear weapons, and from there we assess their true intentions?
If their military nuke program had its genesis in a lie to the world, upon what basis do we determine their ‘real’ intentions, meaning develop and deploy, but to not use?
Nuclear deterrence between the US, USSR and PROC was based upon the idea there was a certain common rationality between the countries and their goals. Are we now making the case that a fundamentalist Islamic regime has that same element of common rationality?
But I still haven’t seen the reasons for these lurches from one assumption (they aren’t developing nukes) to the next (well, they are… but they won’t use them).
Susan Myers
[[Looks like the grownups are back in charge.]]
Wyld Bill
You are referring to that little-reported item in the last day or two that an option being considered by the Obama Administration is the indefinite detaining of terror suspects, without trial?
Susan? Change?
And what, exactly, has ‘changed’ substantively re. American policy regarding this aspect of Iran and Israel?
Redneck Convert
May 15th, 2009
8:50 am
Well, I don’t know which ones to hate the most, the Jews or the Towelheads. I say we just let things simmer till it all boils over and they blast each other left and right and get rid of our problems over there. Sort of like what happens at a trailer park every once in a while. Things will be quiet for a long time and then all of a sudden you read about some good old boy cutting loose and killing about eight people and then putting a gun to his head. No more feuding and it’s good for the undertaking business.
I got to fault My President for butting in over there. You got to mind your own business and let those places get in a big fight on their own and solve things. I think that’s what this Obama is doing. Sooner or later somebody will toss a A-bomb at a enemy and we can set back and watch the fireworks begin. By the time it’s all over there won’t be a Israel or Iran or Iraq neither and they can all go back to herding sheep on the little bit of land that can still be farmed and ain’t ashes and melted sand.
That’s my opinion and it’s very true. Have a good Friday everybody.
ty webb
May 15th, 2009
8:51 am
menat to say “NOT as great a satan”. sorry.
Paul
May 15th, 2009
8:52 am
Susan
Sorry about the botched arrangement in the previous. Should have been:
Susan Myers
[[Looks like the grownups are back in charge.]]
And what, exactly, has ‘changed’ substantively re. American policy regarding this aspect of Iran and Israel?
Wyld Bill
You are referring to that little-reported item in the last day or two that an option being considered by the Obama Administration is the indefinite detaining of terror suspects, without trial?
Susan? Regarding the above comment to Wyld Bill: change?
Copyleft
May 15th, 2009
8:55 am
Ahh, good ol’ warmongering Israel.
Is anybody else reminded of being at a bar with a drunk friend who keeps picking fights and expects you to back him up? Israel’s wandering over to those bikers at the pool table right now.
Brad Steel
May 15th, 2009
9:01 am
Whiner,
Thank you for the fine example of wingnuts-parroting-wingnuts. You marginalized haters should get into a room (small one should be sufficient) and whip each other into a frenzy.
It would be nice for the adults to have some free time so they could focus on fixing the massive screw ups of the past 8 years.
DB, Gwinnettian
May 15th, 2009
9:02 am
DB, I would think a cheerleader such as yourself would be behind your guy 100%.
Well, perhaps you should regard fellow humans as being more nuanced than that.
So are you not going to give me an educated guess as to your own fears that Obama really wants Iran to dominate? I mean, obviously you think it’s a possibility, but how serious is that fear? 1%? 50%?
or more like mine, at the end of the day, something like .037%?
I don’t believe one can ever be 100% sure of anything. Maybe that’s what’s driving this–there are people of faith posting to this thread who have convinced themselves that they are 100% sure they’ll go to Heaven, they are 100% sure that such-and-such in the Bible really happened (not saying this is you, md).
That kind of attitude tends to lap over into politics, wherein those who really do think there is 0% chance that (say) Bush would ever sell out Israel, so that is infinitely preferable to The Other Guy who might be a secret Muslim and might really be a palling-around-with-terrorist type like that screechy Palin lady used to say on the stump.
Sorry for the rant, gotta run, but md, I really am interested in your odds, so post ‘em if you got ‘em and I will check later.
Paul
May 15th, 2009
9:06 am
CopyLeft 8:55
And how is Israel picking a fight with Iran? Do you have cites of Israeli leaders calling for the destruction of Iran? Giving speeches about how they will usher in their millenialist doctrine by eradicating enemies of Judaism?
It would seem the drunk analogy is more apt with the current elected leadership of Iran.
@@
May 15th, 2009
9:10 am
Little traffic this morn, jay.
I’m getting a mental image where the lefties are twittering madly. It would explain their absence.
Don’t you find it odd that the Haaertz article was “put out” prior to the Obama vs Netanyahu bout set for May 18th? Good Cop/Bad Cop ploy? An uncontrollable leak?
What will be even more interesting is when Putin shows up in the ring with his round card.
getalife
May 15th, 2009
9:11 am
Lots of political rehotoric but we do not need another war.
w’s legacy is improving everyday on foreign policy.
Joe Matarotz
May 15th, 2009
9:20 am
Ooops. The CIA has fired back the HRH Pelosi WAS fully briefed about the waterboarding. EIther they issued the briefing at the hair stylist or Nancy just didn’t fully comprehend what she was being told.
md
May 15th, 2009
9:22 am
DB,
To answer your question, highly doubtful.
For this statement:
“there are people of faith posting to this thread who have convinced themselves that they are 100% sure they’ll go to Heaven, they are 100% sure that such-and-such in the Bible really happened”
You do realize that people with the opposite view are the same. Since there is no proof for one side or the other, the odds are 50/50. That is why I discount the true lefties and the true righties. Neither has a clue.
Closed mind syndrome. We live in an infinite universe and only “know” the tiniest fraction of information, and many proclaim to have all the answers, which is impossible.
ty webb
May 15th, 2009
9:24 am
getalife,
Sorry to engage you, but couldn’t resist. That was a fairly even handed nonpartisan comment at 9:11. Or is my sarcasm detector broken?
Taxpayer
May 15th, 2009
9:27 am
There’s all sorts of ‘change’. You just need to look for it. It is there. For one thing, I have yet to hear PresidentObama refer to an ‘axis of evil’. That alone is worth some serious points. For another, President Obama actually has an education — not some contrivance that his Bushy daddy bought for him. That is worth a whole lot when one has a job that requires a real display of intellect. A little point that GeeW and his fanatic following seem to have misunderestimated. In short, the change we have in this administration relative to the last is nothing but good. Now, let’s keep pushing for more of those positive changes. Perhaps, we can get some more documents de-classified in the near future.
As for Iran’s nuclear ambitions, when Russia, China and other countries get concerned about it, that would be a good time for us to express concern as well. Or, we could just boycott Chinese money until they agree to put pressure on Iran to cease their pursuit of nuclear technology. hehehe
Paul
May 15th, 2009
9:29 am
@@
[[Little traffic this morn, jay.
I’m getting a mental image where the lefties are twittering madly. It would explain their absence.]]
Much as I recognize the importance and timeliness of this morning’s thread, I’ll have to explain your remark by referencing he other big news item they don’t want to deal with: Spkr Pelosi’s utterly disastrous news conference yesterday, wherein she:
repeatedly contradicted herself
brought parsing to a whole new level “I said I was NEVER briefed that waterboarding had been done. I DIDN’T say someone else who had been briefed hadn’t told me…” (referring to one of her senior staffers)
Directly accused the CIA of repeatedly lying to her over the years (a violation of Federal law, BTW, yet she never reported this to Justice…)
And that’s just the beginning. I’ve never seen her so flustered, so much prevaricating, so much misdirection.
Like I said: they couldn’t see this coming?
Susan Myers
May 15th, 2009
9:30 am
Paul @ 8:49,
}:>
Paul @ 8:52,
:-9
Susan Myers
May 15th, 2009
9:33 am
ty webb @ 7:58,
Don’t even mention that dunce in the same breath as President Obama.
jt
May 15th, 2009
9:34 am
The world deserves better than the weardbeards and silver-haired make-up wearing politicians that we have now. The YMCA (Youths of Muslim, Christian, and Atheist) CAN do better.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6CPcv2NJDA
Susan Myers
May 15th, 2009
9:34 am
md @ 7:59,
Pickin’ and choosin’ and pickin’ and choosin’, are ye?
Taxpayer
May 15th, 2009
9:37 am
many proclaim to have all the answers.
Come to think of it, I do recall some having such faith.
ty webb
May 15th, 2009
9:37 am
Susan,
OK. Did you read the article or just Jay’s title?
getalife
May 15th, 2009
9:41 am
ty,
I am partisan with my dislike of both corrupt parties.
I am Independent and think they should move government to Wall Street since Wall Street owns them.
The cover ups of crimes committed continues, the wars continue, the bailouts and outrageous spending continues.
Cons should like this obama guy.
He is just like w.
I Report :-)/ You Whine :-(
May 15th, 2009
9:42 am
Aahhh, yes, these libs sure do know how to run government-
The Social Security Administration, which sent out 52 million checks, says that some of those checks mistakenly went to dead people because the agency had no record of their death. That amounts to between 8,000 and 10,000 checks for millions of dollars.-Fox News
And yes, all it took was just a few short months of Obozo to make the United States of America into a second rate third world country-
China’s yuan ’set to usurp US dollar’ as world’s reserve currency The Chinese yuan is preparing to overtake the US dollar as the world’s reserve currency, economist Nouriel Roubini has warned.
What a champion.
Susan Myers
May 15th, 2009
9:45 am
Former Senator Bob Graham has been a staunch ally for those who seek truth and fairness in government. In his book “Intelligence Matters”, Bob states that, “On the argument of weapons of mass destruction, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld even went so far as to declare that we knew where the weapons were, a claim that may have been based on the CIA’s report that it had identified 550 sites where weapons of mass destruction were either being produced or stored”.
It is worth pointing out that the Warren Commission also relied upon info from the CIA to conclude that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone.
CIA lied! CIA lied! OH MY GOD! The CIA lied! No, that could never happen! Not the CIA!
Susan Myers
May 15th, 2009
9:47 am
ty webb @ 9:37,
Umm, you’re still trying to get through it, aren’t you?
Paul
May 15th, 2009
9:53 am
Taxpayer
Regarding your points that have substance, that aren’t simply ridicule:
True about the Axis of Evil and offer to engage Iran (which Iran has rebuffed, but this is only round one and was to be expected). The point to Susan was specific regarding the Iran/Israel situation, and it’s there I see little difference between the two. We’d had reports the Bush Administration had similarly quashed Israeli requests.
Russia’s getting billions building Iran’s nuke capability. They do not see Iran as a threat //to them//.
China? They don’t have much recent history of getting involved in things they don’t see as a direct, immediate problem. They’re too much the capitalists for that.
And (not really serious here, just illustrating a point): why shouldn’t Iran be free to develop their nuclear technology? They’ve repeatedly said it’s for peaceful purposes only and they have no military weapons plan. So why is the Obama Administration repeatedly accusing them of otherwise?
BTW – “1 April 2009 | Communication from China, France, Germany, Russia, UK and USA. The IAEA circulated a communication from China, France, Germany, Russia, UK and USA (issued as INFCIRC/749), that forwarded a joint statement on Iran´s nuclear programme, delivered at the March Board of Governors meeting.”
It would appear that in spite of the other statements and all the money to be made, they do have some concerns.
jt
May 15th, 2009
9:53 am
getalife -
There are neo-cons.
There are neo-libs.
Now there are neo-confederates.
If they fall for the “two party” charade, they are neo-tards.
I would just like to buy the world a coke…………
@@
May 15th, 2009
9:57 am
Paul, they could have seen it coming if they had been honest with themselves.
It was painful to watch Nancy’s press conference — up there all alone — fighting for her life while all those other dems (present but not accounted for) watch her struggle.
Obama? All during the campaign I commented on the box he was putting himself in. He knew full-well he was appealing to those who had cardboard for brains. I don’t anticipate that he will ignore the flaps forever.
Make no mistake, Paul. I have no use for a politician who uses people to launch his political ascension. “Say what you mean and mean what you say.”
That’s a quality I admire.
He was either naive or very cunning during his campaign. To be naive is dangerous. To be cunning is, too often, typical of politicians. He claimed to be above the everday…
his supporters believed him. In other words, they were used.
Paul
May 15th, 2009
10:00 am
Susan Myers
Any idea how the CIA lied in its briefings to members of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, and their staffers, regarding Enhanced Interrogation Techniques, as Speaker Pelosi claims?
I wonder, did they tell Spkr Pelosi they were not going to waterboard anybody? Did CIA tell her they had no legal opinions to support what they were going to do? Did CIA tell her they were not considering using any Enhanced Interrogation Techniques?
and…
Did Speaker Pelosi give the impression she was never aware anyone had been waterboarded? Did she give an account, directly contradicted by Porter Goss, who attended the briefing with her? Did she assent in asking the CIA if there was anything else Congress could do, were there more things CIA could do, to get the info from the detainees?
Paul
May 15th, 2009
10:07 am
@@
I speculated long ago this whole “lied and tortured” mantra came about when Democrats thought they had a sure-fire way to cripple the Bush Administration and Republicans in general. Just a bit of target fixation – you know, pilot’s flying along, zeroing in on the target, gets tunnel vision and flies it right into the ground.
Regarding Pres Obama – he played, brilliantly, the political game that got him where he is. He is deft at adjusting. He seems, at least in the foreign affairs realm, completely comfortable with radical changes, making his earlier pronouncements irrelevant. (This can cause problems for other nations trying to understand, just what is America’s policy NOW?).
Regarding the last part of your post: ideally, true. But when the Democratic candidate needs to thread the needles of the ultralib special interest groups with the money, and the Republican candidate needs to run the gauntlet of the ultracon special interests groups with the money, well… what we see then is simply the reality imposed upon the candidates by the system, regardless of their idealism
md
May 15th, 2009
10:13 am
Suszy,
Deflection seems to be your middle name. Your creativity is showing (lack of). You may want to try to break out of your rut, but for someone so engrained in the rah rah life of the “party”, I know that may be difficult. But even your party promotes “change”. Here’s “hopin”.
ty webb
May 15th, 2009
10:24 am
getalife,
fair point. I disagree with you that conservatives should like obama because he is just like Bush. Conservatives dislike Obama because he’s like Bush. Bush’s low approval ratings don’t just reflect the left’s opinion of his performance. Many Conservatives are just as unhappy with Bush.
Susan Myers
May 15th, 2009
10:33 am
Paul @ 10:00,
:-#
Susan Myers
May 15th, 2009
10:34 am
md @ 10:13,
Made any good choices lately?
@@
May 15th, 2009
10:35 am
Paul:
I had intended to leave this article (dropped off by Ga Values) at Wooten’s:
“The natural propensity of a bureaucracy is not to decide,” he has often said. “It will just chew the cud until there is no taste at all.”
When you discuss Pentagon waste and trade-offs, I’m in the dark. I don’t know one weapon from another but ^^^ that article makes it clear.
I’ll give Obama credit on one thing — his choice in Gates and Panetta. With Panetta, I initially had reservations. I was wrong.
About the special interests…
Last month, four respected public-interest groups – Democracy 21, Common Cause, Public Citizen and U.S. PIRG – called on the House ethics committee to launch an inquiry into whether campaign contributions from the lobbying firm PMA Group, its employees and clients improperly influenced Democratic lawmakers in deciding whether to fund various projects.
Yet on Tuesday, the House voted 215-182 against a Republican resolution to initiate a House ethics committee inquiry. The vote was not strictly partisan – 29 Democrats went against their leadership in favor of an investigation. They obviously share many Americans’ desire for transparent government that makes decisions based on what’s best for the nation, not campaign war chests.
We’re talkin’ $137 million in earmarks. Murtha (D)? $2.37 million. Visclosky (D)? $1.36 million and Moran (D)? $997,348.
Charlie Rangel’s indiscretions pale in comparison but yet, dems take pride in the fact that Charlie has invited the investigation. They (the dems) will sit back and let a black congressman fall on the sword.
The dems and their “glass cliff” policy is alive and well.
md
May 15th, 2009
10:40 am
Susy,
I have to give the party credit. They washed you so well, you are like a little “dogma” dog, barking out the points they taught you. Kind of scary that individuals can be so free of individual thought though.
Bosch
May 15th, 2009
10:48 am
Netanyahu is a yahoo. And if he thinks his country will survive a pre-emptive strike on Iran – he is horribly, horribly mistaken.
He does that he can bend over and kiss his ass and his country’s ass good-bye. (That would be a cool trick if he could).
Israel is acting like a drug addled child – and sometimes mommy and daddy have to make the ultimate sacrifice and refuse help until they help themselves – we need to cut ourselves off.
Bosch
May 15th, 2009
10:49 am
Jay,
If you see Luckovich in the hall today – tell him great cartoon. That one really made me laugh.
DB, Gwinnettian
May 15th, 2009
11:01 am
Thanks for your assessment, md. Also:
You do realize that people with the opposite view are the same.
In terms of certainty (or, if you’d rather, “faith”)? Sure.
However there are numerically far fewer genuine American atheists who are 100% convinced there is no Supreme Being, than there are monotheists 100% convinced there is– which is why I didn’t think to include them in my speculation. But it’s a fair point, I certainly could have done so.
Taxpayer
May 15th, 2009
11:59 am
Paul,
Now who is trying to ridicule whom?
Susan Myers
May 15th, 2009
1:13 pm
md @ 10:40,
So I take it you’ve only made bad choices today. Is that the case?
Lee
May 15th, 2009
1:17 pm
So, Obamonkey gets Israel to back off on plans to attack Iran.
Wonder how many billion$ that is going to cost us taxpayers…
N.J,
May 15th, 2009
2:11 pm
Eisenhower did the same thing in the 1950’s when Israel was planning to attack Egypt and seize the Suez Canal.
Of course all the Arab nations in the middle east have committed to making the entire region a nuclear free zone if Israel gives up its nuclear arsenal and closes down its plant at Dimona. Since Israel has not, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates have started talking about their own nuclear programs, and recently enriched uranium traces have been found in Egypt because Israel has recently been repeatedly violating Egyptian air space.
Israel started the entire race for nuclear weapons in the region, and with its propensity to attack its neighbors on assertions that are discovered to be false after the fact, it seems Israel is the more aggressive force in the region.
In spite of the assertions of Israel and the United States, every signatory of the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty has the right to both build nuclear reactors as well as enrich their own Uranium for them. So far there is zero evidence that the Iranians have enriched Uranium past the degree needed to fuel nuclear reactors, and no evidence of weapons grade uranium or even the capacity for to make weapons grade Uranium has been found.
Iran in fact, has been far more open in allowing inspections of its sites by the IAEE than Israel has. Israel does not allow inspections at all.
N.J,
May 15th, 2009
2:23 pm
Given Israel’s record at breaking international agreements, and the fact that it was much more secretive about its creation of its own nuclear weapons at Dimona, it seems that the other nations in the region have far more reason to distrust Israel than vice versa.
None of the nations in the region showed even the slightest inclination to developing either nuclear energy, which is the right of every nation under the Non Proliferation treaty, as is a nations right to enrich its own nuclear fuel. In this case, Israel is intent on denying the other nations in the region its legal rights under international law, and refuses to sign that treaty itself.
md
May 15th, 2009
2:37 pm
To answer your question susy, I have made and will make plenty of bad choices. But unlike many in this country, I will raise my hand, take the blame for my actions, suffer the consequences, and move on with another life lesson.
I will not ask or expect uncle sugar to do anything for me.
I paid my way through school when I realized education opens doors, my spouse paid her way through school, I have had money and been broke more times than I care to count. But, when I screw up or take a business risk, I know it is my choice and if it doesn’t work out, I suck it up and move forward. I do not pity myself or extend my hand to uncle sugar for a choice I made.
N.J,
May 15th, 2009
2:39 pm
Well we could solve the problem by stopping providing Israel with military aid and other aids at all. One third of all U.S. Foreign aid budget goes to Israel. If we are going to be paying for it, If the United States is paying for it, I suggest that the United States has some sort of right to have some say about how it is used.
Between 1949 and 1997, The United States had given Israel a total of 83.205 billion dollars. But that is not the entire story. The debt on that money until that point was 49.937 billion for a grand total of 133.132 billion.
What this means is that the United States government has given more aid to the average Israeli citizen during this period than it has given to the average American citizen.
Since we are pretty much financing Israel at a higher rate than we are financing the life of the average American, it seems only right that an American president have some say in how they use that aid.
On the other hand, if Israel wants to handle this its own way they could stop taking the money, pay back the 130 plus billion and go its own way. If Israel wins, they win, if its neighbors win, they win. And then the entire middle eastern problem is over.
Susan Myers
May 15th, 2009
2:58 pm
md @ 2:37,
Please give my regards to your Uncle Sugar…if you choose to.
N.J,
May 15th, 2009
3:00 pm
md
Unless you are extremely old, pushing 100, no one in America has paid their own way through college. In the late 1950’s because the United States was a good deal behind the Soviets in the sciences and had a larger base of college educated scientists, which resulted in their launching the first satellite and putting the first man in space. To be blunt after Sputnik was launched and CIA reports came back reporting on the state of science education in the Soviet Union, the government decided to provide a very large subsidization of both public and private university programs in the sciences, as well as subsidizing the tuitions the school charged and subsidizing the contruction of new universities as well as the enlargement of existing ones.
When they launched Yuri Gagarin into orbit, the U.S. expanded those subsidizations to include all fields of university study, increased tuition support to the universities directly and also started providing federal scholarships, grants and low interest loans in order to be competitive in higher education with other nations, particularly those in the Eastern bloc.
Before the government took on this task of huge subsidization of tertiary education, a college education was simply beyond afforability of all American families other than a small number of the wealthy elite. Sometimes those from poorer families got scholarships that allowed this, but these were few and far between.
In any case, a lot of people with college degrees today would not have them if they had to bear the full cost of tuition without federal subsidization. 29 of the U.S. top universities in the United States receiving federal funding are in the South. 3.3 billion dollar of federal research money for research conducted at these universities have provided these schools with world class research facilities. Without that money things would be considerably diferent, because the private sector was not funding this. Federal funding also supports the 45 medicals schools in the South, from which 5000 physicians graduate each year. 29 percent of the nations doctors.
In 1998, the percentage of Americans finishing college was higher than the percentage of Americans finishing high school in the late 1930’s
I know this is off topic, but so is the question I am responding to. I hav’nt the faintest idea of how paying for college has anything to do with Obama telling Israel not to attack Iran. Go Figure.
md
May 15th, 2009
3:34 pm
NJ,
I paid 100% of what was charged above what 100% of the students received.
Splitting hairs like that makes you look petty.
md
May 15th, 2009
3:44 pm
“I know this is off topic, but so is the question I am responding to. I hav’nt the faintest idea of how paying for college has anything to do with Obama telling Israel not to attack Iran. Go Figure.”
You also look silly when you repond to something you know nothing about. That post is in response to susy from many previous posts over many days.
In reference to your own posts, try shortening them a bit, you may have more people read them . I for one tend to scroll right through your thesis.
AMO
May 16th, 2009
2:38 am
I’m just surprise that Americans start to think the right way, Yeah Israel take more than the us citizen.
how do you take it in the crisis period?