Bibi and Barack

I agree with this, Joe.
.
I can only hope that this government topples soon. The things they are doing are making things much worse and as pointed out by one of your colleagues in this article:
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1899135,00.html
.
Heads will be butted.
.
The question is, if Obama has a three year timetable on this, how is he going to get the Israelis to agree?
.
I just don't see it happening unless considerable political force is used, and so far, it's just verbal sparring.

In any case, Mr. Netanyahu should know by day's end that the future of US-Iran relations will be decided in Washington and Tehran, not Jerusalem.
.
Looking back, could you have made such a statement 12-18 months ago?
We certainly live in interesting times.

Jeffrey Goldberg is a mouthpiece for Bibi and the Likudniks. A more sane version than say anybody at the Weekly Standard but still a mouthpiece. Check out Avishai's takedown
.
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/05/17/jeffrey_goldberg_bibi_gun/

Good article about the possible consequences of an Israeli airstike against Iran's nuclear facilities.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1085619.html

Also, in reference to the article Joe linked; does it really make sense to just shoot anyone who doesn't like you? Seems like a rather juvenile strategy to me.

Tremendous link, WILiberal. Very glad you provided it; it confirmed much of what I believed about the realistic prospects of the success of an Israeli strike against the Iranian nuclear program.

Joe: Jeffrey Goldberg, who served in the IAF, was doing some apple polishing of Netanyahu and TPM posted a rebuttal by Avishai. But you point out something which I hope Israelis will look it without blinders: Pres Obama sees US relations with Iran in a broader context than Bibi. For us Afghanistan's western border to a place at which we can work with Iran.

BBC World showed a great program on the Afghanistan drug trade through Iran: pictures of loads of drugs and guns. The Iran police have lost over 100 men in the fight with drug traders since last year. So Iran has an area of co-op with the US and vice versa. I know it looks like small potatoes, but the possibilities of are there.

From the Pres-PM presser this pm Bibi seems - repeat seems - to have taken a milder tone but I am not sure about his commitment to Peace Talks with the Palestinians. After all he has Avigdor Lieberman - his own "Joe" - to contend with.

Hey remember when Joe was recommending Maureen Dowd's articles on Cheney and torture - http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/05/13/uncheneyed-unhinged/
.
Turns out she plagiarizes her material in the NY Times. http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/5/18/732833/-NYT:-Dowd-plagiarism-is-no-big-deal
.
Maureen Dowd = NYTIMES FAIL

In any case, Mr. Netanyahu should know by day's end that the future of US-Iran relations will be decided in Washington and Tehran, not Jerusalem.
.
Joe, you make this sound like Israel wants to control American diplomacy. I personally do not think that Israel gives a fat rat's a$$ if Obama and the rest of the clowns in this administration have talks with Iran.
.
But, Israel most certainly along with the vast majority of Americans believe that a nuclear armed Iran is not only NOT in the best interests of the United States, but also Israel. If you are fool enough to believe this will not come with the full recommendation from most all Jews and Christians from both the United States and Israeli, then you are sadly naive as hell.
.
Like the past blog post by Amy, Obama should not under-estimate the American opinion, he may just be aborted himself.
.
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/08/29/poll-55-percent-of-americans-support-israeli-strike-on-iran/
And this is a strike against Iran.
.
"A Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll last week found more support, 57 percent, for military action against Iran if it continues to produce material that can be used to develop nuclear weapons. In a different approach, the question in this poll took account of Iran's claim that it's trying to develop nuclear power, not weapons."

WisconsinLiberal:
.
This is the most comprehensive report I've seen on the subject, and it confirms virtually everything I've ever written here on the subject.
.
Not much more can be said, other than to understand that that report summarizes the price that will be paid by Israel, the US, and for that matter, the entire world (though in very little detail).
.
I have said all along, and this report supports my contention, when the conclusions it draws are extrapolated into future relationships Israel has a choice in, what the consequences will be.
.
The only thing I would differ on here is that the window is closed and has been for some time. The lessons of the Lebanon conflct have yet to be extrapolated into other aspects of Israel's relationships with it's neighbors.
.
At the present, Israel has only two choices:
.
Face war at various levels in the future, then sue for peace, or,
.
Realize that in peace lies Israels' security*.
.
*There is no way that a small nation with few natural resources can maintain dominance like Israel has for much longer. Therefore, the only security it will have that is not exhorbitantly costly in both moral and physical terms is to do a complete 180, dump the hate, the settlements, the idea of "Greater Israel", their schizophrenic approach to the Palestinian issues, and make peace.
.
And they will have no choice but to take input from others besides themselves just what form that peace will take.

"I also became dismayed by the naked imperialism displayed by Israel's rightwing zealots. One night at a dinner party in Jerusalem in 1977, I heard a young Israeli talking about the Arabs in terms which chilled my blood. "In the next war," he said, "we've got to get the Palestinians out of the West Bank for good."

To me, in my naivete, Israel's struggle had hitherto seemed that of a brilliant little people, who had suffered the most ghastly experience of the 20th century, struggling for survival amid a hostile Middle East still bent upon their destruction. Now, suddenly, I found myself meeting Israelis committed to the creation of a greater Israel embracing the West Bank, who were utterly heedless of the fate of its inhabitants. The Palestinians were perceived as losers, a mere incidental impediment to the fulfilment of Israel's historic territorial destiny. By a curious quirk, that young Israeli whom I heard enthuse about emptying the West Bank of Arabs was Binyamin Netanyahu, today his country's prime minister."
--Max Hastings

It is one thing to support Israel, quite another to support the supremist government of Netanyahu and Avigdor Leiberman. If Netanyahu continues building West Bank settlements, the US should suspend aid to his government.

Joe Klein:
.
Mr. Netanyahu should know by day's end that the future of US-Iran relations will be decided in Washington and Tehran, not Jerusalem
.
Why should Bibi know any such thing?
.
When the going looks like it might get tough with Health Care Reform, or with the SC nomination, won't the Administration just back down again when confronted by an organized, determined opposition, so that their favored priorities will move forward?
.
Won't you be right back here to tell us how Obama is right not to have it out with the entrenched interests, because it's not big enough of a win to take a chance on derailing the Administration's more important agenda items?

Israel and Bibi will pose a real test for Pres Obama. The Israeli establishment will not back off the settlement issues and pushing Arabs out of East Jerusalem. In an odd way Likud and Hamas deserve each other. Shimon Peres will be reduced to platitudes. Recall what happened to Yitzak Rabin. The terrible thing about the Israeli Jews and Palenstinian Arabs is that they have the seeds of their own destruction in their DNA.

Very good quote, sevenoaks. And the "seeds" were strewn upon the rock, and nothing became of the seeds. Will Obama continue a policy with both Israel and Palestine, which so far has resulted in nothing but a large amount of money from the tax payers of the US being spent?
.
Jimmy Carter I remember very well in the late 70's made it his mission to bring about a great change. He did succeed in neutralizing Egypt, but that was all. Obama I am afraid will fall into the same trap everyone since Carter has fallen into. The never ending money pit called Israel/Palestine.
.
Let Israel defend itself if it feels the need. Let the Palestinians also fend for themselves for a change. Show them both that we no longer will spend one more dime, unless both agree. If they don't, then they only have themselves to blame. We can then fund healthcare.

Stuart, in your opinion, what are "their favored priorities"--I've yet to see the admin go to the mat on anything. I could take everything GG has condemned about their civil liberties' record thus far if he was pushing single payer, meaty green legislation, or something other than superficial banking reform, but I've yet to discern what they're saving their evaporating pol-cap for.

"Let Israel defend itself if it feels the need. Let the Palestinians also fend for themselves for a change. Show them both that we no longer will spend one more dime, unless both agree. If they don't, then they only have themselves to blame. We can then fund healthcare."
~
Full on agreement--this is one point on the continuum where libertarians & progressives can come to a warm embrace.

Let Israel defend itself if it feels the need. Let the Palestinians also fend for themselves for a change. Show them both that we no longer will spend one more dime, unless both agree. If they don't, then they only have themselves to blame. We can then fund healthcare.
.
Spoken like an American, Rustydog. Well said.

Oregon JC:
.
Stuart, in your opinion, what are "their favored priorities"--I've yet to see the admin go to the mat on anything.
.
They won't go to the mat, but they'll take symbolic, political victories they can haggle out of the process, one of which is the President's declaration that "health care reform cannot wait, it must not wait, and it will not wait another year". That in practice this means that the Administration will compromise a big-statist, system-tweaking health care-welfare bill through with Co-Presidents Collins, Nelson, Baucus etc. is beside the point. All that matters is that they can crow to a delighted Politico how they were superior to the Clintons, and "got health care reform done", which will satisfy the Village (who of course aren't interested in "change" in the slightest). The folks in Versailles don't really mind throwing statist, welfare-application oriented crumbs to the proles when political fashion demands it --even though they will meanly ridicule every handout to the death when fashion condemns the practice-- as long as nothing really ever threatens to upset the court.
.
The only other issue I can see these people going to the mat about is their Supreme Court pick. Of course, if they truly are going to the mat, it will probably again be over the symbolism, and not the substance. The prestige of the Presidency will be of concern, and that means they get to put a liberal on the bench. The Administration's kind of liberal, if we are to believe Village gossip...ahem, I mean reports isn't exactly a down with free speech kind of liberal, though.

Am I hallucinating or did rusty just say something incredibly coherent?
Props to you rusty, nice to see you talk sense for a change.

Stuart: About what I thought you'd say. Good to hear it though--as Michael Franti sings, I know I'm Not Alone.. Had a rather bleak convo with my pops this morning, the 1st-gen progressive in my family (I'm nisei), and we were commiserating along the lines of "well, at least it's better than Bush..." When you're already having that chat 4 mo's in...
~
Wi Liberal said, "Am I hallucinating or did rusty just say something incredibly coherent?"
~
Hmmm, unless it's like Mo Do yesterday (everyone was a-twitter about her sudden/fleeting engagement with substance, including GG) until we found out she was cutting/pasting, and probably sniffing the glue too.

About a year ago, there was a presidential election in the country of Kenya. Despite all our pre-election shenanigans on bekhalf of our man, he still lost the election - and our USA's McClatchy Newspapers aptly reported as such. So there we were - with Condi in her insolent glory (and self-loathing) reading the riot act to those Kenyans whose overwhelming democratic expression we trashed.

It cannot be democratic if USA's will does not prevail, can it?
Many died in the ensuing instability. And we still call the shorts in there. And we are bracing ourselves and planning for their next elections in 2012.

JK, why are we spending so much time, effort and scarce resources on that obnoxious pauper state of called Israel?

What if we read the riot act to them?

Don't we have the wherewithal to disarm them - and render them harmless and forthcoming so that they are no longer a threat to their neighbors and the civilized world?

Is our State Department incapable of mounting a credible diplomatic and psyche war against the likes of the terror-spewing Nyet-and-who?

It is humbling, indeed irritating, to see our POTUSes, eh, abrogate their leadership of the known world - and bow down to these clowns and their phony lip and vacuous threats to the world.

WisconsinLiberal Says:
" .. Good article about the possible consequences of an Israeli airstrike against Iran's nuclear facilities. .."

We are the world's superpower. [Nyet-and-who and many, nay, almost all Jews may disagree. Do their interests supersede those of the USA? They may do well to realize that we are razing and rebuilding - in our own image - the ancient civilizations of Mesopatamia. And that the mighty age-old civilizations of the North/South America are no more.]

But the USA is even-handed - even a neutral arbitrator - in the conflict in the Middle East. [ The reader (and cfukara) may wish to disagree. ]

And for those fair-minded people who agree let us read a balanced Iranian-centric article on "the possible consequences of an Iranian airstrike against Israel's nuclear facilities."

"the possible consequences of an ( fill in the blank ) airstrike against (fill in the blank)'s nuclear facilities."

Note: The purpose of writing such an article is partly to de-sensitize the world to the possibility of such unconscionably gratuitous act of aggression. We have seen the MO many times before: The psyche war is effective on the hard-working, very hard-working Americans whose taxes prop up that state of Israel - when Israel talks about it for days
(with no dire warnings of threats or swift just retaliation from the USA or UN)
before it launches horrendous acts of aggression that kill and maim multitudes of innocent Palestinians. We expected it, who cares? We have been de-sensitized to the acts of torture and carnage by Israel.

[And of course such a report lays the ground work for quickly drawing the (Christian) USA into an ensuing wider Jewish-Arab-Persian conflict.]

The psyche war works on the hard-working, very hard-working Americans - when Israel warns of for days before it launches horrendous acts of aggression that kill and maim multitudes of innocent Palestinians. Who cares?

And it worked, when Rumsfeld kept on warning us for days ( and thus desensitizing us) that horrible pictures of Nazi acts committed by USA citizens at Mosul, Fallujah, Abu Ghraib, Baghram and Guantanamo will be coming our way. By the time the (less gruesome, unbelievably) pictures were shown to the citizens of the transparency-preaching USA, many were inclined to dismiss the atrocious Hitlerian acts by our compatriots as mere horseplay. [Now, if such acts were committed by foreigners on our citizens ...]

WisconsinLiberal Says:
Monday, May 18, 2009 at 10:05 pm
"Am I hallucinating or did rusty just say something incredibly coherent? Props to you rusty, nice to see you talk sense for a change."
.
Please do not get your hopes too high, WisconsinLiberal. I still firmly believe that the number one role of our Federal Government is to provide for the security of its citizens above all else. Saying that if a senario presents itself, and it is determined Iran will develope nuclear capabilities, then I trump my previous statement in favor of "taking out" their nuclear capabilities.
.
I am not naive enough to believe that Iran has only peaceful intentions with its nuclear ambitions. We have the capabilities to know if Iran is moving forward against the rest of the world to generate nuclear arms, I just hope Obama keeps his eye on it all. If Obama does not keep his eye on Iran, and allows them to develope the nuclear option, then he has failed us all miserably.

"Let Israel defend itself if it feels the need. Let the Palestinians also fend for themselves for a change. Show them both that we no longer will spend one more dime, unless both agree. If they don't, then they only have themselves to blame"

How is this any different from Dubya's first term and look what became of that?