Obama needs to provide real answers to Netanyahu’s arguments

[haman10]

Seriously guys, when the Israelis beat the drums of war every 2 years, i donno why i enjoy my afternoon coffee so much more

 

[Militant Atheist]

When I run out of toilet paper, I usually turn to wiping my *** with Washington Post.

 

[Pak_Sher]

Israel already has nuclear weapons and needs to stop lying and manipulating about the US President.

 

[veg]

I read hundreds of comments under the WP article.

It seems that 85% to 90% comments by US citizens were against WP, accusing it to be more loyal to Israel than US.

US citizens were also criticizing Israel directly. It was refreshing to see that people are becoming aware of Israeli conspiracies.

 

[Korosh kabir]

1995 - Israel ; Iran is going to build his nuke in matter of six month
2005- Israel ; Iran is going to build his nuke in matter of six month
2015- Israel says Iran is going to make nuke in few month
....to be continue

 

[syedali73]

When I run out of toilet paper, I usually turn to wiping my *** with Washington Post.

You don't do justice with your behind though. Its sheer insult to wipe it with Washington post.

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

Obama don't need to provide any answers to Israel.

 

[Solomon2]

Opinions
Netanyahu’s Churchillian warning


By Charles Krauthammer Opinion writer March 5 at 8:10 PM

Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to Congress was notable in two respects. Queen Esther got her first standing O in 2,500 years. And President Obama came up empty in his campaign to preemptively undermine Netanyahu before the Israeli prime minister could present his case on the Iran negotiations.

On the contrary. The steady stream of slights and insults turned an irritant into an international event and vastly increased the speech’s audience and reach. Instead of dramatically unveiling an Iranian nuclear deal as a fait accompli, Obama must now first defend his Iranian diplomacy.

In particular, argues The Post, he must defend its fundamental premise. It had been the policy of every president since 1979 that Islamist Iran must be sanctioned and contained. Obama, however, is betting instead on detente to tame Iran’s aggressive behavior and nuclear ambitions.

For six years, Obama has offered the mullahs an extended hand. He has imagined that with Kissingerian brilliance he would turn the Khamenei regime into a de facto U.S. ally in pacifying the Middle East. For his pains, Obama has been rewarded with an Iran that has ramped up its aggressiveness in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Gaza and Yemen, and brazenly defied the world on uranium enrichment.

He did the same with Russia. He offered Vladimir Putin a new detente. “Reset,” he called it. Putin responded by decimating his domestic opposition, unleashing a vicious anti-American propaganda campaign, ravaging Ukraine and shaking the post-Cold War European order to its foundations.

Like the Bourbons, however, Obama learns nothing. He persists in believing that Iran’s radical Islamist regime can be turned by sweet reason and fine parchment into a force for stability. It’s akin to his refusal to face the true nature of the Islamic State, Iran’s Sunni counterpart. He simply can’t believe that such people actually believe what they say.

That’s what made Netanyahu’s critique of the U.S.-Iran deal so powerful. Especially his dissection of the sunset clause. In about 10 years, the deal expires. Sanctions are lifted and Iran is permitted unlimited uranium enrichment with an unlimited number of centrifuges of unlimited sophistication. As the Wall Street Journal’s Bret Stephens points out, we don’t even allow that for democratic South Korea.

The prime minister offered a concrete alternative. Sunset? Yes, but only after Iran changes its behavior, giving up its regional aggression and worldwide support for terror.

Netanyahu’s veiled suggestion was that such a modification — plus a significant reduction in Iran’s current nuclear infrastructure, which the Obama deal leaves intact — could produce a deal that “Israel and its [Arab] neighbors may not like, but with which we could live, literally.”

Obama’s petulant response was: “The prime minister didn’t offer any viable alternatives.” But he just did: conditional sunset, smaller infrastructure. And if the Iranians walk away, then you ratchet up sanctions, as Congress is urging, which, with collapsed oil prices, would render the regime extremely vulnerable.

And if that doesn’t work? Hence Netanyahu’s final point: Israel is prepared to stand alone, a declaration that was met with enthusiastic applause reflecting widespread popular support.

It was an important moment, especially because of the libel being perpetrated by some that Netanyahu is trying to get America to go to war with Iran. This is as malicious a calumny as Charles Lindbergh’s charge on Sept. 11, 1941, that “the three most important groups who have been pressing this country toward war are the British, the Jewish and the Roosevelt administration.”

In its near-70 year history, Israel has never once asked America to fight for it. Not in 1948 when 650,000 Jews faced 40 million Arabs. Not in 1967 when Israel was being encircled and strangled by three Arab armies. Not in 1973 when Israel was on the brink of destruction. Not in the three Gaza wars or the two Lebanon wars.

Compare that to a very partial list of nations for which America has fought and for which so many Americans have fallen: Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Vietnam, Korea, and every West European country beginning with France (twice).

Change the deal, strengthen the sanctions, give Israel a free hand. Netanyahu offered a different path in his clear, bold and often moving address, Churchillian in its appeal to resist appeasement. This was not Churchill of the 1940s, but Churchill of the 1930s, the wilderness prophet. Which is why for all its sonorous strength, Netanyahu’s speech had a terrible poignancy. After all, Churchill was ignored.

Read more from Charles Krauthammer’s archive, follow him on Twitter or subscribe to his updates on Facebook.

 

[Arminkh]

Churchill didn't necessarily do Britain a favor. He is praised for steering Britain through a war that he could have prevented. His decision to get engaged in the war with Germany cost Britain its empire and its position as the world's undeniable super power. Anybody who knows anything about the recent history, knows that WWII is what triggered Great Britain's decline into a 2nd or 3rd grade power. The problem is that nobody ever asks how and why the war started? The fact is that Britain and France declared war on Germany not the other way around.

Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Comparing BB with Churchill may be legit in the sense that the unnecessary war that listening to BB's speech may cause would probably start the same downward spiral for USA.

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

if nutandyahoo wants a war why cant israel do itself why has he been whinning for nearly two decades now
the fact is bibi cant do it himself if he tries the retaliation from tehran will fcuk the entire middle east
as for amrika
it cant afford another war now so keep whining your whining doesnt matter

 

[syedali73]

Netanyahu as Churchil; A terrorist versus a Statesman. Amazing.

 

[Korosh kabir]

"Washington and its regional puppets led by Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey have been subsidizing the Islamist guerrillas from the outset. “Do you know of any major Arab ally of the US that embraces ISIL?” US Senator Lindsey Graham
facetiously asked General Martin Dempsey at a Senate Armed Services Committee in 2014. To Graham’s surprise, Dempsey responded: “I know major Arab allies who fund them.” US Vice President Joe Biden himself confirmed this in an October 2014 speech wherein he told students at Harvard University that America’s Gulf allies – the Saudis and Qataris especially – were backing ISIS and Jahbat al-Nusra (an al-Qaeda affiliate) with substantive sums of arms and funds. Another US General, Thomas McInerney, told Fox News that the US government helped “build ISIS” by “backing some of the wrong people” and by facilitating weapons to al-Qaeda-linked Libyan rebels which ended up in the hands of ISIS militants in Syria. Retired US General and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander, Wesley Clark, repeated this view in a February 2015 interview with CNN, saying that “ISIS got started through funding from our friends and allies [in the Gulf]” who sought to use religious fanatics to assail the Shia alliance of Syria, Iran and Hezbollah. “It’s like a Frankenstein,” he concluded.
A June 17, 2014, World Net Daily report highlights how Americans trained Syrian rebels who later joined ISIS in a secret base located in Jordan. Jordanian officials told WND’s Aaron Klein that “dozens of future ISIS members were trained [in a US run training facility in Jordan] at the time as part of covert aid to the insurgents targeting the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in Syria.” Reports in Der Spiegel, the Guardian, Reuters and other mainstream outlets all confirmed that the US, Britain, France and their regional allies were training militants in secret bases in Jordan and Turkey as part of the West’s proxy war against the Assad regime." From article entitled: The Destabilization Doctrine: ISIS, Proxies and Patsies

after all these confirmation
Iran has all rights to defend itself and her allies even to go to direct war against those Persian gulf puppets Arab states or even Israel after all those evil job they have done to destabilize her allies and it's interest in the region , and here what we see BIBI (call him baby,) crying out loud for US senates and asking them and encouraging US to attack Iran ,you and your Puppet Arab friends started all this mess ,a very dangerous game , act like a man and have guts and face the consequence.

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

Netanhayu is being more rhetoric to be honest. He needs to control it. US can better handle this, if allowed to deal with Iran now. Obama is doing a great job, in taking peace initiatives. Its not as if Israel is a Nuclear free nation.

Israel is India's friend, helping our defence forces, but that doesnt mean they are always right. War is no solution, and in the lack of intel of Nuclear bomb, its a waste of money and people. Iran as well as Israel needs to make peace overtunes.

 

[Quasar]

What Americans really think about an Iran deal | Brookings Institution

 

[Hassan Al-Somal]

UNITED NATIONS — In the address on Tuesday to the United States Congress by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, we witnessed a new peak in the long-running hype over Iran’s nuclear energy program. Yet all his predictions about how close Iran was to acquiring a nuclear bomb have proved baseless.

Despite that, alarmist rhetoric on the theme has been a staple of Mr. Netanyahu’s career. In an interview with the BBC in 1997, he accused Iran of secretly “building a formidable arsenal of ballistic missiles,” predicting that eventually Manhattan would be within range. In 1996, he stood before Congress and urged other nations to join him to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear capability, stressing that “time is running out.” Earlier, as a member of Parliament, in 1992, he predicted that Iran would be able to produce a nuclear weapon within three to five years.
In front of world leaders at the United Nations in September 2012, Mr. Netanyahu escalated his warnings by declaring that Iran could acquire the bomb within a year. It is ironic that in doing so, he apparently disregarded the assessment of his own secret service: A recently revealed document showed that the Mossad, Israel’s intelligence agency, had advised that Iran was “not performing the activity necessary to produce weapons.” The United States intelligence community had reached the same conclusion in its National Intelligence Estimate.

Despite extensive inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency, no evidence has ever been presented to contradict the clear commitment by Iran’s leaders that they would under no circumstances engage in manufacturing, stockpiling and using nuclear weapons. In 2013, for example, only Japan, which has many more nuclear facilities than Iran,was subject to greater agency scrutiny.

Yet, in his speech this week, Mr. Netanyahu claimed the agency had determined that Iran had “a military nuclear program.” This is a gross distortion of the agency’s position. The “possible military dimensions,” which Mr. Netanyahu amplifies on every available occasion, are based not on the agency’s findings but on referrals by other member states with their own political agendas. In one case, in 2012, a former agency directordismissed such a report “because there was no chain of custody for the paper, no clear source, document markings, date of issue or anything else that could establish its authenticity.”

Iran has also alerted the agency to many errors in the relevant documents, and our position has been confirmed by independent nonproliferation experts. We will nevertheless continue to work with the agency to resolve this issue — despite our skepticism, which leads us to recall the notorious forged document about Niger’s “yellowcake” uranium that was used to coax the Security Council into authorizing the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

As one side of the talks that continue in Geneva, Iran can also bear testimony to the campaign of misinformation by Mr. Netanyahu to mislead the global public about the details of those nuclear negotiations. When the parties were finalizing the interim agreement in 2013, Mr. Netanyahu claimed that it would involve Iran’s receiving $50 billion in sanctions relief; the actual amount was about $7 billion. And as for his prediction that Iran would never abide by the terms of the accord, Iran has dutifully stood by every commitment — as the International Atomic Energy Agency has reported.

In our view, Mr. Netanyahu has consistently used these false alarms and outlandish claims both to serve his domestic political maneuvering and to create a smoke screen that relegates the Palestinian question to the margins. We have noted how his rhetoric has intensified in proportion to the international pressure on Israel to stop the settlement activity and end the occupation of the Palestinian territory.

The paradox of the situation is that a government that has built a stockpile of nuclear weapons, rejected calls to establish a nuclear-weapons-free zone in the Middle East, made military incursions into neighboring states and flouted international law by keeping the lands of other nations under occupation, now makes such a big fuss over a country, Iran, that has not invaded another country since America became a sovereign nation.

Mr. Netanyahu seems to be in a state of panic at the prospect of losing this tool with which to attack Iran, as we do all in our power to address the genuine concerns of the international community and arrive at a settlement over our country’s nuclear energy program. Iran’s efforts, epitomized by the 2013 interim agreement, aim to resolve the issue with the P5-plus-1 group of countries (the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, plus Germany). Since Israel’s prime minister appears to be a person who thrives on chaos and conflict, we fear that he may have further plans to poison the atmosphere and sow discord among those involved in this historic effort.

There are other great issues at hand in the Middle East. The violent extremism we see in Syria and Iraq is one, and to fight it effectively, we need to ease international tensions. We must all address the problem of the breeding grounds that are delivering fresh recruits to the terrorist cause. Israeli aggression and the occupation of Palestinian territories have always been of major propaganda value for extremist recruitment.

During the quarter-century that Mr. Netanyahu and his allies have tried to keep Iran’s nuclear program at the forefront of the global agenda, they increased the number of illegal settlers in the West Bank and East Jerusalem to more than 750,000 from about 300,000. At the same time, Palestinians have continued to be evicted from their homes and land. This historic wrong, coupled with the blockade of Gaza, is the real ticking bomb in the Middle East. The whole world should work to defuse it by rising above petty politics and the lobbying of narrow-minded pressure groups.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/04/o...p-span-region&WT.nav=c-column-top-span-region

Excellent piece and indeed hard-hitting facts! It is high time the world should see the falsehoods and lies that the Israeli PM Benyami Satanyahu is running with - lies that were refuted by every western intelligence agency and by every IAEA inspection reports.

It is also a high time the world should pressure the Zionist and apartheid entity of Israel to stop the illegal occupation of Palestine and the genocide it inflicts on the defenseless Palestinian people.

Thanks to Mr GHOLAMALI KHOSHROO for responding to the lies that Mr Netanyahu is running with, and thank you Mr ResurgentIran for posting it here!

But you did get another answer from me. You're just ignoring it, that's all.

A predictably context-stripping and diverting anti-Zionist piece from the NYT, which prizes media access above accuracy. For as has been pointed out for years, the capability for building nuclear weapons is not the same thing as nuclear weapons themselves. Obama has publicly pledged to prevent the latter, not the former.

Every Western intelligence and IAEA reports have all proved that there are no military dimension to the Iranian civilian nuclear program.

Having said that, the question that everyone should be asking is, what about the 300 Israeli nuclear weapons that were created to be lobbed against any Arab and Muslim nation that stands in the way to prevent against Israel's illegal territorial land grab?