the strange love affair: france, saudi and israel

[bud]

france's sabotage of the nuclear deal between p5+ 1 and iran should be looked at beyond their talking points. according to every other country at the geneva meetings, there was a real, secure deal on the table that even the french diplomats had agreed on, until the french minister flew into geneva and stopped everything.

Diplomats said to be furious after France objected to a stopgap deal being presented as a fait accompli

in this case, france's best interest looks to be arms sales to saudi and other sunni arab states who have been abandoned by the original great satan, america, who has decided to give diplomacy a try.

some western officials accused France of sabotaging the hopes of a deal to curry favour with Israel and the Gulf Arab states.

here is a little more on the economic benefits for france in the la times:

multiple motives may be involved, including France's desire to halt nuclear proliferation but also interests in selling arms to Saudi Arabia and other Arab nations in the Persian Gulf that fear Iran's regional power and would appreciate the French stand.

the saudis have come a long way since the deterioration of iran which started after the revolution. a combination of the iraq, iran war, the brutal u.s. sanctions and the stubborn and overly proud past governments have made iran fragile. saudi has always looked at iran, the shiite islamic republic, with great envy and they have been inching their way into becoming the 'it' state in that region.

everything was in place for saudi: a tactless, dysfunctional iranian government, lead by ahmadinejad and the latest middle east dictator boogyman, the syrian government, who looked to be on its way out.

then suddenly, out of nowhere, the moderate, rouhani comes into power. he has surrounded himself with capable politicians, such as the u.s. educated iranian foreign minister, zarif, who hasn't missed an opportunity to speak to anyone who is willing to listen. the charm offensive is on, which includes the successful social media blitz. some argue that khameini, the one who has the final say in these big matters, has given rouhani and his posse his blessing to negotiate a way out of what has transpired, without giving up what every signatory to the NPT is allowed to have, nuclear technology, within limits. some would also argue that the recent brutal sanctions have worked and they have harmed the pocket books of those who are in power in iran and now they have no choice but to negotiate a deal. this confirms what both the u.s. military and mossad leaders have said, 'the iranian regime is a rational actor'.

natanyahu, has suddenly turned into a panicking and babbling warmonger, instead of the usual calculative warmonger. the saudis, have shown their frustration with the obama administration on two fronts, which are connected: their unwillingness to take military action against the syrian government and obama for wanting a real and genuine effort at diplomatically engaging with iran's new, friendly government. to complete this ménage à trois, enter france, who has for so long been a former shadow of itself. by picking to go with saudi and israel, it may have decided on a move that may bring some prosperity and some influence on the world stage.

in the coming weeks, we will see how strong the influence of the saudis and the likudites will be and if they can counter a willing group of western countries, who look to want a real deal with what seems to be a willing partner in iran.

[Bonam]

The best thing Iran can do is to continue to act rationally, if it can. Rational actors are allowed to obtain nuclear energy and indeed nuclear weapons (despite ineffectual UN laws and treaties) with a minimal amount of fuss. All Iran really has to do is convince the world that it is more interested in its own prosperity than blowing up its neighbors or supporting terrorists, and that said rationality is unlikely to change in the foreseeable future, and no one will do anything when it develops nuclear weapons. Despite electing some relative moderates now and then, it still has a ways to go before the world will trust Iran with nuclear weapons.

Edited November 11, 2013 by Bonam

[bud]

The best thing Iran can do is to continue to act rationally, if it can. Rational actors are allowed to obtain nuclear energy and indeed nuclear weapons (despite ineffectual UN laws and treaties) with a minimal amount of fuss. All Iran really has to do is convince the world that it is more interested in its own prosperity than blowing up its neighbors or supporting terrorists, and that said rationality is unlikely to change in the foreseeable future, and no one will do anything when it develops nuclear weapons. Despite electing some relative moderates now and then, it still has a ways to go before the world will trust Iran with nuclear weapons.

what nuclear weapons? the israeli, u.s. and other international agencies have all confirmed that iran doesn't have a nuclear weapons program. the fear that israel and saudi seem to have is that iran will use the nuclear technology that it is allowed to have under the NPT and start a nuclear weapons program in the future.

[Bonam]

what nuclear weapons? the israeli, u.s. and other international agencies have all confirmed that iran doesn't have a nuclear weapons program. the fear that israel and saudi seem to have is that iran will use the nuclear technology that it is allowed to have under the NPT and start a nuclear weapons program in the future.

Any country with a brain that can get away with having nuclear weapons and has the technology to do so, should be doing it. It is a highly effective deterrent. Even if Iran has no immediate nuclear weapons program, the greater their experience with and knowledge of nuclear technology the easier it would be for them to develop a nuclear weapon in the future. For example, Canada has no nuclear weapons (that we know of) but could make such weapons in under a year. Same with Japan, Germany, and quite a few other nations. Iran would love to be in the same position.

Edited November 11, 2013 by Bonam

[bud]

Any country with a brain that can get away with having nuclear weapons and has the technology to do so, should be doing it. It is a highly effective deterrent. Even if Iran has no immediate nuclear weapons program, the greater their experience with and knowledge of nuclear technology the easier it would be for them to develop a nuclear weapon in the future. For example, Canada has no nuclear weapons (that we know of) but could make such weapons in under a year. Same with Japan, Germany, and quite a few other nations. Iran would love to be in the same position.

agreed.

iran can simply pull out of the NPT and begin building the weapons. meaning that reaching the point in nuclear technology would be a deterrent.

i don't blame the iranians for wanting this technology. i trust the iranian government more than i would the saudis and the pakistanis. which is where we're at now. i think the current u.s. government (not the aipac lobbied congress) prefers iran over saudi. the same country which has the extremist wahabists. the same country where most of the 9/11 hijackers came from. the same country that funds al quaeda behind closed doors.

so it's almost a no-brainer to support iran over saudi. one problem here is that the iranian government is anti-israel. i don't think to the extent that they would try to 'nuke' them, but to the extent that they'd be feared as the neighbour on the block who has a gun and would be willing to show it off against the only bully on the block, israel.

i really do think that this could all end happily if the settlements were halted, there was some land swapping and the palestinian refugees were compensated and a real palestinian state was formed. unfortunately, the israeli government is controlled by the likudites and their settler parties, who, for religious, emotional and financial reasons, want to continue the destructive colonialism.

[jbg]

france's sabotage of the nuclear deal between p5+ 1 and iran should be looked at beyond their talking points. according to every other country at the geneva meetings, there was a real, secure deal on the table that even the french diplomats had agreed on, until the french minister flew into geneva and stopped everything.

Diplomats said to be furious after France objected to a stopgap deal being presented as a fait accompli

in this case, france's best interest looks to be arms sales to saudi and other sunni arab states who have been abandoned by the original great satan, america, who has decided to give diplomacy a try.

******************

here is a little more on the economic benefits for france in the la times:

multiple motives may be involved, including France's desire to halt nuclear proliferation but also interests in selling arms to Saudi Arabia and other Arab nations in the Persian Gulf that fear Iran's regional power and would appreciate the French stand.

Or perhaps since Europe is within easy missile range they're in harm's way as well as Israel? Or maybe to take your conspiracy theories a step further they and a lot of the world need hi-tech support from Israel? Or the fact that Israel is slated to become a major exporter of natural gas, and France is resistant to fracking? All kinds of possibilities I can think of as to why a Western country wouldn't want to self-destruct.

everything was in place for saudi: a tactless, dysfunctional iranian government, lead by ahmadinejad and the latest middle east dictator boogyman, the syrian government, who looked to be on its way out.

then suddenly, out of nowhere, the moderate, rouhani comes into power. he has surrounded himself with capable politicians, such as the u.s. educated iranian foreign minister, zarif, who hasn't missed an opportunity to speak to anyone who is willing to listen. the charm offensive is on, which includes the successful social media blitz. some argue that khameini, the one who has the final say in these big matters, has given rouhani and his posse his blessing to negotiate a way out of what has transpired, without giving up what every signatory to the NPT is allowed to have, nuclear technology, within limits. some would also argue that the recent brutal sanctions have worked and they have harmed the pocket books of those who are in power in iran and now they have no choice but to negotiate a deal. this confirms what both the u.s. military and mossad leaders have said, 'the iranian regime is a rational actor'.

natanyahu, has suddenly turned into a panicking and babbling warmonger, instead of the usual calculative warmonger. the saudis, have shown their frustration with the obama administration on two fronts, which are connected: their unwillingness to take military action against the syrian government and obama for wanting a real and genuine effort at diplomatically engaging with iran's new, friendly government. to complete this ménage à trois, enter france, who has for so long been a former shadow of itself. by picking to go with saudi and israel, it may have decided on a move that may bring some prosperity and some influence on the world stage.

in the coming weeks, we will see how strong the influence of the saudis and the likudites will be and if they can counter a willing group of western countries, who look to want a real deal with what seems to be a willing partner in iran.

And what if Rouhani has no real power since the Supreme Council or whatever it's called has veto power over him? Iran has been known to play "good cop bad cop" before.

[Rue]

The best thing Iran can do is to continue to act rationally, if it can.

Your assumption you know what is rational, let alone Iranians will share that same vision of rationality is irrational.

Bonam please don't buy any pythons and keep them as pets.

Edited November 11, 2013 by Rue

[Rue]

Saudi Arabia has no alliance with Israel, never has, never will. The fact it is at war with Iran and Syria does not make

it Israel's ally and its an absurd thing to suggest.

Shiites and Sunnis have been at war with each other for centuries. If anything, during the Shah's regime, Israel had good relations with Iran but that was a temporary phenomena.

The fact that you share the same enemies does not make you an ally, particularly in the Middle East where "your enemy is my enemy| changes as quickly as the shape of sand dunes.

To understand Middle East politics is to understand there has never been a permanent alliance between any Muslim nation of the Middle East and no Muslim nation of the Middle East will ever accept a Jewish state as long as they prescribe to Sharia Law.

Until Sharia Law, based on the Koran changes its doctrine to state non Muslims can own land let alone have their own state, no Muslim nation will be allied with Israel. The Wahabis who dominate Sunni Islam in Saudi Arabia are as vehemently opposed to a Jewish state and the concept of Jews being equal and therefore entitled to their own state no different than the Shiites.

That is a fact. The pro Iranians on this web site like BudHudson have let it now slip their bias is Shiite Islam not Sunni Islam.

If Saudi Arabia was in a true alliance with Israel it wouldn't have paid for and arranged to get nuclear weapons from Pakistan once the US made it clear they will not confront Iran on its making a nuclear weapon.

Saudi Arabia will not depend on Israel to defend it. It never did. It at one point expected the US to, never Israel.

Saudi Arabia hates Israel. It finances terror cells dedicated to wiping Israel out. Saudi Arabia finds Israel as detestable as Iran, always has, always will.

Saudi Arabia has dominated the Arab League talks and has been the primary reason that league will never recognize a Jewish state.

In fact it was Morrocco not Saudi Arabia that was the least hostile Arab nation to Israel and Morrocco distanced itself from Israel during the spring uprisings fearing Muslim extremists in their own nation would turn on the King for being friendly to Jews.

As for France, it turned on Israel as part of DeGaulle's policy to pursue Arab business interests. France is in direct competition with Iran. France is not an ally of Israel. Its former President and Obama openly complained about Netanyahu on an open microphone which many believe was deliberately done.

France sees itself as the colonial power and therefore overseer of Syria and Lebanon in direct competition with Iran. France's belief it should be the power behind Syria and Lebanon reflects its colonial beliefs that these two countries, Morrocco, Tunisia and Algeria as well as Chad and Niger who are Muslim nations, are part of their sphere of influence.

To suggest because of that they are Israel's ally is ridiculous. La Deuxieme Bureau, France's spy agency protected Yasir Arafat's drug trade. Arafat was a drug pusher. He used his network of connections from his drug caravans to serve France get business in the Middle East. In return he was allowed to ship opium and hash hish from Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon and Syria to Marseilles and on to New York.

Arafat had billions in French and Swiss bank accounts and a state protected villa in France.

France still maintains its connection to Abbas but since Arafat has died has floundered. Many believe Israel poisoned Arafat and have pissed off France. However the method of poisoning suggests Putin and that would make sense because Russia's drug syndicate directly competes with the old Arafat French controlled drug network. Russia's underworld now is in charge of the drug trade in the Middle East further suggesting they killed Arafat.

Interestingly the Russian Mafia are a dangerous destabilizing power now in Syria, Lebanon, Israel, and have their eyes on Egypt and Jordan. Now that Putin bitch slapped Obama in public rendering him a joke, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, are turning to Russia.

Egypt already has pledged a naval port for the Russian navy. The Egyptian Military and Saudi Arabia have just entered into weapons agreements with Russia to replace the US. Israel is in real trouble. They can't turn to Russia. Egypt and Saudi Arabia now that the US does not control them are threats again.

You expect Israel to rely on Russia as an ally to prevent SA and Egypt from being anti Israel? Not a chance.

Israel hates its own Russian mob. They find them a direct threat and the Russian mob is destabilizing the Israeli economy. The last thing Israel will do is get in bed with the regime of Putin who protects and works for the Russian Mob.

This comes down and has always come down to 2 things-oil and drugs. Its dawned on the US they can't rely on SA for oil anymore and think they will replace them with Iran.

Not going to happen. This notion the US can form an alliance with Iran to contain Russia's influence on the Middle East originate swith Obama's Middle East advisor, Zbignew Brezinski. Brezinski says Iran is the best buffer against Russia.

Thus the attempt to suck up to Syria and Iran and Hezbollah by Obama.

Obama is dead wrong. Dead dead wrong. The best way to contain Russia was to maintain alliances with Israel, Egypt and SA. The US has now dropped all 3. Israel now is in a crisis. How does it divest itself of all its dependence on the US?

More importantly Obama blew it sucking up to Turkey. Turkey used to be the NATO ally relied on to counter Russia-now its entered into an alliance with Russia and turned on Iran. The fact that Turkey hates Iran and Syria now does not make it an ally of Israel either.

Israel formed an alliance with Greece to counter their former alliance with Turkey. As long as Erdogan is in power Turkey is another anti semitic regime Obama will embrace.

[bud]

Saudi Arabia has no alliance with Israel, never has, never will. The fact it is at war with Iran and Syria does not make

it Israel's ally and its an absurd thing to suggest.

no one here suggested that they're "allies".

once again you went off on another one of your ramblings based on something that no one ever said. you need to pay better attention.

[GostHacked]

Rue

Interestingly the Russian Mafia are a dangerous destabilizing power now in Syria, Lebanon, Israel, and have their eyes on Egypt and Jordan. Now that Putin bitch slapped Obama in public rendering him a joke, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, are turning to Russia.

What about the CIA backed Al-Queda rebels? Sure that does not have anything to do with the destabilization that is happening there?

[Rue]

no one here suggested that they're "allies".

once again you went off on another one of your ramblings based on something that no one ever said. you need to pay better attention.

Once again Bud your tactics with me are not working.

The headline for this post is:

"the strange love affair: france, saudi and israel"

The above necessarily suggests an alliance, formal or informal.

Its clear from my response I was challenging any love affair. You want to play Bud? You want to play semantics and suggest "love affair" does not suggest some sort of relationship?

By the way Bud, the word dalliance comnonly used to refer to love affairs is comes from the French words d'alliance.

Lol. Bud let me spell it out, your attempts at playing semantics with moi is not working.

Si vous voulez continuez en francais....lesse moi dits....nons Bud, ca ne marche pas.

Edited November 11, 2013 by Rue

[jbg]

Until Sharia Law, based on the Koran changes its doctrine to state non Muslims can own land let alone have their own state, no Muslim nation will be allied with Israel. The Wahabis who dominate Sunni Islam in Saudi Arabia are as vehemently opposed to a Jewish state and the concept of Jews being equal and therefore entitled to their own state no different than the Shiites.

**************

Saudi Arabia will not depend on Israel to defend it. It never did. It at one point expected the US to, never Israel.

Saudi Arabia hates Israel. It finances terror cells dedicated to wiping Israel out. Saudi Arabia finds Israel as detestable as Iran, always has, always will.

Marriages of convenience make for strange bedfellows. SA may hate Israel but they may hate the Shi'ites more. And Israel is a strong, reliable country that honors its commitments.

As for France, it turned on Israel as part of DeGaulle's policy to pursue Arab business interests. France is in direct competition with Iran. France is not an ally of Israel. Its former President and Obama openly complained about Netanyahu on an open microphone which many believe was deliberately done.

France sees itself as the colonial power and therefore overseer of Syria and Lebanon in direct competition with Iran. France's belief it should be the power behind Syria and Lebanon reflects its colonial beliefs that these two countries, Morrocco, Tunisia and Algeria as well as Chad and Niger who are Muslim nations, are part of their sphere of influence.

To suggest because of that they are Israel's ally is ridiculous. La Deuxieme Bureau, France's spy agency protected Yasir Arafat's drug trade. Arafat was a drug pusher. He used his network of connections from his drug caravans to serve France get business in the Middle East. In return he was allowed to ship opium and hash hish from Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon and Syria to Marseilles and on to New York.

Dick Morris can be a bit off balance but once in a while he says or writes something interesting, including this day's blog post (link, excerpts below):

Bring back French Fries.

First, Russia shows the impotence of our Syrian policy and now France demonstrates how we are appeasing Iran foolishly. It’s not been a good year for Obama’s foreign policy. The world is catching on.

But for the objections of the newly stand-up French, led by Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, the 5+1 talks would have led to an abject surrender to Iran, allowing the terrorist-state to continue to build a plutonium plant and to freeze its uranium enrichment centrifuges just one notch below bomb-level.

A plutonium plant can produce enough fissionable material to make a bomb very quickly. And uranium, when enriched to 20%, can be further enriched to 90% — bomb grade — in a few weeks.

(The hard part is getting it to 20%).

************************

Even if the enrichment is not unfrozen, the potential for a plutonium bomb is terrifying enough and the deal would have done nothing to avert it. Iran would not have had to open its plutonium plant to inspection much less to freeze construction.

France rightly insists that Iran de-commission its centrifuges and halt construction of its plutonium plant before any tradeoff for reduced sanctions or asset turnover.

But the larger point is how inept and weak American foreign policy has become. If Russia is more peace loving than we are and France more resolved and strong, how low we have fallen!

Israel’s denunciation of the deal would have counted for nothing had France not heeded her call. It is a delight to see France back in the game, standing up to aggression. It has been a long wait, but the tricolour is once again flying proudly in the cause of justice and world peace.

Vive la France!

Israel is a major hi-tech asset to the West. I would assume that this is more important to France and Europe than to the U.S., which has pretty good hi-tech assets of its own. As I posted above, Israel is about to become a major exporter of natural gas and possibly oil.

This comes down and has always come down to 2 things-oil and drugs. Its dawned on the US they can't rely on SA for oil anymore and think they will replace them with Iran.

Not going to happen. This notion the US can form an alliance with Iran to contain Russia's influence on the Middle East originate swith Obama's Middle East advisor, Zbignew Brezinski. Brezinski says Iran is the best buffer against Russia.

This is a series of articles, which may be of significant interest, on Israel's oil finds. I may start a thread on this, but here are the article links:

• Oil Discovered in Israel’s Yam 3 Offshore Field, Could Generate $11 Billion
• Oil Enters Israel's Offshore Conversation
• Natural Gas May Have Profound Impact on Israel's Geopolitics
• New Israeli Oil Find near Gaza Could Drive Hamas, Abbas into War
• Israel Strikes More Oil in Area Discovered On Basis of Torah Verse

Israel formed an alliance with Greece to counter their former alliance with Turkey. As long as Erdogan is in power Turkey is another anti semitic regime Obama will embrace.

Thus the alliance with Greece. Export of Israeli oil and gas through Greece is a win-win for everyone except Turkey and Lebanon, who choose to try to play spoiler roles.

Edited November 11, 2013 by jbg

[bud]

Marriages of convenience make for strange bedfellows. SA may hate Israel but they may hate the Shi'ites more.

bingo.

[Rue]

Marriages of convenience make for strange bedfellows. SA may hate Israel but they may hate the Shi'ites more. And Israel is a strong, reliable country that honors its commitments.

Dick Morris can be a bit off balance but once in a while he says or writes something interesting, including this day's blog post (link, excerpts below):

Bring back French Fries.

First, Russia shows the impotence of our Syrian policy and now France demonstrates how we are appeasing Iran foolishly. It’s not been a good year for Obama’s foreign policy. The world is catching on.

But for the objections of the newly stand-up French, led by Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, the 5+1 talks would have led to an abject surrender to Iran, allowing the terrorist-state to continue to build a plutonium plant and to freeze its uranium enrichment centrifuges just one notch below bomb-level.

A plutonium plant can produce enough fissionable material to make a bomb very quickly. And uranium, when enriched to 20%, can be further enriched to 90% — bomb grade — in a few weeks.

(The hard part is getting it to 20%).

************************

Even if the enrichment is not unfrozen, the potential for a plutonium bomb is terrifying enough and the deal would have done nothing to avert it. Iran would not have had to open its plutonium plant to inspection much less to freeze construction.

France rightly insists that Iran de-commission its centrifuges and halt construction of its plutonium plant before any tradeoff for reduced sanctions or asset turnover.

But the larger point is how inept and weak American foreign policy has become. If Russia is more peace loving than we are and France more resolved and strong, how low we have fallen!

Israel’s denunciation of the deal would have counted for nothing had France not heeded her call. It is a delight to see France back in the game, standing up to aggression. It has been a long wait, but the tricolour is once again flying proudly in the cause of justice and world peace.

Vive la France!

Israel is a major hi-tech asset to the West. I would assume that this is more important to France and Europe than to the U.S., which has pretty good hi-tech assets of its own. As I posted above, Israel is about to become a major exporter of natural gas and possibly oil.

This is a series of articles, which may be of significant interest, on Israel's oil finds. I may start a thread on this, but here are the article links:

• Oil Discovered in Israel’s Yam 3 Offshore Field, Could Generate $11 Billion
• Oil Enters Israel's Offshore Conversation
• Natural Gas May Have Profound Impact on Israel's Geopolitics
• New Israeli Oil Find near Gaza Could Drive Hamas, Abbas into War
• Israel Strikes More Oil in Area Discovered On Basis of Torah Verse

Thus the alliance with Greece. Export of Israeli oil and gas through Greece is a win-win for everyone except Turkey and Lebanon, who choose to try to play spoiler roles.

Yes and you warned me about Obama two years ago so you can rub it in if you want. Interestingly Haliburton is the principle player in the oil drilling in the Golan right now.

The deal with Greece of course is important because the oil find between Cyprus and Israel is huge and Syria, Turkey and Russia are all upset about not having their hands on it.

As you know there is also a huge oil deposit of Gaza outside Israel that could easily fund a Palestinian nation but that Hamas won't allow anyone near. You remember the British attempted to get a consortium with them over that oil.

If Israel becomes self sufficient with gas and oil its a huge development. Likewise the notion Gaza is sitting on its own oil pocket has to be of interest to Egypt.

Turkey has made loud noises if not let in on this as has Russia. We shall see.

What is disturbing me JBG is this Kerry-Obama decision to play up to Syria and Iran and deliberately slap Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Israel in the face. I know its clear Brezkinski foreign policy. Its exactly what he wrote and as no.1 advisor to the Middle East he has turned the US to Iran as he promised.

Brezkinski is an open anti-Semite of the worst kind,. Next to Russia he sees empowered Jews through Zionism as the world's enemies. He also detests Egypt and Saudi Arabia. All one has to do is read his articles on the Middle East.

He believes the US should form an alliance with Iran to contain Russia. The problem is Brezinski's pee brain can't flex. He no longer has a Shah of Iran-Iran today is a far different creature than in his day. He's a fool. A total and utter fool.

I think Obama's Middle East foreign policy is a disaster. To have Kerry state in public to Abbas and Fatah Hawks that if Israel doesn't withdraw unilaterally there will be another uprising completely obliterated any influence Abbas may have had to prevent an uprisinhg. It gave Fatah Hawks a green light to recommence attacks and you will see as a result of Kerry's stupid, irresponsible words, an uprising now on the West Bank.

If I were the US military industrial complex I would also be seething. Russia has indicated they are now selling weapons to Saudi Arabia and Egypt to replace the Americans, and Russia is going to put a US navy port in Egypt. That is directly as a result of Obama signalling both Egypt and Saudi Arabia he will no longer support either.

Call me a fool but I believe the Egyptian military was and remains a crucial player in controlling Shiite extremism as well as Hamas.

What the phack are Obama and Kerry doing.

As for Iran by playing up to that regime, does the US really think it can get oil from Iran and lower world prices? Why is it sitting on

all the reserves in Iraq? Why spend all those trillions on a war in Iraq to protect the oil there and now turn your back on Iraq and kiss the asp of Iran? What is going on?

Far as I am concerned radical Islam whether its Shiite or Sunni, is equally as problematic and the US has no business trying to suck up to Iran or Syria or the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt or Turkey as Obama has.

I also have to ask-how did Obama justify sucking up to Turkey and Egypt's Muslim brotherhoods, and remain totally silent on the Coptic Christian killings in Egypt? Talk about his true bias creeping through. This is someone who told everyone he is Christian and made a point of repeating that over and over and he stays silent as Christians are massacered but sucks up to the Muslim Brotherhood?

There was Morsi suspending all democratic rights and Obama was calling him? Now suddenly Obama is trusting of Assad?

I wanna puke.

[bud]

i love the honesty that's coming out of the white house! perhaps bibi shouldn't have campaigned against obama or have his friend adelson spend millions against him. bibi's arrogance is being crushed.

U.S. dismisses Israeli assessment on Iran as 'exaggerated, not based on reality'

Strategic Affairs Minister Yuval Steinitz said on Wednesday that the sanctions relief package offered to Iran could be worth as much as $40 billion to Tehran.

But when asked about Steinitz's estimate, State Department spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki criticized Israel and said that Steinitz's "number, I can assure you, is inaccurate, exaggerated, and not based on reality."

link

now the white house is trying to get the american people behind them, like they did when israel wanted u.s. to go to war with syria. they know they can't count on the aipac influenced congress and senate, so they're taking their case right to the american people to avoid another meaningless war.

[Rue]

Oh look who used to call Obama a Zionist apologist now cheering him on. Lol.

[Hudson Jones]

i love the honesty that's coming out of the white house! perhaps bibi shouldn't have campaigned against obama or have his friend adelson spend millions against him. bibi's arrogance is being crushed.

U.S. dismisses Israeli assessment on Iran as 'exaggerated, not based on reality'

Strategic Affairs Minister Yuval Steinitz said on Wednesday that the sanctions relief package offered to Iran could be worth as much as $40 billion to Tehran.

But when asked about Steinitz's estimate, State Department spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki criticized Israel and said that Steinitz's "number, I can assure you, is inaccurate, exaggerated, and not based on reality."

link

now the white house is trying to get the american people behind them, like they did when israel wanted u.s. to go to war with syria. they know they can't count on the aipac influenced congress and senate, so they're taking their case right to the american people to avoid another meaningless war.

Obama is obviously on a mission. He wants to leave office as having achieved what many of his predecessors did not or could not. First, it was Obamacare, despite the many faults it has, became law in U.S., and now it's the Middle East issues. He seems to have a willing partner in Iran and the Palestinians are ready to compromise. The biggest obstacle that remains is Israel's current government and the prostitutes in congress and the senate, who get their foreign policy queues, and campaign funding and political backing from the most powerful lobby group, AIPAC.

Obama has a few things working on his side; The international community is on the side of diplomacy and do not want anymore AIPAC/Israel pushed wars in the Middle East. The American people are feeling the same way. This is why the Obama administration side-stepped congress and senate and went straight to the American people, who, very loudly and clearly said no to a war in Syria. Obama's reluctance to attack Syria was a loss for the all mighty AIPAC. We're seeing the same thing in regards to Iran. The Obama administration is once again turning to the American people and selling diplomacy, while congress and senate are left looking like warmongers, while repeating AIPAC issued statements.

[jbg]

Obama is obviously on a mission. He wants to leave office as having achieved what many of his predecessors did not or could not. First, it was Obamacare, despite the many faults it has, became law in U.S., and now it's the Middle East issues.

Both obvious fiascos. The Middle East is in flames as never before and ObamaCare is cratering.

Next?

He seems to have a willing partner in Iran and the Palestinians are ready to compromise. The biggest obstacle that remains is Israel's current government and the prostitutes in congress and the senate, who get their foreign policy queues, and campaign funding and political backing from the most powerful lobby group, AIPAC.

No. The biggest obstacle is that Iran and the Palestinians want an "all give no take" deal on the part of the West. Western death, on the installment plan.

Obama has a few things working on his side; The international community is on the side of diplomacy and do not want anymore AIPAC/Israel pushed wars in the Middle East. The American people are feeling the same way. This is why the Obama administration side-stepped congress and senate and went straight to the American people, who, very loudly and clearly said no to a war in Syria. Obama's reluctance to attack Syria was a loss for the all mighty AIPAC. We're seeing the same thing in regards to Iran. The Obama administration is once again turning to the American people and selling diplomacy, while congress and senate are left looking like warmongers, while repeating AIPAC issued statements.

AIPAC does not equal Jews. And Jews are not all pro-Israel and many non=-Jews are pro-Israel. The "international community" to which you refer are mostly people who get high placed diplomatic jobs in place of real ones.

[bud]

Both obvious fiascos. The Middle East is in flames as never before and ObamaCare is cratering.

Next?

obamacare has had a pretty crappy start but once it starts working, it will at least show glimpses of something that most of the western countries have.

obama had no teeth in his first term. he had to first get re-elected before being able to do anything. now that he has, either this is all a big charade and he will cave in like all of them have in the past, or he will actually flex the power he has as the president of the united states and make a deal with iran and sidestep bibi and his cries for war.

No. The biggest obstacle is that Iran and the Palestinians want an "all give no take" deal on the part of the West. Western death, on the installment plan.

what do you mean by iran wanting it all? they've already agreed to a lot of concessions and that's why we almost had a deal, until pepé le pew walked in, at the orders of king bibi and pimp saudi to sabotage the deal.

as for the palestinians: if they wanted it all, they would want what international law has said: borders of 1967 and the return of the refugees. however, information from past talks (many of them) have shown that they're open to land swaps and compensation for the refugees.

so i don't know what the fun you're talking about.

it's obvious that it's israel who is into the sabotage business and doesn't want progress in diplomatic negotiations and wants the status quo to continue as far as the palestinian issue. in the case of iran, it wants it to be either attacked or have 'no' nuclear technology. despite having the right to nuclear technology under npt.

AIPAC does not equal Jews. And Jews are not all pro-Israel and many non=-Jews are pro-Israel. The "international community" to which you refer are mostly people who get high placed diplomatic jobs in place of real ones.

who said AIPAC equals jews?

some of the biggest critics of israel's aggression and some of the leaders of human rights are jews. in fact, many of the younger jews who live outside israel, no longer support israel's policies. they don't feel like their western values are compatible with israel.

really, majority of the pro-israeli non-jews are christian zionists who believe in fairytales. like the ones where jews burn alive in what is now, israel. they're the useful idiots that the zionists have gathered to get support in the u.s. otherwise, majority of the people around the world, including in the EU see israel for who it is; one of the biggest threats to peace. the fact that they have warmongers like bibi as their PM and past warmongering PM's such as sharon, is a good explanation as to why people feel that way.

[bleeding heart]

No. The biggest obstacle is that Iran and the Palestinians want an "all give no take" deal on the part of the West. Western death, on the installment plan.

The Palestinians want "Western death," and this is what drives them?

You must really despise those Israeli appeaser-losers, then.

[jbg]

obama had no teeth in his first term. he had to first get re-elected before being able to do anything. now that he has, either this is all a big charade and he will cave in like all of them have in the past, or he will actually flex the power he has as the president of the united states and make a deal with iran and sidestep bibi and his cries for war.

Second-term Presidents are usually weaker for a lot of reasons. One is that the quality of their cabinets declines as the higher quality Secretaries seek jobs in the private sector, since only one or two are kept by the next President. Another is that they have less ability to punish problematical legislators or officials. Effectively re-elected Presidents are often "lame ducks" after the celebrations end.

There are only a few exceptions to this general rule, among them Bill Clinton and to a lesser extent Ronald Reagan. Eben going back tot he beginning of U.S. history second terms didn't work out too well and this was before the term-limiting started. Washington's second term was not particularly good. Jefferson's second term was a disaster and blew up into the War of 1812. Ditto Madison's. Monroe's second term wasn't so awful. Andrew Jackson's second term was awful.

Then we started a series of one-term Presidents. James Polk was a one-termer by design. Zachary Taylor died in office. Millard Fillmore, Franklin Pierce and James Buchanan didn't even try for re-election. Lincoln was shot days into his second term. Andrew Johnson of course didn't try for re-election. About either of "Useless" Grant's terms the less said the better. Rutherford B. Hayes was a one-term by design. Garfield was shot and Arthur, I don't think, ran for a second term. Grover Cleveland was our only "split-term" President and I don't know much about his second term. McKlinley was shot days into his second term. Teddy Roosevelt's second term wasn't awful but didn't measure up to his first term. Woodrow Wilson had his stroke shortly into his second term. Harding died during his second term. "Silent" Calvin Coolidge; if he did anything he'd have been dangerous. Truman's and Eisenhower's second terms were awful. Nixon resigned during his second term. George W. Bush's second term was nothing to write home about.

John Adams, John Quincy Adams, (not sure about) Martin Van Buren, William Howard Taft, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush were defeated at the polls. That leaves FDR, who is very tough to evaluate.

So, most second terms don't end well. Obama looks to be no exception.

[bud]

you didn't give any specific examples why obama's position is weak. every case is unique to itself.

the democrats are not in danger of losing seats in congress when the elections come up. in fact, it looks like the extremely weak GOP is the one who will be losing out. there isn't much worry about donor money from the democrat side and the only big lobby group not happy about obama straying from the usual unflinching support of israel's policy is AIPAC. it's not an internal policy. it is a foreign policy and the americans, it doesn't matter how much lobbying is done, will not support another war. so obama has a lot going for him.

kerry looks to be a lot more capable than hillary. he has a stronger presence and has more than enough experience to be the face of the foreign policy.

bibi has dug himself a hole and it's not so cool anymore to support the warmonger. especially since iran has been so forward about wanting to have a real resolution, without giving up their rights under the NPT.

obama is in a good situation.

[Rue]

Hudson-Bud do explain will you....how if AIPAC controls American foreign policy Obama and Kerry are so openly

anti Israel. Do explain that. You never finish what you start. You come on this forum and make wide open allegations that Jews through AIPAC magically control US foreign policy but when you are asked, explain how if that is true, Obama is anti Israel? Explain it. Finish what you start. The "two" of you using the exact same syntax and speech pattern came on this forum and accused Israeland Kews through AIPAC of controlling the US media.

Finish what you started. Finish for once just one smeer you started on this forum. You can't. The reason? Its quite simple.

Your accusation that AIPAC controls US foreign policy is clearly horse crap. Like other slurs you engage in, you throw them out, then when pointed out how absurd they are, change the topic and focus on another generalization.

Now you want to come on this board now and cheer Obama because he is openly anti Israel its of course to be expected.

But just how many posts ago was it when Hudson or Bud was on this forum claiming Obama was anti Palestinian, pro Israeli and controlled by the Jewish media and now presto you are on his band wagon.

My how its convenient to just carry on and ignore your past posts as if they were never stated.

Lol.

Obama? Oh suddenly he is in a good place because he's trying to make deals with Iran. Right. Never mind he's been humiliated by Putin on the world stage. Never mind the Russians are now building a naval port in Egypt, and lost Egypt and S Arabia to the Russians who are not going to arm them. Never mind Obama humiliated himself in abandoning his alleged red line in Syria. Never mind he turned his back on the Egyptian government and supported Morsi who once elected stripped his country of any vestiges of his supposed democratic revolution. Never mind Obama stayed silent on Morsi's deliberate attacks on Coptic Christians as a way to divert from his economic failures.Never mind Obama remained silent as Morsi repeated the exact same exercises as Hitler in his first days in office, right down to finding a scapegoat to attack-Obama is in a good place.

As long as Obama is advancing an anti Israel platform he's in a good place.

Right.Lol. More brilliant neutral analysis.

How about you now explain Rob Ford and where he's at. Can't wait. No wait, I know. If he says something anti Israel, its a good place.

I got it. Sorry I was confused for a second.

Oh wait now. Netanyahu is a war monger. He's the one on the news saying he will wipe Israel out. He's the one financing and supporting Hezbollah, Hamas, Fatah Hawks, and Assad. he's the one who directly finances terrorists with charters calling on the extermination and wiping out of Israel. He's the war monger.

Of course in your world, Iran is an angel right. That is the script is it not? I mean come now.Iran can threaten to wipe Israel out and finance terrorists trying to destroy Israel but Netanyahu is the war monger.

Lol.

He's not in a good place.

Edited November 18, 2013 by Rue

[bud]

if you could pay attention for once, it wouldn't have to be re-explained to you over and over.

the pro-israeli influence is exerted through campaign contributions coordinated by AIPAC. AIPAC bet on romney to win the presidency and they lost on that. bibi even made ads against obama during the elections.

it's not a secret that AIPAC and pro-israeli lobbies pay out lots of money to these politicians. all you have to do is to look at the money the congressmen/women and senators receive from AIPAC. the more money they receive, the harder they fight for AIPAC. it's not some conspiracy. it's how politics work.

you want to see a list of contributions to american politicians, go here.

the top pro-israeli $ recipient is senator mark kirk. this is the guy who made the following wtf comment when kerry and co went to the senate banking committee to make their case for a delay in increased sanctions on iran to give diplomacy a chance:

“How do you define an Iran moderate? An Iranian who is out of bullets and out of money.”

these are the diabolical, ugly people who support yours and bibi's cause.

Edited November 18, 2013 by bud

[Rue]

if you could pay attention for once, it wouldn't have to be re-explained to you over and over.

the pro-israeli influence is exerted through campaign contributions coordinated by AIPAC. AIPAC bet on romney to win the presidency and they lost on that. bibi even made ads against obama during the elections.

it's not a secret that AIPAC and pro-israeli lobbies pay out lots of money to these politicians. all you have to do is to look at the money the congressmen/women and senators receive from AIPAC. the more money they receive, the harder they fight for AIPAC. it's not some conspiracy. it's how politics work.

you want to see a list of contributions to american politicians, go here.

the top pro-israeli $ recipient is senator mark kirk. this is the guy who made the following wtf comment when kerry and co went to the senate banking committee to make their case for a delay in increased sanctions on iran to give diplomacy a chance:

“How do you define an Iran moderate? An Iranian who is out of bullets and out of money.”

these are the diabolical, ugly people who support yours and bibi's cause.

if you could pay attention for once, it wouldn't have to be re-explained to you over and over.

these are the diabolical, ugly people who support yours and bibi's cause.

Bud nothing in your response to me explains how as you have stated over and over again Israel through AIPAC controls US foreign policy. In fact you have proven the exact opposite in your comments. What is ironic is you presume to tell me to pay attention but the explanation you think you have given contradicts your very assertion! Lol.

Bud read back what you wrote to me. What you established is that AIPAC has no power to influence Obama or Kerry because they backed the wrong candidate. How does that establish their control of foreign policy it shows the exact opposite.

The other comment above also shows the level you are at Bud. You come on this forum to engage in hatred expressed in demonizing anyone who supports Israel.

It shows vividly that your agenda is to incite hatred. You use the most ancient of anti semitic canards and the most ancient of inciting methods to get people to hate Jews and anyone else that doesn't fit their agenda and that is demonization.

No Bud neither I nor anyone else who supports the right of Jews to have a nation is diaboloical or ugly. We are no more ugly or diabolical then any other nationality or ethnicity that seeks collective rights.

Your hatred though and your need to demonize an entire category of people with a negative stereotype deliberately intended to incite hatred against them speaks for itself.

Bud you never fail to lower your responses to just a call to hate and its not difficult for me to show that is all your message ever is about.

In this case it took about 4 threads to expose your hatred....yet again.

By the way Bud, when you want to commence a slur that Jews through AIPAC control the US for Israel finish it. Just once. The latest response is a joke.

Mark Kirk? Now you are suggesting Mark Kirk controls the US as a puppet for Jews? Lol.

What about you Bud. Now that you accuse him of being a puppet, does that mean then that you are diabolical and ugly and part of a conspiracy because you support the Ayatollah's mandate? Using your reasoning I can presume that.

Well? How much does Iran pay you Bud? Just by chance, are you a US senator or congressman?