Good Cop-Bad Cop: Obama and Boehner on Iran?

[Rhea]

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/a-step-too-far--2

"Inviting Prime Minister Netanyahu without consulting the administration is clearly a breach of protocol and an unwelcome injection of partisan politics into our foreign policy. It puts the United States in the middle of Israel’s election, which is highly inappropriate ... I also believe imposing additional sanctions on Iran in the midst of negotiations — which is what Netanyahu will reportedly discuss — would collapse the negotiations and ruin a historic diplomatic opportunity. Imposing sanctions now is reckless and dangerous.”

Does this turn out to be a drama of Good-Cop/Bad-Cop where the Republicans in Congress make Iran think about what **NOT** negotiating with Obama might create?

 

[maxparrish]

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/a-step-too-far--2

"Inviting Prime Minister Netanyahu without consulting the administration is clearly a breach of protocol and an unwelcome injection of partisan politics into our foreign policy. It puts the United States in the middle of Israel’s election, which is highly inappropriate ... I also believe imposing additional sanctions on Iran in the midst of negotiations — which is what Netanyahu will reportedly discuss — would collapse the negotiations and ruin a historic diplomatic opportunity. Imposing sanctions now is reckless and dangerous.”

Does this turn out to be a drama of Good-Cop/Bad-Cop where the Republicans in Congress make Iran think about what **NOT** negotiating with Obama might create?

If it is good cop/bad cop, it is not intentional. The administration seems really p.o.'d that the Republican Congress would act as if it were an independent legislature in a reputed democracy.

Thou shall not cross Dear Leader.
With their gutter sniping failing to stop Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s planned March speech before Congress, White House aides are unloading their full arsenal of bile. “He spat in our face publicly, and that’s no way to behave,” one Obama aide told an Israeli newspaper. “Netanyahu ought to remember that President Obama has a year and a half left to his presidency, and that there will be a price.”

It is pointless to say petty threats do not become the Oval Office. Trying to instruct this White House on manners recalls what Mark Twain said about trying to teach a pig to sing: It wastes your time and annoys the pig.

Still, the fury is telling. It reminds, as if we could forget, that everything is always about Obama.

How dare Israel be more concerned with the existential threat of Iranian nukes than with Obama’s feelings? And what do members of Congress think they are, a separate branch of government or something?

http://nypost.com/2015/01/24/white-house-going-nuclear-on-netanyahu/

 

[Rhea]

If it is good cop/bad cop, it is not intentional. The administration seems really p.o.'d that the Republican Congress would act as if it were an independent legislature in a reputed democracy.

Oh, I agree it's not intentional. I'm just curious if it'll turn out to be that way. In other words, backfire totally on both The GOP and Netanyahu.

Thou shall not cross Dear Leader.
With their gutter sniping failing to stop Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s planned March speech before Congress, White House aides are unloading their full arsenal of bile. “He spat in our face publicly, and that’s no way to behave,” one Obama aide told an Israeli newspaper. “Netanyahu ought to remember that President Obama has a year and a half left to his presidency, and that there will be a price.”

It is pointless to say petty threats do not become the Oval Office. Trying to instruct this White House on manners recalls what Mark Twain said about trying to teach a pig to sing: It wastes your time and annoys the pig.

Still, the fury is telling. It reminds, as if we could forget, that everything is always about Obama.

How dare Israel be more concerned with the existential threat of Iranian nukes than with Obama’s feelings? And what do members of Congress think they are, a separate branch of government or something?

well this article is kind of silly and hyperbolic.

I don't think it's a petty threat. I think it's a very real consequence that Netanyahu will lose standing if he acts against diplomacy. And that the consequences will come from far wider than the White House, just sort of naturally.

And it's not "How dare Israel care..." when many in Israel itself are also calling Netanyahu out as wrong to do this.

 

[fromderinside]

I'm really glad that some are still standing for the idea that American politics ends at our borders.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/a-step-too-far--2

"Inviting Prime Minister Netanyahu without consulting the administration is clearly a breach of protocol and an unwelcome injection of partisan politics into our foreign policy. It puts the United States in the middle of Israel’s election, which is highly inappropriate ... I also believe imposing additional sanctions on Iran in the midst of negotiations — which is what Netanyahu will reportedly discuss — would collapse the negotiations and ruin a historic diplomatic opportunity. Imposing sanctions now is reckless and dangerous.”

Does this turn out to be a drama of Good-Cop/Bad-Cop where the Republicans in Congress make Iran think about what **NOT** negotiating with Obama might create?

That would require more cooperation from the Republicans than I think they're capable of.

I think Obama is hung up on the usual leftist flaw of thinking any dispute can be talked out.

 

[untermensche]

Netanyahu should be free to come to talk to Congress whenever he wants to.

He can beg for sanctions.

But he can't impose them.

And everybody should be opposed to Iran getting nuclear weapons.

And also support all nations in the ME getting rid of them.

 

[fromderinside]

And everybody should .... also support all nations in the ME getting rid of them.

Why would Iran be a worse actor than Pakistan? If not why not mistrust all the rest of those nuclear nations?

Lets rid nukes from where you prescribe and all nations in SW Asia and all nations in SE Asia and E Asia and W Asia and N Asia and Central Asia and Europe and Africa and all nations in N America and all satellites and all ships and submarines getting rid of them .....

amen

 

[untermensche]

And everybody should .... also support all nations in the ME getting rid of them.

... and all nations in SW Asia getting rid of them

... and all nations in SE Asia and E Asia and W Asia and N Asia and Central Asia and Europe and Africa and all nations in N America and all satellites and all ships and submarines getting rid of them .....

amen

Of course.

But you start small and work up.

 

[fromderinside]

... and all nations in SW Asia getting rid of them

... and all nations in SE Asia and E Asia and W Asia and N Asia and Central Asia and Europe and Africa and all nations in N America and all satellites and all ships and submarines getting rid of them .....

amen

Of course.

But you start small and work up.

I like the way we used to do it. Get rid of the big guy nukes then pressure the middle sized guys, the little guys, the places. We don't have forever. Its only been seventy years since the bomb and less than 40 years since reductions began and already we've gotten rid of over half of those bad guys. Starting small, if Iran is any measure, would get rid of one nuke every 15 years or so.

 

[untermensche]

I like the way we used to do it. Get rid of the big guy nukes then pressure the middle sized guys, the little guys, the places. We don't have forever. Its only been seventy years since the bomb and less than 40 years since reductions began and already we've gotten rid of over half of those bad guys. Starting small, if Iran is any measure, would get rid of one nuke every 15 years or so.

Who are the bad guys again?

 

[fromderinside]

I like the way we used to do it. Get rid of the big guy nukes then pressure the middle sized guys, the little guys, the places. We don't have forever. Its only been seventy years since the bomb and less than 40 years since reductions began and already we've gotten rid of over half of those bad guys. Starting small, if Iran is any measure, would get rid of one nuke every 15 years or so.

Who are the bad guys again?

Use bolded as a clue (Louis Black voice for clue)

 

[untermensche]

Who are the bad guys again?

Use bolded as a clue (Louis Black voice for clue)

Fine. Getting rid of Israel's nukes is too small for you.

Or is it impossible?

 

[arkirk]

In order to deal with these foreign nations, Israel included, we have to know what they have and whether it is on the table in exchange for peace. So let the IAEA go through Israel's stockpile of nukes, so we know what we are dealing with. It is obvious that IAEA has been in Iran for years. No nation has a right to be "ambiguous" when it comes to nuclear weapons. This issue alone should put Israel on the same footing with us as N. Korea. We know they have them...more than 200 I understand.

We could then sanction Israel and Iran at the same time and force them to negotiate with each other. It is in granted favored status to one nuclear armed nation against one not so armed. As long as this condition persists, it is my guess that negotiations are going nowhere. The problem is that Israel through AIPAC owns so many of our federal legislators, and these legislators are acting as agents of a foreign government within our own government.

The actual origin of Israel's military might is clearly in the U.S. Netanyahu appears to me to be an agent of these legislators's policies in the middle east and his speech to congress was to convince them to continue to support his chauvanistic regime in Israel. I feel homeland security should not allow this man in our country as his regime is a state sponsor of either TERRORISM or aggerssive war. This of course is all water under the bridge as long as the U.S. has veto power in the U.N. and can keep its puppets in line. This kind of situation keeps the world stirred up and keeps our arms industries busy, when we really have far more pressing issues like alternative energy solutions, crumbling infrastructure and educational institutions in our own country. These things are hurting us at home with every passing day and all we get is more and more phoney "security."

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Netanyahu should be free to come to talk to Congress whenever he wants to.

He can beg for sanctions.

But he can't impose them.

And everybody should be opposed to Iran getting nuclear weapons.

And also support all nations in the ME getting rid of them.

Iran's nukes are more aimed at us than Israel.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And everybody should .... also support all nations in the ME getting rid of them.

Why would Iran be a worse actor than Pakistan? If not why not mistrust all the rest of those nuclear nations?

Lets rid nukes from where you prescribe and all nations in SW Asia and all nations in SE Asia and E Asia and W Asia and N Asia and Central Asia and Europe and Africa and all nations in N America and all satellites and all ships and submarines getting rid of them .....

amen

Iran has an Islamist government, Pakistan does not. If Pakistan gets an Islamist government things will be even worse.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

In order to deal with these foreign nations, Israel included, we have to know what they have and whether it is on the table in exchange for peace. So let the IAEA go through Israel's stockpile of nukes, so we know what we are dealing with. It is obvious that IAEA has been in Iran for years. No nation has a right to be "ambiguous" when it comes to nuclear weapons. This issue alone should put Israel on the same footing with us as N. Korea. We know they have them...more than 200 I understand.

You're forgetting that Israel didn't sign the NPT. The IAEA can't do anything there.

We could then sanction Israel and Iran at the same time and force them to negotiate with each other. It is in granted favored status to one nuclear armed nation against one not so armed. As long as this condition persists, it is my guess that negotiations are going nowhere. The problem is that Israel through AIPAC owns so many of our federal legislators, and these legislators are acting as agents of a foreign government within our own government.

And how do you propose we ensure the Palestinians keep whatever agreements they negotiate given their track record of breaking them before the ink is dry?

 

[arkirk]

You're forgetting that Israel didn't sign the NPT. The IAEA can't do anything there.

We could then sanction Israel and Iran at the same time and force them to negotiate with each other. It is in granted favored status to one nuclear armed nation against one not so armed. As long as this condition persists, it is my guess that negotiations are going nowhere. The problem is that Israel through AIPAC owns so many of our federal legislators, and these legislators are acting as agents of a foreign government within our own government.

And how do you propose we ensure the Palestinians keep whatever agreements they negotiate given their track record of breaking them before the ink is dry?

There you go assuming again. Regarding the NPT. If it is to work, NO NATION SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO ESCAPE ITS OBLIGATION TO NOT USE NUCLEAR WEAPONS. Merely not signing a treaty does not absolve Israel of moral obligations perhaps best handled by a criminal court...like the ICC. We have leaders in our country pursuing policies that are crooked and aggressive and they always keep our political system from signing treaties that might lead to their prosecution. If the U.S. signed on with the ICC, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeldt, Clinton, and a lot of others would suddenly be open to be prosecuted. Your answer is to defend these dishonest types with your unblinking nationalistic loyalty.

Any nation as thoroughly militarily humiliated as the Palestinians have become will be incapable of keeping agreements because they have not the power to enforce them on their own people and anybody else that cares to operate in that space. When IDF can come into their territory, destroy their houses and orchards, take their water, and build a fortified settlement right in their midst and they cannot do anything about that, you are going to see terrorism. Wake up Loren!

 

[untermensche]

Netanyahu should be free to come to talk to Congress whenever he wants to.

He can beg for sanctions.

But he can't impose them.

And everybody should be opposed to Iran getting nuclear weapons.

And also support all nations in the ME getting rid of them.

Iran's nukes are more aimed at us than Israel.

Iran does not have any nukes so where they are aimed is some fantasy.

 

[Axulus]

Netanyahu should be free to come to talk to Congress whenever he wants to.

He can beg for sanctions.

But he can't impose them.

And everybody should be opposed to Iran getting nuclear weapons.

And also support all nations in the ME getting rid of them.

Yes - Israel is extremely hypocritical to demand that Iran not have any yet have some in its own possession.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You're forgetting that Israel didn't sign the NPT. The IAEA can't do anything there.



And how do you propose we ensure the Palestinians keep whatever agreements they negotiate given their track record of breaking them before the ink is dry?

There you go assuming again. Regarding the NPT. If it is to work, NO NATION SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO ESCAPE ITS OBLIGATION TO NOT USE NUCLEAR WEAPONS. Merely not signing a treaty does not absolve Israel of moral obligations perhaps best handled by a criminal court...like the ICC. We have leaders in our country pursuing policies that are crooked and aggressive and they always keep our political system from signing treaties that might lead to their prosecution. If the U.S. signed on with the ICC, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeldt, Clinton, and a lot of others would suddenly be open to be prosecuted. Your answer is to defend these dishonest types with your unblinking nationalistic loyalty.

Any nation as thoroughly militarily humiliated as the Palestinians have become will be incapable of keeping agreements because they have not the power to enforce them on their own people and anybody else that cares to operate in that space. When IDF can come into their territory, destroy their houses and orchards, take their water, and build a fortified settlement right in their midst and they cannot do anything about that, you are going to see terrorism. Wake up Loren!

Has Israel used a nuclear weapon? No? Then where is the crime you are referring to?

The reality is that Israel's nukes have kept there from being a major war there for more than 40 years. That sounds like a plus in my book.

- - - Updated - - -

Iran's nukes are more aimed at us than Israel.

Iran does not have any nukes so where they are aimed is some fantasy.

But they are developing them to deter any retaliation for their support of terrorism. They saw what happened to Afghanistan for supporting Bin Laden and don't want that to happen to them.