Netanyahu? Is he a hero or warmonger?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by 63dot, Mar 2, 2015.

  1. 63dot macrumors 603

    63dot

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Location:
    norcal
    #1
    ...and beyond that are his talks to AIPAC an alignment with the republican party as suggested by some on CNN or even a political move for Isreal's March elections?

    He's coming from a political climate that is increasingly hostile towards his hawk-like ways back at home and his dangerous rhetoric against Iran.

    Is he thinking the long term and the threat of Iran's nuclear program? Is he only thinking about elections in two weeks? Is a successful move towards thwarting a US-Iran agreement detrimental to a possible US led coalition against Sunni ISIS?

    Tomorrow will be a record third time that a foreign leader has addressed the US Congress.
     
  2. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #2
    He's been saying Iran is one year away from a Nuke since 1996.

    The man is a warmonger, nothing more. His entire political history is one of aggression.

    Our intelligence agencies (both the DoD yearly review, the executive summary) and the 2014 QDR state explicitly that Iran's military strategy is that of slowing down any invasion to the point where diplomatic negotiations take place.

    Now factor in that they have been trying to agree to having uranium enriched by a third party state for their energy program, but have been blocked because we keep calling for a no enrichment policy (reactors need 20% enriched, bombs need 90%+) which directly conflicts with their rights to low grade enrichment for energy reactors, and you have the base of the problem:

    We don't want them to have anything they are entitled to, and their defensive posture is just in direct responds to the fact that we have entirely surrounded their country with military bases.

    [​IMG]

    The problem comes down to aggressive squawking from war hawks (chicken*****) like Netanyahu, McCain, King, etc.
     
  3. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #3
    People have less and less respect for Israel as time goes on.
     
  4. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #4
    Not sure why this needed a new thread but I'll report what I wrote in the other Israel thread.

    **** Netanyahu. For the better part of a decade he's been advocating we fight a war against Iran who, for the better part of said decade, has been months away from developing a nuke.
     
  5. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
  6. mgguy macrumors 6502

    mgguy

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2006
    #6
    Good questions. Let's hear him out. It is always good to get different points of view, especially from leaders of the countries affected.
     
  7. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #7
    Can't we hear that when he's in Israel?

    ----------

    Definitely.
     
  8. Macky-Mac macrumors 68030

    Macky-Mac

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    #8
    you mean like an insensitive racist thug?
     
  9. mgguy, Mar 2, 2015
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2015

    mgguy macrumors 6502

    mgguy

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2006
    #9
    Possibly, but more effective if delivered directly. He will also be available to meet with individual members of congress and others (too bad not Obama) in private while he is here.
     
  10. LadyX macrumors 68020

    LadyX

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2012
    #10
    A hero? Hell no. He's a warmongering fanatic.
     
  11. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #11
    and Obama.............
     
  12. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #12
    By all means, let's hear him out. He might shock the world and say something different than what he's been spouting for almost a decade.


    Actually, he won't.


    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/netanyahu-declines-democrats-invitation-for-closed-door-meeting/
     
  13. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #13
    Do I have this right that Netanyahu speaking before Congress represents an end run around our State Department and our President? If so, this is unacceptable, imo a reflection of how unpatriotic and ambitious the GOP has become to try to win at all costs.
     
  14. mgguy, Mar 2, 2015
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2015

    mgguy macrumors 6502

    mgguy

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2006
    #14
    It is hard to believe that he won't have private discussions with selected individuals, albeit possibly of his own choosing.

    Re this possibly being an instance of not following protocol, this is something the Obama administration has experience with and can understand. Perhaps they need to be more flexible here. Obama's refusing to meet with him seems a little petty.
     
  15. 556fmjoe macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2014
    #15
    First of all, you will never get a rational discussion about Netanyahu. In the US it's a partisan issue where one side likes him because the other side doesn't and vice versa.

    As far as his foreign policy and dealing with the threat of Palestinian terrorism, he's tactically sound and strategically inept. His policies of overwhelming force work in the short term to reduce violence from Gaza, but ensure that there will always be violence toward Israel from Gaza. The blockade is a classic example of mission creep and losing sight of the goal. Its purpose was to undermine Hamas, with the theory being that Hamas would always be violent. This was a miscalculation on two fronts.

    The goal should have been to eliminate violence toward Israel from Gaza. That's perfectly rational and laudable, and even the most died in the wool leftist would (or should) agree that Israel's government has a duty to protect its citizens. The problem was that they jumped to conclusions when Hamas was elected and assumed that Hamas would always equal violence. Instead of eliminating violence, the goal became undermining Hamas, even if that meant taking measures that encouraged more violent Gazans. The blockade was part of this and the various military incursions into Gaza were another part of it. There are plenty of polls that show Gazans were more likely to support violence after the blockade than before it, as well as during/after the incursions than before them. Israel measures its effectiveness by the reduction in attacks and thinks it did pretty well. It did do pretty well, but only briefly. Meanwhile, the violent groups in Gaza are getting more support and once they have rearmed, attacks pick up again. Israel responds with overwhelming force and the cycle continues. So while Israelis are mostly protected from violence, Israel is locked in a never ending cycle that goes nowhere.

    The second fatal flaw was assuming that Hamas would always be violent and would never change. This assumption falls flat when compared with other groups that have come to power. The Muslim Brotherhood has a long history of opposition to Israel and many were concerned about an attack on Israel when Morsi was elected in Egypt. What happened? Nothing. They are practical enough to know that violent rhetoric that looks good in a charter and in speeches is not going to work when applied in government. It would have been idiotic to attack Israel and the Muslim Brotherhood knew that. They thus softened their stance significantly. Hamas is no different, only their political power is even more fragile. If Israel had worked hard to rebuild Gaza and improve the lives of Gazans, Hamas would have to soften their stance. If life in Gaza was improving and Hamas attacked Israel, Gazans would be furious at them for ruining a good thing and they'd be in political trouble. They're not that dumb.

    As far as Iran goes, Israel is playing whack-a-mole. Similar to violence from Gaza, they temporarily set Iran's program back, often times brilliantly, but then have to do it again later. There is no endgame. Military actions are always short term; political solutions have a chance of working for much longer.

    Part of this is the nature of politics. It's hard to change the status quo. It will not work overnight. If it doesn't work at all, you're out of politics forever. Netanyahu has adopted a safe short term approach that works (briefly) at the expense of a more permanent fix that may or may not work. His successors will inherit the same problems he did.
     
  16. mgguy macrumors 6502

    mgguy

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2006
    #16
    The issue of Iran possibly pursuing the building of a nuclear weapon could be seen by Isreal et al as important enough to go around the Obama administration if they feel that they can't trust them or believe that the negotiation process as is will not produce the desired results.
     
  17. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #17
    The issue isn't just that the Republicans invited him without asking (and if that was the only issue I'd agree - presuming Obama was free.) - it is that it is just before an election, which makes it look like the US is interfering with internal Israeli politics.
     
  18. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #18
    There is no excuse. Once our foreign policy fractures, with Congress trying to take over the role of the Executive Branch, we as a country are neutered and in deep **** on the world stage.
     
  19. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #19
    Netanyahu is in a tough election, it is standard protocol to not meet with leaders for a certain number of weeks before an election to avoid effecting the outcome.
     
  20. mgguy macrumors 6502

    mgguy

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2006
    #20
    The involvement of the US in foreign politics, Israel's politics included, is nothing new and it would be surprising if people thought otherwise. Should all contacts with foreign leaders stop during some period before elections in those countries to avoid the appearance of US influence? The issue of a possible nuclear-armed Iran seems important enough to risk the appearance of political meddling.
     
  21. kds1 Suspended

    kds1

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2013
    Location:
    New York, New York
  22. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #22
    Public ones - yes.
     
  23. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #23

    This is not normal contact with a foreign leader. This is a foreign leader giving an address before Congress. And I'll repeat, Netanyahu has been telling us Iran is less than a year away from a nuclear weapon for almost a decade now.
     
  24. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #24
    Much longer, though he has not been on the same level politically before.

    Basically, he has always wanted to go to ware with Iran his entire political career, mainly because he's the right wing type that thinks good leaders need a war for their legacy.
     
  25. impulse462 Suspended

    impulse462

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2009
    #25
    why does that matter now all of a sudden? what about the countless elections the US has interfered with in other middle east countries; they're not Israel so they obviously don't count right?

    as for netanyahu, i don't know who he thinks he is. all of his bold military statements are that because he's backed up by the US. then he comes and thinks he can dictate what the US should and shouldn't do? lol
     

Share This Page