With Iran Deal Battle in Congress Over, It's Time to Rehabilitate U.S.-Israel Ties

[geek tragedy]

http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/1.674419

Only a reckless, arrogant prime minister would get into a head-to-head battle with the president of the United States, leader of a world super power and Israel’s best friend.

Benjamin Netanyahu did it, despite all the warnings. He figured he’d be able to defeat Barack Obama on his home court and foil the agreement that world powers reached with Iran to suspend the latter’s nuclear program for at least a decade. Netanyahu erred in calculating the power relations in Congress. He believed that rich Jewish-American big shots were powerful enough to persuade the senators and their friends in the House of Representatives to prefer his arguments to their own national interest, as presented by their authorized leadership. In so doing, he again raised the issue of American Jewish double loyalty and aligned himself with one side, the Republican, in internal American politics,

Obama did not surrender to Netanyahu’s onslaught, which broke every rule in diplomatic protocol. The president played his hand well and achieved a blocking majority. The rapprochement in the relations between Washington and Tehran, as in Iran’s relations with other Western states, is a fait accompli. The Vienna agreement will strengthen the moderate faction in the Iranian regime — an important development toward the end of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s term.

...

It’s time Netanyahu and his government stop the obstinate struggle. The personal scars won’t heal until Obama leaves the White House in January 2017, but Israel must be pragmatic and take stock of its needs and opportunities. Due to the embarrassing make-up of Israel’s cabinet — Netanyahu is also foreign minister; the defense minister insulted Kerry — a delegation of senior officials and officers will have to be sent to Washington for summation and rehabilitation talks.

Netanyahu’s declaration of war on Obama was a bad thing. It’s a good thing he lost. A supervised implementation of the Vienna deal will be good for Israel. A rupture with the president, the American public and U.S. Jewry is more dangerous to Israel than the Iranian threat.

[brush]

1. Yes, Netanyahu certainly overplayed his hand

I believe President Obama is a statesman and will not hold Netanyahu's obstinacy against the state of Israel.

He has proven to be the wise, cool head in the whole matter.

One of your other points — dual loyalty of some Jewish Americans politicians is worrisome.

Schumer and DWS turned against the President, the leader of their own party to side with a Israel instead of their own country on the Iran nuke agreement. Their no votes could have doomed the months and months of hard negotiations. They are fortunate that there were enough Dems whose loyalty was to this country only.

The dual loyalty is actually more than worrisome, it's extremely troubling.

[geek tragedy]

2. I'm not going to say they're dual loyalists. Neither does the Haaretz editorial

I will say that Schumer shares a foreign policy ideology that's a lot more Dick Cheney than it is Barack Obama.

New York City has a reputation as a great liberal oasis, but it's a lot more complicated than that.

The anti-war elected officials in this city are predominantly people of color--because it's Latino families from the Bronx and African-American families in Brownsville whose kids would be at risk of being deployed over there--white people in places like Borough Park or the Upper East Side don't have family members in the military.

[King_David]

3. Really ....Dual Loyalty?

Of these Jewish senators?

Your post is more than disgusting...





http://www.jewishledger.com/2015/08/iran-debate-devolves-with-charges-of-dual-loyalty-and-dog-whistles/


http://www.democraticunderground.com/12231872

[brush]

4. So is their stand against the President, their party's head, and the Iran agreement

[King_David]

5. There is no more a classic Antisemitic accusation against ANY Jew than the dual loyalty canard....

Antisemitic canard

Dual loyalty

A canard found in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, but dating to before that document, is that Jews are more loyal to world Jewry than to their own country. Since the establishment of the state of Israel, this canard has taken the form of accusations that Jewish citizens of countries such as the United States are more loyal to Israel than to their country of residence.[53]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitic_canard

[brush]

6. What's Shumer and DWS's reason for siding with the repugs/bibi/Cotton?

[oberliner]

7. Schumer: Why I’m opposing the Iran nuclear deal

Last paragraphs:

Therefore, I’ll vote to disapprove the agreement, not because I believe war is a viable or desirable option, nor to challenge the path of diplomacy. It is because I believe Iran won’t change, and under this agreement it will be able to achieve its dual goals of eliminating sanctions while ultimately retaining its nuclear and non-nuclear power.

Better to keep US sanctions in place, strengthen them, enforce secondary sanctions on other nations and pursue the hard-trodden path of diplomacy once more, difficult as it may be.

http://nypost.com/2015/08/07/schumer-why-im-opposing-the-iran-nuclear-deal/

[brush]

8. Yeah, yeah! Who believes that bs?

[oberliner]

9. What do you think is the real reason?

I am not sure I get what you are saying.

[brush]

10. Shumer's reason and other leading questions

Shumer wants to become the next Dem leader in the Senate yet he goes against the President, the leader of his party and justifies it with transparent word salad bs that reads like talking points from Tom Collins and the rest of the repugs.

Why would he damage his chances of succeeding Harry Reid — is it fear of AIPAC? Is he all of a sudden great friends and of a like mind with Collins?

I would bet that the majority of New Yorkers side with the President on this so Shumer, who runs statewide and not in a smaller Congressional district, knows he could whether any re-election backlash from AIPAC if he voted with his party and the President.

You have to ask him why he's voting agains the Iran agreement but I find it disgusting.

[oberliner]

11. "You have to ask him why he's voting against the Iran agreement"

He explained it in the Op-Ed piece that I just posted.

You are the one saying that it is BS.

[brush]

12. Those are the same reasons the repugs cited.

Don't want a Dem leader who sided with repugs on such a consequential issue.

[King_David]

13. So best to stick with the classic antisemitic canard ?

The same vile antisemitic canard that the most extreme right wingers use against Jews ?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=112045

[brush]

14. Keep believing that if you want

Shumer still cited repug/bibi/cotton talking points.

Who needs that for the Democratic Leader in the Senate.

[King_David]

15. It's not a "belief"

Fact :

The charge of "Duel Loyalty" toward a Jew is the very most extreme right wing antisemitic canard .

It's up there with the Blood Libel .

It's not my "opinion " or my "Belief" it's not "Hasbara " or whatever.....

Fact is that Duel Loyalty charges on Jews are antisemitic.

PERIOD!!!!!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=112045


http://www.democraticunderground.com/12231872