Obama meeting with Netanyahu today in the Oval Office.
(Photo: Doug Mills/The New York Times)
I just caught video of President Obama's public appearance at the White House with Benjamin Netanyahu this morning-- their ninth meeting-- and the weather has changed: Netanyahu looked distinctly unhappy while Obama looked confident. Note that in the transcript, Obama does the unpardonable and brings up the Palestinian issue and the peace process, giving Iran lower billing.
Then Obama says we want diplomacy and that Netanyahu also wants "to resolve this diplomatically." But Netanyahu doesn't want that. That's a thumb in his eye.
And Obama said, "I look forward to the Prime Minister sharing with me his ideas about how we can increase the prospects of peace and security in the region." Sort of putting the onus on Netanyahu (as Peter Voskamp notes).
And Netanyahu's answer is that You are the big Satan and we are the little Satan, and "we are you and you are us." War in the middle east, neverending.
I believe the conventional wisdom on the lobby might be shifting before our eyes: that the lobby has overplayed its hand. On CNN today they are talking about what an Iran war would do to gas prices and what sanctions are doing to people in Tehran. And now even James Fallows is angry about the way Israel is leading us around by the nose.
And Haaretz says the die is cast:
No one who knows Washington and its ways could mistake the subtext of his words. A strong commitment to Israel? Assuredly. Capitulation to the dictates of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu? Not a chance. After a speech like that, his meeting with Netanyahu on Monday is almost superfluous: It already seems clear that Obama is determined not to grant him anything.
Here are some White House excerpts followed by a foreign pool report also hinting at the glumness of the encounter.
Obama: During the course of this meeting, we'll talk about the regional issues that are taking place, and I look forward to the Prime Minister sharing with me his ideas about how we can increase the prospects of peace and security in the region. We will discuss the issues that continue to be a focus of not only our foreign policy but also the Prime Minister's -- how we can, potentially, bring about a calmer set of discussions between the Israelis and the Palestinians and arrive at a peaceful resolution to that longstanding conflict. It is a very difficult thing to do in light of the context right now, but I know that the Prime Minister remains committed to trying to achieve that.
And obviously a large topic of conversation will be Iran, which I devoted a lot of time to in my speech to AIPAC yesterday, and I know that the Prime Minister has been focused on for a long period of time. Let me just reiterate a couple of points on that....
We do believe that there is still a window that allows for a diplomatic resolution to this issue, but ultimately the Iranians' regime has to make a decision to move in that direction, a decision that they have not made thus far.
And as I emphasized, even as we will continue on the diplomatic front, we will continue to tighten pressure when it comes to sanctions, I reserve all options, and my policy here is not going to be one of containment. My policy is prevention of Iran obtaining nuclear weapons. And as I indicated yesterday in my speech, when I say all options are at the table, I mean it.
Having said that, I know that both the Prime Minister and I prefer to resolve this diplomatically. We understand the costs of any military action.
PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU: ...I think that, as you said, when Americans look around the Middle East today, they see one reliable, stable, faithful ally of the United States, and that's the democracy of Israel.
Americans know that Israel and the United States share common values, that we defend common interests, that we face common enemies. Iran's leaders know that, too. For them, you're the Great Satan, we're the Little Satan. For them, we are you and you're us. And you know something, Mr. President -- at least on this last point, I think they're right. We are you, and you are us. We're together. So if there's one thing that stands out clearly in the Middle East today, it's that Israel and America stand together.
I think that above and beyond that are two principles, longstanding principles of American policy that you reiterated yesterday in your speech -- that Israel must have the ability always to defend itself by itself against any threat; and that when it comes to Israel's security, Israel has the right, the sovereign right to make its own decisions. I believe that's why you appreciate, Mr. President, that Israel must reserve the right to defend itself.
And after all, that's the very purpose of the Jewish state -- to restore to the Jewish people control over our destiny. And that's why my supreme responsibility as Prime Minister is to ensure that Israel remains the master of its fate.
From Laura Haim of Canal Plus-I tele News France:
For their ninth meeting inside the Oval Office since 2008, the tone was definitely somber between The President of The United States and The Israeli Prime Minister. ...
When Prime Minister Netanyahu spoke to the President, he was smiling a little at first but then he looked President Obama in the eyes and said, “Israel must defend itself.” Then, slowly articulating his words in perfect English, the Israeli PM said in a grave tone of voice, “My personal commitment is a commitment to the security of Israel. Israel has the sovereign right to make a final decision. My supreme responsibility as Prime Minister of Israel is to ensure that Israel remains the master of its fate"
President Obama returned his gaze with a grave expression, his left hand resting calmly on his leg.
Inside the Oval Office with the President, your pooler saw Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications Ben Rhodes standing near the window. On the Israeli side, the Israeli ambassador Michael Oren was there with the national security adviser Yaakov Amidror and the political adviser to the PM Aaron Dermir. General Locker, The Israeli military secretary, was also invited to be part of the meeting with Liran Dan, the media adviser and Gil Schefer, the Chief of Staff and special adviser to Prime Minister Isaac Molcho.
..On the Israeli side, some Israeli reporters told your pooler that they were inside the Prime Minister’s plane when he came to North America. According to them, the Prime Minister spoke to them for a few minutes on the plane and just made “nice small talk about the weather, nothing else.” Inside the White House, Jacob Eilon, nightly news anchor for channel 10 in Israel, was part of the Israeli pool and told your pooler, “Both leaders would like to label the meetings as positive rather than create a showdown. I wish we knew what was happening.”
oh here we go again with the “barry’s still on our side” nonsense…….
He’s “anti-containment” – which is EXACTLY what the Lieberman/graham amendment’s policies proposals are. “containment” is “off” the table — so the definitions of everything become incredibly arbitrary…”capability” is the new red line, which the iranians have already passed – making authorization to use force a really easy sell.
How do americans feel about a congress with single digit approval ratings – and a president who deserves at least as much scorn, taking the country to war with no vote, no plebiscite? nothing?……
“How do americans feel…”
Well, doesn’t that sort of beg, or even beg for, the question; “Which Americans”?
For a small number of Americans, going to war with Iran, or for that matter, almost anybody, is a good thing. And don’t forget, our media never met an undeclared war they didn’t like. And it doesn’t take a whole lot of Americans to get a war going, or keep it going these days. And there are enough desperate or desperately misinformed young people to fill the boots on the ground.
And remember, Obama will probably be running against Romney in the next election. If I were me, I would start drinking, heavily, about now.
@ Mooser,
Q: And there are enough desperate or desperately misinformed young people to fill the boots on the ground.
R: I guestimate there are more desperate and desperately penniless young people to fill the boots on the ground out there than willful and potential killers.
[guestimate = a fusion of 'guess' and 'estimate']
Mooser, maybe you should refresh your memory on the Pentagon Papers? Our American cannonfodder these days does not come from families with easy decent job prospects. Pentagon stats show the bulk come from gentile white rural and lower middle class suburbanite families. Perhaps you are aware that these young troopers, and their families, are supporting Ron Paul by and large? (And so are an a lot Military and IT brass, but only the retired ones can say anything.) Yeah it’s all obvious. Between Obama and Romney, the likely finalists, wonder who they will go for? Romney, with 5 sons who have never served in the Military? Or, Mr affirmative action icon? I do think that if Israel bombs Iran, Obama or whoever is POTUS will follow suit, and it’s likely to happen this year, before the next POTUS is elected. Or ASAP afterward.
Hopefully Dan he’s just trying to get re elected so he can kick Netanyhau’s ass for the next 4 years.
No, American, Obama is just trying to get re elected. Full stop.
I don’t feel anything, Dan. I’m numb. I’m sorry I argued with you regarding Ron Paul a while back too. Now I understand what you were trying to say.
IMO, Americans have no government. An unelected layer of powerful wealthy people, corporations, lobbies, etc. are the real ‘government’ so to speak. They present puppets to the American public. Mouth pieces who bow to the highest bidder. Only interested in continuing the status quo. Americans vote for these folks believing their vote really counts.
If all 50 states were to secede from DC, DC would declare us all an enemy.
If Obama admit the truth, that a military option could lead to instability and global warfare, and that a military solution was off the table, well I wouldn’t believe him. But it would be the right thing to say.
The G8 are now going to meet not in Chicago, but in Camp David. Shows how scared the plutocrats are of the population.
…I think that, as you said, when Americans look around the Middle East today, they see one reliable, stable, faithful ally of the United States, and that’s the one that puts the gasoline in their cars and it’s Saudi Arabia.
touche! Love it!
Maybe Netanyahu should speak with the king and get them to bomb Iran :) Just a little favor between good neighbors.
@ seafoid,
Q: Saudi Arabia.
R: That, Hillary Rotham Clingon, approved anti-bastion of democracy, freedom fighters supporting everywhere but @ home, human rights suppressing, female-degrading antidote of liberty?
Saudi Arabia is just a Muslim version of Israel
would you prefer to be orthodox +female in Bnei brak or orthodox and female in Taif ?
@ seafoid,
I’d like to be like Hillary Clingon, telling the world an authoritarian regime is clamping down on Syrians from within the safety of those bastions of freedom like Qatar and Saudi Arabia…
“My supreme responsibility as Prime Minister of Israel is to ensure that Israel remains the master of its fate”
It’s 45 years too late , dude
Well said, seafoid. Almost 20 years since the Oslo Accords. Arafat is dead, possibly assassinated. Rabin was assassinated. The settlement population had doubled, construction has escalated. There are still Palestinian refugee camps. International law and UN regulations are being ignored. Every day the situation is worse. I guess it’s a bonus that the Sinai Peninsula is part of Egypt again, the Lebanon occupation and wars are in the past (but the consequences remain every day), and there are no longer any settlements in Gaza.. but the core of the issue has always been EJ, the WB, and the refugees. The closest this ever was to anything resembling a resolution was June 4th, 1967. All downhill from there.
Master of their fate? It is too late. Israel’s fate is written in stone. More non-Jews live West of the Jordan River than Jews. More Jews are leaving than coming. More Arabs are born than Jews. Israel’s will fail demographically at some point in the future. That is a fact.
Is a spoiled child ever really the master of its fate?
I have to agree with Phil on this one. This is a significant development. Obama’s insistence that the threshold for war is Iranian nuclear “weapons”, not “capability” is key. His thundering about all options on the table, no containment, etc are just political pablum, the crucial point is that these scary options only come into play if Iran pursues nuclear weapons. Since Iran is not working on nuclear weapons and have stated quite clearly that they are not going to do so, this leaves open the door to diplomacy and negotiations.
Obama’s positive reception at the AIPAC meeting yesterday when he used the same words suggests that the lobby is beginning to have second thoughts about continuing to push the US into another war for Israel. I believe Netanyahu has been boxed in for now. Maybe the box is the mouse cage where he belongs and the cat is running a little more freely.
These comments are not to praise Obama, he is responsible for allowing this dangerous situation to arise in the first place as the Leverett’s at raceforiran have so thoroughly documented and Bromwich has explained so well. But hopefully, the danger today is less than it was just last week.
“I believe Netanyahu has been boxed in for now. Maybe the box is the mouse cage where he belongs…”
Is there such a thing as a rat cage?
@ TovioS,
Q: These comments are not to praise Obama, he is responsible…
R: Let me chime in with a fully agreeing voice.
Well said.
I agree… Col Lang and others who know what is going on at the pentagon re Israel and have experience with Israel seems to think Obam held the line all things considered. A sample:
link to turcopolier.typepad.com
“A little later, Natanyahu sat in the Oval Office and once again lectured the president of the United States on the world and the place of the United States in it .
He said that Israel trusts nobody.
He also said that Israel exists because Gentiles cannot be trusted but that the US and Israel are the same thing. This implies that the US, although untrustworthy as a country is nevertheless at the disposal of Israel for various suitable tasks. The inevitable conclusion of these statement is that the US must obey Israel.
IMO, Bibi is mad as a hatter. He is consumed with fear and paranoia. There is no injury that he would not do the US if he thought it useful to his fantasies. Barak is no better. These two men along with their henchmen and lackies in this country will try to drag the US into war with Iran before November. Probablity of the attempt? Somewhere around 80%.
If they wait longer than that and Obama is elected, there will be a reckoning. pl”
In other words, you are not us and we are not you.
“you are not us and we are not you.”
Life is bigger
It’s bigger than you
And you are not me
The lengths that I will go to
The distance in your eyes
Oh no I’ve said too much
I set it up
That’s me in the corner
That’s me in the spotlight
Losing my Zionism
link to youtube.com
Shingo — Exactly. There *IS* daylight between these strange bedfellows, to mix metaphors. Bibi is *FORCED* to admit it (though perhaps he hasn’t noticed that he did say it).
WHAT HAPPENED TO LET OBAMA FEEL LIKE BREAKING FREE?
THIS IS NO WAY TO RAISE FUNDS FROM YOU-KNOW-WHOM.
“WHAT HAPPENED TO LET OBAMA FEEL LIKE BREAKING FREE?”
umm, have you actually watched what the GOP candidates call debates?
That may be “what happened.” His opposition is self-destructing. If for no other reason, Ron Paul’s candidacy is genius to ensure GOP fragmentation. Even Adelson’s money has not been enough to prop Newt.
Nutshell.
Question is, will others (media) pick up on this also. Not likely, but as you point out the obvious germ of the thought is there, right out in the open, at the highest level.
Interesting development. More interesting because it seems to be a forced (as in forced upon Netanyahu) distinction.
On balance this all seems positive.
small victories
Obama’s wordplay the past few weeks in reaction to israeli pressure has been very clever and direct: I don’t bluff
What he did today was pull israel out from hiding behind Big Ole US of A and push it out front – a very necessary and LOOOOONG overdue step to putting israel in their place vis-a-vis its relationship with America … his words put the onus on israel and he MUST stay the course with this approach – all of our intelligence agencies and military leaders are backing him up to make America’s self-interest the priority
Poor Bibi
Ohh, can’t anybody see
We’ve got a war to fight
Never found our way
Regardless of what they say
How can it feel, this wrong
From this moment
How can it feel, this wrong
Storm.. in the morning light
I feel
No more can I say
Frozen to myself
I got nobody on my side (AIPAC don’t count)
And surely that ain’t right
And surely that ain’t right
Ohh, can’t anybody see
We’ve got a war to fight
Never found our way
Regardless of what they say
link to youtube.com
131 comments in NYT on this one, and nice reading. Also crosscheck the Reader Picks voting. And smile about the NYT editor’s Pick: they had a hard time finding comments that do not tell Bibi to back off.
NYT: Obama Cites ‘Window’ for Diplomacy on Iran Bomb
eGuard, what happened to the comments? I can’t find them. Were they pulled or am I being dumb?
“what happened to the comments? I can’t find them. ”
They’re still there. 378 when I checked just now.
“And smile about the NYT editor’s Pick”
It’s often interesting comparing the NYT picks with the reader’s picks on this subject. I wouldn’t want to swear to this, but it’s my impression that letters critical of Israel tend to get more “thumbs up” votes than the ones supportive of them. Which is surprising if true. I don’t know what it would show about either NYT readers or Americans in general, if anything.
“It’s often interesting comparing the NYT picks with the reader’s picks on this subject.”
Yeah, I’ve noticed the same thing. Its always clear the story the moderaters are trying paint, promoting inane comments and ignoring the best and most recommended. I think they’re bound to remove that feature. It shows too clearly how out of step with they with where the public is on Israel.
On a story about AIPAC/Israel yesterday there was the same preponderance critical comments of Israels influence over US FP. I don’t know if/how this will change the political reality, but it a revolution IMO to see this kind of frank talk about I/P in the Times.
link to nytimes.com
“My head is spinning. It is amazing how far down the rabbit hole American foreign policy has traveled when it comes to Israel. Can one imagine having an American-Italian Political Action Committee where once a year every political leader converges in our nation’s capital to pander to Italy? To commit to “always siding with Italy”? To promising American troops to be placed in harms way for the machinations of ITALY? We must shake the irrevocable hold that this nation Israel (with an outsize financial and political influence) has on our foreign policy”
Hahahaha 99% of NYT readers are anti warmongering Apartheid israel!
Will whoring congress take note that more and more Americans can see them being pimped out by successive israeli leaders and consequently under this new phase of citizen enlightenment change their profession to politics? Oh wait, whoring and politics are indistinguishable.
Somebody need set up ‘whoreholics anonymous’ meetings on Capitol Hill – so many will be seeking help sooner than later.
you seriously crack me up taxi. i would so love to be a fly on the wall of your brain for a day. but there are probably no walls in there.
It appears Obama, under the US Military Command influence, is holding his ground privately while pandering to Israel firsters publicly.
But, AIPAC, like Phoenix, is flying evermore closer to the sun.
I think you mean Icarus.
American, Like Icarus, not Phoenix.
Icarus it is.
Why is it that so many progressives will more or less ignore Obama’s unbroken history of obeisance to the lobby on every substantive matter as they take heart from the microscopic parsing of any phrase which may conceivably, by some mixture of hope and wish, be understood as standing up to it?
As for Obama becoming free to challenge Netanyahu once he’s in his final term, not a chance. It’s not just his own viability as a candidate that’s of concern to him, it’s also his place in the Democratic party. It wasn’t until years after his presidency was over and it was clear that he had become a non-person that Jimmy Carter spoke up.
Obama’s not going to cloud his post-presidency opportunities by suddenly developing a conscience.
Your copy-editor needs a serious [non-physical, non-threatening, non-real] smack in the face.
Q: Netanyahu only responded the only way he know how…
R: Make that ‘knows.’
Yes, you may call me a nitpicking nitwit. No problem. The thing is, we’re dealing with very serious problems here and with typos like the above, you’re diminishing the message. I know you guys are ‘bloody’ serious and give it all you’ve got. Don’t let ‘unprofessional’ slip ups spoil the ‘food for thought’ served.
Net-an-yahoo-who? Does he want to outdo his slain brother?
HaAretz: “The news in Obama’s speech was that it deliberately didn’t include any news. Everything he said last night has been said in the past, by him and by other senior administration officials. There’s no point in trying to bargain for just a bit more (“Give me something – at least free Jonathan Pollard, so I don’t go home empty-handed”). In American, this was a message whose meaning is unmistakeable.”
They’re saying it, and so AIPAC is hearing it. The BIG-ZION donors are hearing it. So, again, to repeat myself and everybody else, WHA HOPPIN ? What happened to make President Obama think this was the time to STOP GROVELING? Is there another money source? Are the BIG-ZION moneyboys tired of the BLATANT Bibi? Tired of wars fought for Israel? For “what gives”, read “who gives”.
With the Republicans committing electoral harakiri, Obama may not need that money any more.
I am he as you are he as you are me
And we are all together
See how they run like pigs from a gun
See how they fly, I’m crying
Full page ad in Washington Post by top US military/IT guys–against war on Iran: link to niacouncil.org
This just in:
Daniel—I’m furious.
After signing contracts and paying in full for a mobile ad to carry your message to the AIPAC Policy Conference today; after letting 100,000 of you know about the truck; after nearly 5,000 of you signed the ad and let all of your friends know; after hundreds more chipped in for the ad; after sending a press release out to the media….After all that, the owner of the truck changed his mind at the last minute and decided not to let our ad run.
Cecilie Surasky, Deputy Director
Jewish Voice for Peace
Daniel Rich, I signed that petition for the truck; why do you think the truck owner backed out? Did you vet the owner before you contracted? To see if he or she could stand the heat? Seems not. If, so, bad planning.
@ Citizen,
I only signed the petition, Citizen, others did the physical work. But I share your sentiment, because I did raise my brow when I read the news. Wonder what they’ll do with the greenbacks …
I am you and you are me?
Who’s the walrus?
@ pineywoodslim,
Thank you for a good laugh. Appreciated.
It is true that Obama publicly is not agreeing to Netanyahu’s demand to clearly define the point that will trigger a U.S. attack. Nor is he willing to adopt Israel’s “red line” of the “capability” of producing a bomb instead of having a bomb (significant).
However, in holding firm against the recent Israeli and neocon demands in the last couple of days, Obama has repeatedly and clearly declared that he will respect Israel’s decision to attack Iran. Didn’t Obama, in the past couple of months, send Panetta, Donilon and Dempsey to tell the Israelis to hold off their attack? These American officials indicated that an Israeli attack would be a disaster.
Why is Obama now giving Israel his blessing for this disaster?
It seems to me that Netanyahu has already gained something significant for this confrontation with the President.
Ira, I think you are right. All Bibi needs to do is make sure when he attacks Iran there is some ostensible evidence Iran reacted by attacking US assets or personnel. This evidence can be trumped up before the attack, during it, or right after the Israeli bombs start falling.
Ira says: Why is Obama now giving Israel his blessing for this disaster?
I admit this is a bit like tea leaf reading, but the signals for the last two days is that Obama did not give Netanyahu anything. All of Israel’s tough talk, threats, promises to go it alone rhetoric over the past 6 months was designed to pressure Obama into attacking Iran. Israel has spent the last 6 months on a massive PR campaign where they also mobilized AIPAC, large Zionist donors in the US and neocon journalists and “think” tank “scholars” to create a political climate where Obama would have no option but to go along. Ari Shavit in Haaretz last week expressed Netanyahu’s plea most explicitly. Obama to his credit said no.
Now Netanyahu will have to go back home and face the logistical reality of Israel attempting to bomb Iran alone. It knows it cannot. This whole thing was a massive bluff. It looks like Bibi and Barak have terribly over-played their hands and depending on how widespread their defeat becomes known could result in serious political problems later.
There is still danger, nevertheless. If Bibi and those around him started to believe their own mythical powers, then they just might launch some attack that would have unpredictable consequences. I do hope the Iran and the US have opened some lines of communication in case of that eventuality where they agree to not shoot at each other. I am sure the Russians would be agreeable to opening up that sort of dialogue.
This was an interesting two days in international politics. We got an answer to a question that has been building since last summer. The chances of ruinous war has just declined.
ToivoS,
I do not think that Bibi and Barak are bluffing. Meir Dagan, the ex Mossad chief, who criticized their plan to attack Iran does not think they are bluffing. I do not think the U.S. officials that recently went to Israel like Panetta and Dempsey believed that the Israelis were bluffing.
My understanding is that in the summer of 2008 the Israelis were ready to attack and Bush sent Sec Def Gates and other officials there who put the breaks on that effort. I believe that in 2010 Gates went to Israel believing that the Israelis were about to attack Iran and among other things bought some time by giving them bunker busting bombs!!
The Israelis would, of course, prefer the Americans initiate on attack.
However, I am afraid Bibi and Barak have convinced themselves that an Israeli attack on Iran is just another use of force, for which they have infinite faith.
If B & B get into trouble, they can count on the US to have their back diplomatically, logistically, and if necessary militarily. That’s the special relationship.
I hope I am wrong, but I am pretty depressed about all this. I believe that this will be a disaster.
Please excuse me, I am about to listen to the Israeli Prime Minister’s speech at AIPAC.
Ira I share your concern. Maybe I am a bit more optimistic but my read could be completely off. I hope your read is wrong, is all.
It seems to me that Netanyahu has already gained something significant for this confrontation with the President.
Obama was already shamelessly repeating Netayahu’s talking points about Israel’s right to defend itself during last year’s Middle East and AIPAC addresses:
May 19th, 2011, link to nytimes.com
As I recall, he regurgitated the same sort of crap again during the opening address to the UN General Assembly last September too. Afterward Bibi said that security cooperation was Obama’s badge of honor. In any event, the rest of the points in Obama’s speech were cut’n pasted from the MFA website. link to ynetnews.com
RE: “For them, you’re the Great Satan, we’re the Little Satan.” ~ Netanyahu
MY COMMENT: For me, the U.S. is the Great Sadist and Israel is the Little Sadist!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
RE: “Israel must reserve the right to defend itself…that’s the very purpose of the Jewish state — to restore to the Jewish people control over our destiny.” ~ Netanyahu
SEE: Israel’s Defense Chief OK’s Hundreds of Israeli Deaths, By Ira Chernus, CommonDreams.org, 11/11/11
ENTIRE COMMENTARY – link to commondreams.org
ALSO SEE – Iranophobia: The Panic of the Hegemons, by Ira Chernus, Tikkun Magazine, November/December 2010
LINK – link to tikkun.org
P.S. INTRODUCING MY NEW AVATAR, “NUTTYYAHOO” by DonkeyHotey (JPEG) – link to google.com
P.S. RE: “Israel must reserve the right to defend itself…that’s the very purpose of the Jewish state — to restore to the Jewish people control over our destiny.” ~ Netanyahu
IN OTHER WORDS, FROM WIKIPEDIA [Iron Wall (essay)]:
SOURCE – link to en.wikipedia.org
ALSO SEE: The Iron Wall, Vladimir (Ze’ev) Jabotinsky, 1923 – link to mideastweb.org
@ Dickerson 3870,
Q: … that they’d fight back and prove themselves tougher than their enemies.
R: Not when you use Palestinian kids for target practicing. The godly Merkava MBT surely got a serious ‘beating’ in 2006. Cast Lead became the resurrection of the IDF’s masculinity.
Sorry. MBT = Main Battle Tank
We are you, and you are us. We’re together.
gag me with a spoon.
Yeah Annie, it made me puke on my keyboard.
@ Annie Robbins,
That line and these remarks…
“The bond between our two countries is unbreakable … our commitment to the security of Israel is rock-solid. The United States will always have Israel’s back when it comes to Israel’s security.” – POTUS
…made me violently sick. I’m out of barf-bags and I know more’s coming. Help!
Help!
i’ll do my best daniel!
Actually, my English idioms are poor. What does it mean to “have someone’s back”? Apply a switch to the backside?
it means if you fall backward they will be there to support you.
link to urbandictionary.com
To have someones back also means that if attacked in front, we will protect your flanks and back from from attack.
@ Annie Robbins,
Thank you! I guess in sing sing ‘I’ll have your back’ means something more sinister?
But I have to admit “who is the walrus” gave a good chuckle.
that’s hilarious, like the beatle song.
He bad production
He got walrus gumboot
He got Ono sideboard
He one spinal cracker
He got feet down below his knees
Hold you in his armchair
You can feel his disease
Come together, right now
Over me
In high-level meetings like this, the outcome is almost invariably known before the meeting takes place. Agendas have been traded, it’s been discussed, positions set. All that’s left is the pretty face for public consumption.
It appears that Obama, to his credit (though no fan), in calm-assertive manner, did not try to restrain (pull in the exact opposite direction) BN’s singular focus, but rather yanked BN to the side (if anyone is familiar with Dog Whisperer terms and techniques). Brilliant, if that’s what actually happened.
Ongoing.
`@ ritzl,
Higher up this thread someone used ‘reading tea leaves’ as an analogy. I guess in most cases we only know what we’re shown.
On a side note: you’ve ruined my romantic notion of ‘dog whisperer’ by using the word ‘yanked’ in the same sentence :o)
Yes, We are you, and you are us. We’re together., except when we’re not.
We’re not when we adopt a policy of not telling you when we plan to attack Iran, but we
are when we need your weapons and planes and bunker busters and jet fuel and to come to our rescue when we find ourselves over our heads.
except when we’re not.
yeah, israel makes its own decisions and reserves the right to defend itself but when it comes to defending itself it wants us to do it’s bidding and pay the price in all directions..one way street with nuthin in it for us. they are not us and we are not them, at all. and contrary to the hasbara we do not share the same values.
Bibi, if you were us, you would have to observe things like equal protection and the separation of church and state.
As someone who doesn’t believe it will make much difference who wins the next election, nor believes that the winner of the last election has made any difference, I hope I’m not going to be accused of giving Obama a pass. FWIW, I think Obama has been a disaster on pretty much all counts. I recently spoke to someone who is a rabid Obama cultist. I said “He hasn’t done anything. Tell me what he’s done”. The reply was that “he has let gays serve openly in the military”. I kid you not, that was the reply.
Wow, so now gays can not only go to various ME hellholes and commit war crimes, they can do so openly. Instead of what we had before, i.e. equal opportunity war crimes, we now have OPEN equal opportunity war crimes. I mean, wow, that changes everything, doesn’t it?
So with that out of the way, I think Phil is basically right here. It seems significant to me because I can’t think of any other occasion where Obama has been put under pressure and he hasn’t capitulated.
This is his first non-capitulation, as far as I am aware. I think the basic reason for it is that the Israelis, whether they realize it or not, are demanding that Obama do something that would be catastrophic both for him personally and for the US. It is clear that the military has comprehensively explained the situation to Obama and that he understands it.
So the Israelis are finding that whilst it is usually easy to manipulate and pressure presidents into doing stupid things that cost the US materially, it is a different matter when the cost is existentially high. Obama knows that the economy will fall apart if the Iran thing blows. The total collapse of the economy is an existential threat to the US, something that the Israelis appear not to understand … not that they would care but it does seem to me that they don’t understand the consequences for the US. I suspect the reason is that they always get bailed out of the consequences of their own idiotic wars, so they are unacquainted with the concept of having to live with your mistakes and that there is nobody to bail out the US. On the contrary, the Chinese are eagerly waiting for the US to collapse. As Zbiggy noted, their only request is “please don’t decline too quickly”.
pabelmont, let me try to answer your question, i.e. “what has changed”. Well, firstly the Republicans do not look like serious contenders and the economy is showing some signs (very minor, but perhaps not completely invisible) of recovery. This is putting Obama into a position where he feels like “listen, you guys are going to have to deal with me next year, so don’t try anything”. Secondly, because the Israelis are simply asking for too much, Obama finds himself with his back against the wall. But between his back and the wall is the military/intelligence community, which is visibly and publicly giving him cover. Of course there is a lot of mixed messaging and obfuscation, but the message to Israel seems clear enough to me.
I don’t expect Israel to attack alone, for various reasons:
1. The 5th Fleet being jammed so conspicuously into the Gulf.
2. I think Netanyahu is a coward. He wants Uncle Sam to do the business, he doesn’t want to take the blame for the casualties himself.
3. They know they can’t really take out the Iranian program completely. So after using their air force without getting the job done, they are then left with nothing to bluster with. No leverage at all on Iran in that scenario.
I could be wrong, they could be crazier than I think, but that’s my call on it at the moment. I think Obama has bought some time and he may even find that non-capitulation serves him well. I mean, even George Bush learned on the job to the extent that the Israelis couldn’t persuade *him* to bomb Iran, as much as I’m sure he wanted to.
@ Opaleye,
The military is hurting and bleeding badly. The amount of shredded bodies being flown into Landstulh’s staggering [Germany]. I will fight for the dignity of every man and woman in the armed services [despite the fact I think they're all wrong], because the flow of blood on either side of conflicts, is red.
The total collapse of the economy is an existential threat to the US, something that the Israelis appear not to understand … not that they would care but it does seem to me that they don’t understand the consequences for the US. I suspect the reason is that they always get bailed out of the consequences of their own idiotic wars, so they are unacquainted with the concept of having to live with your mistakes and that there is nobody to bail out the US.
Excellent point.
A lot of negativity in the posts – perhaps justified, but consider the positives:
1. In the press conference Pres. Obama said nothing more radical than what he was compelled to say in the AIPAC speech and in no way suggested a green light to Netanyahoo – it’s not palatable but his re-election is on the line.
2. Pres. Obama not only raised the Palestinian issue, but shifted the onus to Netasnyahoo to provide some kind of a plan for moving the process forward – did anyone expect this skillful bit of business?
3. As it appears that the Israeli electorate’s overwhelming concern is that they have the complete support of the US in all matters, the reaction of the Israeli media would seem to suggest that the absence of pledges of unconditional support will cause Netanyahoo problems with any unilateral action.
The only reason why i sort of kind of believe that Obomber might be actually pushing back on I/P status quo is because prior to this meeting the Americans have sent in the National security state leadership re: Gen Dempsey and Leon Panetta to make statement on major networks as well as a noticeable difference in the language being used by some media figures.
There seems to be a sea change of sorts from the normal narrative that we have gotten accustomed to.
Yes, this is the major difference with Iraq. You never saw military/intelligence figures undermining the case for that war and it is also clear that some media figures have taken the hint both regarding war and (gasp) Israel. We are starting to see a media meme where, whilst Israel is still wonderful, they aren’t supposed to contradict the Commander in Chief of the Known Universe, aka Dear Leader, aka Mr Obomber. He’s the one who says when the bombs start a-flyin’, got it? There have been notes in Haaretz about Israel drawing fire in the US due to being too pushy. This is new.
Ah, the naive smell of optimism.
@ Exiled At Home,
Innocence is naive and so is optimism. I’m naive. Am I wrong?
USA cannot attack Iran in my opinion for many reasons but two stand out:
a. it is illegal.
b. China and Russia are vehemently against, and they have good reason, see a.
c. after the attack, Iran will be still there while China and Russia may show the fullness of their displeasure by plying Iran with best weapons at their disposal, or at least threatening, the implication being dreadful beyond imagining.
d. the only way out of it will include a lot of humiliation.
Or we start WWIII. If you read scenarios “how WWIII could start”, the most convincing is a crisis involving Iran.
One problem with illegality of war is that we will not finish it, Iran will still be there, there will be economic and military shitstorm, and countries will have to declare what they think. If we prevail quickly by force, as in Iraq, we can shrug off complains and veto in UNSC. But we will not. Obama has to fear consequences of a stupid war more than Israel lobby.
I do not understand the GoI game plan. They are not in Entebbe anymore. The idea that you can separate Iran from Asia is ludicrous. Iran cannot be a crazy regime because after doing some shit they still have to trade with someone. But if they pass Chinese/Russian/Indian specification of sanity, they can survive. Big Asian countries do not cherish USA (and even less Israel) explain them what to do.
The way I see it, if USA attacks, Russia and China are instantly involved. For example, Putin may declare that one more bomb dropped on Iran and Diego Garcia goes poof. I mean, they told us that they do not want an attack, didn’t they? If Israel attacks, it is iffy. USA will have to answer if we gave permission. Without permission, Israel is not allowed to used weapons purchased in USA. Would we impose sanctions on Israel as demanded by Iran, Russia and China? What if they impose blockade on Hormuz AND Russian exports of energy? This is deep, deep shit, but if we are illegal, between that illegality and economic ruin, Europe can turn against us, I mean, in UN vote.
This scenario may be far fetched, but starting a war with a major Eurasian country opens possibilities without limit. Therefore I doubt that there will be a war. But there will be no diplomatic solution either, and it kind of looks silly if you make some ultimata and then you say “whatever”.
By the way, it seems that comments in NYT are 10:1 against the war. This craziness will make Obama elected.
Israel has no legal right under international law to attack Iran, yet this is not even mentioned in the US coverage furnished by our mainstream media, and it’s not even mentioned by any of our political leaders–I’m not even certain Ron Paul has specifically said so although he has delineated how stupid and against US interests an attack on Iran would be.
Look how thin Bush Jr’s legality was, if any, for the war on Ira
q–even solely in terms of a veneer of American law, let alone international law.
Obama quickly put an end to any thoughts of legal action against the Bush Jr regime heads; and now he himself has stretched presidential power in the war business.
China and Russia would net gain much from a war with Iran by USIsrael; already China has taken advantage of US sanctions to get Iran to significantly lower the price of sales to China.
Perhaps Obama should invite Netanyahu for a nice chat next to a fireplace, relax with some good booze and play some records. E.g.
You invite me to a war party me no wanna go
Everybody seem to be inviting me
To a war party me no wanna go
Heard about the last one so thanks but-no thank you, you
Do you wanna go, say no
Oh, do you wanna-na-na go, say no
Me no wanna go right now
Me no wanna go right now
Mooser wrote, “And there are enough desperate or desperately misinformed young people to fill the boots on the ground.”
I can vouch for that. My neighbor’s oldest son just joined the army, and a month ago I went over to their house for his going-away party. The kid is 21, has a GED, is smart but without direction, so he joined up because that is the only future he sees open to him. I drank whiskey with the father in the kitchen and he kept saying, “I’m so worried, I know we’re going to war with Iran.” I couldn’t reassure him with an empty platitude. so I did did what any other adult would do–listened and got really drunk with him.
Netanyahu only cares about Jewish lives.
Our troops are just throw-aways. The old term is “cannon-fodder.” This is acutely true now that we have no active Military Draft, although the buys are still legally suppose to register for the Draft; in fact, it’s a requirement on boys seeking various government help, such as Pell Grants. If there was one thing imaginable that might eventually result in reviving the Draft, it’s an attack on Iran–there’s an awful lot of possible ways that could go given the current constellation of things. Even a suggestion of such revival would really show show the cleavage in Uncle Sam’s saggy baggy man tits.
Obama has boxed himself in further in the trek toward Bibi’s war with Iran; he’s now on record telling the world containment will never do. The legs of US diplomacy are now stumps.
Unlike his predecessor, Obama seems to know how to be diplomatic and tactful.
Bibi/Israel hasn’t a clue, as though diplomacy and tact has been bred out over the last 63 years, replaced with the arrogance and stupidity of believing their own propaganda.
Kinda like ‘I’d rather believe my parents stories than face the fact that Santa doesn’t exist!’ …… and when the stocking isn’t filled … ‘there’s always next Xmas’
Phil, I’m not nearly as optimistic. Everything is a charade, a staged performance to confuse and/or manipulate the public. Tony Cartalucci reminds us of the PNAC sequel from the Brookings Institute, “Which Path to Persia?” and quite depressingly, they’re following the script to the letter.
link to infowars.com
This piece by Derfner is very revealing:
link to salon.com
Yes, isn’t it. As I thought, Netanyahu is a cheap thug and empty suit and blow hard liar even according to the Israelis who know him.
Pepe Escobar has some interesting comments here:
“… Bibi the Bully badly wants a Republican to take out Obama in November. Obama knows he can’t be defeated by King of Flip Flop Mitt Romney or Ayatollah Rick Santorum. But he can be defeated by the proverbial US gas pump. The problem is, submitting or not to Bibi the Bully’s absolutist demands, oil prices go up; they have already have by 20%, and this growth may reach 50% or more if speculators deem an attack imminent.
Tehran may hold the key to defuse the whole psychodrama – and the demented speculation on oil prices. By late March or early April, with his authority immensely strengthened, negotiators on behalf of Ayatollah Khamenei will be back on the table discussing the nuclear dossier with the P5+1 – US, France, Britain, Russia and China, plus Germany.
Obama himself may also hold the key. He could pull a Nixon – as in going to China to meet Mao in 1972 – and offer a face-to-face to Khamenei. The industrial-military-media complex, Big Oil, the Israeli firsters and especially Bibi the Bully will be seeing all shades of red. But it does take balls to really earn a Nobel Peace Prize. Obama, will you tear down this wall (of mistrust)?
This is the section of Obama’s speech at AIPAC centered on Iran:”
(con’t at link) link to atimes.com