Netanyahu's Speech on House Floor

[lawrocket 3]

I didn't listen to it. But I find myself riveted by the response from the Dems who boycotted the speech.

I'm finding some weird things. Most of them are making the following points:
(1) how much they love Israel
(2) how much the world hates Israel and the US sticks up for them
(3) that a bad deal is better than no deal
(4) that the House floor is no place for political theater or for politic purposes
(5) that they are insulted at how the President was dissed
(6) that the Iranian government and the Iranian people are inseparable

Why am I more interested in the response? The Democrats had a win here and their responses are laughable. Bibi apparently said that his intention wasn't to be political right at the outset. I would have just left then and when asked later said, "he's the PM of a country on the House floor giving a speech. It doesn't get more political than that. No further comment."

But the Dem response all had the same talking points. And they sounded silly. I can't imagine that Bibi was any sillier. I mean, Democrats saying they didn't want to participate in political theater by making it more theatrical?

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Channman 2]

lawrocket

I didn't listen to it. But I find myself riveted by the response from the Dems who boycotted the speech.

I'm finding some weird things. Most of them are making the following points:
(1) how much they love Israel
(2) how much the world hates Israel and the US sticks up for them
(3) that a bad deal is better than no deal
(4) that the House floor is no place for political theater or for politic purposes
(5) that they are insulted at how the President was dissed
(6) that the Iranian government and the Iranian people are inseparable

Why am I more interested in the response? The Democrats had a win here and their responses are laughable. Bibi apparently said that his intention wasn't to be political right at the outset. I would have just left then and when asked later said, "he's the PM of a country on the House floor giving a speech. It doesn't get more political than that. No further comment."

But the Dem response all had the same talking points. And they sounded silly. I can't imagine that Bibi was any sillier. I mean, Democrats saying they didn't want to participate in political theater by making it more theatrical?

I just listened to it on talk radio. My understanding there were dems present on the floor and they clapped/and stood to their feet often in agreement.

The white house reaction on the other hand was shocking. Susan Rice saying the speech, "It's destructive to the fabric of the relationship". At least Democratic Congressman Menendez took a pretty hard shot at Susan Rice condemning her remarks. He also made it a point to escort the Prime Minister to the House Chamber.

[BillyVance 35]

I guess you could say they seem to have forgotten that Iran and its leaders have repeatedly called for the annihilation of Israel. So with that in mind, I can understand Bibi's points where he is coming from.

The very last thing we need is some radical islamic punk ass group getting their hands on a nuke weapon. However, Iran is mostly if not all Shiite muslims and their military is helping the fight against the Sunni ISIS forces so...

I wouldn't trust anybody in the middle east anyhow, but I do support Israel's right to exist and defend itself. I don't always agree with everything they do though.

"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

[jclalor 12]

Because we all know what wonderful strategic advice Netanyahu's has given us in the past concerning the Middle East.

Remember when he claimed their would be wonderful benifits that the region would see if we gave Sadam the boot?

He's just trying to get re-elected, over half of his own country wants him out of office.

[lawrocket 3]

I agree. One thing that I see missing is a middle ground. To this, I think the Dems are correct. Bibi's tone seems to be never never never negotiate. I think this is wrong and the tone isn't helpful.

ON the other end is the Admin's tone and process. The US looks weak. Here is how it's been:
"Hey, Iran. Stop it with the weapons, bro."
"No."
"Come on, Iran. I've been asking nicely for six years."
"No."
"Well, then, I'll sanction you some more."
"Big deal. China buys all the oil we can sell them. And China is nice enough to turn it into gasoline for us."
"That's cheating!"

Here's the thing, though. I think we should WANT Iran to develop a peaceful nuclear power production capacity. THink of the goals it would accomplish:


(1) Greenhouse gas reduction
(2) extends supplies of oil
(3) Economic and social development
(4) reliability
(5) We can provide anti-virus software

There is a middle ground. It isn't a no nuclear/all nuclear weapons thing.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[airdvr 210]

You really trust Iran? A deal with them isn't worth the ink used to write it. When did we start thinking it was OK to negotiate with terrorists?

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[lawrocket 3]

jclalor

Because we all know what wonderful strategic advice Netanyahu's has given us in the past concerning the Middle East.

Remember when he claimed their would be wonderful benifits that the region would see if we gave Sadam the boot?

He's just trying to get re-elected, over half of his own country wants him out of office.

Bibi has only Israel to worry about. One or two Dems I heard mentioned his lousy record with this stuff as a reason to not pay attention to him. They lost that point, though, in the other fluff and bs.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Elisha 1]

lawrocket

I didn't listen to it. But I find myself riveted by the response from the Dems who boycotted the speech.

I'm finding some weird things. Most of them are making the following points:
(1) how much they love Israel
(2) how much the world hates Israel and the US sticks up for them
(3) that a bad deal is better than no deal
(4) that the House floor is no place for political theater or for politic purposes
(5) that they are insulted at how the President was dissed
(6) that the Iranian government and the Iranian people are inseparable

Why am I more interested in the response? The Democrats had a win here and their responses are laughable. Bibi apparently said that his intention wasn't to be political right at the outset. I would have just left then and when asked later said, "he's the PM of a country on the House floor giving a speech. It doesn't get more political than that. No further comment."

But the Dem response all had the same talking points. And they sounded silly. I can't imagine that Bibi was any sillier. I mean, Democrats saying they didn't want to participate in political theater by making it more theatrical?

As for a reaction, how about "Thanks for sharing."...and then they are free to disregard anything that Bibi said? Yes, the theatrics are well....ridiculous.

[lawrocket 3]

airdvr

You really trust Iran? A deal with them isn't worth the ink used to write it. When did we start thinking it was OK to negotiate with terrorists?

First, Iran is signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. It has the right under the treaty to develop peaceful nuclear power.

Second, the US is signatory, and has had 45 years now to disarm itself of nuclear weapons. It hasn't. Neither has any other nuclear weapons state. We're cheating, too. And sure as hell don't want Iran having what we have. We know Iran is cheating because Stuxnet actually worked.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[jclalor 12]

lawrocket

***Because we all know what wonderful strategic advice Netanyahu's has given us in the past concerning the Middle East.

Remember when he claimed their would be wonderful benifits that the region would see if we gave Sadam the boot?

He's just trying to get re-elected, over half of his own country wants him out of office.

Bibi has only Israel to worry about. One or two Dems I heard mentioned his lousy record with this stuff as a reason to not pay attention to him. They lost that point, though, in the other fluff and bs.

And yet him an obama agree do agree on one thing.

http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2015/03/netanyahu-obama-climate-change-terrorism

[champu 1]

lawrocket

Neither has any other nuclear weapons state.

???

[rushmc 23]

jclalor

******Because we all know what wonderful strategic advice Netanyahu's has given us in the past concerning the Middle East.

Remember when he claimed their would be wonderful benifits that the region would see if we gave Sadam the boot?

He's just trying to get re-elected, over half of his own country wants him out of office.

Bibi has only Israel to worry about. One or two Dems I heard mentioned his lousy record with this stuff as a reason to not pay attention to him. They lost that point, though, in the other fluff and bs.

And yet him an obama agree do agree on one thing.

http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2015/03/netanyahu-obama-climate-change-terrorism

I dont know about Bibi but this sure as hell does nothing for Obama

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[jakee 1,594]

airdvr

You really trust Iran? A deal with them isn't worth the ink used to write it. When did we start thinking it was OK to negotiate with terrorists?

A long, long time ago. Some of them we even help.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[wmw999 2,584]

Netanyahu is doing his job; he's supposed to represent Israel's interests as best he can. Talking to Congress definitely qualifies, especially with the nuclear talks going on.

Objecting to it is Obama's job, especially if they really do avoid having heads of state address Congress or the like when elections are coming up.

I disagree with the boycott; this kind of boycott is generally childish and unproductive. But it's all political theater. There is absolutely nothing that will come from this other than everyone being able to say "they did the right thing" and "got their point across." And without actually risking anything -- how cool is that

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[rushmc 23]

wmw999

Netanyahu is doing his job; he's supposed to represent Israel's interests as best he can. Talking to Congress definitely qualifies, especially with the nuclear talks going on.

Objecting to it is Obama's job, especially if they really do avoid having heads of state address Congress or the like when elections are coming up.

I disagree with the boycott; this kind of boycott is generally childish and unproductive. But it's all political theater. There is absolutely nothing that will come from this other than everyone being able to say "they did the right thing" and "got their point across." And without actually risking anything -- how cool is that

Wendy P.

It raises the risk of Obama's agreement with Iran not getting through the Senate

He (Obama) seems to want a deal regardless of the details in it

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Elisha 1]

wmw999

...

I disagree with the boycott; this kind of boycott is generally childish and unproductive. But it's all political theater. There is absolutely nothing that will come from this other than everyone being able to say "they did the right thing" and "got their point across." And without actually risking anything -- how cool is that

Wendy P.

Exactly. As I said, why can't they be like "thank you for sharing, but I don't agree" and go their merry ways.

[TriGirl 343]

lawrocket

***You really trust Iran? A deal with them isn't worth the ink used to write it. When did we start thinking it was OK to negotiate with terrorists?

First, Iran is signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. It has the right under the treaty to develop peaceful nuclear power.

Additionally, how about the world community offering to send experts from other countries that use civil nuclear power to help Iran build their plants? Why should they want to do all that work to develop and distribute it (re-inventing the wheel, so to speak)? Put the ball in Iran's court to accept or decline the assistance. If they're really trying to refine to weapons-grade, not just civil power grade, I'd love to hear their reasoning for declining the help (from neutral countries, of course -- I'm quite certain they'd be able to decline an offer from US nuclear technicians!)

See the upside, and always wear your parachute! -- Christopher Titus

Shut Up & Jump!

[RonD1120 62]

PM Netanyahu made the point very clear that both the Islamic State in Iran and ISIS want the same thing, total control of the Mideast and ultimately the world. They are just arguing over who is going to control it.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[Boomerdog 0]

Quote

Additionally, how about the world community offering to send experts from other countries that use civil nuclear power to help Iran build their plants? Why should they want to do all that work to develop and distribute it (re-inventing the wheel, so to speak)? Put the ball in Iran's court to accept or decline the assistance. If they're really trying to refine to weapons-grade, not just civil power grade, I'd love to hear their reasoning for declining the help (from neutral countries, of course -- I'm quite certain they'd be able to decline an offer from US nuclear technicians!)

It's a nice thought and I'm sure you offer it in good faith and well thought through and OBTW, I'm not falsely or immodestly patronizing your comments. But even under the conditions you describe would not guarantee that Iran would halt their intent to develop nuclear weapons.

[Andy9o8 2]

RonD1120

PM Netanyahu

I tried, but he has me blocked.

[cvfd1399 0]

Quote

RonD1120 wrote:
PM Netanyahu

I tried, but he has me blocked.

[jakee 1,594]

RonD1120

PM Netanyahu made the point very clear that both the Islamic State in Iran and ISIS want the same thing, total control of the Mideast and ultimately the world.

Really? What exactly have Iran been doing about that lately?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[StreetScooby 5]

I watched the speech. Thought he knocked it out of the park. Any rational person would be hard pressed to disagree with anything he said.

We are all engines of karma

[Stumpy 284]

airdvr

You really trust Iran? A deal with them isn't worth the ink used to write it. When did we start thinking it was OK to negotiate with terrorists?

No, but I trust Israel about the same amount, along with the US.

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[ryoder 1,590]

StreetScooby

I watched the speech. Thought he knocked it out of the park. Any rational person would be hard pressed to disagree with anything he said.

He has a history of contradicting what his own intelligence service has told him:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/23/leaked-spy-cables-netanyahu-iran-bomb-mossad

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.