Guest shiloh357 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Good point, Justin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeBernard Posted March 6, 2015 Group: Junior Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 2 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 78 Content Per Day: 0.01 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/25/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted March 6, 2015 My personal view from over here in the UK (and one shared with quite a few I've spoken to) is one of general bemusement at the whole US political system. US politicians (both sides) do not look good over here in the UK, not just because of this, but also because of a series of events- the habitual threat to shut down goverment, failure to compromise etc etc. Israel's (sorry, Bibi's) constant doom-mongering over Iran's nuclear ambitions have failed to become reality; Iran has been one year from getting a nuclear weopen for something like 20 years now. So when Bibi talks, many here ignore him (Just to clarify- I'm talking about Bibi in particular here, not necessairily the entire Israeli establishment. I'm prepared to bet large amounts of cash that Mossad don't give specifics in their briefings to him, but an intelligent estimate with an error margin. But as a politician, Bibi would rather be dramatic than accurate). So many here are staggered that Republicans would rather believe a foreign head of state than their own President over confidential talks. In the UK we'd wait and see until the deal has been reached and made public for our parliament to ratify (and see for ourselves what has been agreed) rather than listen to a man noted for hyperbole and hysteria. We're also vaguely bemused by why it is that loyalty to a foreign country (often over and above loyalty to the US) is seen as a politically positive thing; anybody here in the UK who is seen as too pro-Eu or too pro-US is shot down; we want our leaders to be pro-UK. And also; in all the military adventures that the US has had (with the exceptions of Vietnam, Panama and Grenada) the UK has been there, fighting and dieing alongside US troops. But I am hard pressed to think of a single conflict where we have fought alongside Israeli troops as well. Even the French have fought alongside the US more times than Israel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 a lot of exaggeration in that comment, Bernard. It is not the case that Bibi is doom mongering and it is not the case that he has been saying that Iran is one year away from getting a nuke for the last 20 years. Try to be more accurate Furthermore, we don't believe or trust our president and for good reason. He lied to us repeatedly in order to sell his socialist healthcare plan that he could never have passed if he had told us the truth. He favors illegal aliens over American citizens and he is fiscally irresponsible, narcissistic, he violates our Constitution every chance he gets, he has an incoherent foreign policy that has not only destabilized the middle east, but also allowed the rise of ISIS. He causes race division, and class warfare in this country and has overall made the world a more dangerous place. Bibi Netanyahu, between the two is more respectable (albeit not perfect) and between the two Netanyahu is the only one who knows how to be a leader. We are not loyal to Israel over the US, but we do support Israel in our common war on terrorism So again, all you can do is engage in meaningless, silly hyperbole that really doesn't' belong in or contribute anything of value, intelligence, substance or importance to this conversation. t Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeBernard Posted March 6, 2015 Group: Junior Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 2 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 78 Content Per Day: 0.01 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/25/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted March 6, 2015 a lot of exaggeration in that comment, Bernard. It is not the case that Bibi is doom mongering and it is not the case that he has been saying that Iran is one year away from getting a nuke for the last 20 years. Try to be more accurate Furthermore, we don't believe or trust our president and for good reason. He lied to us repeatedly in order to sell his socialist healthcare plan that he could never have passed if he had told us the truth. He favors illegal aliens over American citizens and he is fiscally irresponsible, narcissistic, he violates our Constitution every chance he gets, he has an incoherent foreign policy that has not only destabilized the middle east, causes race division, and class warfare in this country and has overall made the world a more dangerous place. Bibi Netanyahu, between the two is more respectable (albeit not perfect) and between the two Netanyahu is the only one who knows how to be a leader. We are not loyal to Israel over the US, but we do support Israel in our common war on terrorism So again, all you can do is engage in meaningless, silly hyperbole that really doesn't' belong in or contribute anything of value, intelligence, substance or importance to this conversation. t You're right, I should be more accurate. It is in fact 23 years. In 1992 Netanyahu warned that Iran was 3-5 years away from getting the bomb (deadline passed in 1995 without Iran getting the bomb). In 1995 Netanyaho said once again Iran was 3-5 years away from getting the bomb (deadline passed in 2000 without Iran getting the bomb) In 1996 Netanyaho warned again.... In 2002 Netanyaho claimed Iran was operating centrifuges 'the size of washing machines' In 2012 Netanyaho stood in front of the UN and claimed Iran was 1 year from getting the bomb (deadline passed in 2013 without Iran getting the bomb). And, just to illustrate my point about the difference between what Mossad is saying and Netanyaho's rhetoric- in 2011 an ex-Mossad chief Meir Dagan said that Iran was not likely to get a nuclear bomb in the timeline that Bibi was stating; he has also emerged again in the past few days saying that Netanyaho is more likely to damage international efforts to stop Iran than help them. It wasn't Obama that destabilised the Middle East. It was the fact that Bush/ Blair did not properly think through the implementation of peace after the Iraq war and the filling of the void left by Saddam's goverment (I supported the war, by the way. Just thoroughly disappointed how Bush/ Blair mucked up the peace and seemed to throw away the sacrifices made many of our soldiers). Obama's (and Europe's, afraid to say) dithering over the Arab Spring (does the West help? Does it stand by so that local uprisings aren't seen as US proxies?) has wasted a potential golden moment for the Middle East (and by the way, genuinely democratic nations are much less of a threat to Israel than dictators). The majority view from Europe is not that the US leads, but rather that Israel talks and Republicans follow. It may not be what is happening, but it is how it appears. Which is important, because if the next president is Republican, and he (or she) asks the world to support further sanctions on Iran, people may not listen as they will assume it's just Israel talking. For the US to lead, it must be seen to lead, not to follow. Or to dither, which is how Obama has been seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 Actually, Iran has been deadly close to getting a nuclear bomb, much closer than what is generally known, but Israel has been (and we have found out after the fact) working behind the scenes doing whatever kind of sabotage they could to set Iran back and they have done so successfully, To act like this is just crying wolf is simply irresponsible. I would rather have a leader who is vigilant (even if he is sometimes mistaken) than kind of milk toast, morally indifferent, embarrassment of a president that sits in the White House now. And yes it was Obama that destabilized the middle east with the ongoing disaster of the "Arab Spring" and the way he has allowed ISIS to come to the forefront. The world is worse because of Obama. If you like him so much, we will send him to you so that he can spend you into oblivion and we can elect someone with some commonsense who will put Americans first. The reason it appear that Israel is taking the lead, is that between Obama and Netanyahu, Netanyahu is the only one that is a true leader and understands the threat and what it poses not only to his nation but the world. Iran isn't just an Israel problem. Iran is a rogue nation that will be our worst nightmare if the get the nuke. And most of us won't be losing sleep over what Europeans think about us. We have never really cared before and we don't need to now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Summers Posted March 6, 2015 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 0 Topic Count: 9 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 225 Content Per Day: 0.07 Reputation: 27 Days Won: 0 Joined: 02/19/2015 Status: Offline Birthday: 02/29/1984 Share Posted March 6, 2015 (edited) Amazing how invading Iraq and leaving a hugh power vacuum unfilled had nothing to do with destabalizing the Middle East. Partisan politics at its finest. Edited March 6, 2015 by Alex Summers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 What destabilized the middle east was failing to secure a SOFA before leaving Iraq, and the Arab Spring and the way we threw Libya and Egypt under the bus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Summers Posted March 6, 2015 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 0 Topic Count: 9 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 225 Content Per Day: 0.07 Reputation: 27 Days Won: 0 Joined: 02/19/2015 Status: Offline Birthday: 02/29/1984 Share Posted March 6, 2015 (edited) Had Bush not invaded the country there would have been no need for a SOFA and likely no Arab spring for that matter Not to mention 3 trillion more dollars in our coffers and 5000 more service members alive Edited March 6, 2015 by Alex Summers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Summers Posted March 6, 2015 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 0 Topic Count: 9 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 225 Content Per Day: 0.07 Reputation: 27 Days Won: 0 Joined: 02/19/2015 Status: Offline Birthday: 02/29/1984 Share Posted March 6, 2015 (edited) Blaming Obama for this is like blaming the relief pitcher that comes into the game with his team down 0-12 and give up 6 more runs with losing the game for the team. Edited March 6, 2015 by Alex Summers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 No, it's not like that at all. Obama has out spent every president before him and has disregarded the Constitution and has several scandals with the IRS, NSA, Ben Ghazi, Fast and Furious, etc. None of that can be blamed on Bush If it was only six months ago he had been elected you might make that kind of argument, but after six year and two elections in office, that ignorant argument doesn't work anymore Alex. At some point, Obama has to put on the big boy pants and learn what it means to take responsibility for the stupid things he has done. The Arab Spring had nothing to do with Iraq, the two are not connected. And if we had gotten the SOFA, ISIS would have had a vacuum to fill. All of that is Obama's fault, pure and simple. Obama has been in office for over six years and the first two years, Obama and the Democrats held all of the levers of power and they have not only ruined this country, but have a completely incoherent foreign policy that punishes our allies and rewards our enemies. We could elect a chicken to the White House and have a better president Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts