Unprecedented: Obama vs. Bibi
Ah, so this is the way Obama will be playing the Israeli election:
After staying mum on Israeli issues in the run-up to the election, the White House on Wednesday broke its silence — answering Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s victory with fresh criticism and making clear that a new rift has opened between U.S. and Israeli leaders, this time over Palestinian statehood.
In its first public response to Netanyahu’s election triumph, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said President Obama still believes in a two-state solution. This was after Netanyahu, shortly before the vote, reversed his stance and stated he would not allow the creation of a Palestinian state.
Earnest acknowledged Wednesday that the U.S. would have to “re-evaluate” its position on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in light of those comments. But he stressed that Obama believes a two-state solution is best. And State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki clarified that the administration “absolutely” will continue to push for this.
The idea that Obama had stayed “mum” on Israeli issues is risible—what is the Iran deal (and Netanyahu’s subsequent speech to Congress) if not a big Israeli issue? Netanyahu seemed to face two alternative approaches in the lead-in to this election: continue to mouth the polite, US-and-Western-Europe-backed fiction that the Israelis have a partner in peace in the Palestinians, or tell the truth and say they don’t. Neither approach was going to keep Obama in Netanyahu’s camp, either, because Obama had already turned into his outright opponent. So Netanyahu might as well tell the truth about that 2-state thing, and try to actually win the election.
So now Obama has found an excuse to open the rift wider and say his hand was forced by Netanyahu’s abandonment of the 2-state solution. The whole thing is some sort of verbal game in which both sides are pretending—and have been pretending for quite some time—a lot of things, including that there has even been a possibility of a two-state solution since at least 2000 (abandonment of Camp David and beginning of the Second Intifada) and probably much much earlier.
That word “unprecedented” keeps being used for things that Obama has done. It certainly seems to be an appropriate one for this act of a president’s reversing course on a long-held and bipartisan foreign policy without any pressure from Congress or the American people, all on his own, a change from supporting a long-term ally (over sixty-five years) to undermining it, all in a single administration. This reversal had actually happened before any announcement on the 2-state solution from Netanyahu, as was made crystal clear during Obama’s current push for the Iran deal, which also featured cozying up to a country that had been one of our biggest enemies for about forty-five years and which has not shown a single sign of stopping being one.
The closest thing I can think of is Nixon in China, but in that case what Nixon did was to open up the very beginning of relations with a heretofore shunned nation. He didn’t reverse course on general policy towards Communism (in fact, one of his rationales for the China visit was to strengthen his hand against the Soviets), China had already long been a nuclear power so their acquisition of nuclear weapons was a fait accompli, and most particularly he got assurances from the Chinese that Taiwan would be protected (so far that doesn’t seem to have gone too badly). Nor did he do it for personal reasons—either of dislike or affection—for the leaders of China.
I’m not suggesting that Obama’s hatred of Netanyahu is the sole reason for his shabby treatment of him and of Israel lately. But Obama is so often juvenile, petty, and personal in his reactions in general that it’s a good bet that it’s a factor. Another factor is undoubtedly that Netanyahu is a man of the right. My guess is that, in Obama’s mind, Netanyahu is something like the George Bush of Israel—a man for whom he most likely combines a personal and a political distaste.
If Israel had elected a nice accommodating leftist I assume that Obama would have called to congratulate him/her the instant the victory was declared, if not sooner. Instead, Obama is now considering abandoning Netanyahu at the UN in order to punish him and Israel. It will be very interesting to see what Congress does, if anything, although I’m not sure what they could do about it. And if any of the Democrats stand up and criticize Obama, will that person suddenly be slapped with a DOJ or IRS investigation?
[NOTE: In mulling over the origins of Obama’s anti-Israel venom, I kept thinking of Edward Said. I had some vague memory that Said had been teaching at Columbia when Obama was there, and that they later were friends or something of the sort. As quick as you can say “Google!,” up came a long list of articles about that very thing. The allegations are that Said was important in shaping Obama’s views of the region:
Prior to his death in 2003, Said was the leading anti-colonial thinker in the United States. Obama studied with Said at Columbia University and the two maintained a relationship over the next two decades. Obama attended a Palestinian fundraiser in Chicago in 1998 in which Said was the featured speaker, and Obama also befriended Said’s protege Rashid Khalidi, who currently occupies the Edward Said chair of Arab Studies at Columbia.
Said wasn’t a mere academic; for a time, he served as a member of the Palestine National Council. In this capacity he worked closely with Yasser Arafat. Said has been photographed throwing rocks at Israel to symbolize his support for armed resistance against the Jewish state; one Jewish magazine dubbed him a “Professor of Terror.”
More here and here. In summary, it is highly likely that Obama’s views on Israel have “evolved” during his administration in much the way that his views on gay marriage have: that is, that he was always considerably anti-Israel and pro-Palestine, but that until now he’s felt he had to dissemble about it until freed from the need to care what the US public thinks.]
Let us all remember that the Palis will only accept a one-state solution, and it must be THEIR solution and THEIR state and No Jews Allowed!
If Israel had elected a “nice accommodating leftist” the friendship would have lasted for awhile until the accommodating leftist told Obama “no” or until the day the Palestinian flag flew over Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. Then as the remaining Jews if there were any were burying their dead Obama would make some desultory remarks about how it was too bad how many Jews had been killed before he called to congratulate the Palestinians for their glorious victory.
Right now is the time when the true caliber of Congress will be tested. President Richard Nixon was tested by the Yom Kippur War when he was under extreme political duress and passed with flying colors. If it weren’t for president Nixon’s bravery and love for Israel, Israel might have fallen then. Now righteous men and women who love Israel will be tested again because Haman lives again in the White House.
Would he act any differently if he was a Muslim? I think he is wether he admits it or not. I predict he will “come out” shortly after leaving office, deciding to embrace the faith of his youth.
Caroline Glick: “The Israeli Solution”. (2013)
…and all and any of her columns from Jerusalem Post. Reality. Such a pain to be avoided by Lefties.
How can you make peace with someone who has declared they intend to kill you?
There is something nauseating about Obama spokesman Earnest’s calling out Netanyahu for stepping outside the fictional fairy land where a responsible Palestinian state is just around the corner. He projected a tone of ridiculous pretension when referring to a two state solution being long-standing US policy. Rather than being smug, he should be embarrassed to point out that US policy has so long been wedded to such a delusional understanding of the Middle East.
There is hope. Of course, since this will help save the Jews, there is a large degree of irony attached.
We have a paradox – at a time when Obama presents the Palestinians and their partners in crime with a window of opportunity that looks as though it may never be duplicated, we are presented with the reality of Palestinian history where no opportunity to miss any opportunity has ever been, or can ever be foregone.
In the words of Charlie Partanna, “which of dese?”
The only outcome that can be predicted is violence. I can only hope it will be expressed in its usually inchoate manner by those who lust for Israel’s demise.
We can be sure that Obama has already directed Samantha Power, the “U.S. ‘Permanent’( how can any UN ambassador be ‘permanent’?) Representative to the United Nations”, to now vote in favor of ALL sanctions and resolutions against Israel.
The new sanctions and resolutions against the now ‘rogue’ state of Israel will be far more severe than the former sanctions against Iran and a prefatory move to Obama cutting off all U.S. military and economic aid to Israel.
Obama will now accelerate his plans to, through the UN, force Israel to accept a suicidal two-state ‘solution’. That UN solution, forced down Israel’s throat is likely to contain the Muslim ‘right of return’ while failing to acknowledge Israel’s right to exist. The goal is suicidal demographic ‘immigration’ (sound familiar?) and de facto denial of Israel’s national legitimacy.
Of course, the Palestinians may once again snatch defeat from the jaws of victory by insisting on such onerous terms that neither Obama nor the MSM can spin them as even remotely acceptable.
The relations between the races in America have grown worse under this man, and now Israel is suddenly the enemy. Truly scary the harm one person can do when he’s aided and abetted by the media and partisans who think only of winning the game.
When I was in Jerusalem, the designer of the security fence told our group about an exchange he had with then Senator Obama. It was clear from that exchange that BHO is unconcerned about Israel’s security and survival. His concern is that the “Palestinians” are given all the land that they are “entitled” to. I’m guessing that he wants to push Israel back to the 1948 borders.
And he doesn’t like Tony Abbot either and gave him unasked for advice on preserving the Great Barrier Reef.He knows best,our dear leader.
May there be some kind of turning away from the Democrat party by those who care about Israel in the next election.
“I’m guessing that he wants to push Israel back to the 1948 borders.” Judith L.
That may be what he tells himself but since he knows those 1948 borders to be indefensible and therefore not viable, underneath whatever the rationalization he employs, the motivation is a truly hostile animosity. Make no mistake, Obama wishes Israel’s destruction every much as does Hamas.
Correspondingly, though I suspect it’s much more subconscious, the same rationale must apply to Carter.
It takes, at the least willful blindness and a maliciousness of the heart to not acknowledge that the Palestinians do not want peace and will not settle for anything less than Israel’s destruction.
And once again, the silence is deafening from the American Jewish community. I am continued to be amazed how their leftist inclinations always trump their ethnic heritage, especially when they are so adept at pushing the “victim status” for all other minority groups. The disconnect with their thinking and history is amazing.
physicsguy–
Last Friday evening, I had my first encounter with some Jewish friends (a young couple with 2 children, 8 & 10), who are seeing things as they really are. I was pleasantly surprised to find that indeed they now understand that Obama (and the Democrats for that matter) aren’t what they believed. We talked at length. At one point, he said, “I hate to think I’ve been played.” I said, “You were.”
For some strange reason the thought keeps recurring that Valerie Jarret, the woman who gave Michelle Robinson her first real political job in the Daley administration and nowadays the She Who Must Be Obeyed in the Obama White House was born in Iran and lived there until she was 5 or 6. Not that that means anything. Other than her being raised in the nation that keeps promising to vaporize the country Obama is always mad at.
If the Palestinians have no guns, there will be peace. If Israel has no guns there will be no Israel.
A story from the “Nixon in China” event, as told by Kissinger:
At a formal event, Kissinger approached Mao (yes, da man) and said (though an interpreter) that it was an historic event, with both counties doing this with nothing to gain but peace. Mao stared at Kissinger, and replied “If I had nothing to gain you wouldn’t be here. If you had nothing to gain you shouldn’t have come.”
ed in texas Says:
March 19th, 2015 at 7:15 pm
A story from the “Nixon in China” event, as told by Kissinger…
The Barney song has done damage!
This is out of right field, but does anyone talk about how the USA now seems to allies around the globe? With the media in cahoots and Obama the Messiah in charge, if I were an Englishman, Irishman, German, Chinese, Bora-Boran, Alaskan, Indian, Sudanese (not all at once) person abroad, watching this, it would be hard for me to remember that the US of A is a lover of freedom, liberty, free speech, capitalism, gun owning, self starting people, with about 320 million of us, supposedly, who love to export democracy and then defend it. I would look and go whoas – the light on the hill has gone out.
The Left are the Left. They are NEVER different. There is no mystery. There are no questions about them. In truth they are not “The Left”. That is a semi-benign euphemism. They are properly called by their two real names: Nazi-type Fascists and/or Leninists on the way to Stalinists. Obama is their leader.
Let’s let that sink in: The truth of the matter is that the president of the United States is a Fasco-Stalinist and he and his comrades are actively seeking the destruction of the US, the elimination of Jews from the world, and the imposition of a general tyranny over mankind down to its very soul.
1. They hate America and seek to destroy it.
2. They hate Jews and therefore seek to destroy the Jewish homeland, making common cause with Iranian Nuclear tipped Mullahs in the effort.
3. And so on. There are no reasons one can give to support the contrary – that they do not seek to eliminate Jews; that they do not seek to destroy America.
Period.
Barry is thinking more along the lines of the 1820 borders of Zion.
Congratulations, Your Victory is ‘Costing You’
Libtard woman in an alternate reality ….
awwww!
betyangelo,
Foreign governments are well aware of Obama’s foreign policies and what it says about both Obama and America and are indeed reacting.
As this implies, economic alignment often precedes political accommodation.
betyangelo:
Been talking about it for most of Obama’s term of office.
I wrote this article in October of 2009.
What Mike said.
Our allies, even the Australians, are nervously making Other Plans. And per Dick Cheney, they’ve been telling any American pols they know that they’re paying a heavy price bakc home when they DO support us.
I talked to an Israeli friend tonight (in her 50s, diplomat’s daughter). She said a couple of things: that the Obama Brigade in Israel used the same “Hope and Change” slogan for Herzog, and “young, hip, cool people chanting catchy slogans” to appeal to Israel’s young LIVs. This impressed the kids; the parents? not at all.
She also said that Hussein O. has already allowed our agreement to supply Israel with oil in a military emergency to lapse: quietly, back-door betrayal, with our Lickspittle Media saying nought about it. And that he’s doing other such things, all in the background.
Anyone who doesn’t think he’s a raving Jew-hater is living in a fantasy. And Bibi is three things he can’t stand: a real man, unafraid of the Malevolent One, and principled.
Remember the obsidian malice of his eyes in the second Romney debate? Youtube it. It struck me cold at the time.
Marco Rubio speech: You know Obama despises the State of Israel, right?
Blistering.
http://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=355618
I don’t think Obama can do much of permanence to Israel directly in under 2 years.
Instead, he’s trying to make changes on the ground that will outlast his presidency.
If the next president has any sense, he will take the first opportunity to publicly repudiate Obama on several points.
Use the bully pulpit to shoot down his ideology when Obama can’t fight back.
Is Obama Sunni or Shia?
Matt_SE Says
“If the next president has any sense, he will take the first opportunity to publicly repudiate Obama on several points.”
What if the next president is a Democrat?
Sharon W. Your young Jewish friends weren’t “played”. They jumped aboard the train with glad cries and a feeling of superiority over the rubes.
I know or know of few people who were “played”. They did it to themselves, and they did it to me. I don’t have any patience with them, whether they claim the scales have fallen.
Backofanenvelope Says:
March 20th, 2015 at 2:37 am
Is Obama Sunni or Shia?
Obama is Shiite …
if you allow the ideology to change, then it becomes something different. the trick is to change other things one part at a time, till the other thing is completely new and different without people noticing much for a while.
with that understanding, then one only needs to know the actual ideology in order to know what is going on in the heads of the people who follow it as the point of the ideology is that they are not able to think independently… like the confucians they operate from a behavioral tradition that informs them what point to take or not take what action to head towards etc…
the only thing that they do have control over is the speed and implementation of the points within the limits that people allow until things are so changed people wake up suddenly going “what happened?”
with all that said
On The Jewish Question
Works of Karl Marx 1844
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/jewish-question/
from the wiki on the above document:
Marx concludes that while individuals can be “spiritually” and “politically” free in a secular state, they can still be bound to material constraints on freedom by economic inequality, an assumption that would later form the basis of his critiques of capitalism.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Bernard Lewis has described “On the Jewish Question” as “one of the classics of anti-Semitic propaganda.”[6] According to several scholars, for Marx Jews were the embodiment of capitalism and the representation of all its evils
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Bruno Bauer over the nature of political emancipation in Germany. According to McLellan, Marx used the word “Judentum” in its colloquial sense of “commerce” to argue that Germans suffer, and must be emancipated from, capitalism.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Others argue that On the Jewish Question is primarily a critique of liberal rights, rather than a criticism of Judaism, and that apparently anti-Semitic passages such as “Money is the jealous god of Israel, in face of which no other god may exist.” should be read in that context
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Larry Ray translates a sentence of Zur Judenfrage and interprets it as an assimilationist position “in which there is no room within emancipated humanity for Jews as a separate ethnic or cultural identity”, and which advocates “a society where both cultural as well as economic difference is eliminated”.
Here Ray sees Marx in a “strand of left thinking that has been unable to address forms of oppression not directly linked to class”.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Francis Wheen says: “Those critics, who see this as a foretaste of ‘Mein Kampf’, overlook one, essential point: in spite of the clumsy phraseology and crude stereotyping, the essay was actually written as a defense of the Jews. It was a retort to Bruno Bauer, who had argued that Jews should not be granted full civic rights and freedoms unless they were baptised as Christians”.
[note that this is their attempt to save the works of marx from the points that they dont agree with, while refusing to change marx… ie. what hitler used to justify the things he did really was a misinterpretation. while attractive to people on the left, it certainly does not align with the fact that wherever and whenever their power waxes, antisemitism rises to the point of public fear among those paying attention – artfldgr]
Although, he claimed to be an atheist Bruno Bauer viewed Judaism as an inferior civilization
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Jonathan Sacks, Chief Rabbi of the United Kingdom, regards application of the term “antisemitism” to Marx as an anachronism–because when Marx wrote On the Jewish Question, virtually all major philosophers had expressed similar views, and the word “antisemitism” had not yet been coined, let alone developed a racial component, and little awareness existed of the depths of European prejudice against Jews. Marx thus simply expressed the commonplace thinking of his era, according to Sack
[note that this is another trying to save the point. if the africans can claim racism prior to trotskys invention of the word in 1935, why in this context is it wrong to do the same? because in the race concept, it favors the discord necessary to rewrite the social doctrine and organization of peoples, while in the marxian thing, it would amount to an attack on marx as the cause of the events in the modern century that has continued to foment jew hatred. given the leaderships pseudo hidden penchant to marx, how can they just rewrite their gospel and deny their god marx? they cant, any more than a saint in the catholic would shrug and give up their faith rather than dying to maintain its purity and unmutable forms – artfldgr]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
In part II of the essay, Marx refers to Thomas Mé¼ntzer:
The view of nature attained under the domination of private property and money is a real contempt for, and practical debasement of, nature; in the Jewish religion, nature exists, it is true, but it exists only in imagination.
It is in this sense that [in a 1524 pamphlet] Thomas Mé¼nzer declares it intolerable
that all creatures have been turned into property, the fishes in the water, the birds in the air, the plants on the earth; the creatures, too, must become free.
[and so here you see the reason why there is such an idea of animals must be equal to humans and free… which would move the state towards favoring vegitarianism… just as hitler did as they have the same base of operation… also note the way the left claims to be modern, and that the not left follows old past things, while the left is modernity in action following ideas from the 1500s later solidified in the 1850s, and as such now remains unchanged as the gospel of marx – artfldgr]
there is so much more as there is no way for me to summarized and show 500 years of unread thinking and discourse… though i will say that not knowing that puts you in the position of where they can ignore you as an ignorant simpleton for not knowing it… – artfldgr
Neo Says: and most particularly he got assurances from the Chinese that Taiwan would be protected (so far that doesn’t seem to have gone too badly).
Really? perhaps thats because like most people there is a very narrow view of what is good and a complete ignoring as to the games that go on that we refuse to include in our assesments… like intrigue, assasinations, spying, etc.
Taiwan facilitates technology transfer to the Chinese communists…
if all you look at is whether china invades taiwan, then maybe in that simple view you may say it worked out well… but this is ignorant in that for decades this facilitated the turning over of US and other countries technology to the chinese!!!
its like saying, the boy who helped you with your packages is so nice you refuse to notice that once he gained entry to your home that nice person robbed you
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Presidential aide Wang Jen-ping was found in 2009 to have sold nearly 100 confidential documents to China since 2007
Military intelligence officer Lo Chi-cheng was found to have been acting as a double agent in 2010 for China since 2007
Maj. Gen. Lo Hsien-che, electronic communications and information bureau chief during the administration of former President Chen Shui-bian, has been suspected of selling military secrets to Mainland China since 2004.
In 2007 the Ministry of Justice Investigation Bureau stated that 500 gigabyte Maxtor Basics Personal Storage 3200 hard drives produced by Seagate Technology and manufactured in Thailand may have been modified by a Chinese subcontractor and shipped with the Virus.Win32.AutoRun.ah virus. As many as 1,800 drives sold in the Netherlands and Taiwan after August 2007 were reportedly infected with the virus, which scanned for passwords for products such as World of Warcraft and QQ and uploading them to a website in Beijing
artfldgr – So if you have a seagate drive in your computer, they have access to you secrets… did hillary have a seagate drive? how about other leaders of the free world? companies? corporations? etc? think that facilitating a conduit for broad spying is a good thing?
Taiwan Arrests Alleged Chinese Spy
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/policy-budget/warfare/2015/01/20/taipei-china-arrest-espionage-spy/22036535/
Chinese Spies Expand Operations in Taiwan
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/policy-budget/warfare/2015/01/24/taiwan-china-espionage/22154631/
The Spies Are Coming! The Spies Are Coming to Taiwan!
Just how bad is Taiwan’s spy problem?
http://thediplomat.com/2015/01/the-spies-are-coming-the-spies-are-coming-to-taiwan/
The optics couldn’t be worse – four Taiwanese military officers, including an Air Force pilot, a lieutenant colonel and a former Army major general, indicted on charges of belonging to a spy ring led by a Chinese intelligence officer. Oh, and the owner of a karaoke club, to boot.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
15 cases were uncovered in 2014 alone. Has the Taiwanese security apparatus been completely penetrated by Chinese spies, as some analysts have been arguing?
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
of course we refuse to even acknowlege that their existence actions and soi on actually has an effect… so we ALWAYS leave them out of every discussion… unless i bring them up…
the ONLY reason that taiwan is still taiwan is that the chinese get western tech easier from them than it does from the USA Directly… they can insert things into disk drives, they can take military tech we loan or give. etc
The PLA’s rationale for stealing secrets from Taiwan is self-evident: Beijing does not recognize the existence of Taiwan as a sovereign state and regards it instead as a province awaiting “re-unification,” by force if necessary.
so their idea is that taiwan belongs to them so they are not spying if they are looking at their own property!!!
Taiwan Receives First US Anti-Submarine Aircraft
http://archive.defensenews.com/article/20130925/DEFREG03/309250013/Taiwan-Receives-First-US-Anti-Submarine-Aircraft
getting the above tech is very valuable to china, no?
it also allows people like obama and others who favor communism to transfer technology to the enemies state by granting it to these sattelites., this is why the US Was reluctant to give romania missle protection, and why the ukraine thing may be to get those missiles so that russia can examine them and work out how to defeat them!!!
Taiwan receives US submarine-launched missiles
http://www.presstv.com/detail/2014/01/08/344401/taiwan-receives-us-submarine-missiles/
nice… they get to peer into our missle technology
meanwhile… people here in the west think that their stuff is defunct because its not updated with modern computer tech… however, the reason its not updated with that tech is that its designed to function in a nuclear conflict…
hey! want to add that taiwan makes lots of chips and then allows counterfeits and sub quality unhardened chips to be slipped into the supply strea?
this example is from china directly:
Counterfeit chips plague Pentagon weapons systems
http://www.publicintegrity.org/2011/11/07/7323/counterfeit-chips-plague-pentagon-weapons-systems
The Navy Bought Fake Chinese Microchips
US weapons ‘full of fake Chinese parts’
DARPA technology uncovers counterfeit microchips
Outsourcing Security: Defense Manufacturing Goes the Way of the Automobile
http://truth-out.org/archive/component/k2/item/90375:outsourcing-security-defense-manufacturing-goes-the-way-of-the-automobile
He says the Pentagon started outsourcing the manufacturing of “high-end” computer chips to Taiwan in the early 1990s – microchips used in US fighter jets and missile defense systems, for instance. Over time, the Taiwanese have “second-sourced” most of these contracts to the Chinese, he says
yeah… thats a good deal
list out everything from the social issues, the race issues, the denuement of the military, the moral hit, the shrinking, the rules of engagement from a nuthouse, the spying of our own people (Snowden wants to come home), the lack of enough healthy people to join up whether its too fat or too nutty, the counterfeit parts, the sabotaged pieces, the disk drives and so on
yeah neo… good deal
of course we are not allowed to include this in our viww and assesments… are we? the fact the taiwanese people are not under the mainland chinese is great… no. its not… the chinese are allowing this as they can steal tech, insert tech, sabotage tech, and much much more.. including facilitate tech transfers from the west to them by politicians who are in kahoots with them now that nixon made close door deals the norm and the people cant know what their representatives are agreeing to
I cheerfully await the Israeli response.
I don’t know how Mr. Netanyahu will respond to an American Administration that blatantly threatens to abandon its sole ally in the Middle East. I suspect, based on Mr. Netanyahu’s past behavior, that it will be masterfully played, and that it will be classy.
I also know that Mr. Obama thinks he’s playing beanbag — and he’s not; his minor verbal slips cost lives. Mr. Netanyahu, on the other hand, is fighting for his nation’s survival, and he DOES know it. He also clearly knows, by now, with whom he is dealing.
Perhaps Mr. Netanyahu can bring this home to Mr. Obama. The next 22 months will be difficult… but they will be intensely interesting.
Artfldgr:
“Doesn’t seem to have gone too badly” is not even remotely the same as “has gone well.” I used the former phrase rather than the latter for a reason.
So no, I wasn’t saying it had gone well. I didn’t want to turn the post into a lengthy discussion of the pros and cons of what Nixon did re China. My point was simply that Taiwan hadn’t fallen to China entirely, as some feared. Period. Not that the deal was 100% wonderful; the point was, as after, to make a comparison to dealing with Iran now, given what Iran is and its designs on Israel. My point is that Taiwan has not been threatened to the degree Israel will almost certainly be.
g6loq:
Why do you say Shiite?
Wasn’t Obama raised in Indonesia, and attended Muslim school there? Isn’t Indonesia almost entirely Sunni? And wasn’t his father Kenyan, and aren’t they mostly Sunni as well? I realize that at this point Obama is favoring Iran, which is Shiite. But if we are referring to the wing of Islam he was exposed to as a child it would be Sunni, it seems to me.
Richard Aubrey:
I agree with you that if people had exercised due diligence they would have known what was what with Obama. But the reality is that most people have neither the time nor the inclination to spend hours and hours and hours digging deep behind the headlines. Now, you might say they shouldn’t trust their party, their friends, or the MSM to inform them. But most people do because their lives are full and doing research is boring (I happen to like it, but that’s not really all that common, is it?). So yes, they got “played,” in that Obama reassured them and they wanted to believe, the Party assured them, the MSM assured them, CNN assured them, and even Republicans like Peggy Noonan and David Brooks assured them, as well as many Jewish leaders. What was not to like?
Had a really weird dream last night. The international community (including the Vatican; I’m not sure why that was involved) “resolved” the Palestinian problem by basically unrecognizing Israel, and arbitrarily designating it as part of “Palestine”. I don’t think the dream lasted long enough to note any repercussions of that action, but it was troubling.
Hope it doesn’t turn out to be prophetic a couple of decades from now.
junior:
Wow, my sympathies. At least I’m not having dreams about geopolitics—not yet, anyway. At least not that I can remember.
Neo,
I think g6loq was attempting a pun 😉
Actually, the Shiite/Sunni question is intriguing. One of the only obvious parts of Obama’s foreign policy that isn’t obviously pro-Sunni Jihadist is appeasing the mullocracy of Iran – which, last I checked, is a major backer of anti-Sunni Islamic violence. Is he such a kiss-up to Islam that he takes the side of any Islamist in any situation regardless of sectarian factors, or is he trying to play both sides? The level of Chicago evil is such that I wouldn’t otherwise put it past him to play two sides against each other, but how does that benefit Islam against Obama’s least favorite entity, citizens of the United States?
Kyndyll: I am not prepared to say that President Obama is a Muslim. I’m quite willing to say that he is sympathetic to Islam, and perhaps a “fellow traveler”.
As such — and given his freshman-bull-session level of understanding of international politics — I wouldn’t be surprised to find that the distinction between Shiite and Sunni is unimportant to him. I’m sure he’d much rather support any Shiite country OR any Sunni country instead of Israel.
physics guy:
That did occur to me, briefly. But I figured he’d have spelled it differently (leave out one of the “i’s”?).
Maybe I’m losing my sense of humor 🙂 .
But it actually is a real question that I’ve wondered about when I realized how strongly Obama was favoring the Shiite Iran over the Sunnis in the Middle East.
You know, I really don’t think we have to search for Obama’s hidden, or not so hidden, affiliation with Muslims to explain his motivations, when we can look much closer to home and see what he sat through for 20 years at a church based on black liberation theology run by his close friend and mentor, Jeremiah Wright. Just take a peek at this video from 2008, and feel the hatred coming at you. No mention of Jews, in particular, in that bit, but elsewhere Rev. Wright has been quite explicit about how he feels about them. Anyway, that’s where Obama is coming from.
From three years ago: Obama & Jeremiah Wright’s ties to the “Nation of Islam” and Libya.
https://presentdiscontent.wordpress.com/2011/02/25/obamas-ties-to-the-nation-of-islam-and-libya/
You know, I think a lot of BO’s moslem cheerleading is a sort of Lefty “Fight tha Power!” dashiki-wearing, Flip Off America BS. I’ve never thought the guy was reverent in any religious sense. But in practical terms, what difference, at this point, does it make?
I wonder if Bibi could try discretely putting it out that a few of Israel’s Samson-option nukes are pointing at the US. That might concentrate a few minds in Washington.