Obama Panders To Iran, Throws Israel Under The Bus
GrayRiderYNETNEWS (skip to most recent comments)
According to a ynetnews report Monday, the Obama administration used covert back channels to assure Iran that
the the U.S. will not back Israel if they decide to unilaterally attack Iran's nuclear facilities.
The United States has indirectly informed Iran, via two European nations, that it would not back an Israeli strike against the country's nuclear facilities, as long as Tehran refrains from attacking American interests in the Persian Gulf, Yedioth Ahronoth reported Monday.
The Obama Administration's anti-Israel position has repeatedly been a major concern for our only true ally in the Middle East.
Throwing Israel under the bus, seems to be a top foreign policy for this president.
Reader Comments (71)
Obama hates the Jews.
He only hates the smart ones. He's best buddies with the stupid ones who keep writing him checks.
If this story is true, it represents one of the most idiotic and dangerous bits of foreign policy imaginable. This administration is run by deranged dopes who think Neville Chamberlain was right.
My gut tells me it wasn't a European nation that told Iran but Russia. We already know Obama told Medvedev to just let him get through the November elections and we’ll discuss that unilateral disarmament thing you guys want. So if Obama will throw America under the bus, does Israel even count?
Read the quote a little closer guys.
The key word in the quote paragraph is unilaterally. Yep, Obama is reiterating American policy since the beginning of time and as Reagan eloquently put it, it's "not the business of [Israel] to make American foreign policy."
But apparently, it's the business of Obama to screw up American foreign policy.
This isn't about Israel controlling what we do. It's about Obama blabbing to our enemies that we won't back our friends.
Apparently if Israel has the right to commit us to a war against Iran, then yep, we've signed over not only our foreign policly but our economic security to Israel. Hope they use it wisely.
If Israel acts without telling us or getting our approval on the matter then we've no obligation to back them up.
You're missing the entire point. What we plan to do, or not do, in the event of an Israeli attack on Iran's nukes, is NOT something that our Idiot-in-Chief should be telling our ENEMIES about.
We've got thousands of US sailors in the Persian Gulf in range of Iranian anti-ship missles. You may not be aware of it but the Iranians do have the capacity to sink those ships. If Israel launches an attack without letting us know or getting our permission and it results in a knee-jerk reaction by the Iranians to sink those ships and our men and women at sea aren't prepared in advance for that attack, then there should be hell to pay in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem as the case may be.
According to Kwawk, the "thousands of US sailors in the Persian Gulf" are little better than Iranian hostages to Israel's good behavior. SMART POWER!
Actually, hard as it is for you to believe it, other people beside yourself are aware of that.
Apparently, Obama's idea for protecting our sailors is to send a pleading note to Ahmadidn'twash saying, "Please don't hurt us. We'll do whatever you want, but please don't hurt us."
Good grief. It's the Barbary Pirates all over again, except this time we're giving in and waving a white flag in advance.
And why would it be Israel's fault if Iran launches an unprovoked attack on us?
No. Obama's comments to Iran are to let Iran know that Israel is responsible for it's own actions. We have a defensive treaty with Israel, which means we've pledged to come to their defense if they're attacked. What we don't have is a treaty that allows Israel to attack other countries and expect us to come to their aid.
None of our allies has such power over our foreign policy, I'm not exactly sure why you wish to grant such special privilidge to Israel.
It has always struck me as ironic that the left continuously blames Israel (or "Jewish run" media, banks, etc.) then out of the other side of their mouths wildly belittle everybody who doesn't agree with their derangements by calling them Nazi's or their political "tactics" Nazi-esque. If they actually gave a damn about the Jewish people they probably wouldn't throw around Nazi comparisons so recklessly and irresponsibly... or at least call out the buffoons who do it (unlike Nancy, who sat there as it was said and kept a stiff smiling face while spinning it).
Nazi's brushed their teeth...
George Bush brushed his teeth...
Nazi's sometimes drove around motorcycles...
Sarah Palin sometimes drives around on motorcycles...
Nazi's owned blimps just like Goodyear's and flew it around the country...
Republicans drive around on Goodyear tires all across the United States...
(they have NOTHING left at this point but ridicule, deceit and hateful insults)
And you seem to believe that an Iranian retaliation against us for an Israeli attack is somehow justified even if we have no advance knowledge of Israel's unilateral action. Is Iran not responsible for it's actions too?
lmao Mach. Obama's comments were aimed at avoiding the Iranians thinking that an attack by Israel was an attack by the US. The US and Israel are coordinating daily on Iran policy. The Iranians would have good reason to believe that an attack on them by Israel constituted an attack on them by the US, if they weren't told otherwise.
If you believe that Iran and Israel are responsible for their own actions then you should have no problem with Obama telling Iran that a unilateral attack on Iran by Israel is the responsibility of Israel alone. Obama's also letting Israel know that he will make the decision of when it's appropriate to commit American troops to battle.
I hope Israel has a good plan for killing Iran's nuke program. Iran is the problem. Problems need to be dealt with, in whatever terms are required.
And they're going to believe otherwise just because Obama tells them so?
lol, Democrats sure acted quick on that
I imagine the announcement at the DNC sounded like this:
"Excuse me, can we have your attention please... is there a dentist in the crowd?"
Obama's choice about whether or not to back an Israeli strike ends the moment Iran retaliates against us. THAT is the only message Obama needs to be sending the mullahs.
And now the anti-Israel party makes it official.
lol Mach. If I were President and our warships were attacked because Israel decided to go it alone and attack Iran, I'd have the Israeli navy put to the bottom of the Mediterranean.
This need you guys have to perpetually undermine Obama is mind numbing.
Good thing Obama cares more about the lives of those men and women on those ships over there than you do. Cares enough to actually try to avoid such an attack rather than simply pointing fingers if one happens.
Skinny - I've said before that the right wing in this country led by Limbaugh could have taught the Nazi's a thing or two about propaganda. The final solution wasn't the only thing the Nazi's ever did and yes, right wing propaganda, including the use of scapegoats and shouting down the opposition, is almost as accomplished as that of Nazi Germany.
Wow... seriously... the timing of that... . just... wow.
You'd be replaced as Commander-in-Chief before anyone seriously considered carrying out such an order.
I guess kwAwk is admitting he's lost the argument, judging by the Nazi remarks.
Let's pause and reflect on this notion for a moment kwawk, before we're really left without any choice but to tear this comment to smithereens ... do you really believe this or is that back-against-the-wall feeling you lefties feel these days causing you to just swing wildly?
After all it's not our fault leftist ideology is so bad it runs itself out of existence.
Well now... tell us how you really feel, lol.
On the positive note, you didn't suggest incinerating them... so there's a start.
Israel must look at the left (Obama included) and think "with friends like these..."
The best way to avoid being attacked is to make it crystal clear to Iran (or anyone for that matter) that we will respond with overwhelming force to any attack launched against our armed forces. To do otherwise, or worse threaten one of our allies, will be interpreted as a sign of weakness by our enemies.
And the best way to avoid our service members being killed in the first place to explain to the Iranians that as long as they are at the negotiation table and cooperating that we will not aurthorize a strike against them. The best way to avoid our service members getting killed in the first place is for Israel not to strike at Iran without our concurrance so that we might have all of our military assets in the proper defensive posture to deal with the ramifications.
All of the retaliatory strikes in the world against Iran won't bring back somebody's father, mother, husband, wife, sister, brother, son or daughter serving oun our ships who was killed unnecessarily.
Iran already understands that we will strike them with a vengence if they attack our ships, but if they feel attacked or if they feel justified, that will not stop them from doing so anyways.
Nope. I've discussed many, many times the smoke and mirror tactics employed by the right wing propaganda machine in this country to deceive and mind fuck their audience.
You guys are willing victims of said tactics but that doesn't make them not real.
Israel needs our permission to attack Iran???? Did we ask for Israel permission to attack Iraq or Afghanistan? A neighbor near Israel's border regularly proclaims that Israel will be wiped off the map with the implied threat of nukes and Israel needs our permission?????? Wow, that's some F'up diplomacy.
As long as Israel hides behind our umbrella of protection, especially concerning the UN, then yeah, it's probably be a pretty good idea for Israel to get our blessing before starting a war with Iran.
If you're seriously talking about holding Israel responsible for an Iranian attack, then at best you're sending mixed signals that will interpreted as weakness not just by Iran, but all our enemies. You'd know this if you weren't brainwashed by Noam Chomsky.
Yes. Israel gets massive amounts of financial aid from us, depends upon us for advanced military technology, and needs us to protect them in the UN. They'd be stupid to lauch an attack on Iran without our permission, and if such an attack resulted in the death of American service members they'd definitely be in line to be punished for their actions.
If anybody has been brainwashed it's been you. Apparently you believe that if a pit bull attacks you because your jackass friend has been throwing rocks at it, you should punish the dog and give your buddy a pat on the back.
Israel doesn't need our 'protection' from their neighbors. They have aptly demonstrated their ability to defend themselves again and again.
The UN is toothless without the US to enforce its provisions, and Israel didn't begin to receive significant aid from the US until the Yom Kippur War. Seriously, have you read anything about Israel that wasn't written by Chomsky or one of his acolytes?
Well if that's true, then they can repay that $20 to $30 billion in military aide we've given them over the past 10 years. And they certainly won't need us to use our security council vote to block all of the nasty sanctions and other penalties and punishments the UN has to offer them.
Think of that $6 to $10 per US taxpayer going in military aide to a country smaller than New Hampshire.
A dog that can't discern between an attacker and a bystander is too dangerous to be left alive or unchained.
I just want to make sure the proper perspective is being seen on my part... Has the dog been randomly firing rockets into the friend's backyard, putting his spouse and children at risk?
And erase the only accomplishment of the Carter Administration?
They don't need our veto now. No one is going to bother enforcing anything from the UN except us.
Prior to the US becoming the primary sponsor of Israel, France was the main sponsor of Israel. Have you read anything about Israeli history that wasn't written by Dick Cheney?
From kwawk;
"Apparently you believe that if a pit bull attacks you because your jackass friend has been throwing rocks at it, you should punish the dog and give your buddy a pat on the back."
So let's deconstruct this sentence here:
You=United States
Pit Bull=Iran
Rock Thrower=Israel
So kwawk see's Israel as the instigator of this fight. You know the country with the only independent democracy in the Middle East. You would think Israel is the country that builds nukes with the intention of "wiping Iran of the map." Of course Iran could be the aggrieved party above and Israel is the pit Bull and the U.S is the rock thrower. Unbelievable the hate for Israel and the Jews by liberals.
I suspect that your ethos is along the same lines as that which guides street gangs.
My buddy the crip is going to rape your sister while I stand over and protect him, but if you attack me because of it, I'll burn down your house because I wasn't raping your sister, it was my buddy.
LOL! Now you know why Israel gets all the credit for it's military victories.
Lol so is Iran the rape victim in this analogy?
kwawk;
Keep digging. How is the Chinese food?
Nazis, Limbaugh, rape, Dick Cheney... Wow.
KwAwk, is there anything else equally constructive that you'd like to toss into this discussion?
Yeah. It's pretty hard to have a serious discussion with people that hate their own country so much they'll blame pretty much everything on their own President.
And you should read up on Nazi propagada Red. It may help you follow the conversation.
What are you trying to do here, kwAwk? Be as offensive as Winston? I thought better of you.
It is difficult to have a serious discussion about this issue when the other person makes an analogy where Israel (the 154th largest country in the world) is a rapist, and Iran (18th largest country in the world) is the rape victim.