Author Topic: Netanyahu becomes political player, so Kerry treats him like one  (Read 18784 times)

Offline michaelintp

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1276
    • View Profile
Re: Netanyahu becomes political player, so Kerry treats him like one
« Reply #45 on: March 10, 2015, 02:35:59 pm »
Reg, of course everyone on the forum, and even more so you, is entitled to post whatever articles they wish. That is one thing I love about the HEF.  But ... we've all got to think about the fact that when one posts an article without comment, the normal implication is that one more-or-less agrees with the article. That might not always be the case, but usually if one disagrees, one says so by expressing some criticism of it along with the post.  So ... you can understand why I asked.

Hmm. I do not assume that the poster agrees with articles by others that they post but rather that it is being offered for our consideration. Members can and do make commentary when they want to. I think it's best to ask if you want to know.

I disagree with you with regard to the normal assumption. In the vast majority of cases people post articles without comment that they (largely) agree with. Why? Because people usually are not interested in promoting points of view they disagree with. Unless the purpose is to expressly criticize or mock the article. In that case, there is almost always some comment.

However, in this case I did ask Reg if he agreed with the flawed Naureckas article ... and he didn't really directly answer the question with regard to the article.

Curtis, why are you bringing up this article matter?  When I did ask Reg if he agreed with it?  I chose not to push for a direct response to the question, and instead made a general observation that I believe is true.  If you doubt the truth of the observation, just look at the polital/ideological slant of the vast majority of artices posted and the political/ideological views of the person posting the article. In the overwhelming number of cases you will see a "remarkable" correlation.

Of course there may be an exception from time to time. Which was why I asked.
First of all, there is nothing for you to disagree with. I simply stated what I assume about members' reasons for posting, namely, as little as possible.

Secondly, I know you asked Reggie about that article. I think that's a good idea which is what I said.

Lastly, the reason I mentioned it is that I noticed a difference between your assumptions and mine. (I don't pretend to know what's "normal" there.) I do think you sometimes leap to conclusions that turn out to be mistaken. As do we all on occasion.

Yes, I didn't leap to any conclusion.  As you say, I asked the question.

The rest of what I've written above is, I believe, a statement of the obvious, supported by logic and the evidence of years of political/ideological article posts and the consistency of the perspectives expressed in those articles by the persons doing the posting and with the viewpoints of the persons doing the posting, across the board, year after year. 

Put another way, what I am suggesting is that your "assumption" that there is no nexus between the views expressed in articles and the views of the person posting the articles is flawed. 
The spirit of emptiness is immortal.
It is called the Great Mother
because it gives birth to Heaven and Earth.
It is like a vapor,
barely seen but always present.
Use it effortlessly.

Tao Te Ching, Ch. 6

Offline Curtis Metcalf

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 4501
  • One never knows, do one?
    • View Profile
Re: Netanyahu becomes political player, so Kerry treats him like one
« Reply #46 on: March 10, 2015, 03:30:50 pm »
The rest of what I've written above is, I believe, a statement of the obvious, supported by logic and the evidence of years of political/ideological article posts and the consistency of the perspectives expressed in those articles by the persons doing the posting and with the viewpoints of the persons doing the posting, across the board, year after year. 

Put another way, what I am suggesting is that your "assumption" that there is no nexus between the views expressed in articles and the views of the person posting the articles is flawed.

Except I made no such "assumption". Perhaps due to my training as an engineer, I find value in exercising discipline in distinguishing between that which is factual and that which is hypothesis. In other words, that a thing may be so or is even likely so is different from it is so. Fewer mistakes that way.

In this case, it seems to me that posters may or may not agree with articles they post. Or they may partially support some of it. As Reggie said, it's not a binary world. Or at least it's not for me.
"Seek first to understand, then to be understood."
"Be hard on systems, but soft on people."

Offline michaelintp

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1276
    • View Profile
Re: Netanyahu becomes political player, so Kerry treats him like one
« Reply #47 on: March 10, 2015, 04:33:42 pm »
The rest of what I've written above is, I believe, a statement of the obvious, supported by logic and the evidence of years of political/ideological article posts and the consistency of the perspectives expressed in those articles by the persons doing the posting and with the viewpoints of the persons doing the posting, across the board, year after year. 

Put another way, what I am suggesting is that your "assumption" that there is no nexus between the views expressed in articles and the views of the person posting the articles is flawed.

Except I made no such "assumption". Perhaps due to my training as an engineer, I find value in exercising discipline in distinguishing between that which is factual and that which is hypothesis. In other words, that a thing may be so or is even likely so is different from it is so. Fewer mistakes that way.

In this case, it seems to me that posters may or may not agree with articles they post. Or they may partially support some of it. As Reggie said, it's not a binary world. Or at least it's not for me.

... and I, in contrast, believe that people should be viewed as responsible for what they disseminate, whether it be their own words or the words of others that they uncritically spread.  Because, as can be shown through years of posts, in the vast majority of cases people post political/ideological articles they generally sympathize with or to bolster a position they support (unless there is reason to believe the contrary in a specific instance). 



The spirit of emptiness is immortal.
It is called the Great Mother
because it gives birth to Heaven and Earth.
It is like a vapor,
barely seen but always present.
Use it effortlessly.

Tao Te Ching, Ch. 6

Offline Reginald Hudlin

  • Landlord
  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9888
    • View Profile
Re: Netanyahu becomes political player, so Kerry treats him like one
« Reply #48 on: March 10, 2015, 08:17:01 pm »
TUESDAY, MAR 10, 2015 11:20 AM PDT
Bibi in big trouble: New poll shows Israeli PM in danger of losing bid for fourth term
Center-left Zionist Union alliance pulls ahead of Netanyahu's Likud
LUKE BRINKER 
 


Bibi in big trouble: New poll shows Israeli PM in danger of losing bid for fourth term

Corroborating other surveys showing that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu failed to score a big polling bounce following his controversial March 3 congressional address on Iran, a new poll released Tuesday finds the prime minister in grave danger of losing his bid for a fourth term ahead of national elections in one week.

The poll, from the Knesset Channel, puts the center-left Zionist Union ahead of Netanyahu’s Likud party, with the Zionist Union on track to win 24 seats in the 120-seat parliament to Likud’s 21. The centrist Yesh Atid party is projected to win 14 seats.

Haaretz notes that if the Zionist Union joins forces with Yesh Atid and smaller left-leaning and Arab parties, it could form a government with 56 seats. Combining with smaller right-rightist and ultra-Orthodox parties, Netanyahu is on track to assemble 55 seats at most.

The Zionist Union is a coalition of Isaac Herzog’s Labor and Tzipi Livini’s Hatnuah parties. If the coalition manages to form a government, the two plan to rotate the prime ministership, with Herzog serving as premier for the first two years of the government’s term and Livni serving for the latter half. Both Herzog and Livni harshly criticized Netanyahu’s congressional address denouncing a potential Iranian nuclear deal, arguing that the speech further isolated Israel on the international stage.

Offline michaelintp

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1276
    • View Profile
Re: Netanyahu becomes political player, so Kerry treats him like one
« Reply #49 on: March 10, 2015, 10:18:17 pm »
Interesting article regarding Israeli politics.  Democracy in action.

One should note that none of Netanyahu's major political opponents is proclaiming that Iran's leaders never have desired and never will desire to develop nuclear weapons, to empower Iran and destroy Israel, but that the Iranian leaders only desire to produce peaceful nuclear energy.  ::) 

Iran's genocidal actions would not necessarily be through direct nuclear strikes (though they could). Could be through proxies armed by an untouchable nuclear Iran.

Opponents of Netanyahu may oppose him on other grounds, but they don't make the absurd claims of the anti-Israel pro-Iranian apologist Naureckas who lauded the peaceful intentions of Iran in the article you posted above.

Heads up:  When you hear such crap, you're listening to an antisemite (or a fool).
The spirit of emptiness is immortal.
It is called the Great Mother
because it gives birth to Heaven and Earth.
It is like a vapor,
barely seen but always present.
Use it effortlessly.

Tao Te Ching, Ch. 6

APEXABYSS

  • Guest
Re: Netanyahu becomes political player, so Kerry treats him like one
« Reply #50 on: March 10, 2015, 10:24:00 pm »
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu? Yes, I agree with his stance but not his approach. I’m not the only one! This is a global issue & not an Obama administration issue. We know the U.S. is in (diplomatic) talks with Iran on the appropriate & responsible use of nuclear technology. But Israel needs to campaign the U.N.. Netanyahu’s actions does seem to undermine the POTUS & Israel’s closest allies. Key word- plural= allies.

I don’t support & have great concern about Muslim nations with access to create/produce W.M.D. or bio-toxic hazardous material.

Remember, Islam was the first to enslave African people... hundreds of years before Europeans (& the French, Germans, Spain, Portuguese, Dutch, Italians, Belgians... damn! Basically everybody. How do think we lost? Africa literally had  the world against them!) From a historical perspective, Muslim countries have yet to show mutual humanity & balanced civility toward any culture of people out-side of Islam. At least Netanyahu is the first to “G-check” Iran. Well, he tried to coerce Obama to do it with him. 

Murdered cartoonists? Terrorist attacks in France over satire?  Really? C’mon, Muslims (extremists)! Snap-out-of-it!
Haartz is one of the biggest publications in Israel-BTW. They did a report on discounting the “pass-over” tradition, because there is little to no evidence of the Hebrew's exodus from Egypt. There was no uproar from fellow Jews & no one associated with the article was killed. 

Remember, Muhammad Ali? No, not our great legendary boxer/activist. The Turkish leader! He destroyed ancient Egyptian monuments to build Turkish mosques. Really? No regard. Remember how Iran treated the “First Lady”? They edited her attire to support a misogynistic standard of modesty.

Again, I spent most of my youth as a practicing Muslim. My young-one even went to Claira Muhammad (an all Muslim elementary school). As a former student of Islam, I’ve witnessed the acceptance of violence thru “martyrism” & oppressive “Sharia-Laws”. Point is- I support Israel but not Zionism. I support Muslim countries but not Islamic imperialism. No nuclear program, please! Pretty, please!

Assalamu Alaikum  (peace be upon you)

Shalom         
« Last Edit: March 10, 2015, 10:27:56 pm by APEXABYSS »

Offline michaelintp

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1276
    • View Profile
Re: Netanyahu becomes political player, so Kerry treats him like one
« Reply #51 on: March 10, 2015, 10:32:59 pm »
Always a fresh perspective, Apexabyss.  Even when I don't agree with everything you say, I enjoy hearing what you have to say.    ;)
Thought-provoking.
I mean, for a moment, you even "elevated" the Hudlin 100!   
... in more ways than one.   8)
The spirit of emptiness is immortal.
It is called the Great Mother
because it gives birth to Heaven and Earth.
It is like a vapor,
barely seen but always present.
Use it effortlessly.

Tao Te Ching, Ch. 6

Offline Curtis Metcalf

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 4501
  • One never knows, do one?
    • View Profile
Re: Netanyahu becomes political player, so Kerry treats him like one
« Reply #52 on: March 11, 2015, 10:17:26 am »
... and I, in contrast, believe that people should be viewed as responsible for what they disseminate, whether it be their own words or the words of others that they uncritically spread. 
Sure, in the same manner that one can contrast apples and oranges. I believe it is possible to note a trend without imputing a rule or duty. Again, I'm just explaining how I think about it and why.
"Seek first to understand, then to be understood."
"Be hard on systems, but soft on people."

Offline Curtis Metcalf

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 4501
  • One never knows, do one?
    • View Profile
Re: Netanyahu becomes political player, so Kerry treats him like one
« Reply #53 on: March 11, 2015, 01:50:58 pm »
Opponents of Netanyahu may oppose him on other grounds, but they don't make the absurd claims of the anti-Israel pro-Iranian apologist Naureckas who lauded the peaceful intentions of Iran in the article you posted above.

Heads up:  When you hear such crap, you're listening to an antisemite (or a fool).

Interesting. I didn't read Naureckas' article the same way. Although you might be right about the where the author's sympathy generally lies, his article is about the coverage of Netanyahu's speech. He notes some facts that he claims are not generally included in the coverage. It is true that including or not including those items frames the coverage differently. It is certainly the case that there can be widely different views on the significance of these items.

However, is it wrong to even consider these items in assessing the overall situation? I understand you object to what you perceive as the writer's support for Iran and/or anti-Isreal stance, but do you also take issue with what he claims are facts? Specifically:
  • "Israel possesses nuclear weapons."
  • "Iran has consistently maintained that it has no interest in building a nuclear weapon."
  • "not only does Iran deny wanting to make a nuclear bomb, the intelligence agencies of the United States (New York Times, 2/24/12) and Israel (Guardian, 2/23/15) also doubt that Iran has an active nuclear weapons program."
  • "the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, signed by both the United States and Iran but not by Israel"
Although I was aware of 1 & 2, I wasn't fully cognizant of 3 & 4 if both claims are true.

So are these claims factual or not:
  • is widely believed to be true although I don't believe that Israel has officially acknowledge possessing nuclear arms.
  • Iran does claim to be interested only in nuclear energy for peaceful purpose. Their credibility in this claim is widely doubted to say the least.
  • may not be verifiable. Even if representatives of both agencies have made those statements publicly, they may or may not be expressing the official position of the agency or be aware of all the intelligence.
  • 4 appears to be true.
I'm not sure what all this means regarding the negotiations in progress, but I believe it's generally better to know than not to know.
"Seek first to understand, then to be understood."
"Be hard on systems, but soft on people."

Offline michaelintp

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1276
    • View Profile
Re: Netanyahu becomes political player, so Kerry treats him like one
« Reply #54 on: March 11, 2015, 10:10:19 pm »
Yes I believe Israel has nuclear weapons. Given the hostile region in which it exists, and its history of being attacked (and nearly destroyed in the 1973 Yom Kippur War), it needs the maximum deterrent. Because its existential survival is at stake.  I discussed this in my original post reacting to the Naureckas article.  But it has not used them and has never sworn to purge its neighboring nations from the region (in contrast to Iran's statements regarding purging Israel).  Nor has Israel threatened to destroy the United States. The Iranian leaders have - to destroy first the "Little Satan" (Israel) and then the "Great Satan" (the United States).  Look at my prior posts on this thread regarding their motivations.

Israel is not bound by the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Iran acts as though it were not bound even though Iran is a signatory (which should give you a sense of how Iran intends not to be constrained by the agreements it signs).

Curtis, with your engineering background, I think you'll find these citations really interesting, regarding Iran's nuclear program:

The New York Times
What Iran Won’t Say About the Bomb
By WILLIAM J. BROAD and DAVID E. SANGER
MARCH 7, 2015

OVER the course of a dozen years, ever since atomic sleuths from the United Nations began scrutinizing Iran’s nuclear program, hundreds of inspections have uncovered a hidden world of labs and sprawling factories, some ringed by barbed wire and antiaircraft guns, others camouflaged or buried deep underground. Yet despite that progress, Iran has so far managed to evade a central question — whether it knows how to build an atom bomb.

With negotiators from six world powers facing a deadline later this month to cut a basic agreement with Iran on the fate of its nuclear program, much of the public discussion has focused on curtailing Iran’s uranium plants and plutonium complex, its pathways to atomic fuel. In short, the buzz centers on brawn, not brains. But quietly, the United States and its allies are also discussing whether a final deal should compel Tehran to reveal the depth of its atomic knowledge.

That inner debate, as one European official in the midst of the negotiations put it, turns on “whether to force Iran to explain its past” — especially before 2003, when American intelligence officials believe Iran operated a full-scale equivalent of the Manhattan Project — “or whether to focus on the future.”

American officials are vague when pressed on how fully Iran will have to answer questions it has avoided for years from United Nations inspectors with the International Atomic Energy Agency, based in Vienna. To date, Iran has dodged all but one of the agency’s dozen sharp questions on bomb design.

“Iran’s most serious verification shortcoming,” Olli Heinonen, the former chief inspector, now at Harvard, said recently, “remains its unwillingness to address concerns about the past and possibly ongoing military dimensions of its nuclear program.”

Investigators at the I.A.E.A., drawing on intelligence from member states as well as their own investigations, have assembled a secret trove of reports, correspondence, viewgraphs, videos and blueprints that purport to show Iran’s skill in warhead design

Iran ridicules the material as fake, maintaining that the trove is full of forged documents created by the Central Intelligence Agency or Israel’s Mossad. (The atomic agency’s chief, Yukiya Amano, dismissed that allegation in an interview last summer, saying the inspectors had confirmed the documents by consulting other sources.)

The problem is that the documents, if real, would undercut Iran’s argument that its nuclear ambitions are entirely peaceful, centering on the production of radioisotopes for medicine and electrical power for economic growth.

Expertise in warhead design, as opposed to atomic fuel production, is far more ephemeral and hard to track. It can also be less ambiguous. Some nuclear parts have application only to making weapons, such as neutron spark plugs at the core of some atom bombs. In contrast, uranium can fuel both nuclear arms and reactors that make electricity — it can light cities or annihilate them.

In early 2003, when the inspectors began their investigation, the focus was mainly on whether Iran was building factories that could make fuel for nuclear arms. That agenda made sense because acquiring fuel is the hardest part of the bomb equation. It’s the chokepoint. Moreover, it was relatively easy for the inspectors to monitor the giant factories that Iran was building, such as the plutonium reactor at Arak and the uranium plant at Natanz, its halls roughly half the size of the Pentagon.
Today, the six powers negotiating with Iran — Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States — still focus overwhelmingly on fuel production. They want Tehran to downsize or disconnect the centrifuges that spin at supersonic speeds to purify uranium. They want the reactor at Arak, still under construction, reconfigured to produce less plutonium, the other bomb fuel. The negotiators want the cutbacks to be large enough and long enough in duration — a decade or more — to ensure that Iran for the near future cannot mount a headlong rush for a bomb, known in the field as breakout.

Even Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, in his dramatic speech to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday, elevated brawn over brains, saying “nuclear know-how without nuclear infrastructure doesn’t get you very much.” He added, “A pilot without a plane can’t fly.”

True enough. But there are other ways to get fuel, including buying it from the likes of North Korea or on the black market. So the design riddle still lurks in the background, both for breakout and what experts call sneak out.

Iran already knows how to make a rudimentary bomb. So do terrorists and college students. The real question is whether Iran can miniaturize a weapon to fit atop a missile, can make bombs more destructive than the one that turned Hiroshima into a radioactive cinder, and can use precious fuel sparingly enough to build a nuclear arsenal.

The I.A.E.A. inspectors saw hope of getting answers in mid-2007 when they agreed on a “work plan” with Iran meant to shed light on what happened inside the secretive laboratories run by Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, said to be Iran’s atomic mastermind. More than two years later, in late 2009, the plan lay in ruins. Mohamed ElBaradei, then the agency’s director general, said [b}the inquiry had “effectively reached a dead end” because of Iran’s intransigence.

In November 2011, the inspectors stepped up the pressure by publishing a detailed listing of a dozen major fields critical for warhead building, saying their cache indicated that Iran had deeply researched the topics. Iran repeated its disavowal. In August 2013, as tensions mounted, Iran’s new president, Hassan Rouhani, elected on a platform of getting international sanctions lifted, agreed to open negotiations about the overall fate of Iran’s atomic program.

While those talks have dragged on for 18 months, Iran has let inspectors deep inside its production facilities and observed every commitment on cutting back its production of nuclear fuel. But it has continued to stiff-arm the inspectors on the question of suspected “military dimensions,” despite agreeing to another work plan. The Obama administration has said little about that silence.

Last month, the inspectors reported that “Iran has not provided any explanations” for two of the three design questions now on the table. The other nine remain in limbo.

So will Iran have to come clean before the economic sanctions are lifted? American officials won’t say. “It’s the most sensitive topic for the Iranians,” said one former American negotiator. “Is it worth blowing up a potential agreement in the name of forcing a confession?”

One solution, analysts suggest, would be the gradual lifting of sanctions in step with the investigators certifying that Tehran was finally answering their longstanding queries. That is under discussion. But it remains unclear whether the atomic riddle will be resolved. If past is prologue, the West might once again find itself stonewalled.

William J. Broad is a science reporter and David E. Sanger is a national security correspondent for The New York Times.


The following website is informative:
http://www.nti.org/country-profiles/iran/   

It has subsections for nuclear, missile, biological, etc.

Under the “missile” subsection, the following quote from Ayatollah Khamenei’s 2010 speech to Iran’s Air Force Staff is revealing:

"This country with its great capabilities in missile technology, biology, nuclear and laser technology - which you have heard about - and various other areas is the same country that had to import the most basic weapons at the beginning of the Revolution. Our country had to borrow from different countries. We had to buy the most basic things from abroad, and they refused to sell them to us. We had to pay several times more than the real price, and we had nothing of our own. The same Army, the same Armed Forces, and the same Air Force have now made these achievements. And the same academic, scientific, and technological units have now achieved this position."

The “missile” section goes into great detail regarding Iran’s missile program including Iran’s ballistic missile program. It is frightening.

In the “nuclear" section, the following is a description of Iran’s nuclear weapons programs:

On 8 November 2011, the IAEA released a highly anticipated safeguards report on Iran.  In an annex to the report, the Agency presented a lengthy, detailed account of "possible military dimensions" to Iran's nuclear program. Most of the information in the annex had been known previously, but the November 2011 report was the first time that the IAEA assembled available evidence into one overview document. According to the report, Iran has engaged in a range of activities "relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device." These included efforts to "procure nuclear related and dual-use equipment and materials by military-related individuals and entities;" to develop "undeclared pathways for the production of nuclear material;" to acquire "nuclear weapons development information and documentation," presumably from the A.Q. Khan network; and to "work on the development of an indigenous design of a nuclear weapon including the testing of components." The report further stated that prior to the end of 2003 those activities took place under a "structured program," and that there are indications that "some activities relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device continued after 2003, and that some may still be ongoing."

Also telling is Iran’s cover-up of its activities.  For example:

In late January 2012, an IAEA team headed by the Deputy Director General for Safeguards Herman Nackaerts visited Iran to discuss ways to resolve outstanding issues. A follow-on visit took place in late February 2012, but the two sides were unable to agree on a plan, and the IAEA expressed its disappointment in the meeting due to Iran's refusal to grant access to the Parchin military complex―a site where Iran has allegedly conducted high explosive and hydrodynamic experiments relevant to the development of nuclear weapons. On 6 March 2012, Iran announced that it would allow IAEA inspectors to visit Parchin, but several rounds of subsequent IAEA-Iran talks throughout 2012 did not produce an agreement on a "structured approach" that would include a visit to the site.  Furthermore, at a meeting of the IAEA Board of Governors in September 2012, the U.S. envoy accused Iran of "systematically demolishing" the very facility IAEA inspectors wanted to visit.  The Institute for Science and International Security has published satellite images of the site that show items that "could be associated with the removal of equipment or with cleansing it."  A May 2013 report by the IAEA Director General noted that Iran has "[spread, leveled and compacted] material over most of the site, a significant portion of which it has also asphalted."
The spirit of emptiness is immortal.
It is called the Great Mother
because it gives birth to Heaven and Earth.
It is like a vapor,
barely seen but always present.
Use it effortlessly.

Tao Te Ching, Ch. 6

Offline michaelintp

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1276
    • View Profile
Re: Netanyahu becomes political player, so Kerry treats him like one
« Reply #55 on: March 11, 2015, 11:22:03 pm »
The bottom line is that you don't need to be a rocket scientist to know what the Iranian regime is up to.

Which is why, among other reasons, the whitewashing Naureckas article sickens me.  From the entire tenor of his piece, I know what he is about. 

My hope is that the time and effort I went to to pull this information together for you was productive. Curtis, Reggie, Apexabyss, anyone else, I hope you find it useful.
The spirit of emptiness is immortal.
It is called the Great Mother
because it gives birth to Heaven and Earth.
It is like a vapor,
barely seen but always present.
Use it effortlessly.

Tao Te Ching, Ch. 6

Offline Curtis Metcalf

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 4501
  • One never knows, do one?
    • View Profile
Re: Netanyahu becomes political player, so Kerry treats him like one
« Reply #56 on: March 12, 2015, 07:44:34 am »
Thanks, Michael. That is useful information. I think it helps with understanding the context around the negotiations. I believe that all the parties negotiating with Iran are aware of all of that and more. I don't think anybody trusts the Iranian government.

I don't share your characterization of the Naureckas article. That seems as much a critique of the media coverage as support for Iran to me. There are many perspectives even within Iran; not all of them fit into a good vs. evil binary narrative in my view.
"Seek first to understand, then to be understood."
"Be hard on systems, but soft on people."

Offline michaelintp

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1276
    • View Profile
Re: Netanyahu becomes political player, so Kerry treats him like one
« Reply #57 on: March 12, 2015, 07:44:47 pm »
I'm glad the info is helpful.  :)

I believe that once one understands the strategy and goals of the Iranian leadership (and similar-minded fanatics), and honestly acknowledges them, it becomes clear that attempts to delegitimize the very existence of the state of Israel are nothing more than pretty-packaged support for genocide (in some cases express, in other cases tacit).  It is part of the vilification of the victim. With the reaction being, were Israel eradicated, "Too bad ... so sad. They deserved it."  Naureckas among them.  I know the rhetoric. The same rhetoric that recently produced the open antisemitism at the UCLA student government meeting. See the separate thread on that topic.

Curtis, I absolutely agree with your positive characterization of large numbers of Iranians. Who are oppressed by the fanatic autocratic theocratic regime. I hope you don't seriously think I believe otherwise (with all this "binary" business).  We saw what happened to those good Iranian people after the disputed reelection of Ahmadinejad in 2009 and during the "Arab Spring."  Beaten and machine gunned. They do not run the Iranian government, the Revolutionary Guard, the military or the police in Iran. Those who disagree with the Iranian government's geopolitical strategy have no influence. And there is no reason to believe they will.  Iran, with all major political candidates vetted and approved by the Supreme Ayatollah and 12-man Guardian Council, is not a democracy.
The spirit of emptiness is immortal.
It is called the Great Mother
because it gives birth to Heaven and Earth.
It is like a vapor,
barely seen but always present.
Use it effortlessly.

Tao Te Ching, Ch. 6

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9268
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Netanyahu becomes political player, so Kerry treats him like one
« Reply #58 on: March 18, 2015, 04:32:03 pm »

Offline Reginald Hudlin

  • Landlord
  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9888
    • View Profile
Re: Netanyahu becomes political player, so Kerry treats him like one
« Reply #59 on: March 23, 2015, 09:17:55 pm »
James Baker blasts Benjamin Netanyahu
“His actions have not matched his rhetoric,” says the former secretary of state.
By EDWARD-ISAAC DOVERE 3/23/15 9:16 PM EDT Updated 3/23/15 11:34 PM EDT

It’s not just Democrats and White House officials who’ve got problems with Benjamin Netanyahu.

Blasting “diplomatic missteps and political gamesmanship,” former Secretary of State James Baker laid in hard to the Israeli prime minister on Monday evening, criticizing him for an insufficient commitment to peace and an absolutist opposition to the Iran nuclear talks.


Baker told the gala dinner for the left-leaning Israeli advocacy group J Street that he supported efforts to get a deal with Tehran — but he called for President Barack Obama to bring any agreement before Congress, even though he may not legally be required to do so.

Baker, who was the chief diplomat for President George H.W. Bush and is now advising Jeb Bush on his presidential campaign, cited mounting frustrations with Netanyahu over the past six years — but particularly with comments he made in the closing days of last week’s election disavowing his support for a two-state solution and support for settlements strategically placed to attempt to change the borders between Israel and the West Bank.

“Frankly, I have been disappointed with the lack of progress regarding a lasting peace — and I have been for some time,” Baker said. And “in the aftermath of Netanyahu’s recent election victory, the chance of a two-state solution seems even slimmer, given his reversal on the issue.”

Baker said while Netanyahu has said he’s for peace, “his actions have not matched his rhetoric.”

Some Republicans in Congress have claimed Obama has eroded American support of Israel.
That’s wrong, too, Baker said.

“No one around the entire world should ever doubt America’s commitment to Israel, Not now, or at any point in the future,” he said.

Earlier in the day at the conference, White House chief of staff Denis McDonough reiterated Obama’s frustration with Netanyahu, saying that the administration is holding the prime minister to his comments ruling out a two-state solution — even though Netanyahu immediately began to walk those comments back the day after his Likud Party won a resounding number of seats in the Israeli Knesset.

Baker said he’s also holding to Netanyahu’s pre-election comments — and pointed out how out of sync he believes the Israeli leader is with his own country, and with Washington.

“Although Netanyahu and his right-and-center coalition may oppose a two-state solution, a land-for-peace approach has long been supported by a substantial portion of the Israeli body politic, by every American [administration] since 1967 — Republican and Democratic alike — and a vast majority of nations around the world,” Baker said.
As to Netanyahu’s opposition on Iran, Baker warned against seeking only a perfect deal.

“If the only agreement is one in which there is no enrichment, then there will be no agreement,” Baker said.

After all, Baker said, no military solution could work in his assessment: an American strike would only generate more support among Iranians for the fundamentalist government, and an Israeli strike would neither be as effective nor carry American support.

This isn’t the only tough moment in U.S.-Israeli relations, Baker said, recounting some of his own head-butting in the late 1980s and early 1990s. In those days, the administration was dealing with Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, a hard-liner who referred to Netanyahu as “too soft,” according to Baker.

The danger now, Baker said, is the personalization and politicization of the disputes between the governments in Washington and Jerusalem.

“This is of course a delicate moment in the Middle East, and will require clear thinking from leaders,” Baker said. “That clear thinking should not be muddled by partisan politics.”


Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/james-baker-blasts-benjamin-netanyahu-116338.html#ixzz3VH0WQYD9