Will US join Israel in Iran strike?

[sly_wolf 199]

A look at their advisers tells you, it would be a trigger happy administration all over again. Neo-cons - that's who these two foreign policy novices are relying on. That hasn't ended well last time around and it won't end well this time. Anyone in favor of going to war with Iran, vote for Mitt. If he wins, you will get your war.

Thats right, cause going to war is a good business decision for some folks.

[MyLittlePony 340]

No war can pay off the last wars the us is in debt for still. Iran would be another country the military stuck for 10 years.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Netanyahu votes Romney, Ehud Barak endorses Obama

All political pundits in Israel are touting the same line this weekend: Barak is splitting from Netanyahu. The defense minister opposed the prime minister’s tone and messages towards the American administration, doesn’t think that Israel must attack during “the political window of opportunity” (i.e. before the presidential elections), and has given up hope that Netanyahu will add him and his party members to the Likud list for the next Knesset.

Proxies to Barak also quoted his “frustration” over the lack of progress or interest Netanyahu has showed in the diplomatic process. According to Yedioth Ahronoth, Barak was said to believe that the Palestinian issue – and not the Iranian bomb – is the real existential threat Israel is facing. No kidding. And Likud’s Yuval Steinitz has already started attacking Barak on behalf of the prime minister.

A couple of takeaways:

1. More than anything, it seems to me that Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defense Minister Barak have taken opposing sides in the presidential elections. Netanyahu is putting all his chips on the Republican party. He did all he could to help the candidacy of Mitt Romney – throwing a big welcome for him in Jerusalem and avoiding the customary public congratulations for the president, who on that very day approved the financing of another Iron Dome battery. It wouldn’t be such a wild guess to suggest Netanyahu is also behind the recent revelation over his outburst in the meeting with the U.S. ambassador to Israel.

Defense Minister Ehud Barak, at the same time, has an open channel with the administration, and has repeatedly aided the Democratic campaign by repeatedly praising the president for his commitment to Israel’s security. Quote:

I should tell you honestly that this administration under President Obama is doing in regard to our security more than anything that I can remember in the past.

What remains to be seen is which one of the Odd Couple made the smarter bet. To be sure, I don’t think that a Republican administration would be that different from what we got from the Democrats with regards to Israel/Palestine, but the result of the elections will influence the Israeli political system.

If Obama wins, Netanyahu will be even more dependent on his defense minister and on his Republican friends on the Hill. Expect many more Cantor hours for the Israeli prime minister in such a case. If Romney gets the presidency, Netanyahu may as well move into the White House (though Sheldon gets to pick his bedroom first).

2. There will be no Israeli attack on Iran.

http://972mag.com/netanyahu-votes-romney-ehud-barak-endorses-obama/55471/

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

2. There will be no Israeli attack on Iran.

That is worrisome. The more they deny it, the more likely it will happen soon. The usual diplomatic language is, "All options are on the table." The mere fact that the US is not rattling its sabers and nobody is stepping in between Israel and Iran tells me something is afoot.

Of course, the US is making the same mistakes with Syria that they did with Egypt, and it is not like the US is feeding an old friend to the wolves. Syria is an easy call. So, why Libya and not Syria?

Edited September 9, 2012 by The Patriot

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

That is worrisome. The more they deny it, the more likely it will happen soon. The usual diplomatic language is, "All options are on the table." The mere fact that the US is not rattling its sabers and nobody is stepping in between Israel and Iran tells me something is afoot.

Of course, the US is making the same mistakes with Syria that they did with Egypt, and it is not like the US is feeding an old friend to the wolves. Syria is an easy call. So, why Libya and not Syria?

Who is "they" ? The person making the statement is not a member of the government; he's a journalist who likes to read the tea leaves.

However, the split inside Netanyahu's government is very real and has been growing for some time. The vast majority of the Israeli military-intelligence community (of which Barak is a member) are firmly against any Iranian attack. That isn't to say that none of them would like the U.S. to go ahead and take care of business for Israel, Netanyahu included. But it seems that Barak is growing impatient with Bibi and his failure to take care of business with the Palestinians.

Why Libya and not Syria ? Syria doesn't have any oil.

[Pooky 3,850]

Why Libya and not Syria ? Syria doesn't have any oil.

Libya did not have Russia and China in their corner, blocking any substantive action in the U.N.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Libya did not have Russia and China in their corner, blocking any substantive action in the U.N.

True, Russia considers Syria to be within its "sphere of influence;" as with the rest of the Middle East and Iran, it's against U.S. meddling within that sphere. With Libya, not so much. And China's opposition to military action against Syria is due to its relationship with Iran.

That's what you call a Mexican standoff.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Who is "they" ?

They is a combination of media and government. No secret. Media parrots what they hear. What they hear is what government wants them to hear. Of course, behind the various governments are the kingmakers, and some of those own a good portion of the media.

There was one interesting show on PBS decades ago, part of a series, where they set up a mock National Security Council meeting with some of the folks that actually held those positions sitting in the chairs. Most of them were Nixon and Johnson people, so that gives you an idea how long ago that was. There was no shame in their candor, and their willingness to manipulate the press, and therefore public opinion.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

They is a combination of media and government. No secret. Media parrots what they hear. What they hear is what government wants them to hear. Of course, behind the various governments are the kingmakers, and some of those own a good portion of the media.

There was one interesting show on PBS decades ago, part of a series, where they set up a mock National Security Council meeting with some of the folks that actually held those positions sitting in the chairs. Most of them were Nixon and Johnson people, so that gives you an idea how long ago that was. There was no shame in their candor, and their willingness to manipulate the press, and therefore public opinion.

Well, Israel has a lot of different media that tell a lot of different sides of stories. The Jerusalem Post is the paper that studiously tows the Likudnik (current Israeli government) line, along with Israel Hayom which is the personal cheerleader for Netanyahu (owned by kingmaker Sheldon Adelson.) These papers have been emphasizing how imminent an Israeli strike on Iran is, so you can guess that this is the story that the government wants Israelis to hear.

The article I posted was from 972 Mag. Not saying that you should consider it "the Gospel," but it's hardly a parrot for government press releases. It is generally very critical of the Israeli government, and Netanyahu in particular.

I like to follow all the Israeli media - they are much more diverse in viewpoints than American media - while at the same time always keeping in mind each one's "agenda."

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

The economy is worse than it was when he took over? The economy was contracting at a 9% pace shedding close to a million jobs a month. It is worse today than it was then? You're delusional.

Dude you are denial and it is not a river in Egypt. .

When he took over Vs Now

Unemployment --7.8 Now--8.4

Gas 2.14 Now--3.78

AVG Income- 54,983 Now--50,964

U.S.- Debt-- 10.6 T Now 15.9 T

Just for fun

23,136,000: The Number Of Americans Who Are Unemployed, Underemployed, Or Have Stopped Looking For Work. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

12,544,000: The Number Of Unemployed Workers. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

8,031,000: The Number Of Workers Working Part-Time For Economic Reasons. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

5,033,000: The Number Of Workers Who Have Been Unemployed For 27 Weeks Or Longer. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

1,043,000: Construction Jobs Lost Since President Obama Took Office. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

582,000 Manufacturing Jobs Lost Since President Obama Took Office. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

368,000: Workers That Dropped Out Of The Labor Force In August. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

261,000: Jobs Lost Since President Obama Took Office. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

41,000: Downward Revision Of Jobs Created Over The Last Two Months. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

15,000: Manufacturing Jobs Lost In August. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

1981: The Last Time The Labor Force Participation Rate Was At Its Current Level Of 63.5 Percent. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

43: Consecutive Months The Unemployment Rate Has Remained Above Eight Percent. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

39.2 Weeks: The Average Duration Of Unemployment – Nearly Double The 19.8 Weeks When President Obama Took Office. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

14.7 Percent: The Real Unemployment Rate, Including Those That Are Working Part-Time Due To Economic Reasons. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

11.2 Percent: The Unemployment Rate Had Labor Force Participation Remained Steady Since President Obama Took Office. (American Enterprise Institute, 9/7/12)

8.4 Percent: The Unemployment Rate Had Labor Force Participation Remained Steady From July. (American Enterprise Institute, 9/7/12)

8.1 Percent: The Unemployment Rate In August. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

7.8 Percent: The Unemployment Rate When President Obama Took Office. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

5.4 Percent: The Unemployment Rate President Obama’s Advisers Predicted If We Passed His $787 Billion Stimulus. (Christina Romer and Jared Bernstein, “The Job Impact Of The American Recovery And Reinvestment Plan,”1/9/09

[Pooky 3,850]

The economy is worse than it was when he took over? The economy was contracting at a 9% pace shedding close to a million jobs a month. It is worse today than it was then? You're delusional.

Dude you are denial and it is not a river in Egypt. .

When he took over Vs Now

Unemployment --7.8 Now--8.4

Gas 2.14 Now--3.78

AVG Income- 54,983 Now--50,964

U.S.- Debt-- 10.6 T Now 15.9 T

Just for fun

23,136,000: The Number Of Americans Who Are Unemployed, Underemployed, Or Have Stopped Looking For Work. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

12,544,000: The Number Of Unemployed Workers. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

8,031,000: The Number Of Workers Working Part-Time For Economic Reasons. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

5,033,000: The Number Of Workers Who Have Been Unemployed For 27 Weeks Or Longer. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

1,043,000: Construction Jobs Lost Since President Obama Took Office. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

582,000 Manufacturing Jobs Lost Since President Obama Took Office. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

368,000: Workers That Dropped Out Of The Labor Force In August. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

261,000: Jobs Lost Since President Obama Took Office. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

41,000: Downward Revision Of Jobs Created Over The Last Two Months. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

15,000: Manufacturing Jobs Lost In August. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

1981: The Last Time The Labor Force Participation Rate Was At Its Current Level Of 63.5 Percent. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

43: Consecutive Months The Unemployment Rate Has Remained Above Eight Percent. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

39.2 Weeks: The Average Duration Of Unemployment – Nearly Double The 19.8 Weeks When President Obama Took Office. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

14.7 Percent: The Real Unemployment Rate, Including Those That Are Working Part-Time Due To Economic Reasons. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

11.2 Percent: The Unemployment Rate Had Labor Force Participation Remained Steady Since President Obama Took Office. (American Enterprise Institute, 9/7/12)

8.4 Percent: The Unemployment Rate Had Labor Force Participation Remained Steady From July. (American Enterprise Institute, 9/7/12)

8.1 Percent: The Unemployment Rate In August. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

7.8 Percent: The Unemployment Rate When President Obama Took Office. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 9/7/12)

5.4 Percent: The Unemployment Rate President Obama’s Advisers Predicted If We Passed His $787 Billion Stimulus. (Christina Romer and Jared Bernstein, “The Job Impact Of The American Recovery And Reinvestment Plan,”1/9/09

Vector versus Position.

The direction is better than it was 4 years ago, the current position is not.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Vector versus Position.

The direction is better than it was 4 years ago, the current position is not.

The vector sucks as well. For every new job created, four people leave the work force. If we had the same worker participation as we did in January of 2009, the unemployment rate would be 11.2%

When you include the underutilized labor figure with the eight million Americans who have lost hope altogether and stopped looking for a job, real unemployment now stands at just under 19 percent.

[Pooky 3,850]

The vector sucks as well. For every new job created, four people leave the work force. If we had the same worker participation as we did in January of 2009, the unemployment rate would be 11.2%

When you include the underutilized labor figure with the eight million Americans who have lost hope altogether and stopped looking for a job, real unemployment now stands at just under 19 percent.

I never said the vector was good, just that it is better than it was 4 years ago.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Why Libya and not Syria ? Syria doesn't have any oil.

According to the Libs we stole all Iraqs oil! Remember? We got plenty now.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

Vector versus Position.

The direction is better than it was 4 years ago, the current position is not.

So you admit we are worse off than 4 years ago but we are in a better position. OMG will you Libs say anything to defend the indefensible. :bonk: