Posted on 03/05/2015 5:18:21 AM PST by cotton1706
It was disconcerting to watch Congress cheer wildly as a foreign leader, the prime minister of one of America's closest allies, trashed an American president's foreign policy. It was equally strange that the speaker of our House of Representatives interjected the United States Congress into an Israeli political campaign.
It fell to Isaac Herzog, Benjamin Netanyahu's leading opponent in Israel's March 17 election, to make the essential point: that Tuesday's speech was "a very harsh wound to Israel-U.S. relations" and "will only widen the rift with Israel's greatest ally and strategic partner."
The rapturous greeting Congress bequeathed on Netanyahu for his attack on President Obama's approach to negotiations with Iran no doubt created great footage for television ads back home and won him some votes at the right end of Israel's electorate.
But Herzog's observation stands: John Boehner's unprecedented act of inviting the leader of another nation to criticize our own president, and Netanyahu's decision to accept, threaten to damage the bipartisan and trans-ideological coalition that has always come together on behalf of Israel's survival.
Netanyahu may have spoken the words, "We appreciate all that President Obama has done for Israel," but the rest of his speech painted the president as foolish and on the verge of being duped on a nuclear deal by the mullahs in Tehran.
The Israeli leader reached for the most devastating metaphor available to him, the appeasement of the Nazis that led to the Holocaust. He urged the United States "not to sacrifice the future for the present" and "not to ignore aggression in the hopes of gaining an illusory peace." This is what he was accusing Obama of doing. No wonder House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi described herself as "near tears" over Netanyahu's "condescension toward our knowledge of the threat posed by Iran."
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
“Netanyahu may have spoken the words, “We appreciate all that President Obama has done for Israel,” but the rest of his speech painted the president as foolish and on the verge of being duped on a nuclear deal by the mullahs in Tehran.”
Question is, was he wrong?
“Not sure what polls you’re looking at but this guy
is keeping up with latest polls.
They show little change with Likud trailing Labor slightly.”
Okay forgive my ignorance of Israeli politics, but when I read the polls you just cited, it shows Zionist Union 23 projected seats (up from 20) and Likud 22 projected seats (up from 18). Then the other parties assumedly lose the various seats these two parties gain.
It seems to me that if this were the election result, it may not changes things much from where they are presently. Likud currently must be governing with a coalition of third parties and either they or Zionist Union would have to do so again.
So from what I see, the Zionist Union/Likud battle is not really what matters as much as which third parties pick up the remainder of the seats.
So given all that and unless I’m missing something, does anyone know what the bottom line prospects are of Bibi remaining in power based on these polls? Or to put it another way, which of those third parties listed are Likud friendly and which vote with Zionist Union?
You’re assuming Netanyahu wants to govern from the Right. He’s been more than willing in the past to make common cause with the Left to avoid governing with the Right. my best guess is that he makes a ‘unity’ government with Labor-Livni.
“It was disconcerting to watch Congress cheer wildly as a foreign leader, the prime minister of one of America’s closest allies, trashed an American president’s foreign policy.”
___
What’s ‘disconcerting’ is the fact that we have to rely on a foreign leader to do the job that our congresscritters should be doing. During his joint session speech Netanyahu looked like a big, bold man amongst a group of little, whiney boys and girls. Nuclear bombs can’t wreak the destruction on this country that government corruption has already inflicted.
Bibi will be given first try at forming a coalition. That has never been in doubt. The breathlessness for the “Un-Zionist Union” in the US media has simply been a desire to see Likud getting a black eye in the process of forming a new government. That may succeed, but Netanyahu will be the PM.
Russia must know that what they have going on the side will make their turn to be a victim of Islamic Terror only be delayed by a year or two.
I don’t know why Russia would want to ride that horse?
Good for Netanyahu for exposing just how foolish Obama is. Foolish is as foolish does.
E.J. Dionne doesn’t ‘get it’.
Outside of E.J.’s little bubble citizens hate liberal elites - and they fear Iran getting the bomb. Put those two concepts together and you’re got the country cheering for Netanyahu... and cheering ... and wishing he was our President.
Good one!
“Bibi will be given first try at forming a coalition. That has never been in doubt. The breathlessness for the “Un-Zionist Union” in the US media has simply been a desire to see Likud getting a black eye in the process of forming a new government. That may succeed, but Netanyahu will be the PM.”
Thank you! That’s exactly what I wanted to know. Because you’re right, if you listen to the media here, you would think that the race is “neck and neck” and the chances of Bibi staying in power are 50/50.
“You’re assuming Netanyahu wants to govern from the Right. He’s been more than willing in the past to make common cause with the Left to avoid governing with the Right. my best guess is that he makes a ‘unity’ government with Labor-Livni.”
This is why I needed to be educated on Israeli politics. I assumed he’d form a right wing coalition since he is a conservative. But if he forms a unity government, that’s fine too — whatever he’s gotta do to remain PM, cause we need his voice on the world stage at least until we get a real leader here at home.
Obama is setting the stage for a nuclear war in the Mideast. If he makes the concessions to Iran Israel will be forced to defend itself by attacking Iran. This will set off a massive war. Whether this will nuclear or conventional or not is up for grabs but Israel will not subject itself to another holocaust.
He’s not really a conservative by American standards. He is more like a Mitt Romney and does firmly believe in a measure of economic freedom.
Obama’s bet, by contrast, is that a deal opening up space and time provides the best chance we have of encouraging political evolution in Iran. Of course there is no guarantee of this,..Kick the can down the road for a different President to find...for another kick.
I thought there had been upheaval in Iran last year or two years ago, and we did nothing. 0bama doesn’t care about political evolution in Iran. But he does want to kick the can down the road.
Perhaps your concerns were a motivator for prayer - in which case, don’t stop. Peace for Israel, and in particular Jerusalem, should always be in our prayers.
Shalom!
The first and last sentence I read. He starts off as a lying propagandist, so there's no point continuing.
Netanyahu is a pragmatist in most things. To ensure Israel’s survival he has compromised in many other areas. He does not have the “luxury” of being an Israeli Ted Cruz. Because he is not overtly religious (although is not secular like most Israeli PMs of the past), he tends to lean away from the Right. In Israel, the Right parties are religious.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.