Good article on the speech: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...eech-didnt-do-his-american-allies-any-favors/ The summary: Netanyahu argues that if the U.S. walked away, Iran would eventually capitulate on everything; the “better deal” he imagined is one in which Iran does everything short of dismantling its government. He had nothing to say about why this might happen if we weren’t negotiating, other than that we should “keep up the pressure.” That’s his alternative: Do nothing, and instead of just going ahead and developing nuclear weapons, Iran will see the light and completely reverse everything it’s been doing. To call that position “absurd” is too kind. You don’t have to be some kind of foreign policy whiz to grasp that there’s something weird about arguing that 1) Iran is a nation run by genocidal maniacs; 2) they want nuclear weapons so they can annihilate Israel; and 3) the best way to stop this is to abandon negotiations to limit their nuclear program and just wait to see what they do. But that’s the position Netanyahu and his supporters in the Republican Party are now committed to.
Why do libtards want Iran to get the bomb? I don't get it. I know there is no good answer to this question, I know the answer will be along the lines or "we don't want Iran to get the bomb, but...". The truth is that libtards reflexively defend any policy spit out of this administration, no matter how absurd. And of course, any enemy that Obama can help, any ally that he can snub, libtards will go along with it. I am curious. Who will libtards blame when Iran tests a nuclear weapon, the Saudis buy some nukes from Pakistan, and the entire Middle East ends up in flames? Oh yeah. Bush. Bush did it...
You just straw-manned all the "libtards" position. It has been explicitly noted that Bibi has been disingenuous with the progress of Iran's weaponized nuclear program. Bibi is a master of employing fear mongering level pandering to get what he wants. Everything is imminent to him. No one takes you seriously. Your only avenue of refutation is employing ad hominem level fallacies. The right wing has some serious cognitive dissonance issues with Bibi and their faux patriotism. On one hand they pander toward the uber 'patriot' crowd and propagate American exceptionalism and on the other hand they fall on their knees and open their mouths to Bibi's **** while he repeatedly disrespects the United States calling us "easily manipulated".
Seriously, treeman is a joke. He has this asinine notion that his minuscule experience in Iraq gives him authority to be patronizing in Middle Eastern policy. He claims to be an expert yet has no formal education on the region.
What is Netanyahu advocating though? I agree we shouldn't trust Iran with nukes but it's not clear what exactly Netanyahu expects. He gave a speech that essentially sounded like he is calling for the US to go to war with Iran but from other stuff I'm seeing that isn't really what he is calling for. Or is that?
Haha, this ladies and gentleman, is how you make yourself look like an ignorant moron nobody wants to have a dialogue with. Pretty typical of our house republicans as well.
I thought that the best way to do that was to accuse people of treason for not seeing eye to eye with the president.
It'n not about seeing eye to eye with the president. If my opinion isn't credible enough, look to high ranking pentagon officials that disagree with the president as well but think this is too far. I commented on it earlier, and I believe someone else posted a link of it too.
Differences are to be had, that's why there is a system of checks and balances to maintain the integrity of our governing body in the midst of it all, but this...just too far. Regardless of what your views might be, to stand as a unified nation in the eyes of other nations should be a given. You may disagree with the commander in chief, as many did with Bush at the time, but calling the leader of another nation without even notifying the COF is blatantly disrespectful to this nation as a whole. If screwing over the country came with screwing over the left, I'm sure many republicans wouldn't hesitate.
That wasn't a speech to the congress or to the american executive branch or to Obama. That was a speech to the public. It was really weak and laughable at time. But he got the point across with all the press-able words. Kind of like his cartoon bomb. https://firstlook.org/theintercept/...y-netanyahu-crying-wolf-iranian-nuclear-bomb/
He is just as wrong as when he pushed the US to go to war with Iraq. Netanyahu should apologize for the hundreds of thousand of dead Iraqis, the needless death of US (not Israeli) soldiers and the creation of ISIS.
It's one thing for Americans to criticize the president. I get that. It's like family, we can do that but god forbid someone outside the family does it. Some here are essentially saying it's completely okay for a foreign leader to come into our house and **** on our president. **** those people
Would you support Germany going to war with Iran? Unless I'm misunderstanding, that seems to be the position that he's advocating. He doesn't want Iran to have nuclear weapons, and he doesn't want the west to consider any type of negotiation. What is the other alternative?
