Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

global1

(25,296 posts)
Tue Mar 3, 2015, 12:36 PM Mar 2015

So Even If The President And Kerry Are Successful And Get A Signed Deal With Iran.....

Bibi and the Repugs are cutting it off at its knees from the get go. Just listen to Bibi - he is making a argument that we can't trust it. So it is ineffective from the start.

Is Israel included in the negotiations? Do they have representation in these talks being conducted? If they aren't sitting at the table they don't really have a clue of what is being discussed.

35 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
So Even If The President And Kerry Are Successful And Get A Signed Deal With Iran..... (Original Post) global1 Mar 2015 OP
Is Israel included in the negotiations? 2naSalit Mar 2015 #1
Iran does not recognize Israel as a state. Nuclear Unicorn Mar 2015 #2
And that has 2naSalit Mar 2015 #3
You were playing it up as if the sole reason Israel is not included is because of Netanyahu. Nuclear Unicorn Mar 2015 #4
I was not "playing" anything "up" 2naSalit Mar 2015 #5
The problem with Iran isn't Netanyahu, it's the Iranian dictatorship. Nuclear Unicorn Mar 2015 #7
When is the last time Iran launched an offensive war? Cali_Democrat Mar 2015 #8
Thanks Cali 2naSalit Mar 2015 #9
Your defense of an anti-semitic, homophobic, terrorist dictatorship is nauseating. Nuclear Unicorn Mar 2015 #11
Iran hasn't launched an offensive war since 1775 Cali_Democrat Mar 2015 #13
"Israel, on the other hand, launched an offensive against Gaza in 2014." Nuclear Unicorn Mar 2015 #20
You lap up conservative propaganda like a good little puppy Cali_Democrat Mar 2015 #21
You don't really have anything to say except ad hominems and insults Nuclear Unicorn Mar 2015 #22
Your conservative talking points are stale and tiresome Cali_Democrat Mar 2015 #25
"I ain't buying." Nuclear Unicorn Mar 2015 #28
Start your own war with Iran. Also, please credit the PNAC when using geek tragedy Mar 2015 #24
So I'm guessing that the leftynyc Mar 2015 #12
The ultimate solution will be for Israel to give up their nukes and join the NPT Cali_Democrat Mar 2015 #15
Actually you were leftynyc Mar 2015 #19
Yep SickOfTheOnePct Mar 2015 #27
More likely is that the negotiations are between the P5 +1 and Iran karynnj Mar 2015 #33
Bibi hurt Israel today. Octafish Mar 2015 #6
And three guesses as to who gets to 2naSalit Mar 2015 #10
Bibi said he knows what's in the deal: "You can Google it" he said to Congress! KoKo Mar 2015 #14
LOL Cali_Democrat Mar 2015 #16
Yes...here's the video if you can deal with watching.. KoKo Mar 2015 #18
Salon just posted Quote on Bibi's telling Congress to "Google" the Iran Deal KoKo Mar 2015 #17
Great quote - especially the line below the one you bolded karynnj Mar 2015 #26
Israel is not in the negotiations and as long as there are at least enough Democrats on karynnj Mar 2015 #23
Overiding a veto? SickOfTheOnePct Mar 2015 #29
A veto of legislation that is pushed by AIPAC to give Congress a vote on the agreement karynnj Mar 2015 #34
Ah got it, thanks SickOfTheOnePct Mar 2015 #35
Israel doesn't have a clue about what is being discussed? former9thward Mar 2015 #30
No one asked him about their arsenal, did they? Hawks for Israel buy into every lie coming Jefferson23 Mar 2015 #31
How can a deal be "ineffective"? philosslayer Mar 2015 #32

2naSalit

(86,943 posts)
1. Is Israel included in the negotiations?
Tue Mar 3, 2015, 01:39 PM
Mar 2015

The answer is no. And because Bibi is talking out his asshole, which happens to be located in the middle of his face, it's all the more reason to call him out on the whole bloviation tactic. He's here to be the big cheerleader for yet another war of choice whereby he expects to gain more of our tax $$ to prop up his ambitions to rule the middle east by getting us to hand it to him on a golden platter. Meanwhile the RWNJs are wetting themselves in ecstasy over his war drumming.

I'm getting so sick and tired of these f*wads.

Nuclear Unicorn

(19,497 posts)
4. You were playing it up as if the sole reason Israel is not included is because of Netanyahu.
Tue Mar 3, 2015, 03:45 PM
Mar 2015

It doesn't matter who the PM of Israel may be the Iranian dictatorship doesn't recognize Israel's right to exist.

2naSalit

(86,943 posts)
5. I was not "playing" anything "up"
Tue Mar 3, 2015, 03:55 PM
Mar 2015

I was stating what portion of my personal disdain for a specific individual who is engaging in a blatant attempt to thwart the efforts of our president from doing what is right rather than in the interests of an errant PM who needs to be voted out of office in his country - the part I would post in public. There are good reasons why the boss of the country about whom nobody can utter a discouraging word is not involved in the negotiations... and I would venture to guess that they are similar to and in partly because of this individual who needs to be disciplined for his blatant act of attempted manipulation. If Bibi were more reasonable, maybe he would be included. You'd have to interview the actors in this play to discern their true reasons for such things as you suggest... and I don't see that event developing in the near future so...

 

Cali_Democrat

(30,439 posts)
8. When is the last time Iran launched an offensive war?
Tue Mar 3, 2015, 04:02 PM
Mar 2015

What about Israel?

Which country has nukes?

Your defense of Netanyahu/GOPers is hilarious, but predictable.

*flush*

2naSalit

(86,943 posts)
9. Thanks Cali
Tue Mar 3, 2015, 04:06 PM
Mar 2015

I wasn't talking about Iran but some folks seem to think that deflection works with everyone.

As far as I'm concerned, there is no defense for Bibi or what he thinks he's going to accomplish here. And I said nothing about Iran.

Nuclear Unicorn

(19,497 posts)
11. Your defense of an anti-semitic, homophobic, terrorist dictatorship is nauseating.
Tue Mar 3, 2015, 04:08 PM
Mar 2015

Iran has attacked Jews as far away as Argentina. Iran sends weapons to Hamas and Hezbollah. Iran sent weapons and personnel into Iraq to kill US troops and foment the Mahdi militia. Iran uses murder to suppress dissent from its own citizens.

There is nothing/no one in the Iranian dictatorship worth negotiation with.

 

Cali_Democrat

(30,439 posts)
13. Iran hasn't launched an offensive war since 1775
Tue Mar 3, 2015, 04:13 PM
Mar 2015

Israel, on the other hand, launched an offensive against Gaza in 2014.

You've been brainwashed by right wing media and it shows.

Israel is the threat to Middle East peace. They are the ones with nukes. Iran does not posses a nuclear weapon. If anything, they might want to acquire one to defend themselves against the Israelis who have shown a propensity to attack their neighbors.

Now Bibi comes crying to America about nukes.

He should go fuck himself.

Thankfully Obama is rejecting his warmongering fear tactics

Clearly you buy the Israeli/GOP propaganda.

Sucker.

Nuclear Unicorn

(19,497 posts)
20. "Israel, on the other hand, launched an offensive against Gaza in 2014."
Tue Mar 3, 2015, 05:22 PM
Mar 2015

Oh, how cute. Revisionism.


Israel is the threat to Middle East peace.

Yeah. Those sneaky Jews -- all 6 million of them -- are going to conquer the hundreds of millions of people surrounding them. That's what is totally going to happen.


Clearly you buy the Israeli/GOP propaganda.

By your reckoning since you support the terrorist, homophobic, dictators in Tehran that makes you...
 

Cali_Democrat

(30,439 posts)
21. You lap up conservative propaganda like a good little puppy
Tue Mar 3, 2015, 05:27 PM
Mar 2015

You've got all the neocon talking points down for sure.

You were probably clapping while the GOP Senator from Israel spoke to the Congress Critters.

Sucker.

Nuclear Unicorn

(19,497 posts)
22. You don't really have anything to say except ad hominems and insults
Tue Mar 3, 2015, 05:32 PM
Mar 2015

You can't refute the fact that Hamas started the 2014 war with its rocket attacks, Iran funds Hamas and Hezbollah, Iran has repeatedly made eliminationist threats against Israel, they have conducted attacks on Israeli citizens in Argentina and elsewhere, Israel has no capability let alone desire to conquer its neighbors, Iran has attacked US personnel, Iran suppress domestic dissent through murder, Iran is a violent dictatorship.

 

Cali_Democrat

(30,439 posts)
25. Your conservative talking points are stale and tiresome
Tue Mar 3, 2015, 05:42 PM
Mar 2015

Americans are tired of getting dragged into wars in the Middle East.

Your boys, Bibi and Boner, want to do just that. They have no alternative to a nuclear deal with Iran.

Israel is the only country in the Middle East with nukes. Israel is occupying Palestinian territory. Israel is also occupying Syrian territory.

Israel is the country that won't sign the NPT and they actually have nukes.

Go spit your GOP talking points some place else.

I ain't buying.

 

leftynyc

(26,060 posts)
12. So I'm guessing that the
Tue Mar 3, 2015, 04:11 PM
Mar 2015

FACT they finance hezbollah, islamic jihad and hamas makes them precious little kittens. Obviously the nukes are safe with Israel - that you would be fine with the religious freaks in Iran having them is your problem. All of this is entirely besides the point - Iran is never going to agree to a time limit - they've already refused the 10 year one the President wanted.

 

Cali_Democrat

(30,439 posts)
15. The ultimate solution will be for Israel to give up their nukes and join the NPT
Tue Mar 3, 2015, 04:16 PM
Mar 2015

Until that happens, countries in the Middle East won't feel safe and might pursue nukes because Israel has shown a propensity to attack their neighbors.

Nobody is saying they're precious little kittens, but what's the alternative to a nuclear deal?

Iran would just ramp up their program and Israel will be even less safe.

 

leftynyc

(26,060 posts)
19. Actually you were
Tue Mar 3, 2015, 04:32 PM
Mar 2015

implying they were precious little kittens with "when was the last time they launched an offensive war" nonsense. If I lived in the same neighborhood Israel does, I'd also have nukes and would never give them up - neither will Israel.

karynnj

(59,510 posts)
33. More likely is that the negotiations are between the P5 +1 and Iran
Tue Mar 3, 2015, 06:07 PM
Mar 2015

The P5 consists of the UN security counsel countries - the US, UK, France, China and Russia - the plus 1 is Germany. This is above Israel's weight class.

2naSalit

(86,943 posts)
10. And three guesses as to who gets to
Tue Mar 3, 2015, 04:07 PM
Mar 2015

pick up the tab for that... (first two don't count).

But I know that you already know the answer to that.

KoKo

(84,711 posts)
17. Salon just posted Quote on Bibi's telling Congress to "Google" the Iran Deal
Tue Mar 3, 2015, 04:17 PM
Mar 2015

Last edited Tue Mar 3, 2015, 04:52 PM - Edit history (1)


Netanyahu’s shocking affront: What his stunning speech was really about
The Israeli PM briefly said nice things about Obama, before trashing him and his intelligence for 45 minutes


Netanyahu went on to describe the outlines of the deal, as rumored in the press. If you’re really so thankful to the Obama administration for putting its neck on the line in the international community so many times to defend Israel, then the first thing you might want to do is reconsider commenting, before the U.S. Congress, on murmurs thrown around in the press. “While the final deal has not yet been signed,” he said, “certain elements of any potential deal are now a matter of public record. You don’t need intelligence agencies and secret information to know this. You can Google it.” Yes, and we all know that anything that’s Googled is reliable information and merits official denunciation from a “friendly” visiting head of state on U.S. soil, in a campaign speech. It would be much less insulting if Netanyahu commented in such incendiary fashion after a framework had been reached at the end of the month, but of course that, if it even got that far, would come after the Israeli election.


http://www.salon.com/201

karynnj

(59,510 posts)
26. Great quote - especially the line below the one you bolded
Tue Mar 3, 2015, 05:43 PM
Mar 2015

It is seriously weird that the source for Netanyahu was Google. I wonder if Netanyahu has ever googled his own name -- say with the added words "war criminal". I have seen a lot of pretty nasty things about him on the internet. He could also try "dishonest", "Mean spirited" - in fact, he could limit his source to Israeli media for those two.

karynnj

(59,510 posts)
23. Israel is not in the negotiations and as long as there are at least enough Democrats on
Tue Mar 3, 2015, 05:37 PM
Mar 2015

Obama's side to prevent the Republicans from overriding a veto, they can't pass anything to stop it.

I suspect that IF there is an agreement, Obama and Kerry will work hard to make the case to both the American people and to Congress. As Diane Feinstein pointed out -- this is the only real alterntive - Netanyahu did not offer one.

Frankly, this is an effort to avoid a war with Iran - one Netanyahu and others have been pushing for long time.

karynnj

(59,510 posts)
34. A veto of legislation that is pushed by AIPAC to give Congress a vote on the agreement
Tue Mar 3, 2015, 06:43 PM
Mar 2015

As it currently stands, this is NOT a treaty and does not need Congressional approval. If Congress passes the legislation requiring Congress approve it, then things get much tougher.

SickOfTheOnePct

(7,290 posts)
35. Ah got it, thanks
Tue Mar 3, 2015, 06:49 PM
Mar 2015

Personally, I believe that it should be a formal treaty rather than simply an agreement, but I see what you're saying.

former9thward

(32,151 posts)
30. Israel doesn't have a clue about what is being discussed?
Tue Mar 3, 2015, 05:57 PM
Mar 2015

Then why did the White House warn BiBi not to reveal details of the negotiations?

U.S. officials warn Netanyahu on sensitive details

Top U.S. officials ahead of the speech sternly warned Netanyahu not to reveal secret details of the talks, which are entering a crucial final stage, warning such revelations could have a disastrous impact on hopes for a deal.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/02/politics/netanyahu-speech-iran-obama-congress/index.html

Jefferson23

(30,099 posts)
31. No one asked him about their arsenal, did they? Hawks for Israel buy into every lie coming
Tue Mar 3, 2015, 06:00 PM
Mar 2015

out of Bibi's mouth..they have dangerous ideas. Fear monger and war monger extraordinaire.

Noam Chomsky: Opposing Iran Nuclear Deal, Israel’s Goal Isn’t Survival — It’s Regional Dominance

NOAM CHOMSKY: For both president—Prime Minister Netanyahu and the hawks in Congress, mostly Republican, the primary goal is to undermine any potential negotiation that might settle whatever issue there is with Iran. They have a common interest in ensuring that there is no regional force that can serve as any kind of deterrent to Israeli and U.S. violence, the major violence in the region. And it is—if we believe U.S. intelligence—don’t see any reason not to—their analysis is that if Iran is developing nuclear weapons, which they don’t know, it would be part of their deterrent strategy. Now, their general strategic posture is one of deterrence. They have low military expenditures. According to U.S. intelligence, their strategic doctrine is to try to prevent an attack, up to the point where diplomacy can set in. I don’t think anyone with a grey cell functioning thinks that they would ever conceivably use a nuclear weapon, or even try to. The country would be obliterated in 15 seconds. But they might provide a deterrent of sorts. And the U.S. and Israel certainly don’t want to tolerate that. They are the forces that carry out regular violence and aggression in the region and don’t want any impediment to that.

And for the Republicans in Congress, there’s another interest—namely, to undermine anything that Obama, you know, the entity Christ, might try to do. So that’s a separate issue there. The Republicans stopped being an ordinary parliamentary party some years ago. They were described, I think accurately, by Norman Ornstein, the very respected conservative political analyst, American Enterprise Institute; he said the party has become a radical insurgency which has abandoned any commitment to parliamentary democracy. And their goal for the last years has simply been to undermine anything that Obama might do, in an effort to regain power and serve their primary constituency, which is the very wealthy and the corporate sector. They try to conceal this with all sorts of other means. In doing so, they’ve had to—you can’t get votes that way, so they’ve had to mobilize sectors of the population which have always been there but were never mobilized into an organized political force: evangelical Christians, extreme nationalists, terrified people who have to carry guns into Starbucks because somebody might be after them, and so on and so forth. That’s a big force. And inspiring fear is not very difficult in the United States. It’s a long history, back to colonial times, of—as an extremely frightened society, which is an interesting story in itself. And mobilizing people in fear of them, whoever "them" happens to be, is an effective technique used over and over again. And right now, the Republicans have—their nonpolicy has succeeded in putting them back in a position of at least congressional power. So, the attack on—this is a personal attack on Obama, and intended that way, is simply part of that general effort. But there is a common strategic concern underlying it, I think, and that is pretty much what U.S. intelligence analyzes: preventing any deterrent in the region to U.S. and Israeli actions.

AARON MATÉ: You say that nobody with a grey cell thinks that Iran would launch a strike, were it to have nuclear weapons, but yet Netanyahu repeatedly accuses Iran of planning a new genocide against the Jewish people. He said this most recently on Holocaust Remembrance Day in January, saying that the ayatollahs are planning a new holocaust against us. And that’s an argument that’s taken seriously here.

NOAM CHOMSKY: It’s taken seriously by people who don’t stop to think for a minute. But again, Iran is under extremely close surveillance. U.S. satellite surveillance knows everything that’s going on in Iran. If Iran even began to load a missile—that is, to bring a missile near a weapon—the country would probably be wiped out. And whatever you think about the clerics, the Guardian Council and so on, there’s no indication that they’re suicidal.


in full: http://www.democracynow.org/2015/3/2/noam_chomsky_opposing_iran_nuclear_deal


 

philosslayer

(3,076 posts)
32. How can a deal be "ineffective"?
Tue Mar 3, 2015, 06:01 PM
Mar 2015

I trust my President in his negotiations. And once signed, I trust that the Iranians will live up to their end of the bargain. And there will be inspections to verify it. Therefore, it is "effective".

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»So Even If The President ...