RE: * RE: What is Bibi's game?

RE: * RE: What is Bibi's game? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Kirata -> RE: RE: What is Bibi's game?* (3/3/2015 1:24:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moderator3 Guidelines for this section, in part, read as follows: Please do not change the thread title, a member’s nickname or a quoted post. So the answer to that would be; Quotes are not to be changed. For various reasons this was added to the guidelines to prevent problems between members, changing the contents or meaning of the post, any harassment that could take place and to prevent conflict resolution between members and staff when moderators must dig, for the facts and where things went wrong. It would save staff time so that they could work other important matters rather than trying to balance out the disputes between members. Saving staff time means less staff needed and a higher potential to provide consistency and fairness for the members. To address something you haven't brought up: Posters are asked to shorten quotes when they are quoting a number of other posters and perhaps quote fewer. The content must not be changed. Okay you got it, and thanks for adding that additional clarification. But not being a fan of spankings (receiving only [;)]) I have to ask one more question. If a someone is replying to what I'll kindly call a "wall of text," can it be broken up in order to align one's comments to the parts of the post to which they apply? Or would it be allowed to highlight (using color) the parts to which one wants to respond? Just tryin' to stay out of trouble here. [:D] K.

Moderator3 -> RE: RE: What is Bibi's game?* (3/3/2015 1:31:57 PM)
Kirata, Highlighting would be best because it doesn't change the wording or context in any way, but does make it easier to point out what you are responding to or break up the wall of text. Thank you for asking.

Zonie63 -> RE: What is Bibi's game?* (3/3/2015 4:36:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle What is Bibi really up to? Is he still trying to provoke confrontation and possibly war with Iran? Is he damaging or sticking up for Israeli interests? Is he merely doing his job and protecting Israel from a potential Iranian nuclear attack? Is he interfering in US politics and siding with the Republicans, damaging the bipartisan support for Israel in Congress? Was Boehner right to go behind the White House’s back to invite Bibi? Was Bibi right to accept Boehner’s invitation? Will there be lasting damage to the one sided US-Israel alliance? Would the world be a better place without Bibi as Israeli PM? It's hard to say, although I've noticed that Israel and Iran have taken a back burner while most media/public attention has been on ISIS and Ukraine - not to mention the top domestic issues, such as the economy, immigration, and the never-ending saga over healthcare. Maybe this is Netanyahu's way of saying "Nobody is paying enough attention to me!" If ISIS is a bigger threat than Iran, then it's possible that some US officials might see Iran as a potential ally of convenience and reconsider the current status of US-Iranian relations. Be that as it may, I don't think that this will entail any long-term damage to US-Israeli relations. I would also wonder about the motivations of the Republicans in Congress. They've been trying to drum up public support over immigration, ISIS, Ukraine, and wanting to repeal Obamacare, so they've got quite a bit on their plate at the moment. Why would they even want to add this complication?

cloudboy -> RE: What is Bibi's game?* (3/3/2015 8:30:37 PM)
God knows he sure steered us right in IRAQ and has done a wonderful job smoothing relations with Palestine.

Kirata -> RE: What is Bibi's game?* (3/3/2015 10:00:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy God knows he sure steered us right in IRAQ and has done a wonderful job smoothing relations with Palestine. [:)]

tweakabelle -> RE: What is Bibi's game?* (3/4/2015 2:10:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy God knows he sure steered us right in IRAQ and has done a wonderful job smoothing relations with Palestine. Nranyahooooooo certainly has a certain reputation when it comes to offering advice on current affairs and predicting future events. Indeed you might say that his accuracy in predicting an Iranian nuclear bomb is unique - he has been predicting one to eventuate "within a year" every year since 1991. That's right - he has been fearlessly predicting an Iranian nuclear bomb every year for the past 24 years. Despite this less than stellar record he's still predicting an Iranian nuclear bomb "within a year" today. Just as a broken clock is right twice a day, Netanyahoooooo's prediction is bound to come true one of these centuries, assuming of course that the Iranians decide to build a nuclear bomb (which they haven't)

Kirata -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/4/2015 2:15:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity What does that mean to a cult whose central belief system enshrines the fairy tale that "Allah" will magically aid them in such a battle, and bestow awesome heavenly rewards for those who die in Jihad against the despised Jews Alternatively, we could ask about a cult whose central belief system enshrines the fairy tale that "G-d" gave them that land and it is theirs by divine right. Just for the record, lest there be any doubt... My response to Sanity was heavily laced with sarcasm. That's why I used the same words that he did. I don't actually consider either Islam or Judaism to be a "cult". That said, however, both have their extremes. The Ultra-Orthodox in Israel have made the news for fielding "modesty patrols" in their neighborhoods, just as Muslims in Britain have made the news for doing the same in theirs. The Talmud forbids gentiles from making (religious) holidays for themselves, under penalty of death, and as we know only too well the Islamists have their own list of "crimes" punishable by death. That just seems to be the nature of the beast when it comes to religion. People get some "holy book" up their nose, take it literally, and go off the rails. My favorite Zen teaching story tells of a monk who begs of his Abbot how best to teach the truths of the Sutras. The reply he receives is, "Burn them!" That, too, should not be taken literally, but I hope you see the point. If anyone took offense, it was not intended. K.

tweakabelle -> RE: What is Bibi's game?* (3/4/2015 2:46:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zonie63 It's hard to say, although I've noticed that Israel and Iran have taken a back burner while most media/public attention has been on ISIS and Ukraine - not to mention the top domestic issues, such as the economy, immigration, and the never-ending saga over healthcare. Maybe this is Netanyahu's way of saying "Nobody is paying enough attention to me!" If ISIS is a bigger threat than Iran, then it's possible that some US officials might see Iran as a potential ally of convenience and reconsider the current status of US-Iranian relations. The longer term role of the Israel-US alliance is increasingly questioned in US foreign policy circles. One school of thought* holds that: In recent years, all US Middle Eastern policy has as its #1 priority the promotion of Israeli interests, even if that means downgrading US interests to second place. However Iraq has demonstrated the limited ability of the US to convert military superiority into political advantage. It follows that the US cannot be the leading Power in the region. So the US's interest is to develop an balance of power between the region's leading countries - Turkey Iran Saudi Arabia and Israel (internal issues in Egypt keep it off this particular list). We can see the beginnings of this reconsideration of interests in the fight against IS, where longtime enemies and ideological antagonists, the US and Iran are co-operating while Israel is sidelined, not even a player in that particular fight. This is in line with other regional conflicts eg Iraq where Israeli involvement was surplus to needs. Indeed an Israeli presence in Iraq would have proved to be so counter productive it would have led to a fracturing of the 'coalition of the willing'. If this analysis has merit, then it follows that Israel will be very uncomfortable with a potential downgrading of its alliance with the US and Netanyahoooooo's complaints and manoeuvres can be seen in this light - one of Israel's goals is to keep Israel's position as a leading Power in the region and to maintain its stranglehold over US policy towards the region, a stranglehold that has served Israeli interests so well, to the detriment of the US's own interests. OTOH, Obama is more concerned with re-establishing a US policy towards the region that prioritises US interests, in reversing the one sided US-Israel alliance which is proving increasingly counter-productive to US interests and restoring more balance to US policy, in short a US policy that is genuinely American and not one written in Jerusalem * For a more complete analysis from this perspective see: https://www.stratfor.com/weekly/netanyahu-obama-and-geopolitics-speeches

Mikhaelis -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/4/2015 2:59:52 AM)
All anyone needs to know about Israel and its "alliance with America is the following three items: The U.S.S. Liberty, Jonathan Pollard, and the Lavon Affair.

tweakabelle -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/4/2015 3:18:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata If anyone took offense, it was not intended. K. This is a general comment and not directed at Mr. K or any other individual. I found it interesting that comments about Christianity or Judaism required clarification to avoid 'offense' but precisely the same remarks about Islam required no such clarification. Clearly at some point along the line, a double standard is in operation. On these boards, posters feel able to post the most outrageous remarks about Islam ( a religion that I personally have very little time for ), remarks that if made about another religion would provoke (justifiably) outraged responses from other posters. Like I say these comments are not aimed at anyone in particular but ....... if the cap fits wear it

bounty44 -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/4/2015 3:54:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mikhaelis All anyone needs to know about Israel and its "alliance with America is the following three items: The U.S.S. Liberty, Jonathan Pollard, and the Lavon Affair. going to have to do better than that by placing those accounts into their contemporary relevance. why/how do they matter now?

Kirata -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/4/2015 5:21:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle This is a general comment and not directed at Mr. K or any other individual. I found it interesting that comments about Christianity or Judaism required clarification to avoid 'offense' but precisely the same remarks about Islam required no such clarification. Clearly at some point along the line, a double standard is in operation. On these boards, posters feel able to post the most outrageous remarks about Islam ( a religion that I personally have very little time for ), remarks that if made about another religion would provoke (justifiably) outraged responses from other posters. Like I say these comments are not aimed at anyone in particular but ....... if the cap fits wear it Well maybe I need to clarify further. My principal purpose was to avoid my views being mistaken for something other than what they are because of the way I expressed them. Offhand, I can't recall anyone ever clarifying their remarks about any religion simply to avoid offense. Not that I won't take your word for it, but next time it happens wake me up. Given the usual trend when religion becomes a topic, I may want to have it bronzed! K.

Kirata -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/4/2015 5:32:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bounty44 quote: ORIGINAL: Mikhaelis All anyone needs to know about Israel and its "alliance with America is the following three items: The U.S.S. Liberty, Jonathan Pollard, and the Lavon Affair. going to have to do better than that by placing those accounts into their contemporary relevance. why/how do they matter now? There are a lot of things to consider in evaluating our relationship with Israel, but I wouldn't exclude those. Trust in the other party's integrity is central to pretty much any good relationship. Not that we've ever let anything so noble affect some of our other choices of "friends," but it might serve us well to start. K.

tweakabelle -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/4/2015 6:38:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: bounty44 quote: ORIGINAL: Mikhaelis All anyone needs to know about Israel and its "alliance with America is the following three items: The U.S.S. Liberty, Jonathan Pollard, and the Lavon Affair. going to have to do better than that by placing those accounts into their contemporary relevance. why/how do they matter now? There are a lot of things to consider in evaluating our relationship with Israel, but I wouldn't exclude those. Trust in the other party's integrity is central to pretty much any good relationship. Not that we've ever let anything so noble affect some of our other choices of "friends," but it might serve us well to start. K. There is a lot more than just trust and integrity involved. The USS Liberty attack was an act of blatant aggression carried out by Israel against a (virtually unarmed) US Navy signals ship in the hope that Egypt would be blamed for it, and that the US would subsequently enter the concurrent 6 Day War on Israel's side against the Egyptians in retaliation. For more info check out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_(AGTR-5) The Liberty attack makes it crystal clear that Israel is prepared to use any tactic, including armed attacks on the armed forces of its 'ally' and murdering as many of the crew as it could, to achieve its strategic and political goals. Such ruthless amorality is especially relevant today, as we witness Netanyahoooooo doing everything he can including using the floor of the US Congress to try to manoeuvre the US into a confrontation with Iran, a confrontation from which Israel would emerge a major beneficiary.

mnottertail -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/4/2015 7:17:44 AM)
The issue of the Beebster talking to joint sessions is both a strawman and a red herring, nobody gives a fuck about that, it has to do with his attaching himself in an improper way to influence his election, and using the United States of America to do so. He has addressed joint sessions twice before with no issues. Timing.

Aylee -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/4/2015 7:23:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail The issue of the Beebster talking to joint sessions is both a strawman and a red herring, nobody gives a fuck about that, it has to do with his attaching himself in an improper way to influence his election, and using the United States of America to do so. He has addressed joint sessions twice before with no issues. Timing. He gave Pelosi the vapors. That is something to make your day that much better! [:D]

GoddessManko -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/4/2015 7:54:11 AM)
As long as Iran is complying with the IAEA I do not understand his argument, when they were not under Bush was when there was a reason for concern. Iran is exporting oil to China and need alternative energy and according to the IAEA not near the capacity necessary for a nuclear weapon. Israel on the other hand has the highest # of nuclear scientists per capita in the world and we trust them. It's not like Iran is getting some sort of special treatment. I miss Olmert.

Aylee -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/4/2015 9:39:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko As long as Iran is complying with the IAEA I do not understand his argument, when they were not under Bush was when there was a reason for concern. Iran is exporting oil to China and need alternative energy and according to the IAEA not near the capacity necessary for a nuclear weapon. Israel on the other hand has the highest # of nuclear scientists per capita in the world and we trust them. It's not like Iran is getting some sort of special treatment. I miss Olmert. Yeah, that turned out so well with the Norks. If all they really wanted was some enriched uranium for nuke power they could purchase it from France and Russia for about 18 mil. Far cheaper than what they are trying to do.

Sanity -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/4/2015 9:45:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail The issue of the Beebster talking to joint sessions is both a strawman and a red herring, nobody gives a fuck about that, it has to do with his attaching himself in an improper way to influence his election, and using the United States of America to do so. He has addressed joint sessions twice before with no issues. Timing. He gave Pelosi the vapors. That is something to make your day that much better! [:D] The hag was incensed that the Republicans acted in a partisan manner, in regard to inviting Netanyahu to speak Apparently she believes that acting in a partisan manner is something only her and her army of trogs is supposed to be able to do

mnottertail -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/4/2015 9:46:32 AM)
Ja, I think that inviting a foreign leader into our legislature to disparage the president is beyond fucking partisan, it is treason.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.09375