* What is Bibi's game?

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

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

Message

tweakabelle -> * What is Bibi's game? (3/2/2015 9:31:52 AM)
Veteran war monger and Israeli PM Netanyahoo is due to address a joint sitting of the US Congress today. The speech and the invitation to give it from GOP leader Boehner has been controversial from the get go’ , and has put great strain on the ‘unbreakable' alliance between the US and it’s Middle Eastern ally. The White House wasn’t consulted about the invite and declined to meet with Netanyahoo. Privately and publicly White House officials have been trenchant in their criticisms of both the invitation and Netanyahoo’s acceptance. Bibi is accused of interfering with US internal politics and giving support to the Republicans. It’s no secret that Obama, who doesn’t count Bibi among his fav people, is so angry that US-Israel relations have dropped to a new low. Bibi is also accused of trying to torpedo any agreement with Iran to curb Iranian nuclear ambitions. Bibi claims that the mooted agreement (which still hasn’t been arrived at but is said to be imminent) will be detrimental to Israeli interests. Are his fears about an Iranian bomb (which he has been predicting to be imminent since 1991, almost a quarter of a century) real? Is Bibi, never one to choose peace when war is an option, trying to set off another Middle Eastern war? 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? [Mod edit to title to add * Warning thread.]

DaNewAgeViking -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/2/2015 10:36:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle What is Bibi really up to? Is he still trying to provoke confrontation and possibly war with Iran? Is he damaging ... Israeli interests? 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? All this is precisely the speculation over at Huffington Post. According to several commentaries, he has a history of manipulating the U S into Middle Eastern wars, and his gamesmanship will do serious damage to support for Israel. Honestly, if I was in Obama's place, I would have denied him entry. [sm=bury.gif]

Sanity -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/2/2015 11:08:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaNewAgeViking Honestly, if I was in Obama's place, I would have denied him entry.[/size] [sm=bury.gif] Has Obama given himself that power yet?

mnottertail -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/2/2015 11:12:49 AM)
Actually, there is a very good chance the constitution gives him that power.

joether -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/2/2015 11:27:09 AM)
Last I checked, if a US President determines someone should not be allowed into the USA, they have the ability to hold such access. Something created during the George W. Bush '9/11' moments shortly after the actual event. Would be funny for conservatives and Republicans to rail against President Obama if he did such a maneuver. It would simply show their level of hypocrisy on this issue. Likewise, last I checked, is the duty of foreign policy to be conducted by the Speaker of the House, or the President of the United States of America? Maybe the DOJ should investigate the Speaker of the House and other Republicans on the theory they are trying to undermine government as a prelude to a tyrannical government taking over. An if that was true, how many of those gun nuts would immediately side with President Obama? Since one of the myths is that the guns are to keep the government from being tyrannical..... I think it is in poor taste at best, if not highly insulting (at worst) to side-step the Executive Branch with a foreign dignitary visiting the nation. That the concept is used for political points, NOT, for being a unified nation. Because this allows Democrats to do it in the future. And when conservatives and Republicans bitch about it (like we all know they will); they'll just be reminded how they 'went along' with this crap in the first place. If its 'OK" for them to do it, its 'OK' for other people to do it as well.

cadenas -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/2/2015 11:29:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity quote: ORIGINAL: DaNewAgeViking Honestly, if I was in Obama's place, I would have denied him entry.[/size] [sm=bury.gif] Has Obama given himself that power yet? He has it. Politicians need passports and visas just like everybody else. The difference is that such diplomatic visas are approved or denied by Dept. of State, and are entirely discretionary. But it would probably be a stupid move. It would be (rightfully) used by Republicans as ammunition. Much better to give Bibi enough rope to hang himself with!

Sanity -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/2/2015 11:36:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Actually, there is a very good chance the constitution gives him that power. It was a rhetorical question Everyone knows that the rule of law no longer applies

mnottertail -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/2/2015 11:51:40 AM)
The rule of law has never really applied in America. There are not that many well-defined and established laws. Now, in the case of the president, he has pretty much been rule of law down the line.

Politesub53 -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/2/2015 12:01:32 PM)
Israeli elections coming up Tweaks. I am surprised the repblicans broke with protocol by invighting him with an election due shortly. With regards to would the world be a better place without him in politics, maybe but he was democratically elected. That said, the Israeli right would be far worse.

Aylee -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/2/2015 12:06:14 PM)
Why do so many of you think that congress is supposed to answer to the president? I am pretty sure that is not how it is set up.

GoddessManko -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/2/2015 12:10:43 PM)
The US currently has two problems as far as checks and balances. Executive power in itself shouldn't exist but it is somewhat necessary when you have the secondary issue. Congress 90% of America holds in disdain but are not voting out because they don't have enough information and transparency on policy holders. The secondary problem is 20-year career Congressmen who feel like none of you are a threat. In a democracy. Otherwise there would be no way there would be voter IDs etc to hinder people's political power further or shutting down DHS to put this country and the lives of Americans at risk. All I really have to say on the issue.

joether -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/2/2015 12:57:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee Why do so many of you think that congress is supposed to answer to the president? I am pretty sure that is not how it is set up. OH....MY....GOD! You really have...NO FUCKING CLUE....how America operates? Ok...this is a crash course in American government... We have this old document that is about 239 years old. Its called the US Constitution. Within the document it explains the three types of branches of government: Executive, Judicial, and Legislative. It explains the general ideas of each of these groups, and over time, these groups have more or less developed into their own individual entities at the federal level. More importantly, is that all three have separate duties and responsibilities. And that the other two as a rule, should not enter into the responsibilities of the third. ....BUT.... It is the responsibility and duty of the other two branches to keep the third one 'in line'. This means neither the Executive or Judicial branches of government makes laws. The Executive nor Legislative branches do not determine how laws are interpreted. Finally, the Legislative and Judicial branches do not run the day-to-day operations of the nation, nor handle duties reserve to the Executive branch. Congress (i.e Legislative branch)...DOES...and....IS....answerable to the Executive (i.e. the President) and Judicial (i.e. The US Supreme Court) branches of government. Its a concept you can find in any online search engine for 'Checks and Balances' and 'United States of America'. What IS your educational level?

Aylee -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/2/2015 1:35:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee Why do so many of you think that congress is supposed to answer to the president? I am pretty sure that is not how it is set up. OH....MY....GOD! You really have...NO FUCKING CLUE....how America operates? Ok...this is a crash course in American government... We have this old document that is about 239 years old. Its called the US Constitution. Within the document it explains the three types of branches of government: Executive, Judicial, and Legislative. It explains the general ideas of each of these groups, and over time, these groups have more or less developed into their own individual entities at the federal level. More importantly, is that all three have separate duties and responsibilities. And that the other two as a rule, should not enter into the responsibilities of the third. ....BUT.... It is the responsibility and duty of the other two branches to keep the third one 'in line'. This means neither the Executive or Judicial branches of government makes laws. The Executive nor Legislative branches do not determine how laws are interpreted. Finally, the Legislative and Judicial branches do not run the day-to-day operations of the nation, nor handle duties reserve to the Executive branch. Congress (i.e Legislative branch)...DOES...and....IS....answerable to the Executive (i.e. the President) and Judicial (i.e. The US Supreme Court) branches of government. Its a concept you can find in any online search engine for 'Checks and Balances' and 'United States of America'. What IS your educational level? The executive is not supposed to make laws? Hmmmm. . . you might send Obama a note about that. Specifically, my post was referring to the comments made in this thread. Why should congress have to check with the executive branch about who they invite to speak? In fact, you little twit, you yourself commented about congress "side stepping" Obama about this. Another comment of YOURS: quote: Likewise, last I checked, is the duty of foreign policy to be conducted by the Speaker of the House, or the President of the United States of America? Maybe the DOJ should investigate the Speaker of the House and other Republicans on the theory they are trying to undermine government as a prelude to a tyrannical government taking over. An if that was true, how many of those gun nuts would immediately side with President Obama? Since one of the myths is that the guns are to keep the government from being tyrannical..... Though the President is the "commander in chief of the armed forces" and head of the Executive Branch, he does not hold absolute power or right in negotiations or expressions of solidarity with other nations. When it comes to foreign affairs, legislation, and the future of the country a congressman almost always has more insight, objectiveness, and opportunity for relations as a President will control policy usually no longer than 8 years. How much education do YOU have? Why don't you go show your ass to your other elitists.

Kirata -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/2/2015 1:43:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee Why do so many of you think that congress is supposed to answer to the president? OH....MY....GOD! You really have...NO FUCKING CLUE....how America operates? The Executive, among other powers and duties... executes the instructions of Congress, and Congress has the power to... remove federal executive and judicial officers from office. So I don't think you know what you're talking about. Source K.

mnottertail -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/2/2015 2:40:04 PM)
quote: The executive is not supposed to make laws? Hmmmm. . . you might send Obama a note about that. No reason to do so, he has not made any.

joether -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/2/2015 2:45:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee Why do so many of you think that congress is supposed to answer to the president? OH....MY....GOD! You really have...NO FUCKING CLUE....how America operates? The Executive, among other powers and duties... executes the instructions of Congress, and Congress has the power to... remove federal executive and judicial officers from office. So I don't think you know what you're talking about. Source So, according to your 'reading' and 'understanding' of Constitutional Law, the President of the United States, should wait for Congress to decide on 'what we do' during a nuclear attack by another nation? Do you have any idea how 'simpleton' of an understanding you use in your argument? Yes, Congress can define the powers of the Executive branch. However, the other two branches (that would including the Executive branch, if your following along) can decide if that is allowable. The Republicans have tried passing bills to limit the President's powers over the last few years. They have all gone down in flames. If they did manage to pass one, without a super majority in both the House and Senate, the bill would go to.... ....let me think about it.... ...oh yeah....THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH! Likewise, Congress can not 'up and remove' someone they dont like from the Executive or Judicial branches of government. There is a process. Its pretty lengthy and in-depth. Not the sort of reading material 'suitable' to your grade level.

Kirata -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/2/2015 3:56:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether I'll leave it to a guy whom has a 4.0 and magna cum laude in J.D., to know the law pretty well. You're making shit up again. Obama's Harvard GPA has never been released, and Latin honors attach to the baccalaureate. (Magna cum laude "in" J.D. What a hoot!) K.

Kirata -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/2/2015 3:59:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether So, according to your 'reading' and 'understanding' of Constitutional Law, the President of the United States, should wait for Congress to decide on 'what we do' during a nuclear attack by another nation? Have you ever considered seeing a therapist? K.

bounty44 -> * RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/2/2015 4:28:22 PM)
something that apparently needs to be brought up: "Joint Meeting & Joint Session Addresses Before Congress by Foreign Leaders & Dignitaries" http://history.house.gov/Institution/Foreign-Leaders/Joint-Sessions/ (that site lists foreign leader/dignitary by year going back to WWII) another site says: "Including Petro Poroshenko, President of Ukraine, who addressed a Joint Meeting of Congress on 18 September 2014, there have been 114 Joint Meeting addresses delivered by foreign leaders and dignitaries extending back to King David Kalakaua of Hawaii in 1874.... "France and Great Britain have the distinction of sending the most leaders or dignitaries to deliver joint meeting addresses before Congress, with eight Joint Meeting addresses by heads of state or dignitaries a piece. In descending order other countries leading the list of Joint Meeting addresses include: Israel (7), Mexico (7), Italy (6), Ireland (6), the Republic of Korea (6), Germany, including West Germany and unified Germany (5), India (4), Canada (3), Argentina (3), Australia (3), and the Philippines (3). "Winston Churchill made more addresses to Congress than any other individual. He addressed Joint Meetings in 1941, 1943, and 1952. Nelson Mandela of South Africa has addressed Congress twice, in 1990 and 1994. Yitzak Rabin of Israel also addressed Joint Meetings of Congress on two occasions, in 1976 and 1994." http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3263154/posts [Mod edit to add * thread warning.]

DaNewAgeViking -> RE: What is Bibi's game? (3/2/2015 7:52:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Actually, there is a very good chance the constitution gives him that power. It was a rhetorical question Everyone knows that the rule of law no longer applies Especially when you lose a troll-off on this forum. [sm=binky.gif]

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875