- This topic has 193 replies, 27 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 5 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
CA
Are you serious? Of course I googled!
did you
” we must also bear witness to the courage and the dignity of the Iranian people, and to a remarkable opening within Iranian society. And we deplore the violence against innocent civilians anywhere that it takes place.”
June 23 2009
At any rate for arguments sake say he shouldev been more supportive. Fine
It is now 2015. Six years later what is done done. Are you saying A better plan than the current one is to keep all of Irans enrichment programs running and wait for the people to rebel?
Reagen is dead sadly. I’m so sorry to have to tell you. (Unless you meant Ron Reagen? but he is a big liberal so he wont be attacking anyone anytime soon. Michael Reagen prob would attack but he isn’t running).
As I told Reb Wolf the other day, ubiquitin, I offer advanced English refresher courses. “A Reagan” doesn’t necessarily mean Pres. Reagan, nor is the term limited only to people with the last name Reagan. It includes men with the caliber of Ronaldus Magnus.
Lol Joseph
And your version of “advanced English” includes Bush Obama and Clinton too? what about the other 40 presidents are there names alos descriptors?
And why havent these descriptors been included in “advanced English” dictionaries?
ps dont worry I knew what you meant. And explained why attacking Iran is not a politcally viable option regardless of who (or what caliber person) is in the whitehouse.
“i’ll give you alternatives
1) keeping sanctions
2) increasing sanctions
3) holding out for a better deal
“
The sanctions failed. Iran is closer to a nuclear weapon than ever. And this may be the best deal that could be gotten. The deal much more reflects the framework released by the US a few months ago than the claims of conservative pundits over the past few weeks, and other media reports were that Putin was having the Russians basically side with Iran in the final negotiations.
Furthermore, air strikes would only make a small dent in Iran’s nuclear capability, and might lead to World War III for which the US is not prepared. We would have to enact a massive tax increase, a massive increase in the national debt, and probably bring back the military draft. Republicans would shut down the government in response to the first two and the latter would likely bring civil unrest.
ubequitin,
There are ways to punish China and Russia, if they don’t support sanctions.Like “forget” to pay the debt.
Stir up Eastern Europe against Russia and “reset” again and build the missile shield in Poland.
What! we just go, oh my! no options, let the bad guys win, is that the American way! Well, I guess if the people who should no better than anyone else, what is right and what is wrong, what is true and what is false, what is of value and what is transient, what is freedom and what is slavery, I’m talking about good observant Jews here, well I guess then, if this “fever” has infected even the likes of these, then there really is no hope in man and only H’ can solely save us.
Let’s hope that Iran slips up (or N. Korea) and then maybe again we’ll see the “Sleeping Giant” rise from the ashes. Nothing else is going to help to stir the complacent mood.
Besides , there is plenty of evidence that Iran, even with China, and to a lesser extent Russia, violating the sanctions, was suffering, and Pitom! let’s start “negotiations.”
Support for rebels against the regime does not consist of platitudes of “I support the Iranian people in their quest for freedom.” It involves actively getting help to them , Obama, Clinton, et. al. had no trouble finding a way to support Libyan , a.k.a Muslim Brotherhood rebels. They always find a way to support those who they are truly friendly with.
I really can’t believe that some people (I’ve developed an aversion to the word “folks”(wonder why)) cannot see how this has played out.
First you delay sanctions that, implemented earlier, could have more impact.
Second, you sneak around behind your legislative body and “allies”back and start negotiations, aimed at legalizing the Iranian path to the bomb
Third, you set up public “negotiations” when the sanctions are starting to take effect.
Fourth, you not only give them a path to the bomb but legalize trade in arms and ballistic missiles
Fifth, You make no mention of the most secret Installations or intercontinental ballistic missile systems.
Sixth,You make agreements to help them protect against any sabotage of their work and research, thereby thwarting a reasonable method Israel has to slow down or thwart their path.
NO GUYS, there was “NOTHING” that could have been done other than this deal.
Truth is this deal was wanted, planned for and sought after, it was more trouble convincing the French than the Iranians, because the Iranians had nothing to lose and for the US “negotiators” it played into their primary intention, to set up a new order in the M.E.
Forgot one important point,
Meanwhile, giving them access to all that money means that they can fund terrorism and help to kill Jewish soldiers and reign terrorist missiles and mortar on Israeli homes.
Your complacency, enables that EVIL to take place.
Just think that, when you support Obama and his minions, you are endangering my youngest son(who is in Hesder) and my daughters in Haifa, within close reach of Hezbollah missiles(Iranian supplied,) along with countless other Israeli families. Perhaps when you think in personal terms, it will move you.
That’s talking about near future, in the slightly more distant future, you may be talking about your own homes, (G-d forbid) and worse missiles or EMP.
You just don’t call it quits when EVIL threatens.
A gutten Shabbos , Shabbat Shalom, to all.
Tirtza
you have it backwards “well I guess then, if this “fever” has infected even the likes of these, then there really is no hope in man and only H’ can solely save us.”
That is first of all. That isnt the “well I guess then…”
There is no hope in man period. Only Hashem can solely save us period.
Now on to practical Hishtadlus
“Like “forget” to pay the debt.”
“Stir up Eastern Europe against Russia”
Russia is the strongest power in Eastern Europe
Nobody is paying any debt.
“Besides , there is plenty of evidence that Iran, even with China, and to a lesser extent Russia, violating the sanctions, was suffering,”
The object wasnt to get them to suffer, it was to prevent them pursuing a nuclear weapon.
” “allies”back and start negotiations, aimed at legalizing the Iranian path to the bomb”
america biggest allies were involved in the negotiations. The plan as it stands PREVENTS IRan from getting a bomb. Now you can argue that it wont actually due that. But claiming it is “AIMED at legalizing the IRanian path to the bomb” is simply misrepresenting the facts.
“You make no mention of the most secret Installations or intercontinental ballistic missile systems.”
Because they are secret
“You make agreements to help them protect against any sabotage of their work and research, thereby thwarting a reasonable method Israel has to slow down or thwart their path.”
that is Arutz sheva fear mongering
” Perhaps when you think in personal terms, it will move you.”
I take extreme offence at that! I too have family in Israel and your children are my family too, may Hashem protect them.
Shame on you for resorting to misplaced ad hominem attacks.
A Gut shabbos to you as well
Just to be clear.
During the debates with Romney Obama claimed there was no difference between the two in regard to Iran.
He made it clear, over and over and over again that if Iran refused to get rid of their Nuclear Program he would take it out militarily.
Now it seems that Obama is claiming that is not an option.
So I guess that means Obama is admitting publicly that he lied to the American People in order to get elected.
Ben Levi
“He made it clear, over and over and over again that if Iran refused to get rid of their Nuclear Program he would take it out militarily.”
He was lying. politicians do it all the time.
Those following politics know it is a lie as it is said. For example, ANYBODY who says they plan on moving the embassy to Yerushalyim. (Like George W Bush promised in the past and Jeb Bush did recently) is lying, As he said the words most know it is an empty campaign promise. Ditto for attacking Iran.
(The only thing I wonder is how much of a lie it is when people know it is an empty promise, and how many people have to know. For example Mcain promised to move the embassy to Jerusalem, Obama never did. A friend of mine criticized Obama for not making the same promise though he admited it would be an empty promise, he felt that Obama not making the empty promise was a red flag. I was happy that for once a politican wasnt pandering what was obvious nonsense)
Hope that clears it up. Obama, like all politicians is a liar.
Though this aprt was true ” Romney Obama claimed there was no difference between the two in regard to Iran.” Romney wouldnt attack Iran either.
“Reagen is dead sadly”
Ronald Reagan is the President to gave armaments to Iran.
“Nobody is paying any debt.”
Germany did not pay off its World War I debt until 2010. The UK only paid off its World War I debt a few months ago.
And they complain about Greece???
CA
I’m sorry I dont follow
Charlie
“Ronald Reagan is the President to gave armaments to Iran.”
True and lets not forget the F15’s and Awocs to Saudis.
And remember how he supported Israel’s attack on Osirak. Oh wait…
The best American President for Israel, by far, was Pres. George W. Bush.
Actually I for one think that Romney would have attacked Iran.
In fact I think that the circumstances in the Mideast would have been completely different Republicans won.
Whether you agree with them or not Republicans generally hold the military in higher esteem then the Democrats and tend to listen better.
I fully believe that the would have been a Status of Forces agreement in place had a Republican been President ( the general consensus is that Obama blew it because of a general lack of interest) as such there would have been a larger US presence in Iraq as there should have been.
Couple that with the fact that there would have been a more robust deployment of troops in line with he general’s requests.
There would never have been a timeline given for the US withdrawal.
The above facts on the ground would not have allowed the rise of ISIS to begin.
In addition during the “green revolution” American support for the opposition would have been clearer and possibly include covert arms from the nearby forces which possibly would have brought down the Iranian government as it brought down others.
The reason is simple
All of the Mideast countries would have supported it (unlike the embassy move) and any one with a half a brain understands what is already being said.
This agreement sets off an arms race in region already teeming with millions of armed individuals calling for the destruction of the US led by a country that Obama’s admits remains committed to the same goal.
Even without Israelis interest’s it is an epically bad decision to basically allow you enemy to become you equal.
Jospeh that is off topic and debatable.
Certainly those displaced from Gush KAtif would disagree.
I remeber his critiscm after Jenin, I was protesting his push to divide Yerushalyim at Annapolis. (why doesnt any body else remebr that, google it it wasnt that long ago)
Oh and remeber when he alloweed Israel to us US held airspace to attack IRan?
Me neither!
If by “best” you mean that he wasnt Obama you are right. If you are using any fact based measurment it is very hard to make that case
One advantage Obama has over most Presidents is the sheer number of failed promises and policies make it impossible to keep up
with anything and people forget them simply because of the number.
1) The colossal failure of the stimulus which officially was designed to improve the infrastructure (shovel ready jobs anybody?) and did no such thing and was going to keep unemployment down below 8 percent (oops!) and lead to the “Summer of Recovery” remember that summer?
2) The Health Insurance Bill popularly known as Obamacare was going to get you better health insurance (which top doctor’s take Obamacare plans?) save you 1500.00 dollars on each plan (shucks that didn’t happen) and enable you to keep the insurance that you wanted ( well that didn’t happen).
3) We were going to close down Guantanamo and any prisoners released were of course harmless and not going to go back to trying to kill US citizens’ ( That didn’t happen)
4) We were going to completely withdraw from Iraq.Yup that happened and now we have ISIS.
5) We were going to be more respected in the world. I guess that means laughingstock.
6) We were going to have renewed unity no “blue state’s or Red state’s just Americans. Remember that. Tell that to the police.
7) Obama would ensure that Syria never crossed his red lines by using chemical weapons. Yup, that worked out and Assad would leave power. Yup that worked out.
8) Obama would ensure every option remained on the table to not allow Iran to get “the bomb”.
Gee what a pres.
Ben
“Actually I for one think that Romney would have attacked Iran.
In fact I think that the circumstances in the Mideast would have been completely different Republicans won.”
Doubtful, though theres no way to know either way
“Whether you agree with them or not Republicans generally hold the military in higher esteem then the Democrats and tend to listen better.”
Depends what you mean by higher esteem. If you mean prevent their access to care and sending them into harms way under faulty pretenses I agree, but that is a funny defnition of “higher esteem”
“I fully believe that the would have been a Status of Forces agreement in place had a Republican been President ( the general consensus is that Obama blew it because of a general lack of interest) as such there would have been a larger US presence in Iraq as there should have been.
Couple that with the fact that there would have been a more robust deployment of troops in line with he general’s requests.
There would never have been a timeline given for the US withdrawal.”
The timeline was Bush’s
“The above facts on the ground would not have allowed the rise of ISIS to begin.”
Probably correct, but it was Bush’s timline
Also keep in mind Leaving Saddam wouldve prevented both ISIS and Iran devolping nucleur weapons (Cheney actually said this in the early 90’s)
“In addition during the “green revolution” American support for the opposition would have been clearer and possibly include covert arms from the nearby forces which possibly would have brought down the Iranian government as it brought down others.
A lot of “possbilys” and Arming IRan is probably illegal
” I think there is a strong room to believe Romney would have bombed Iran”
There is no room to believe that.
” or at worst supported an Israeli attempt.”
Bush had the oppurtunity to do that. Why wouldRomney have been different. And why does ISrael need the US’s permission? They are big boys if it is so critical for their survival,why dont they just do it?
” The reason is simple
All of the Mideast countries would have supported it (unlike the embassy move) and any one with a half a brain understands what is already being said.”
Not all, Saudi arabia MIGHT but never openly.
“This agreement sets off an arms race in region already teeming with millions of armed individuals calling for the destruction of the US led by a country that Obama’s admits remains committed to the same goal.”
The agreement prevents IRan pursiuing weapons! Now my concern is that Iran wont keep their end, but built into it is going back to sanctions.
“Even without Israelis interest’s it is an epically bad decision to basically allow you enemy to become you equal.”
Do you mean that? You beleive the agreement allows IRan to be the US’s equal?
Actually the timeline is not Bush’s it was up to Obama to negotiate a Status of Forces agreement.
He failed to do so. Period.
As for preventing military access to care.
You are trying to distract but I’ll take the bite.
The actual member’s of the Armed forces do not seem to feel that the Republicans prevent them from getting care since they continue to overwhelmingly support them in elections.
As to whether or not I feel that this agreement allows them to become the equal of the USA.
Well they have a wide ranging Nuclear program an in house military program have demonstrated a commitment to using all spare cash fro military means and are about to essentially be given hundreds of billions of dollars.
As for all Mideast countries supporting it.
They all did not just Saudi Arabia or are you completely unaware of Mideast politics?
Yes I agree with Rubio’s recent op-ed instead of acting as if this was negotiations between a super power and third world country Obama made it negotiations between equals and that is one result that may come out of it.
CA
Not quite What I meant was this discussion is regarding the plan TODAY on July 17 2015 (ok few days ago when signed)
The gist of my argument is what alternative is there?
Arguing that years ago Obama could have supported the revolution isnt an alternative to the current agrement.
Sorry if I wasnt clear.
That said regarding Romney you are sort of right Since obviously I can be hundred percent sure. But I am certain he wouldnt attack Iran.
(for argument’s sake are you Will Trump deport all illegal imigrants? Would Anybody drop a nucleur weapon on IRan? I think we can be certain that neither will happen. I am equally certain that Romney wouldnt have attacked IRan)
Ben
“As for all Mideast countries supporting it.
They all did not just Saudi Arabia or are you completely unaware of Mideast politics?”
I am very well versed in mideast politics, Though Iam not sure what you mean.
First of all, I could care less at this point what any president did or would have done, we are talking about today.
ubequitin,
I think that the way you take each point that I bring up and appear to answer it is quite clever but you are not answering the points at all, you are just latching on to something that you can argue about,like the “suffering” bit, you know that was not the point.
The “allies” was a reference to Israel and Saudi Arabia, which is in quotation marks because they are not being treated as allies.
Of course, EU is chomping at the bit to get into trade with Iran.
You are reaching when you claimed the fear mongering, the initial report was on A7 but there was confirmation by Daniel Pipes, a respected analyst. I haven’t read the agreement but this is not speculation, they referred to a certain section.
I was not making a personal attack against you, but trying to stimulate your heart, an emotional appeal, but I guess that only works with people who are not already convinced that they know the right answer.
Of course, I think H’ is the Director of all things but we are expected to play our role.
I’m very glad that I have returned to Israel because, being a person that experiences guilt easily, I would have hated to be stuck in America with Obama or his successor and something bad to happen to Israel, either by a nuclear attack or serious attacks thru Iran’s proxies. Here I’m with my people and I’ll suffer their fate without regret, you in the US will just have to suffer guilt if something happens and you did not try, even, to prevent it.
I’m not trying to make you feel guilt, it’s just my reaction and may be yours as well, if, G-d forbid, something happens.
One thing you can do, which I’m sure you will do, is pray intensely for the safety of Israel and the destruction of our enemies. It is the Nine Days and we should not be arguing among ourselves but concentrating on getting all of Am Yisrael to unite and beseech H’, there are so many crises that need His intervention.
A Gutten Vok, Shavua Tov
Tirtza
“First of all, I could care less at this point what any president did or would have done, we are talking about today.”
Complelty agree
“I think that the way you take each point that I bring up and appear to answer it is quite clever”
Thank you
” but you are not answering the points at all, you are just latching on to something that you can argue about,like the “suffering” bit, you know that was not the point.”
I address almost every point.
The bottom line is, no viable alternative is beiong offered to the agreement
” The “allies” was a reference to Israel and Saudi Arabia, which is in quotation marks because they are not being treated as allies.”
The US has other allies, whiule I wish they put ISrael first, ISrael if far from the biggest/most important ally .
” I haven’t read the agreement but this is not speculation, they referred to a certain section.”
I have, it is speculation
” I was not making a personal attack against you, but trying to stimulate your heart, an emotional appeal, but I guess that only works with people who are not already convinced that they know the right answer.”
I dont knoiw thta that is a bad thing per se. Emotions are certianly important but logic is more important
Of course, I think H’ is the Director of all things but we are expected to play our role.”
Agred, though in your previous post you accidently put those roles backwards
“I’m very glad that I have returned to Israel because, being a person that experiences guilt easily, I would have hated to be stuck in America with Obama or his successor and something bad to happen to Israel, either by a nuclear attack or serious attacks thru Iran’s proxies.”
I shudder at the thought. Chas veshalom
“Here I’m with my people and I’ll suffer their fate without regret, you in the US will just have to suffer guilt if something happens and you did not try, even, to prevent it.”
I dod what I can. The agrement might prevent it. If IRna keeps their word then they wont have a bomb. If they dont keep their word the agreement is null.
” I’m not trying to make you feel guilt, it’s just my reaction and may be yours as well, if, G-d forbid, something happens.”
I would feel terrible, not guilty at all. Except in the communal aveira sense.
“One thing you can do, which I’m sure you will do, is pray intensely for the safety of Israel and the destruction of our enemies.”
3 times daily! (sometimes extra here and there)
“It is the Nine Days and we should not be arguing among ourselves but concentrating on getting all of Am Yisrael to unite and beseech H’, there are so many crises that need His intervention.”
Amen
“A Gutten Vok, Shavua Tov “
You too
tirtza:” I haven’t read the agreement but this is not speculation, they referred to a certain section.”
ubequitin,:”I have, it is speculation”
Where can I see the whole document?
Did you read the section at the end, “Nuclear Safety, Safeguards and Security?”
They quoted (WITH QUOTATION MARKS) from that section,
“”E3/EU+3 parties, and possibly other states, as appropriate, are prepared to cooperate with Iran to establish a Nuclear Safety Centre in Iran, engage in workshops and training events in Iran.”
but then,
“co-operation in the form of training courses and workshops to strengthen Iran’s ability to prevent, protect and respond to nuclear security threats to nuclear facilities and systems as well as to enable effective and sustainable nuclear security and physical protection systems.”
Check it out again
someone said iran is gog what’s his mekor?
In response to the poster who said that the protection for sabotage against Iran’s nuclear program is”speculation” by Arutz7, perhaps Israel HaYom is considered more trustworthy.
“The US needs to defend Iran from an attack on its march to an Iranian (nuclear) bomb, because of the excuse that the nuclear (facilities) are for civilian purposes?,” fumed a senior Israeli diplomat at the Prime Minister’s Office quoted by Israel Hayom.
Also the exact location in the deal is reported,
“article 10 on page 142 of the 159-page deal”
There is a lot more to this deal than just the “excuse” that there is no better deal, many additional allowances and even help are included.(See my former posts)
Besides the fact that it actually “legalizes” their acquisition of the bomb.
Tirtza
“Where can I see the whole document?”
Google is your friend. Washington post has it, among others
“Did you read the section at the end, “Nuclear Safety, Safeguards and Security?””
Yes
“Check it out again”
I did
Arutz Sheva implies it is directed against Israel.
bottom line is If Iran keeps their end of the deal (and again I doubt they will) they cant get a bomb, and there is no need to sabotage their facilities. IF they dont keep their end, the deal is void.
Dont you think it is important to protect nuclear facilities from sabotage? This one is a no-brainer
Thanks for the insult.
No, I think that Iran’s nuclear facilities should be sabotaged if they are not being used to provide electricity or medical products, apparently I’m in good company seeing that the senior Israeli diplomat. also concurred.
Why should you not want to sabotage their facilities if there is ANY chance that they are working on the bomb? (You know, they can, even openly do some work)
“IF they dont keep their end, the deal is void.”
Oh, how much do they have to violate to void because if they violate a little and the sanctions “snap back”(are presented to the UN for discussion, we know how the UN works), then Iran has it in the agreement they can void the deal.(really effective!)
Plus, how do we know they are not violating? Giving 24 day notice will certainly provide much ease in hiding. (Now, we see where the 24/7 came from, I guess we were very stupid to think it meant 24 hr./7 days a week, instead of 24 days/7 days, what do you expect from,”If you like your health plan you can keep it?”)
No agreement would have been better and even though they constantly said they would not sign and they’d walk away from a bad one, they didn’t, plus the freeing up of other sanctions, arms and ballistic missiles, plus all the US sanctions dropping giving them $100-150 billion to sponsor Hezbollah, Assad, Hamas, and the Houthis. Plus, help in protecting from sabotage, whatever that means.
There is little to be done because Obama is hurrying to the UN to release the sanctions, even before Congress gets a chance to review but, at least, if concerned US citizens flood their Congressmen with requests to keep sanctions in place, at least then, they will not get the billions from the US to sponsor terror and maybe it will send a message to other ally nations that the US does not deal with evil. Also, if the US starts exporting oil, as the GOP Congress has put forth, then the world market will be even more glutted with oil and the prices drop further and will diminish their relief further.
It would have been better to not have negotiated until they had really exhausted their funds in the Syrian front but that wasn’t our “dear” POTUS’s plan.
You guys have that choice to make, sit back and say, “Oh my, nothing we can do.” -OR- Fight it.
Tirtza
I didnt mean to insult. (I’m not even sure which line you mean “no-brainer”? I just meant it was obvious.
“No, I think that Iran’s nuclear facilities should be sabotaged if they are not being used to provide electricity or medical products, apparently I’m in good company seeing that the senior Israeli diplomat. also concurred.”
that makes three of us!
“Oh, how much do they have to violate to void because if they violate a little and the sanctions “snap back”(are presented to the UN for discussion, we know how the UN works), then Iran has it in the agreement they can void the deal.(really effective!)”
What? did you just say that if IRan violates the deal then they can void it?
If they violate it (even “a little”) the sactions immediatly snap back, no UN needed.
(“,”If you like your health plan you can keep it?””
You can! but that is a dfifferent topic)
“No agreement would have been better”
How?
ubiq: If the Iran deal is anything less than dangerous for Israel, why is the entire political spectrum in Israel, from the far-right (Liberman et al) to the far-light (Lapid et al) and everything in between (Netanyahu, Herzog, Livni) dead set opposed it to in very stark and almost apocalypse terms?
Joseph
Good question
1) I dont know you have to ask them
2) I never said it isnt dangerous for ISrael, in the course of theis discussion I think that point is forgotten. ALL I am saying is that I have not heard a viable alternative (neither here nor from any of the people you mentioned). I dont think the plan is a good plan and I dont think it will work. I am failry certain (As I have been since Saddam was taken out of the picture over ten years ago) that Iran will get the bomb and we will all learn to live with it.
– Sanctions havent worked (and according to some have helped stir anti-US hatred
– Military attack isnt politcally viable (or even expected to eb effective according to some mossad reports)
– That leaves kicking the can down the road, and hoping that maybe just maybe either the IRanians will keep their end. and again if they dont, then we are back where we were July 14.
1) I dont know you have to ask them
It’s fine for you not to know. Perhaps you should accept that if political enemies are all agreeing that this Iran agreement is terribly worse than no agreement, than your layman analysis based on being a news junkie doesn’t give you sufficient insight to disagree with national leaders in a state of ongoing mortal conflict.
The Israelis are virtually all saying that having no agreement would be better than this agreement and that this agreement puts Israel at great security risk.
Contrary to popular belief Iran is not Gog Umagog. Most Rishonim learn that its somewhere in Europe others being more specific like Russia or England. For more information look at Yechezkel Perek 37.
Ubiquitin, please, stop… (I wanted to write “playing devil’s advocate here”, but then I thought it maybe a Catholic term and concept). You, probably, yourself realize that you are wrong.
DC MUTU, or a different country of the Europe’s north. Actually, an alliance of Magog and other northern European countries. The NATO.
“How?”
Because they would not have gotten:
Freeing up of other sanctions, for arms and ballistic missiles,
Giving them $100-150 billion to sponsor Hezbollah, Assad, Hamas, and the Houthis.
Help in protecting from sabotage
Recognition
I went to some effort previously to explain how the sanctions have not been in place for really long enough because of Obama foot dragging and secret meetings. PM Netanyahu believes that not only keeping but increasing sanctions maybe effective, I trust him more than Obama, I’d be inclined to believe him.
Even if they aren’t effective than the 4 points I have (AGAIN) outlined above are better than this deal, which you admitted Iran will break anyway.
If your point is that all political action is fruitless and the only recourse is to daven, well you are right. I did not get excited about this deal until it appeared that it was going to be signed during the Three Weeks and that means that we have to wake up to see that it is Divinely ordained. I remembered that Mordechai and Esther actually did something when there was Hester Panim and we should, in our own small way, attempt to do something as well.
The PM believes that even if the UN has dropped sanctions, the US sanctions are more important (I was wrong about this, he knows more) and additionally they send a message to the world, “Israel does not stand alone.” I think that observant Jews, especially should go to the rally on Wed. and call and write their Congressmen. We each can do our small part.
You should read up more on how practical it would be for Iran to be called out over small to medium violations. See Tuvia Brodie’s Blog on Arutz7.
I don’t know your political leanings because I rarely post comments on the news pages and only recently in CR, but if your ACA comment is any indication, it seems that you are quite a staunch Obama supporter. It’s sad that so many Jews still cling to this man, at this late date. I would think that when even Haaretz publishes an article against the Iran deal, it’s way past time for any Israel loving Jew to finally abandon this man whose ideas have led to so much harm.
Wake up, there’s still time.
Now, I’ve about run out of patience explaining over and over, so, I’ll give others the chance to defend the PM’s position.
Kol tuv
Jospeh
I actually have a theory but it involves more conjecture than I am used to so I’ll leave it off for now, as I feel I have satisfacorily answered your question in point #2 above.
Keep in ind, none of us are making any policy decisions, we are just hocking so i feel comfortable disagreeing with national leaders.
You argument is an appeal to authority which i am not that big a fan of.
Mdd
I dont.
Tirtza
“Because they would not have gotten:
Freeing up of other sanctions, for arms and ballistic missiles,
Giving them $100-150 billion to sponsor Hezbollah, Assad, Hamas, and the Houthis.
Help in protecting from sabotage”
They only get these things if they keep their end of the deal.
“Recognition “
I’m so sorry to tell you but they have been full members of the UN for quite some time now. I;m not sure what you mean by “recognition”
“If your point is that all political action is fruitless and the only recourse is to daven, well you are right.”
That isnt my point, but obviously its true.
“they send a message to the world, “Israel does not stand alone.” “
Obama has repeatedly said this, Obviously not enough though.
“
“I think that observant Jews, especially should go to the rally on Wed. and call and write their Congressmen. We each can do our small part.”
by all means! all I am calling for is cautious optimism. I am not saying it is a good deal.
“you are quite a staunch Obama supporter”
not at all! (though you probably would consider me one since I dont think he is an america hating -antisemitic-islamofascist-socialist-kenyan-muslim-atheist-communist) Obama has been a complete dissapointment easily the second worst president of the 21st century and I hope it stays that way. I am a fact supporter. Though as an adom gadol once said “reality has a well known liberal bias”
ubiq: Your #2 doesn’t address my #2. “The Israelis are virtually all saying that having no agreement would be better than this agreement.”
Joseph
Fair enough. Well I disagree with what they are saying.
Fair enough. Well I disagree with what they are saying.
“Perhaps you should accept that… your layman analysis based on being a news junkie doesn’t give you sufficient insight to disagree with national leaders in a state of ongoing mortal conflict.”
Ubiquitin, the sanctions did work — that’s why the Iranians agreed to negotiate. Keeping them and increasing them is one option. going to war is another option. Do not give me all the liberal lies about how the force does not work. It does.
Ubiquitin, the sanctions did work — that’s why the Iranians agreed to negotiate. Keeping them and increasing them is one option. going to war is another option. Do not give me all the liberal lies about how the force does not work. It does.
Joseph
It absolutely does. If they have secret alternativ eplans it is there responsibilty to share them. We dont live in a autocratic society where “laypeople” accept everything “national leaders” say. And besides leshitascha what right do you have to disagree with YOUR national leaders who support the plan?
Please dont reply to that question it is an absurd question and you have every right, nay duty! to disagree with your leaders if you believe they are wrong. Keep up the good work
mdd
addressed already, see above.
Ubiquitin, not really. The real reason is that the liberals lack the will and the stomach even for a limited, mostly air campaign against Iran.
*sigh*, ubiq. A nuclear armed Iran is a far greater threat to neighboring Israel than to far away America. America’s national interests and Israel’s national interests do not always coincide.
So tell me, should we sign a nuke treaty with North Korea? Should we put boots on the ground to fight ISIS in Syria and Iraq? Should we arm Ukraine against the Russian rebels?
What do we need military leadership addressing these questions when we have ubiquitin answering it all based on his reading the news.
Joseph I’d love to discuss all those things!
But are you saying I cant have opinions? what about Rush Limbaugh Sean Hannity et al, after all they arent in the “military leadership” either did they ask you for permission to have an opinion?
Are you really suggesting that only military leadership can have opinions on the topics you mention? I have to say that is a bizzare notion but you are certainly entitled
mdd
even if that is true. Bottom line is you agree that attacking isnt an option. Fyoo had me worried.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.