Wednesday, March 04, 2015

The NYT's "Dangerous Truth" On Netanyahu

Mr. Netanyahu’s Unconvincing Speech to Congress -
Despite his commitment to negotiations, President Obama has repeatedly said he would never let Iran obtain a nuclear weapon and if an agreement is not honored, he would take action to back up his warning. Mr. Netanyahu obviously doesn’t trust him, which may be the most dangerous truth of this entire impasse.
Imagine someone sitting in a small state surrounded by larger states that refuses to recognize it's existence and regularly call for it's destruction not having total faith in BO to stop one of those powers gets nuclear weapons?  The idea boggles the minds at the NY Times!

After all, as the the article pointed out, even if something "bad" DID happen, it wouldn't be BO's fault:
Iran’s behavior is often threatening and reprehensible, and that is precisely why Mr. Obama has invested so much energy in trying to find a negotiated solution. But a major reason for Iran’s growing regional role is the American-led war that toppled Saddam Hussein in Iraq, which Mr. Netanyahu supported, although he was not prime minister at the time. Even after a nuclear agreement is signed, some sanctions connected to Iran’s missile and nuclear programs will remain in place.
See if Israel gets nuked, it is all W's fault!!  (and Bibi's to boot) Why, if Iraq was there, I'm CERTAIN that Iran would have absolutely no desire for nukes. Right? The calculus by which having another close competitor in the region -- which ALSO wanted nukes, would somehow make Iran LESS likely to want them is one of those calculations that you pretty much have to be on the far left to even imagine.

How can anyone not totally trust BO after both did and didn't end the war in Iraq??

Naturally, BO is not responsible for anything that happened in Iraq -- nor Afghanistan, or Syria for that matter. Remember the "red line"? Remember how smart the "Russian Reset" was and how Romney was mocked by BO saying "the cold war has been over for 20 years" when Mitt correctly pointed out that we still had geopolitical conflicts with Russia? BO is simply a "proven performer" when it comes to foreign policy. Please name his greatest foreign policy "success"?  Was it handing or not handing Iraq to ISIS? Losing Egypt as an ally? It gets really tough to pick.

How could anyone whose entire existence likely hangs on preventing Iran getting a nuke not feel completely confident in the solemn and clearly competent word of a guy that promised that "if we like our healthcare we can keep it" ?

It's gotta give Israel extra solace seeing the NYT's hedging their bets "just in case" so that we all know that it was W's and Netanyahu's fault!

So even if Israel ceases to exist under mushroom clouds, the NYTs is obviously not going to be convinced that anything could have been done after W screwed it all up.

What a comforting state of affairs if you have any care for 8 million Jews or so being immolated!
'via Blog this'

No comments:

Post a Comment