Concerning the Middle East... Obama (activist, invasion, lobby, ammunition)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Name one thing the President has been right about, concerning the Middle East.
I'm racking my brain thinking of one right move.
Someone refresh my memory.
Helping Israel build the Iron Dome. Boosting aid to Israel by 30%. Killing OBL. Winding down Afghanistan. Bombing ISIS. Getting Arabs to put their own armed forces in action in Syria and Yemen. If you try, you can find things which turned out correct. He is half way out the door, so maybe we should be more concerned about what the next guy would do.
We can name Yemen, Iraq as failures of U.S foreign policy. I believe the Syria files are the pits of Obama's legacy. In the beginning of '12, Obama did not want to get himself involved in any shape of form with the Syrian civil war. He wanted the region to handle its own problems and he just allowed the region to take care of it. Now, we have dozens and dozens of proxy groups, representing many countries in the region. Now it has turned into an regional conflict and not a domestic conflict. If Obama took advantage of the FSA when it first started at full strength, then things may of changed today.
What is this interest that they are pursing? Oh my lawd, more sanctions.. A better deal.. A tighter coalition against Iran. Heaven forbid Israel's input to a country that has waged terrorism against her for decades.
Read your Federalist Papers, lobby groups are legal and are another means of checks and balances. Your asymmetrical attack on AIPAC but not the other thousands of other lobby groups speaks volume about your agenda. But sure, continue blaming Israel for our problems!
American exceptialism.. My way or the highway. I thought you were not a Republican?
Anyhow, when a country expresses nuclear genocide and will have the means to carry out its desires, the Israeli Prime Minister has a duty to its country to do what it needs to do for national security concerns.
And please, you know very well the Republicans used Netanyahu for his congressional speech for their political gain more than anything.
No, it is about Israel having too much input and trying to dictate U.S. foreign policy to pursue Israel's own interest at the U.S.'s expense.
It is not a problem for the U.S. that Iran is funding proxies against Israel. That is a problem for Israel only, and Israel can do whatever it wants about it.
I used AIPAC as an example because it is well known, there are plenty of other groups pushing nonsense too. Way too many to name here.
Never said lobby groups were illegal or wrong. My point is wrong for U.S. politicians to put another country ahead of their own. When we elect politicians in the U.S. it is to serve the national interest of the U.S., not to get for money from a group to put another country ahead of their own and then undermine the U.S.
Not blaming Israel for all of the U.S.'s problems, you incorrectly drew that conclusion. It is a fact Israel is part of the reason the Jihad chooses to attack the U.S. Other parts to that include supporting dictators in the Arab world (Saudi Arabia {Ironic since it is also funding proxies against Israel}, Egypt, etc...). Obama has foolishly continued this, along with needless interventions that do not serve U.S. interests, but undermine it.
As for the Iran deal, doesn't matter much because U.S. politicians continue to ignore a big plausible reason why Iran would want the bomb, as a deterrent to its enemies, real or perceived. Pakistan, allied with Iran's enemy Saudi Arabia has a nuke, Israel has nukes, the U.S., UK, France have nukes. Iran would more than likely get a nuke to use as a deterrent to outside powers it believes are threatening Iran. This is the same thing the U.S. and U.S.S.R. did to each other during the Cold War.
As of now Iran is a third rate military power that poses little to no threat to the U.S. It would be best to stop focusing on Iran so much and stop needlessly intervening in the Middle East as it only earns the U.S. more enemies wanting to attack the U.S.
No, it is about Israel having too much input and trying to dictate U.S. foreign policy to pursue Israel's own interest at the U.S.'s expense.
It is not a problem for the U.S. that Iran is funding proxies against Israel. That is a problem for Israel only, and Israel can do whatever it wants about it.
I used AIPAC as an example because it is well known, there are plenty of other groups pushing nonsense too. Way too many to name here.
Never said lobby groups were illegal or wrong. My point is wrong for U.S. politicians to put another country ahead of their own. When we elect politicians in the U.S. it is to serve the national interest of the U.S., not to get for money from a group to put another country ahead of their own and then undermine the U.S.
Ohio... repeating the same thing over and over again does not make things true.
Israel has too much input in U.S foreign policy, examples please? Israel influencing the Democrats.....? Can you enlighten me just what AIPAC has that other lobby groups do not?
The United States has a bi-partisan conflict, AIPAC has little significance in the adoption of foreign policy. The perfect example is PM Netanyahu's speech to Congress. As of today, the Republicans invited him to further their agenda while Obama and the P5+1 consolidated a deal without any input from Netanyahu. If U.S policy was influenced by Israel, then there would be no discrepancy today by the Israeli government (Common sense).
Quote:
Not blaming Israel for all of the U.S.'s problems, you incorrectly drew that conclusion. It is a fact Israel is part of the reason the Jihad chooses to attack the U.S. Other parts to that include supporting dictators in the Arab world (Saudi Arabia {Ironic since it is also funding proxies against Israel}, Egypt, etc...). Obama has foolishly continued this, along with needless interventions that do not serve U.S. interests, but undermine it.
As for the Iran deal, doesn't matter much because U.S. politicians continue to ignore a big plausible reason why Iran would want the bomb, as a deterrent to its enemies, real or perceived. Pakistan, allied with Iran's enemy Saudi Arabia has a nuke, Israel has nukes, the U.S., UK, France have nukes. Iran would more than likely get a nuke to use as a deterrent to outside powers it believes are threatening Iran. This is the same thing the U.S. and U.S.S.R. did to each other during the Cold War.
As of now Iran is a third rate military power that poses little to no threat to the U.S. It would be best to stop focusing on Iran so much and stop needlessly intervening in the Middle East as it only earns the U.S. more enemies wanting to attack the U.S.
I explained to you in another thread with several detailed posts to why Iran wants nuclear weapons. You continue to ignore new information and you continue to leave out Iran's sponsorship of terrorism.
Ohio... repeating the same thing over and over again does not make things true.
Israel has too much input in U.S foreign policy, examples please? Israel influencing the Democrats.....? Can you enlighten me just what AIPAC has that other lobby groups do not?
The United States has a bi-partisan conflict, AIPAC has little significance in the adoption of foreign policy. The perfect example is PM Netanyahu's speech to Congress. As of today, the Republicans invited him to further their agenda while Obama and the P5+1 consolidated a deal without any input from Netanyahu. If U.S policy was influenced by Israel, then there would be no discrepancy today by the Israeli government (Common sense).
I explained to you in another thread with several detailed posts to why Iran wants nuclear weapons. You continue to ignore new information and you continue to leave out Iran's sponsorship of terrorism.
An Iranian patsy I must say.
Never said AIPAC has anything special (used as an example because it is well known). AIPAC, and other groups, are pushing the U.S. to needlessly be involved in the Israel/Palestine conflict which no matter who wins will not benefit the U.S. what so ever. Getting needlessly involved in the Israel/Palestine conflict has damaged U.S. interests, and has been part of the reason the Jihad has been attacking the U.S. (Main reason for Ramzi Yousef WTC 1993 Bombing). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel...s_of_influence
Israel is a negative for U.S. interests in the region. Despite this U.S. politicians continue to put Israel ahead of U.S. national interests in the region and this has resulted in dead Americans. Michael Scheuer, former CIA head of the Bin Laden unit describes this in the Doha Debates.
I mentioned Iran funding proxy groups against Israel, which you deem as terror groups here, I just never named them so you are incorrect in saying I never mentioned anything about Iran's sponsorship of terrorism, or proxy groups depending on how you want to term them (Hezbollah, etc...). U.S. has done the exact same thing in plenty of other countries (Angola, Afghanistan, China, U.S.S.R., Nicaragua, etc...) so Iran is not alone in this. Saudi Arabia, the U.S.'s so called ally, has been funding proxies against Israel, Sunni extremist groups that have attacked the U.S., yet almost no one wants to bring this up or dump those tyrants.
Why would Iran want to use a nuclear weapon on Israel, knowing Israel would strike back using their nukes? It would similar to the U.S.S.R. using its weapons on the U.S. during the Cold War, mutually assured destruction for both nations. If Iran gets a weapon, even though Netanyahu has been saying Iran is within a year of getting a weapon for about 20 years, it would more than likely be used as a deterrent against its perceived enemies.
Never said AIPAC has anything special (used as an example because it is well known). AIPAC, and other groups, are pushing the U.S. to needlessly be involved in the Israel/Palestine conflict which no matter who wins will not benefit the U.S. what so ever. Getting needlessly involved in the Israel/Palestine conflict has damaged U.S. interests, and has been part of the reason the Jihad has been attacking the U.S. (Main reason for Ramzi Yousef WTC 1993 Bombing). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel...s_of_influence
Israel is a negative for U.S. interests in the region. Despite this U.S. politicians continue to put Israel ahead of U.S. national interests in the region and this has resulted in dead Americans. Michael Scheuer, former CIA head of the Bin Laden unit describes this in the Doha Debates.
Just so you know this is your opinion, not facts. And opinions are worth nothing and mean nothing.
I shall repeat, Federalist Papers allow for lobbying, as an extension of the checks & balances system. Until you can prove that AIPAC has effected U.S policy negatively or positively, you contribute nothing here but propaganda and wishful thinking.
I mentioned Iran funding proxy groups against Israel, which you deem as terror groups here, I just never named them so you are incorrect in saying I never mentioned anything about Iran's sponsorship of terrorism, or proxy groups depending on how you want to term them (Hezbollah, etc...). U.S. has done the exact same thing in plenty of other countries (Angola, Afghanistan, China, U.S.S.R., Nicaragua, etc...) so Iran is not alone in this. Saudi Arabia, the U.S.'s so called ally, has been funding proxies against Israel, Sunni extremist groups that have attacked the U.S., yet almost no one wants to bring this up or dump those tyrants.
Why would Iran want to use a nuclear weapon on Israel, knowing Israel would strike back using their nukes? It would similar to the U.S.S.R. using its weapons on the U.S. during the Cold War, mutually assured destruction for both nations. If Iran gets a weapon, even though Netanyahu has been saying Iran is within a year of getting a weapon for about 20 years, it would more than likely be used as a deterrent against its perceived enemies.
Iranian patsy?
You actually typed the name of Iran's proxy's but you have not accepted it as 1) an issue and 2) blamed Israel and the Saudi's. It does not matter if the U.S has done it, this does not give exclusive rights for Iran to do it. Israel has nothing to do with U.S policy and certainly has nothing to do with its existence, which Iran repeatedly threats and funds. And mind you, the U.S does not fund groups to kill civilians.
There is a Cold War at play between the Shia-Sunni and the Persian Empire vs West. A nuclear weapon will give them legitimacy to expand more territory. Iran can conduct harsher terrorist attacks against Israel and the U.S with less blowback. So, until you address that Iran is behind the destabilization of the region without blaming the U.S, Israel, blah blah, then we can continue from there.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
