In an op-ed on February 9, I suggested that Israel’s opposition leader, Isaac Herzog, should stand alongside Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu before Congress on March 3, to underline “their common conviction that the regime in Tehran cannot be appeased and must be faced down.”
On Monday evening, as details of the looming US-led deal with Iran emerged from Geneva, Israel’s most respected Middle East affairs analyst, Channel 2 commentator Ehud Ya’ari, made precisely the same suggestion. So problematic are the reported terms of the deal, Ya’ari indicated, that Israel’s two leading contenders in the March 17 elections, Netanyahu and Herzog, need to put aside their differences and make plain to US legislators that the need to thwart such an accord crosses party lines in Israel and stands as a consensual imperative.
After anonymous sources in Jerusalem leaked to Israeli reporters in recent weeks the ostensible terms of the deal being hammered out, various spokespeople for the Obama administration contended that the Netanyahu government was misrepresenting the specifics for narrow political ends. They sneered that Israel didn’t actually know what the terms were. And they made the acknowledgement – the astounding acknowledgement for a United States whose key regional ally is directly and relentlessly threatened with destruction by Iran – that the Obama administration is consequently no longer sharing with Jerusalem all sensitive details of the Iran talks.
And yet among the terms of the deal being reported by the Associated Press from Geneva on Monday are precisely those that were asserted in recent weeks by the Israeli sources, precisely those that were scoffed at by the Administration. Centrally, Iran is to be allowed to keep 6,500 centrifuges spinning, and there will be a sunset clause providing for an end to intrusive inspections in some 10-15 years. If anything, indeed, some of the terms reported by the AP are even more worrying than those that were leaked in Jerusalem: “The idea would be to reward Iran for good behavior over the last years of any agreement,” the AP said, “gradually lifting constraints on its uranium enrichment program and slowly easing economic sanctions.” There is also no indication of restrictions on Iran’s missile development – its potential delivery systems.
In his TV commentary on Monday night, Ya’ari highlighted that the deal could further embolden Iran as it expands its influence throughout this region, and he noted that the isolation of Iran even by Israel’s key allies was already cracking, with the firmly pro-Israel foreign minister of Australia, Julie Bishop, announcing an imminent visit to Tehran – the first Australian foreign minister to make such a trip in a decade.
Ya’ari also noted that the International Atomic Energy Agency has made clear that it lacks the tools to effectively monitor the kind of nuclear program that Iran will be allowed to maintain under the emerging deal – incapable, that is, of ensuring that Iran does not fool the West as it has done in the past.
The devil of such deals is generally in the detail. But the devil, here, is in the principle as well — the principle that the P5+1 is about to legitimize Iran as a nuclear threshold state. From there, it will be capable of rapidly breaking out to the bomb, well aware that the international community lacks the will to stop it.
The Obama administration would evidently like to believe that 10-15 years from now, the ayatollahs will be gone, Iran will have a different leadership, and the threat of what Netanyahu has repeatedly called “the most dangerous regime in the world attaining the most dangerous weapon in the world” will have passed.
But if the deal now taking shape is indeed finalized, the chances of the regime being ousted from within, or effectively confronted from without, will drastically recede. This deal, indeed, will help cement the ayatollahs in power, with dire consequences for Israel, relatively moderate Arab states, and the free world.
It goes without saying that this weekend’s developments in Geneva have only bolstered Netanyahu’s determination to sound the alarm before Congress next Tuesday. It’s also still clearer today why the Obama administration has been so anxious to query his motives and seek to discredit his concerns.
I headlined my February 9 op-ed “Who to believe on Iran: Obama or Netanyahu?” I think we know now.
What a surprise, a bunch of Israel hating Leftists are angry that a real leader will tell Congress the truth. Netanyahu really is the anti-Obama
The audience for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech to Congress on March 3 is shaping up to be largely Republican — and almost completely white.
Many members of the Congressional Black Caucus say they’re planning to skip the speech, calling it a slight to President Barack Obama that they can’t and won’t support.
Israeli officials have been taken by surprise by the CBC backlash, kicked off by Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), a civil rights leader who said last week he won’t attend, quickly followed by Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.) and others. As a result, they’re working to set up a meeting for CBC members with Ambassador Ron Dermer — or even Netanyahu himself when he’s in Washington.
“To me, it is somewhat of an insult to the president of the United States,” said Rep. Greg Meeks (D-N.Y.), leaving the White House on Tuesday after a long meeting with Obama and Vice President Joe Biden, who also will miss the speech. “Barack Obama is my president. He’s the nation’s president, and it is clear, therefore, that I’m not going to be there, as a result of that, not as a result of the good people of Israel.”
Amazing how anyone who speaks the truth draws vehement outrage from the Left.
General Thomas Johnathan “Stonewall” Jackson was a complex man. A doting, loving father, a devoted husband, a Christian, and a fierce warrior, and military genius. I thought of Jackson, and his last battle, Chancellorsville, in which Jackson’s commander, General Robert E. Lee, whose Army of Northern Virginia was outnumbered 134,000 to 57,000 delivered a severe bearing to Union General Joseph Hookers Army of the Potomac In that battle, Jackson performed a brilliant flank attack on Hookers army on May 2, 1863. During the attack, Jackson continually gave his usual admonition for his troops to “press on, press on, press them”. Jackson understood, as did his commander, General Lee that winning a war depended on achieving total military victory.
I thought of Jackson’s words as I read this, from Israeli leader Bejamin Netanyahu
Israel will press its air and ground offensive in the Gaza Strip, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Monday, preparing his country for a longer and bloodier campaign and dashing hopes that the three-week-old conflict would end soon.
Rebuffing appeals from President Obama, the United Nations and others for an immediate cease-fire, Netanyahu said in a televised address, “We will not finish the mission, we will not finish the operation, without neutralizing the tunnels” through which Hamas fighters have sought to infiltrate Israel. The tunnels, he said, “have the sole purpose of destroying our citizens, killing our children.”
Israel’s antagonist, the Islamist militant organization Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip, continued to unleash deadly mortar and rocket fire, triggering air raid sirens across Israel.
Netanyahu, like Jackson, understands that the enemy must be DEFEATED! Obviously, in the case of Jackson, his army was not fighting barbarians stuck in the Seventh Century. He battled against many honorable men, and Jackson, like Lee wanted to achieve peace through military victories that would lead to peace with the North. Israel, on the other hand can have no peace if Hamas is left intact, Hamas, and other terror groups ARE Seventh Century barbarians. Netanyahu grasps that Israel faces life and death every day, a fact seemingly lost on the modern day Neville Chamberlains of the “International Community” and Team Obama. So, I hope, and pray that Israel, as a nation follows the advice of General Jackson, Press on! And, if men like Lee and Jackson, and the Union soldiers of the day lived today, I am sure be very quick to proudly proclaim that they Stand With Israel. The several thousand Jews in Lee’s army would likely be itching to go to Israel to defend that wonderful, freedom loving nation. I bet the Rebel Yell would be much feared by Hamas
The video of two perpetually bitter whiners is enough to gag a maggot. Political Hat has background
One of the basic assumptions of the Progressive notion of “privilege” is that it is so pervasive that it becomes the overwhelming factor that leads straight White “cis-gendered” males (AKA the “Kyriarchy“) to be oppress everyone else. This, of course, is peddled by those who themselves see only in terms of treating people unequally, and viewing them as innately different, and become the monsters that they accuse the “Kyriarchy” of being. The notion of “privilege” and the belief that straight White “cis-gendered” males are always the oppressors, while everyone else is oppressed for being straight/White/&c. or is perpetuating the “Kyriarchy” through “interlocking hierarchies,” has been previously dismissed.
Frighteningly, this idiotic and hate-filled drivel is taught as absolute fact. The concept of America being a great country, that has demonstratedly been one of the most inclusive and tolerant in history to the point where any straying from that is guiltily self corrected, isbeing erased from schools. Rather than that narrative, we are being taught that the Founding Fathers were paragons of oppression and hate, and it is only by Progressingaway from that an towards the rabid Left’s deluded utopia will “equality” and “justice” be achieved, even if they must embrace inequality and injustice to do it.
One of the most obvious, and obnoxious examples, is from a “poetry” event called “Brave New Voices Grand Slam Finals” at the University of New Mexico. Warning, the below video will make you rage:
Liberalism is like on gargantuan pity orgy! It is as if they are only happy if they “feel” like a victim. What a sad way to go through life
Milton Wolf looks back at when cartoons were good! Imagine how cartoons like Looney Tunes, Woody Woodpecker, or Tom and Jerry would be received by today’s bed-wetting Liberals
Here are a few classics