iOwnTheWorld.com

Doesn’t matter. Jewish vote-Obama 70%.

Liberalism uber alles, saecula saeculorum.

(I took German and Latin in 7th grade.)

+9

Plausible deniability.

I dint no nuffins boss honest I dint!

And by boss I mean Ahmadinejad.

+8

It’s a brave new world folks. The lunitics are in charge now…..vote em out in NOV!!!

+9

Ultimately, so what? Israel doesn’t share a border with us, and it’s not a world power. It’s a regional ally, and a small one at that. It’s not like there aren’t other channels of communication, and it’s not written anywhere that *any* foreign leader gets an audience with the President.

Granted, Obizzle probably blew him off for personal reasons, but the list of foreign officials who’ve gotten the could shoulder from The Obamessiah isn’t exactly a short one.

0

…but I’ll bet he finds the time to meet with the mb and cair between now and then! I hope to hell Isreal turns that part of irans desert into a mirror…would serve barry right to take the blame for something he could have stopped and wouldn’t, just before this election…say, Oct or so!!!

Isreal HAS nukes and WILL use them if they feel threatened! It ought to concern barry that a shitload of his brothers are going to be turned into those little glass snow globes…but it doesn’t!

+6

@Xavier: “Most of those other foreign officials aren’t close U.S. allies who are being threatened with the annihilation of their countries.”

More than a few are: Taiwan, South Korea, pretty much all of the Eastern European countries friendly to the US… Notably, all of them are confronted by countries that actually *have* the ability to destroy them (or significant portions of them) in very short order.

Telling the leader of a small allied country that “Sorry, no can do on that meeting” isn’t exactly earth-shattering, especially when there aren’t any exigent circumstances. It would be different if Israel was actively facing something like the Yom Kippur War.

0

@grayscale: “@Roscoe – It’s the same as FDR telling Churchill to fuck-off on the eve of WW2.”

Holy hyperbole, Batman! It’s not even *remotely* close to that. Israel is at least a bit less powerful, less populous, and less of a trading partner than Britain. There’s pretty much no common history, and definitely not a common language. If Israel were to get conquered, the Atlantic shipping lines would not be under threat of being cut by Islamic military forces.

And your analogy is entirely wrong on its face. FDR telling Churchill to fuck-off on the eve of WW2 would be utterly bizarre, as Churchill wasn’t the Prime Minister, Chamberlain was. Churchill wasn’t even in a position of power until AFTER the war started, and even then, he was only First Lord of the Admiralty.

0

And tell us DWS, what do have to say – so that you can deny it later – about this?

+5

@grayscape: “Israel is the only free country in the ME.”

Good for them, but so what? That and $1.50 can get them a coke.

“They are essentially an American outpost”

Really? I could have sworn they were Jewish, but ok, they can be essentially American if they like. They aren’t *actually* American, which is the only group that the US President is ostensibly bound to do anything for.

“The country with the second largest number of Nasdaq listed companies…is Israel.”

Ok, so their companies like to be listed on one of our stock markets. Good for them. And yes, they are a wealthy country relative to their size. But again, so what?

“It is a thriving, open, free, tolerant, compassionate, educated nation.”

Good for them. I’m sure the natives are happy.

“Israel is daily threatened with extermination by those surrounding it. Egypt is now moving tanks into the Sinai in violation of the 1978 peace treaty – in preparation for war.”

And? There’s always a lot of “let Israel off the leash and they’ll kick everyone’s ass!” talk, often said in almost the same breath as “Poor Israel, they have no chance, look at all of the enemies around them!” Well, which is it? Is Israel the all-conquering behemoth or the helpless little bug?

You seem to be arguing that the US should be allied with Israel – well, we are, and that’s fine. However, your points have little bearing on whether *any* president of the US should meet with the Israeli president at any given time. The simple fact is, he’s not obligated to. Do I particularly care that Obama turned down one meeting with Netanyahu? No, it’s his perogative.

There’s a big difference between turning down a meeting, and turning a blind eye to an actual act of war against an ally. Obama (or any president) is free to do the former; the latter is something different, and it does no good to conflate the two.

0

“Six Days, Bitch!”

+3

@Your GOP Elites

I really don’t want to get into a pissing contest with you, and I think you’re intelligent enough to understand the point I was trying to make: Israel is facing nuclear threats which could escalate rapidly before the election. I’m not aware of any other country in the world under that sort of threat regardless of the examples you listed. The “We’re not backing you” messages the State Department has been sending to Israel are in complete opposition to our stance with the countries in your example – many of which are under *actual* U.S. protection.

+7

Personally, I am glad that Netanyahu is not wasting his time with Muslim scum like Zero.

Talking to the UN is almost as useless as talking to Zero, but at least Netanyahu gets diplomatic time with other of Israel’s Western allies (Canada, Poland, etc).

This snub by Zero is just another in a long list, and since it is so close to the election, maybe the Jewish Libs will remember it on Nov. 6.

+7

@Xavier: “Israel is facing nuclear threats which could escalate rapidly before the election. I’m not aware of any other country in the world under that sort of threat regardless of the examples you listed.”

Israel *MAY* be facing a nuclear threat now. The PRC and Russia definitely have nukes, and the Norks at least have a sorta-nuke, so Taiwan, Eastern Europe, and probably Seoul, South Korea all face an actual nuclear threat. And as far as “We’re not backing you” goes – Taiwan got hosed on the One China policy (and the PRC has openly stated that the US values Los Angeles more than Taipei). Poland and the Czechs got the missile shield yanked out from under them. Small shieldes, to be sure, but that still says something. Our support for Georgia was also pretty underwhelming.

As far as escalating before the election – the likelihood is probably greater that Israel strikes Iran than vice versa. I’m fairly confident that even if Barack decides to stick his fingers in his ears and hum, the Israelis would still get word to the US government/military before anything happened, though they’d probably delay it more than they would were a different guy in charge.

I’m just not seeing the need for any great consternation that Obama didn’t meet with Netanyahu. He doesn’t care much for Israel, and he apparently doesn’t care much for Netanyahu on a personal level, either. This isn’t exactly a groundbreaking development. I guess if this incident is the thing that will cause some wavering independent to finally decide against the Obamessiah, well… I think we can all say “Welcome to the party, pal.”

(Sorry, the prior was a sock from a different thread)

0

@grayscape: “You can’t understand the significance of an American president meeting with the leader of our strongest ally in the ME on the verge of war in the ME??”

Verge of war in the Middle East? Where have you been for the last decade plus? There’s plenty of active war already going on, and it has been for quite a while.

And asking for a meeting while attending something at the UN is not quite the same thing as requesting an urgent summit.

0

@Roscoe–

“@grayscape: “Israel is the only free country in the ME.”

Good for them, but so what? That and $1.50 can get them a coke.” (etc.)
_______________________________

You’re completely wrong on this. If you don’t understand the significance of Israel by now–and I do not mean just the religious significance–then maybe you never will. That in itself will drop you out of the discussion; because it’s hard to have meaningful dialogue with someone who doesn’t comprehend the foundational concepts.

It’s like this: although we’re all talking in English here, we’re not speaking the same language.

+8

@Roscoe P. Soultrane

I know Barry’s screwed all our allies – you’ll get no argument from me there. I also am not concerned that Barry didn’t meet with Netanyahu – it simply shows the world that he’s a petty tyrant who puts personal vendettas ahead of international politics.

I do contend that the U.S. relationship with Israel has historically been closer and perhaps more important than some of the other countries we protect, both because of the history of the Jews and the location of Israel in the middle east. My issue with this administration – and this incident – is that it makes the U.S. look indecisive and encourages our enemies, many of whom are Israel’s enemies too.

FWIW: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/iran-is-stockpiling-weapons-grade-uranium-a-new-reported-finds/story-e6frg6so-1226461489599

+7

Guys, don’t waste your time feeding the troll.

It only encourages them.

+7

Well shit I thought all the trolls were named anon. My bad.

+8

@Roscoe

“Verge of war in the Middle East? Where have you been for the last decade plus?”

For some of that last decade I was in a war in the Middle East. But that war will be nothing compared to nuclear war involving several nations right at the time when the world is already on the brink of economic collapse.

+8

@MaryfromMarin:

Ok, so we’ll just write off every single contry in the Middle East because they aren’t Western-style democracies? Israel is the *only* one that counts?

If Western-style democracies are the only Middle Eastern states we should be concerned with, then isn’t what’s been going on in Turkey way more critical? It was a pretty stable Western democracy, and it’s now well on its way towards going Islamic, yet the US never really seemed to care. It’s of far more strategic importance than Israel given both it’s size and location.

0

@Xavier: “I know Barry’s screwed all our allies – you’ll get no argument from me there. I also am not concerned that Barry didn’t meet with Netanyahu – it simply shows the world that he’s a petty tyrant who puts personal vendettas ahead of international politics.”

So we’re in pretty much total agreement there.

“I do contend that the U.S. relationship with Israel has historically been closer and perhaps more important than some of the other countries we protect, both because of the history of the Jews and the location of Israel in the middle east.”

I’d mostly agree on closer – and definitely because of the history of what has happened to Jewish people. I’d disagree with importantance based on location – other than nice beaches, Israel’s location isn’t that critical to much – it doesn’t control strategic waterways or resources (though it has gained some with the recent natural gas discoveries), etc.

“My issue with this administration – and this incident – is that it makes the U.S. look indecisive and encourages our enemies, many of whom are Israel’s enemies too.”

I just see it as more of the same. Everyone out there already knows who Barry is and how he’s going to react. It would be more of a message to the world if it had come from some other president, as it would have been much more out of character, and thus, more an indication of indecisiveness or tacit encouragement – like the ambassador’s statement to Saddam before he invaded Kuwait. That one seemed to signal a change in policy; this one doesn’t.

0

@Roscoe –

“….I’m just not seeing the need for any great consternation that Obama didn’t meet with Netanyahu….”

Just when do you see the great consternation, after Israel and Iran go to war?

You can’t be so haughty and smarter (in your own mind) than thou, and completely dismissive of diplomatic snubs – especially when it involves an ally who has been threatened by every neighboring country.

An ally is a partner. Do you have a partner in your life – and I don’t mean that in the gay/lesbian sense of the term? Do you have someone that you need to talk to in times of crisis? It’s the same thing.

You appear to want Israel to either act on its own pre-emptively or wait until it is attacked before Obumphuk might consider hearing their grievance and plea.

+5

@grayscape: “compared to nuclear war involving several nations right at the time when the world is already on the brink of economic collapse.”

Okay, so what several nationss are going to go nuclear? Israel is the only nuclear power in the Middle East. It is within the realm of possibility that Iran has already built nuclear weapons, but they haven’t tested them, and their delivery systems are, at best, suspect, and Israel’s air and anti-missile defenses are pretty good.

Pakistan could, I suppose, launch nuclear strikes into the Middle East, but that seems pretty unlikely.

The US, France, Britain, Russia, China, and India all have no reason to go nuclear. North Korea doesn’t figure in to the equation as a direct participant, though it could, in theory, supply a bomb or two to Iran.

0

@Stirrin: “Just when do you see the great consternation, after Israel and Iran go to war?”

Hence my prior comment about there being a difference between “can we meet while I’m at the UN” and “we need to have a summit RIGHT NOW”.

“and completely dismissive of diplomatic snubs – especially when it involves an ally who has been threatened by every neighboring country.”

Yeah, because it’s this one, as opposed to all the others that he’s given to Israel, that will make the world sit up and say “You know, he may not like those guys much.” They already know his position – this wasn’t a change in policy or practice.

“An ally is a partner.”

Sort of, yes. For so long as it is in both sides’ interest to be partnered. But there’s a big difference between not meeting with someone and publicly renouncing an alliance – which Turkey basically did to Israel a little while back.

“You appear to want Israel to either act on its own pre-emptively”

Well, they are a sovereign state, and I have no problem with them acting in their own self interest. I would expect them do so, in fact, regardless of whether Barry (or anyone else) gives them the thumbs-up or thumbs-down.

“or wait until it is attacked”

Should it be attacked, different story, as that is a different scenario. I’d still expect them to act in their own self-interest, but I would also figure that the US would intervene – if Israel was at risk and not handily repulsing everything – regardless of what Barry wanted to do.

0

“It’s the same as FDR telling Churchill to fuck-off on the eve of WW2.”

heh, the FUCKING joe kennedie sr. handled that fucking the joooooooooooos job real well for several months, dint he?

0

@Roscoe – One nuke is enough to start…and Israel will use more than one if Iran unleases one first….or hits with chem warheads. Egypt, Syria, Hezbollah, Hamas have been prepping for slaughter for years. Yes – Turkey too.

You know that…but don’t give a shit.

Israel is probably our closest and most effective ally in the world…and definitely in the ME. And Obama snubs as warclouds build?? It’s beyond absurd and foolish. It’s a threat to national security.

But you don’t give a shit because it’s “over there” somewhere…

Iran has been planning to hit us too…. EMP? launched from a ship? Naaaaaa you say. never happen. We’re Merkins. They’re over there. We’re protected by oceans.

Plus you don’t give a shit.

The Islamic caliphate (arab spring) is taking shape. It will affect you. Seen what just happened in Libya? Cairo?

WW1 started with an insignificant guy being shot by a nothing in a nothing place “over there” somewhere….so who cares. Life is cozy up here in Ron Pauls asshole.

Why the fuck am I wasting my time trying to explain to you why 2 plus 2 equal 4?

+5

@Roscoe –

“….Should it be attacked, different story, as that is a different scenario….”

NO! It is not a different scenario. By that time it’s too late! The purpose of meeting is to formulate a strategy so that they either don’t get to that point, or if they do, victory for Israel will be likely (with our help).

“…..but I would also figure that the US would intervene….”

Obumphuk has not given ANY public commitment (outside of hollow rhetoric) that the US would intervene on Israel’s behalf…and thus the reason that this whole topic is even being discussed.

+6

@Roscoe P. Soultrane

“Hence my prior comment about there being a difference between “can we meet while I’m at the UN” and “we need to have a summit RIGHT NOW”.”

Netanyahu didn’t ask for a meeting RIGHT NOW. He asked for a meeting later this month, toward the end of September, which was refused because of Barry’s campaigning schedule.

+7

@grayscape: “WW1 started with an insignificant guy being shot by a nothing in a nothing place “over there” somewhere”

Yeah, you know why that all happened? Because a bunch of nations were all set up in a series of alliances that forced them to attack each other because of a war between two countries that really didn’t matter to any of them. That sort of thing happened a lot throughout Europe’s history and was a big reason why Washington warned against permanent alliances with other nations.

“One nuke is enough to start…and Israel will use more than one if Iran unleases one first”

That presupposes Iran has one, but ok. Further, the primary risk of war is that Israel will attack Iran to prevent them from getting a bomb – basically Osirak on a much larger scale.

“or hits with chem warheads.”

Presumes they could, but ok. If Iran attacked with chemical or nuclear weapons and was able to penetrate the Israeli air defenses, the US would start bombing Iranian bases, which Iran would defend with Russian/Chinese weaponry. That sort of combat (US planes v. Russian/Chinese weapons) has happened before, and the major powers didn’t go to war over it.

“Egypt, Syria, Hezbollah, Hamas have been prepping for slaughter for years.”

And they usually lose – badly. Witness the people here cheering for Israel to go kick ass.

“Turkey too.”

Recent development. But, since they aren’t “free,” they’re not an important country in the Middle East and hence are of no consequence, right? The fall of Westernized Turkey should have been a much more important thing to the US, but it wasn’t. The US (along with NATO) should be having some very serious discussions with Turkey now, since it is a NATO member, and all. That would be the biggest chance for a WWI scenario – since any attack on Turkey would bring NATO in (in theory, at least, more likely, it would cause it to collapse).

“Israel is probably our closest and most effective ally in the world”

Yeah, I still marvel at how the Golani Brigade held the line while the Marines pulled out at the Chosin Resevoir. The 36th Armored’s actions in repelling the Tet Offensive alongside the 101st Airborne are the stuff of legend. When Sayeret Matkal went in and rescued Mike Durant in Somalia…wow. Beautiful operation. Just a hunch, but Britain, Australia, and South Korea kind of have them beat.

“and definitely in the ME.”

Yes, the do provide us with useful intelligence and materials, as we do with them. Other allies are far more useful as far as basing goes.

“Iran has been planning to hit us too…. EMP? launched from a ship? Naaaaaa you say. never happen. We’re Merkins. They’re over there. We’re protected by oceans.”

Wow, you’re totally off the reservation, now. Nothing to do with whether Obama meets Netanyahu, presuming the existence of Iranian nukes, and attributing positions to me I’ve never taken. But if Iran attacked us with nuclear weapons, even Barry would be forced to hit back pretty hard.

“The Islamic caliphate (arab spring) is taking shape. It will affect you. Seen what just happened in Libya? Cairo?”

The West – and really all those countries of the world that could possibly counter it – has decided it is ok with a new Caliphate. Bad idea, but that’s what the elites want. However, unless a single meeting between Obama and Netanyahu was going to resolve the entire matter, not having won’t change anything.

I do like your basic premise of “just because I’m not offended to my very core that Obama didn’t meet with Netanyahu, I’m therefore pro-Armageddon.” It’s been fun to watch.

If you really want to be shocked by one of Obama’s diplomatic screw-yous to an ally, consider: Obama, through Hillary, basically told the Argentinians that we support their position on the Falklands, er Malvinas, vis a vis Britain. If the guy wants to sell out an ally, he knows how to do it in spades.

0

Netanyahu is calling Barry out because of his recent interception of the letter he sent to Iran saying we won’t jump in if Israel attacks as long as you don’t hit these (a list of american bases) Nothing like the muslim Prez giving a list to our enemies of which base to strike..

SO Barry either needs to be an Ally or not, this is Israels way of saying are you a friend or not?

If not we’ll take care of this and forget about our help in the region with your so-called Muslim friends who’ll knife you in a minute. (EGypt and Libyia turned out to be wonderful allies huh?)
It’ll also throw the entire region in termoil with Iran wreaking havoc in the strait of Hormuz, which Barry will have to keep open or fuel prices will skyrocket higher then they already will as soon as Israel starts the spanking process.

Its called Karma Barry, this could be the election killer with his base when he has to get involved not to mention Israels way of saying Fuck you very much Barry.

+7

@Xavier: “Netanyahu didn’t ask for a meeting RIGHT NOW. He asked for a meeting later this month, toward the end of September, which was refused because of Barry’s campaigning schedule.”

Yes, that’s true. I was simply comparing the language of the request. It is one thing to say “I’d like to meet with you when I’m in town” as opposed to “It’s absolutely critical that we meet”. One has a lot more urgency than the other, and would appear to be more consequential if not accepted.

0

@Roscoe – I expect you will be one of the first wondering how and what just happened when WW3 breaks out… Good luck.

Instead of mocking Robert Spencer like you did in another thread, perhaps you should read and learn.

+4

Do they mean to tell us that Obama wouldn’t be able to find 15 minutes to chill out with his home boys? Ya right. This is a punch in the face.

+4

@Roscoe P. Soultrane

Eh!

+3

Buckle up folks. Ben was asking for a last minute intervention. They are all alone in force, but we can back them up in spirit, and only God knows what he is going to do for them. Should be one hell of a show.

+5

Hitler would be proud of Obama.

+6

@Stirrin: “NO! It is not a different scenario. By that time it’s too late!”

It is absolutely a different scenario – if Israel has been attacked, that changes things. At that point an ally has an *obligation* to do something, assuming assistance is requested.

“The purpose of meeting is to formulate a strategy so that they either don’t get to that point, or if they do, victory for Israel will be likely (with our help).”

It could also be simply to give the US Government to prepare itself (and our people in the region), so they don’t have to stammer through a press conference and throw together some sort of plan for protecting embassies and such following an Israeli strike on Iran. In the end, I would expect Israel to act regardless of Obama’s thoughts, if it felt that it had to.

“Obumphuk has not given ANY public commitment (outside of hollow rhetoric) that the US would intervene on Israel’s behalf…and thus the reason that this whole topic is even being discussed.”

Of course, there’s no chance that plans are already in place, probably dating back to Bush II or earlier, for what would be done, right? Obama would undboutedly dither, but events would end up controlling him – like they do with just about everything else.

Meeting or no meeting, if Israel and Iran decide to go at it, we’ve got a loser as a Commander in Chief. At least until January 20th, then things might get better. And realistically, if you were Israel – exactly how much advance notice would you want to give the Obama administration about your intentions and schedules/plans? You might as well just take out a full page ad in the Tehran Times.

0

@grayscape: “I expect you will be one of the first wondering how and what just happened when WW3 breaks out… Good luck.

Instead of mocking Robert Spencer like you did in another thread, perhaps you should read and learn.”

And I leave you to your delusions too, good sir.

0

Well I think Bibi’s conscience can be clear now when they make Tehran glow in the dark. He most likely wanted to discuss this with Obozo but was told to screw off. Just hope innocent American citizens don’t get hurt because of the a-hole in the White House’s actions.

+7

@Roscoe -

“….Meeting or no meeting, if Israel and Iran decide to go at it, we’ve got a loser as a Commander in Chief…..”

You know, if your whole premise is that Obumphuk is a loser, and that it doesn’t matter if he meets with Netanyahu or not, you could have done it in a much less antagonistic and combative way.

I think that your objective is to stir the pot, which I can relate to. But it still doesn’t make your argument valid…

“….And realistically, if you were Israel – exactly how much advance notice would you want to give the Obama administration about your intentions and schedules/plans?….”

You have no idea what Netanyahu wanted to talk about. And again, there are certain diplomatic protocols among allies, and even enemies (pre-muzzloids) that call for communicating grievances and intentions – Pearl Harbor and 9/11 being the exceptions.

+6

Relax everyone. God loves overwhelming odds.

Sure it makes us want to jump off buildings but don’t panic. And pray for Israel.

We are more closely related then RoscHo knows.

+4

@Stirrin: “You know, if your whole premise is that Obumphuk is a loser, and that it doesn’t matter if he meets with Netanyahu or not, you could have done it in a much less antagonistic and combative way.

I think that your objective is to stir the pot, which I can relate to. But it still doesn’t make your argument valid…”

If you want to say it was combative responding to a series of posts that I simultaneously support WWIII yet am unaware of its possibility, fine. My initial point was simply that Israel is a small country and isn’t guaranteed a meeting with Obama, that he doesn’t much care for them, and he’s had no problem snubbing other countries that we are close to. It is what it is.

“You have no idea what Netanyahu wanted to talk about. And again, there are certain diplomatic protocols among allies, and even enemies (pre-muzzloids) that call for communicating grievances and intentions – Pearl Harbor and 9/11 being the exceptions.”

Several possible topics of the meeting were raised – it could be a request for intervention, it could be to plan strategy, or it could be a notification of what Israel is planning to do. Like as not, there’s probably elements of all three, none of which Obama would seem to care about.

I’m not faulting Netanyahu for asking for a meeting, but I’m not at all surprised that Obama said no. He doesn’t seem to care much for Israel, and based on the prior incident where he cut a meeting with the Israelis short to go get dinner, he doesn’t seem to care much for their politicians or diplomatic tact, either. The denial of the meeting was to be expected.

0

@Roscoe –

“….My initial point was simply that Israel is a small country and isn’t guaranteed a meeting with Obama, that he doesn’t much care for them, and he’s had no problem snubbing other countries that we are close to. It is what it is…..”

So you in your infinate and enlightened wisdom have determined that Israel is but, “a small country and isn’t guaranteed a meeting with Obama…..”.

That right there displays your hatred for Israel, and/or your ignorance of the significance that Israel has in the ME and the world.

You have exposed yourself.

+5

@Roscoe–

(Way late in riposting–had a hospital run to make, and a meeting this evening.)

“Israel is a small country and isn’t guaranteed a meeting with Obama”. You still don’t get it, do you? This is NOT about the geographical size of a country. That is totally irrelevant.

“so we’ll just write off every single country in the Middle East because they aren’t Western-style democracies? Israel is the *only* one that counts?” How in the world did you extract that from my comment? You think I meant that Israel was important merely because it is a “Western-style democracy”? Man, are you off-base.

Turkey is “of far more strategic importance than Israel given both it’s size and location.” Yes, Turkey is strategically important. But NOT more important than Israel.

Do you not understand by now that Muslim nations would willingly torch the entire world if that would guarantee the utter destruction of Israel?

That last point is really the bottom line, @Roscoe. When you finally understand that, then real discussions can take place.

+1