TPMCafe
« When Did We Abolish Primary Challenges to Democratic Incumbents? | Home | "Your Department of Law" »

Obama Today: No Green Light to Israel

user-pic

So much for that.

The President said today that he has "absolutely not" given Israel a "green light" to attack Iran.

So Biden either misspoke, was misinterpreted, or has just been corrected by his boss. Israel will get no green light to attack. We will, as Obama said all along, rely on diplomacy to solve the Iran problem.

Good. But we need to do something. I think the mullahs have demonstrated that they are capable of absolutely anything -- including nuking Israel despite the cost to their own people (about whom they care not at all).

But an Israeli attack would not solve anything; on the contrary it would create the havoc in the Middle East like nothing we've experienced yet (and jeopardize the lives of 120,000 American troops next door).

Obama knows that. And if anyone can unravel this knot, it's him.


34 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic


Well lets hope he can unravel the knot. It seems a rather hopeless task, as it appears the current Iranian regime wants nukes first and foremost. In short, a goal that is not much subject to diplomatic carrots and sticks.

user-pic

You have absolutely no evidence--not a shred--for this statement: "It seems a rather hopeless task, as it appears the current Iranian regime wants nukes first and foremost.'

Like most propagandists you converge "nuclear power" with "nuclear weapons." Problem is, most people posting here aren't as stupid as your Wingnut friends.

On the bright side, the fact you have to be so intellectually dishonest to make your points is kinda the point.

user-pic

I think the mullahs have demonstrated that they are capable of absolutely anything -- including nuking Israel despite the cost to their own people (about whom they care not at all).

true, that they do not care about their own people in terms of freedom and anyone who loves freedom would not want to live in iran. but to say that they would nuke israel is folly. you've just shown that you subscribe to the mad mullah theory of iran. by that statement you've just joined the hysteria brigade on iran. you can see this hysteria brigade on haaretz where almost everyday there is an article on iran: should we attack now, should we wait, how about obama, do we have the capability to do it, war game excercises, etc, etc. etc.

user-pic

Very good point, Bluepearl. MJR here yields the fortress and then makes a big to-do about defending a minor guardhouse.

user-pic

The hypothetical nukes are just a pretext.

Focus groups probably show that the average American boob is afraid of nukes in the possession of Iran.

It is to laugh : we just got hornswoggled by this exact same story last time. The news industry treats it seriously - why ?

MJ seems to take it seriously even though he should know better.

A cabal of well-connected guys want to bomb Iran. Oil and gas may be their motivation. The Saudis are probably big backers of the scheme but have their own priorities.

Even today we are yet to be told the honest-to-god reason for attacking Iraq. I mean the REAL motivation - not 'bad intelligence'. Deliberately faked-up stories are not 'bad intelligence'.

user-pic

Even today we are yet to be told the honest-to-god reason for attacking Iraq. I mean the REAL motivation - not 'bad intelligence'. Deliberately faked-up stories are not 'bad intelligence'

what is the difference between governments and the mafia?

the mafia dresses better.

user-pic

The threat, if there be one, is the undisclosed nuclear stockpile in Israel. That, rather than Iranian plutonium enrichment, is the existential problem.

The massive, secret, nuclear arsenal that is estimated by US authorities to contain up to 400 nuclear warheads - enough to wipe out half the world - and being roughly equivalent to 1 WMD for every 12,500 of its population – is an astonishingly frightening factor which completely dwarfs the comparative figure in America, Russia, China, France, UK, India or even Pakistan.

Such enormously powerful weaponry in the hands of an extreme right-wing, coalition government, is not something that induces peaceful sleep at nights. And, unbelievably, that stockpile is supported with more billions of US dollars, each and every year. For what reason, I know not.

I guess you couldn't make it up as a movie plot, it would seem too ridiculous.

user-pic

The media did a horrible job reporting on Biden's remark. I don't think I heard a single reporter mention that Biden was talking specifically about an "existential threat". Granted, such language can be interpreted almost however one wants, but it is still an important caveat to include.

user-pic

You need to include our very own blog author when you talk about the media going nuts and misinterpreting Biden's comments. I hope he doesn't decide to take this blog down like he did the last one (destroying evidence and all that).

user-pic

Actually I heard Richad Lugar saying that last night. There have been people who stepped up to the plate to say that what Biden said was not inaccurate but that they would first have to come to us for our support since we are the only friend of Israel in the middle east.

user-pic

Whenever the subject of 3rd world nuclear weapons proliferation is raised I always wonder why we never hear much about who it was that supplied, and is supplying, the critical technology bits that was, and are, required. Instead, all that we hear about how many centrifuges Iran has acquired, not how and from whom they acquired them. The same goes for the atomic reactors used to produce Plutonium. I don't believe that such 3rd world nuclear wannabe nations created all of the necessary technology from scratch.

Aren't some of the largest industrialized nations guilty here? The Russians, Americans, French, Germans, etc.? Well, maybe, not those nations so much as certain large corporations within them. Kim Jung Il has, and A.Q. Kahn had, become significant sources of technology proliferation, but from where did N. Korea and Pakistan obtain the critical technology for THEIR domestic atomic weapons programs?

This reminds me of how the U.S. hypocritically demonized Sadam's use of chemical weapons against the Kurds while ignoring the fact that we likely sold Sadam those very same weapons. Sadam almost certainly used those weapons against the Iranians in their war. Remember that photo of Rumsfeld shaking Sadam's hand to celebrate the deal?

user-pic

A very relevant point. Britain and France originally and covertly supplied materials and helped construct Israel's nuclear facility and in the years subsequently the US helped build it into the 5th most powerful nuclear state in the world. Again, for what reason - I know not.

As a general comment, if the world's regimes were not awash with American, British, French and Israeli weaponry including cluster bombs, missiles, fighter aircraft, tanks, toxic chemicals including white phosphorus, machine guns, nuclear-armed submarines and so on - perhaps the peoples of the world might have a chance to live out their lives in comparative peace.

But politicians the world over, licence their arms manufacturers to export their deadly tools of extermination virtually without restriction. Everyone makes money - except those who die. And sometimes those who die are citizens of those very states who exported the arms in the first place.

user-pic

China and Russia have sold almost as many weapons (all the types you mention) as the U.S. and a hell of a lot more than Britain, France or Israel. But you left that out because it doesn't fit into your narrow narrative.

And I don't find it "astonishingly frightening" that Israel has had weapons for decades and never used them, including previously under rightwingers like Begin, Shamir and Netanyahu. They're no more scarier than the guys that ran the USSR, China or Nixon.

Deterrence has worked. The ultimate weapon is ultimately unusable. Which is not to say that we should not try our hardest to stop Iran; but I'm not going to say we should bomb them or even subscribe to the mad mullah theory. They're mad, but they're not suicidal.

user-pic

They're "mad." Why? Do they believe that an Iron-Age Sky God was their personal real estate agent?

Now that is madness.

user-pic

Who is the Iron-Age Sky God.

I guess "mad" is not the right word. What I tried to say above is that they are ultimately rational and definitely not suicidal. But agreeing that they are rational, does not mean they don't undertake extremely risky and provocative behavior and view costs and benefits differently than you or I do (think of the North Koreans as an even better example).

Kind of like giving little kids keys to heaven to clear minefields, killing Argentine Jews, instigating coups and unrest in Bahrain and other countries, or antagonizing U.S. Navy ships.

user-pic

Killing Argentine Jews? Wow. You have a wonderful memory about Jews killed in the 1990s, but you are able to forget the 300+ Palestinian children murdered by the human excrement in the IDF this last January. On their worst day, no Arab terrorist is as cowardly or as prolific a child killer than that vermin in the IDF.

user-pic

Yes, thanks I have a great memory. I am also able to remember that any time anybody posts anything on this blog you always have some comment about the Palestinians.

You have a completely single-minded focus on the Palestinians, which is fine, but how does that make you any more partial than any Israeli partisan. It doesn't. You're both blinded by obsession and hatred.

It's funny because I can condemn Sabra and Shatila and other Israel actions, including current ones, but in your mind can the Palestinians ever do wrong? Or the Iranians, Hezbollah? Is there any action of theirs you can rationalize or apologize for?

Which brings me back to my question...what did a few hundred Argentine Jews in a community center have to do with the U.S., Israel, Lebanon, or Iran?

user-pic

Did they provide material support to Israel? I suspect they about as "guilty" as the Palestinian children murdered by the cowardly maggots in the IDF.

You post is always the same, tired, immoral defense of Gun Zionism: "Yes, we murdered children, but other people are bad too."

Sure, other people are. But that doesn't change the fact that the IDF maggots are still baby killers. And the internet is letting us show the world the real, viscious, racist face of Gun Zionism. Suck on that.

user-pic

"We"? I'm not Israeli, I'm American. And it goes back to the point that I can find fault in my country and the Israelis and our other allies and suggest ways to remedy it, whereas you seem to think the Palestinians, Iranians, anyone else are blameless, perfect, total victims in this. And I suppose if Israel disappeared everything would be perfect.

Suck on that? Are you a child? Go watch Farfour with the other little kids.

And what do you think of this?
http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0708/p02s04-usgn.html
You probably won't have anything to say since it doesn't involve whitey or the Jews screwing over the Palestinians. The sad truth is they don't really have any friends and their leaders are hopeless.

user-pic

Does Iran impress anyone as pugnacious ? How many countries has Iran hauled off and bombed in the last thirty years ?

How many countries has the USA hauled off and bombed in the last thirty years ? Can you count them all ? Do not forget Grenada.

USA and its dear ally (and probably, behind the curtain, its dear oil supplier ally ) are picking this fight.

Today I would guess this is strictly about oil and gas. Peak oil is here or coming soon. The USA has to assert military control of the gulf before the citizens of the USA are informed that gas is going to be rationed. Big Poop Sandwich, everyone.

Whatever the stated reasons are they are certainly NOT the real reasons for starting this next war.

user-pic

To answer your questions Iran is extremely pugnacious. Here's a few examples:
-Support of anti-American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan;
-Iran-Iraq War;
-Support of Hezbollah, Hamas and other terrorist groups;
-Interference in Lebanon, Israel, the Palestinian territories, Egypt and other countries throughout the greater Middle East;
-Instigation of a '96 coup in Bahrain;
-Claiming Bahrain and parts of the UAE as its territory;
-Support of world-wide terrorism including the killing of 241 Marines in Beirut and the bombing of a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires killing 85 and injuring hundreds of Argentine Jews (not Americans or Israelis).

So while I would argue that the Iranian regime is much nastier and brutal than others, one could certainly argue at a minimum that it, like the Americans, Saudis, British, Israelis and every other country, interfering in the internal affairs of other states in pursuit of what it sees as its national interests.

user-pic

The Americans have surrounded Iran, operating in every country, province and body of water adjacent to that country.

From these positions the Americans ( and groups working with them ) are provoking and poking into Iran in every way they can. Don't forget a $400,000,000 budget for this adventure was discovered being administered from VP Cheney's office.

Of course our idiotic news organization do not report on this. Our bought-and-paid-for congresspeople are too gripped with fear to discuss this sort of thing. The public therefore thinks there is no such thing.

The USA and its dear ally plan to provoke a war - let's not pretend otherwise.

Is anyone posting here really afraid of Iran ? Why ?

user-pic

You just ignored everything I wrote so I'll accept it as admission that Iran is just as belligerent if not much more so than every other country trying to defend what it sees as its "interests."

Most of the things I mentioned pre-date the '03 invasion of Iraq and even 9/11. Check a map. Americans have very little presences in western Afghanistan and there are no Americans operating in Turkmenistan or to Iran's north.

You really have no idea what you're talking about.

$400 million is peanuts and Cheney is not VP any more. Iran spends a hell of a lot more in Lebanon, Iraq, the Palestinian territories and all over the world making trouble than a measly $400 mn.

I'm not "afraid" of Iran but I'm concerned by their influence and actions. I don't think they pose a direct threat to the physical security of the U.S. because they're not suicidal. But that doesn't mean I want them having nuclear weapons and other technologies. That doesn't mean I think we should tolerate their attempts to destabilize governments all over the world and spread their millenarian ideology. I don't like them setting up Hezbollah cells in South America or obstructing peace in Israel/Palestine or Lebanon. And as for their IRGC-SS/Basij-SA-Brownshirts regime killing its own people in the streets...unfortunately there's not much we can do because only the Iranian people can help themselves through their own internal regime change.

user-pic

The push to 'Bomb Iran' is coming from the exact same people who fooled the American public into attacking Iraq. Oops: there were no WMDs - the dictator there was no threat at all.

Their story was a complete fabrication. We are still not informed of the real reason for attacking and occupying. It was not 'faulty intelligence' - it was a hoax.

Iraq attacked Iran in the 80s. The hideous war that dragged on was prolonged by US support for Iraq. Iran remembers that time well but the Americans like to forget it.

The guys pushing us to 'bomb Iran' are LIARS. They want to 'bomb Iran' for some reason, probably oil and gas, that the American public might not buy. Otherwise why do they not come out and tell the real reasons ? Why does anyone believe them ?

Americans love to bomb things - it is easy to get Americans to agree that a place should be bombed. What happens after that is not clear - but it will not be simple and easy.

The items you mention may all be deplorable but I do not see how that justifies us starting ANOTHER war. We are starting a lot of wars lately but not finishing them. Soon we will be at war from the Mediterranean all the way to India. How smart is that ?

user-pic

I never said Iran's action justified another war, and if you listen to our president I don't see that happening right now. I'm only trying to point out the totally despicable nature of that regime and its current behavior and how detrimental it is to peace and stability in the region.

user-pic

So you listed about 400 people killed by the Pugnacious Iranians during the last 30 years.

How many people have we killed in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan since 2003? How many of them innocent. Tens of thousands.....

Sorry, I know we're not supposed to generalize about Westerners being violent.

user-pic

First off, the number is a hell of a lot more than 400 for the major terrorist attacks alone. You need to consider the materials and training Iran's Quds Waffen SS Force provides to insurgents and terrorists in Iraq, Lebanon and Afghanistan. We could also consider all of its own citizens, especially Bahais, that Iran executes, though that's another topic.

Unlike Iran's presence in all the countries I mentioned, the U.S. presence is sanctioned by the UN and welcomed by all of those governments. I was against invading Iraq, but at least our current President is trying to extricate us from that mess.

And I'd hardly compare our self-defense actions in Afghanistan and Pakistan to the work of a bunch of brainwashed thugs like the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. Our military is imperfect, but it means well unlike that bunch of brutal fanatical cowards.

user-pic

The fact that they hijacked an election, along the lines of the U.S. Supreme Court in 2000, and arrested fewer demonstrators than were arrested by the New York City Police Department during the 2004 GOP convention (and possibly by the Minneapolis Police during the 2008 GOP convention), and killed fewer demonstrators than were killed by the Chinese government just this week. does not demonstrate that the mullahs are "capabable of anything."

For one thing, they seem devoted to maintaining themselves in power. If nothing else, an unprovoked attack on Israel would produce a response that would leave them both out of power and dead. So that doesn't seem to be a sensible option.

The mullahs of Iran may be capable of a lot of things, but some don't even think the election was on the level and said so over the weekend. It's a long way from staging a phony election -- routine dictatorial practice -- and putting down large unauthorized protests -- routine practice in both dictatorships and democracies like the United States (see 2004 GOP convention again -- and 2008 GOP convention, 1968 Democratic Convention, etc., etc.) -- to launching suicidal attacks on a country able and willing to retaliate.

Too many people died in the Iranian protests, mostly at the hands of government thugs, but as these things go, it barely qualifies as a bloodbath. If anything, the mullahs seemed loath to go in for full-scale slaughter of their own people. It was bad enough as it was. No useful purpose is served as acting as if it takes a place among the worst crackdowns in history -- or even, as we've seen in China, the last 30 days.

After all, who is worrying that the persecution of Uighurs means that China is soon to launch a nuclear attack on Japan or even Taiwan?

user-pic

Maybe they were "protecting" their democracy like the Honduran Army.....

user-pic

Joe did not misspeak, and Barry did not contradict. Not giving a green light isn't a true contradiction of not putting up a stop sign/red light.
"...if anyone can unravel the knot, it's him" - based on what? Putin is not impressed. Why would the rulers of Iran, Syria, or the rest be impressed? An American with a pretty-girl face who likes to tell you about his country's flaws is not too imtimidating to guys in this part of the world.

user-pic

...yes, and how impressed were they by an American with a face (and brain) stolen from a chimp and who likes to tell them about the piety and inherent moral superiority of his country? Yeah, Puti-poot, KJI, and all those Mullahs were REALLY intimidated the past eight years, weren't they? Especially Putin, who surely must have realized Dubya was one tough hombre, what with his superhero like ability to see into Putin's soul merely by looking deeply [gag] into his eyes - LOL.

user-pic

It's funny how M.J. concealed his "concern" for the mullahs for so long, while flamboyantly criticizing his neocon blood brothers.

Now we're supposed to support the triggering of a global economic collapse, and the death of unknown numbers of goyim from radiation and starvation, all so Israel can eliminate the last of its independent rivals.

The Saudi regime, which is much more oppressive and radical, which supposedly funded 9/11, and which spreads radical Islam across the region, escapes all discussion.

Iran is dangerous because it is independent, and that is the ultimate threat to emerging world order.

user-pic

MJ writes: " I think the mullahs have demonstrated that they are capable of absolutely anything -- including nuking Israel despite the cost to their own people (about whom they care not at all)."

This strikes me as overblown, MJ. There are lots of regimes that are brutally internally--say, China--but uninterested in nuking another country.

This remark seems un-like you, to be honest.

I think you're shooting from the hip here. Do you have anything to back it up other than pointing to the current crack down?

user-pic

Totally agree. The Iranians have shown themselves to be practitioners of realist policies. Note that they backed Armenia in its conflict with Azerbaijian.

Compare the statements of the Iranian diplomats with those of the Bouncer from Moldova.

Leave a comment

Advertisement
Please disable your adblocker!
Ads are how we pay the bills!

Subscribe

The Coffee House
TPMCafe's regulars

House Brew
From Your Cafe Editor

Special Guests
Big names and big brains

Special Features
Pressing topics and trends

Table for One
An expert's week-long talk.

All Reader Posts
TPM readers discuss.

Book Club Calendar

Coming Soon



Nov. 30-Dec. 4



January 12-16



« Book Club ArchiveFull calendar »

Recent Reader Posts

All Reader Posts »





Masthead

Editor-in-Chief
Josh Marshall



Subscribe to TPMCafe's feed.
Subscribe to TPMCafe's reader blog feed.

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address