You have commented 338 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Israel-Palestine-Jordan
Israel On The Roulette Table
2012-11-08
[Ynet] Obama created tense relations with Netanyahu by choosing Cairo over Jerusalem

Secretly, Netanyahu would have like to see Romney in the White House. People, like countries, have a tendency to connect to those who smile at them. Netanyahu would have loved to help Romney get elected and get rid of Obama's bitterness and the tense relations. But the Israeli prime minister never went public with these wishes.

Despite what his opponents claim, Netanyahu did not bet on Romney. The PM is not the gambling type (even though Sheldon Adelson, one of his biggest donors, is a gaming tycoon). You cannot accuse Netanyahu of being hesitant and unable to make decisions and at the same time allege that he is a wild gambler who takes risks.

Netanyahu did not create the tension with Obama. We should not confuse the victim with the rapist. It was Obama who chose to Cairo over Jerusalem; it was Obama who was photographed with his legs on the table while speaking with Netanyahu over the phone; and it was Obama who coerced Netanyahu into freezing construction in the settlements.

Obama's first term as president was problematic not only for Netanyahu, it was problematic for the entire State of Israel. The official support continues, but the fondness has vanished. Regardless of his relations with Netanyahu, Obama viewed Israel as a burden in the Middle East rather than a strategic asset.

On Wednesday Netanyahu will be accused of gambling on our future. If Romney would have won people would have talked about Netanyahu's luck, but since Obama won, Netanyahu will be accused of jeopardizing Israel's strategic ties with the US. The slogans are ready, as are the banners.

Perhaps a different prime minister would have been able to sustain a better relationship between Jerusalem and Washington, but the only gambler here was Obama, the president who put Israel on the roulette table four years ago and dreamt of winning the jackpot. The results, by the way, are not that great.
Posted by:trailing wife

#6  Glenmore, you concept is correct, your example is wrong.... see Linebacker and Linebacker II

Pocket Money in particular gave the NV a real, solid reason to talk.

Your point is taken, but the example should have been with the final NVA offensive which the US Congress decided would only be allowed 1 billion bucks to defend against.

Then again.. I look at your comment and see you are completely correct. Never mind.



Posted by: Shipman   2012-11-08 18:08  

#5  It was reported one day ago from several sources that Valerie Jarrett was in Iran taking part in secret talks. As I recall, she was born in Tehran.
Posted by: JohnQC   2012-11-08 17:03  

#4  Negotiation is a matter of convincing others you can and will do more than negotiate if you need to. Without credible threat it is pointless (see Viet Nam.)
Posted by: Glenmore   2012-11-08 13:47  

#3  I did say in an earlier comment - the very first thing I expected the Iranians to do after the Nov election was to go into another round of negotiations. And now what do we see - a proposed under-the-table plan for 3 months of talks between Tehran and Washington DC (according to Debka). Maybe Debka is wrong ... but it's typical of Tehran. I have to say - they've been the masters at the negotiating table so far.
Posted by: Raider   2012-11-08 12:44  

#2  Obama's first term as president was problematic not only for Netanyahu, it was problematic for the entire State of Israel. Ditto for the USA. The 47% spoke.
Posted by: JohnQC   2012-11-08 07:47  

#1  See also DAILY TIMES.PK > OBAMA VICTORY SPELLS TROUBLE FOR NETANYAHU.

Iran remains highly unlikely to close the Strait of Hormuz this second time around as like the first - iff the Bammer stays the course on Diplomacy + Hard Sanctions, IT WILL MEAN NO US-LED AIR STRIKES ANDOR GROUND WAR AGZ IRAN UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE. In Israel's = Netanyahu's mind, and rightly so, no US-led air strike or ground war means that IRAN WILL GET ITS NUKES.

Again, IRAN = THE BURDEN IS ON THE US + ISRAEL TO ATTACK IT FIRST, AND SEEMINGLY WIDOUT CAUSE AS IRAN DOES NOT [officially]INTEND TO BUILD ANY DE FACTO NUCLEAR WEAPONS [per the Japan/Egypt Model].
A unilateral Israeli attack means the start of a MAJOR REGIONAL OR TRANS-REGIONAL WAR [Global?] TO WHICH THE US CANNOT HOPE TO STAY NEUTRAL OR UN-INVOLVED. The US in LT may end up having to invade Iran in ground war whether it wants to or not.

Israel vee Iran in ME = Japan vee China in East China Sea, or PHIL vee China in South Sea.

* TOPIX > OBAMA'S SECOND TERM WILL WEAKEN US FOREIGN POLICY.

* DAILY TIMES.PK > OBAMA'S FULL PLATE [second POTUS term]: FISCAL CLIFF, IRAN, SYRIA, as well as Rising China + Uncertain Outcome(s) vee "Arab Spring" [Event + Govts.] + EuroZone/EUZ Crises.

* WORLD MILITARY FORUM > PLA ARMY NEWSPAPER: HOSTILE WESTERN FORCES, GOVTS. FEAR THE "ARMY OF MAO ZEDONG".

versus

* NEW YORK TIMES > THE PERMANENT MILITARIZATION OF AMERICA.

Goodbye America, hello Amerikka.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2012-11-08 01:17  

00:00