Obama on Iran, Israel and Nukes

[Hansmeister]

I don't think he is bluffing, because there is no upside to such a bluff, so why make it?

The upside to such a bluff is the same as with any bluff: the opponent folds.

But he is making the bluff to Israel - they are the target here, the intent is to get them to hold back. What is the upside to getting them to hold back, if there is no intention of going through with an attack on Iran should it become necessary?

If Obama has no intentin of taking military action should it become warranted, then why would he want to discourage Israel from taking that action?

I don't see any reason that makes sense unless you want to assume that Obama really does hate Israel and wouldn't mind seeing their position critically weakened.

Obama is afraid that an attack by Israel would cause a persian gulf crisis that would have oil prices going through the roof, sinking his already slim reelection chance.  Bluffing Israel into inaction until after the election makes perfect sense to Obama.

Partisan bullshit.

You can't argue with that logical reasoning.

It isn't logical reasoning, it is recognizing that logical reasoning won't do any good, because you are a partisan.

And your right, there really isn't any arguing with it.

Ha, I guess name calling is all you have left wen you can't win an argument (-> see Martinus).

[citizen k]

Btw, I'm not a partisan, I'm an ideologue, there is a big difference between the two.

Both are intractable.

[Hansmeister]

Btw, I'm not a partisan, I'm an ideologue, there is a big difference between the two.

Both are intractable.

An ideologue is principled, a partisan is opportunistic.

Just think of all those partisan hacks who attacked Bush for 8 years about Gitmo, warantless wiretaps, and other GWOT-related stuff who have gone completely quiet on those topics since Obama was inaugurated.  If you only knew the JR of the Bush years you would think he was a civil libertarian, now we know he is just a partisan hack who was willing to side with Al Qaeda against his bigger enemy bushitler.

My positions are completely consistent across the board, I have not criticized any anti-terror measure taken by Obama, only those he took to weaken our efforts (as, indeed, I was critical of Bush's "catch-and-release" of Gitmo detainees, for example).  I was also critical of Bush for failing to attack Iran, just as I am critical of Obama, and there is nothing in Obama's past behavior that given me confidence that he will do anything about it now.

[Admiral Yi]

But he is making the bluff to Israel - they are the target here, the intent is to get them to hold back. What is the upside to getting them to hold back, if there is no intention of going through with an attack on Iran should it become necessary?

If Obama has no intentin of taking military action should it become warranted, then why would he want to discourage Israel from taking that action?

I don't see any reason that makes sense unless you want to assume that Obama really does hate Israel and wouldn't mind seeing their position critically weakened.

He is not bluffing Israel, because he has not threatened them with repercussions if they attack.  He has in effect given Israel a US guarantee that Iran will not get the bomb.

The upside to holding Israel back is something along the lines Square Head described--no shit storm in the Persian Gulf.  The upside of bluffing Iran is the hope they will fold.

[Admiral Yi]

You already owe me a foot rub.  Besides, how wide is the window for "no attack on Iran"?

How wide would you like it to be?

[Razgovory]

You already owe me a foot rub.  Besides, how wide is the window for "no attack on Iran"?

How wide would you like it to be?

I dunno, what exactly would I get if I won.  Where does your income come from?

[Razgovory]

Btw, I'm not a partisan, I'm an ideologue, there is a big difference between the two.

Both are intractable.

An ideologue is principled, a partisan is opportunistic.

Just think of all those partisan hacks who attacked Bush for 8 years about Gitmo, warantless wiretaps, and other GWOT-related stuff who have gone completely quiet on those topics since Obama was inaugurated.  If you only knew the JR of the Bush years you would think he was a civil libertarian, now we know he is just a partisan hack who was willing to side with Al Qaeda against his bigger enemy bushitler.

My positions are completely consistent across the board, I have not criticized any anti-terror measure taken by Obama, only those he took to weaken our efforts (as, indeed, I was critical of Bush's "catch-and-release" of Gitmo detainees, for example).  I was also critical of Bush for failing to attack Iran, just as I am critical of Obama, and there is nothing in Obama's past behavior that given me confidence that he will do anything about it now.

Or those partisan hack that critizized Congress during the Bush adminstration for being obstructionist.  Oh, wait.  That was you.

[Kleves]

If Obama thought any of those things were true, he wouldn't make a very public assurance that he would attack Iran rather than allow them to get a bomb.

I'm not sure that follows. Obama may believe that the sanctions will work, and that an Israeli attack at this point would screw everything up. In such a case, he might say that he's willing to attack, but believe that he will never have to actually do so. But that's not even my point; all I've been saying is that Obama will have a tough task convincing Netanyahu to put Israel's fate in his (Obama's) hands.

Is there any more effective way to convince the Israelis that he is serious than a public and unambiguous statement?

Well, that's just the point, isn't it? Obama can say that, but he's going to have to get the Israeli's to trust him.

I guess you can invent scenarios and then question his resolve under those scenarios - but why?

Because don't the Israelis have to do the same thing? Obama is going to have to satisfy them that there's no realistic scenario where he leaves them hanging out to dry.

Are you just looking for a reason to be all pissed off at the man? This makes no sense - if in fact you are of the opinion that the US should take military action as a last resort to stop Iran from going nuclear, then how could it be that the US President stating publicly and clearly that we will do so be seen as some kind of negative?

Whoever said it was a negative, or criticized Obama? I think an Israeli attack at this point would probably do more harm than good - I'm not sure that Israel has the capability to seriously damage Iran's nuclear program (presumably the US still does). So I'm not even disagreeing with what he's doing; my whole point has been that he has a tough sell ahead of him because this is an existential issue for Israel.

[Jacob]

Obama is afraid that an attack by Israel would cause a persian gulf crisis that would have oil prices going through the roof, sinking his already slim reelection chance.  Bluffing Israel into inaction until after the election makes perfect sense to Obama.

Hey Hansie, are you are Romney guy or a Santorum guy? Or do you favour someone else?

[Siege]

I don't think he is bluffing, because there is no upside to such a bluff, so why make it?

The upside to such a bluff is the same as with any bluff: the opponent folds.

But he is making the bluff to Israel - they are the target here, the intent is to get them to hold back. What is the upside to getting them to hold back, if there is no intention of going through with an attack on Iran should it become necessary?

If Obama has no intentin of taking military action should it become warranted, then why would he want to discourage Israel from taking that action?

I don't see any reason that makes sense unless you want to assume that Obama really does hate Israel and wouldn't mind seeing their position critically weakened.

Obama is afraid that an attack by Israel would cause a persian gulf crisis that would have oil prices going through the roof, sinking his already slim reelection chance.  Bluffing Israel into inaction until after the election makes perfect sense to Obama.

Partisan bullshit.

When did you become a liberal?
You KNOW Obama fucking hates Israel, almost as much as he hates America, and see Israel as an imperialist/colonialist enterprise.
Obama wants socialism in America, and if we let him, he will DESTROY this country.

Make no mistake, Obama ain't muslim, but he is atheist-socialist and subscribe to the ideology of liberation.

[grumbler]

When did you become a liberal?
You KNOW Obama fucking hates Israel, almost as much as he hates America, and see Israel as an imperialist/colonialist enterprise.
Obama wants socialism in America, and if we let him, he will DESTROY this country.

Make no mistake, Obama ain't muslim, but he is atheist-socialist and subscribe to the ideology of liberation.

I thought you weren't going to post drunk any more.

If I were you, I'd stick to the moon landing conspiracy.  You have far more credibility on that issue than you do foaming at the mouth over a man you seem to know nothing whatsoever about.

[Siege]

When did you become a liberal?
You KNOW Obama fucking hates Israel, almost as much as he hates America, and see Israel as an imperialist/colonialist enterprise.
Obama wants socialism in America, and if we let him, he will DESTROY this country.

Make no mistake, Obama ain't muslim, but he is atheist-socialist and subscribe to the ideology of liberation.

I thought you weren't going to post drunk any more.

If I were you, I'd stick to the moon landing conspiracy.  You have far more credibility on that issue than you do foaming at the mouth over a man you seem to know nothing whatsoever about.

.

I know a lot about Obama. I juyst need to look at the state of the US Army today.
No money for training, 200 rounds per machinegun to qualify our gunners, no match ammo for sniper rifles whatsoever, very limited ammount of blanks for tactical exercises, repair orders now take months waiting for spare parts, both for weapons and vehicles, etc.

These days we make noise with our mouths to simulate blanks: "Bugbugbuget cuts cutscutscuts!!".
This is how we are training. Never seen anything like this before. You don't fuck around with training.
Whatever we don't train today realistically, we will pay for with blood later on when we deploy.

[Sheilbh]

Partisan bullshit.

Just to note Jeffrey Goldberg (who did the Obama interview) had a good line on this on Twitter.  As he put it 'If Obama publicly circumcised himself and became a Lubavitcher, some on the right would still call him an Israel-hater'.  Seemed apt

[Siege]

Partisan bullshit.

Just to note Jeffrey Goldberg (who did the Obama interview) had a good line on this on Twitter.  As he put it 'If Obama publicly circumcised himself and became a Lubavitcher, some on the right would still call him an Israel-hater'.  Seemed apt

You do realize many Chabad Lubavitch members are anti-israeli, right?

[Sheilbh]

You do realize many Chabad Lubavitch members are anti-israeli, right?

Yes.  Some are. I think Goldberg meant the ones who aren't.