US Elections 2012 Obama v Romney Official Thread
Discussion
Countdown said:
stevejh said:
So at a time when Israel is probably close to launching an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities Obama can't make time to see Netanyahu but can make time to see Morsi, book an appearance on Letterman and go to a Jayzee and Beyonce hosted, $40,000 a table, fundraiser. Diplomatic priorities slightly awry perhaps.
Hmm... The first US Prez not to shout "How high sir?" when the Israelis say jump.The man's a disgrace.
stevejh said:
Possibly not a good time not to be talking to Israel though is it. I'm sure if Israel does attack Iran in the next few weeks there will be a lot of people wishing Obama had done more to keep Israel on side.
IMO Israel are using the election to blackmail Obama into attacking Iran (Any attack by Israel would be limited in its effectiveness, whereas the US would eliminate any Iranian nuclear capability over a short period of time).However Obama seems to be one of the few US presidents to realise that Israeli interests are not always (or even often) aligned with US interests (and I gather more and more Jews in the US are agreeing with Obama). I think the Americans should be proud to have a president who's not a poodle to a foreign power.
Netanyahu is a dick. He phoned up giving a tiny window in which he could meet when he already know Obama was elsewhere. When Obama's refused to jump to his command he set to leaking it to the press. There's generally a convention that national leaders stay out of each others elections but as I said, Netanyahu is a dick.
Countdown said:
stevejh said:
So at a time when Israel is probably close to launching an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities Obama can't make time to see Netanyahu but can make time to see Morsi, book an appearance on Letterman and go to a Jayzee and Beyonce hosted, $40,000 a table, fundraiser. Diplomatic priorities slightly awry perhaps.
Hmm... The first US Prez not to shout "How high sir?" when the Israelis say jump.The man's a disgrace.
rohrl said:
Netanyahu is a dick. He phoned up giving a tiny window in which he could meet when he already know Obama was elsewhere. When Obama's refused to jump to his command he set to leaking it to the press. There's generally a convention that national leaders stay out of each others elections but as I said, Netanyahu is a dick.
And you know these intimate details how?Jimbeaux said:
No, the first man to snub a visiting world leader to attend a rapper-hosted dinner; call it what it is, disrespect. The UK leadership has had to endure their share as well from him.
TBH, given the choice of "rapper" or "politician", I'd go out to dinner with the rap singer, too.CommanderJameson said:
Jimbeaux said:
No, the first man to snub a visiting world leader to attend a rapper-hosted dinner; call it what it is, disrespect. The UK leadership has had to endure their share as well from him.
TBH, given the choice of "rapper" or "politician", I'd go out to dinner with the rap singer, too.
Jimbeaux said:
rohrl said:
Netanyahu is a dick. He phoned up giving a tiny window in which he could meet when he already know Obama was elsewhere. When Obama's refused to jump to his command he set to leaking it to the press. There's generally a convention that national leaders stay out of each others elections but as I said, Netanyahu is a dick.
And you know these intimate details how?
rohrl said:
Jimbeaux said:
rohrl said:
Netanyahu is a dick. He phoned up giving a tiny window in which he could meet when he already know Obama was elsewhere. When Obama's refused to jump to his command he set to leaking it to the press. There's generally a convention that national leaders stay out of each others elections but as I said, Netanyahu is a dick.
And you know these intimate details how?From the FT
Obama-Bibi spat, not so bad for Barack
September 12, 2012 9:39 am by Gideon Rachman
Under normal circumstances, an American president running for re-election would do his utmost to avoid a row with the Israeli prime minister. But I wonder whether President Obama really will be damaged by his semi-public clash with Benjamin Netanyahu?
The conventional argument is that the Jewish vote is very important in two vital swing states, Florida and Ohio. The major American-Jewish organisations are passionate in their support for Israel and their concerns about Iran. So being perceived to be tough on Israel and weak on Iran is dangerous for Obama.
On the other hand, there is some evidence that Jewish voters in general are less hawkish, and more liberal, than the major American-Jewish organisations. AIPAC, although officially non-partisan, has taken positions on the Middle East and Iran that are very “neocon” – placing the organisation much closer to the Republicans than the Democrats. The Jewish vote, however, continues to be strongly Democratic.
The Romney camp will hope that an Obama-Bibi clash might change that. But many Jewish voters will know that there are important and respected figures within Israel, for example President Shimon Peres, who oppose Netanyahu’s drive to strike Iran.
Facing down pressure from Netanyahu to strike Iran might also play well with the wider American electorate. America is war weary at the moment - and foreign policy is low down its list of priorities. President Obama seems to have inoculated himself against the charge of weakness in foreign policy through the killing of Osama bin Laden. His opponent Mitt Romney will be tempted to wrap his arms around Netanyahu (an old friend), when Israeli visits the US for the UN General Assembly. But that could be a mistake – for both parties.
Obama-Bibi spat, not so bad for Barack
September 12, 2012 9:39 am by Gideon Rachman
Under normal circumstances, an American president running for re-election would do his utmost to avoid a row with the Israeli prime minister. But I wonder whether President Obama really will be damaged by his semi-public clash with Benjamin Netanyahu?
The conventional argument is that the Jewish vote is very important in two vital swing states, Florida and Ohio. The major American-Jewish organisations are passionate in their support for Israel and their concerns about Iran. So being perceived to be tough on Israel and weak on Iran is dangerous for Obama.
On the other hand, there is some evidence that Jewish voters in general are less hawkish, and more liberal, than the major American-Jewish organisations. AIPAC, although officially non-partisan, has taken positions on the Middle East and Iran that are very “neocon” – placing the organisation much closer to the Republicans than the Democrats. The Jewish vote, however, continues to be strongly Democratic.
The Romney camp will hope that an Obama-Bibi clash might change that. But many Jewish voters will know that there are important and respected figures within Israel, for example President Shimon Peres, who oppose Netanyahu’s drive to strike Iran.
Facing down pressure from Netanyahu to strike Iran might also play well with the wider American electorate. America is war weary at the moment - and foreign policy is low down its list of priorities. President Obama seems to have inoculated himself against the charge of weakness in foreign policy through the killing of Osama bin Laden. His opponent Mitt Romney will be tempted to wrap his arms around Netanyahu (an old friend), when Israeli visits the US for the UN General Assembly. But that could be a mistake – for both parties.
rohrl said:
Jimbeaux said:
Cute; so you made up the "small window" fact?
No, that was reported last night (UK time). Netanyahu's office said he had a small three hour window of availability on the Friday and that he had offered to fly from NY to DC if necessary.Jimbeaux said:
rohrl said:
Jimbeaux said:
Cute; so you made up the "small window" fact?
No, that was reported last night (UK time). Netanyahu's office said he had a small three hour window of availability on the Friday and that he had offered to fly from NY to DC if necessary.
The White House have denied that a meeting was even requested -
They are even asking questions back home. As Shaul Mofaz says;
White House spokesperson said:
“Contrary to reports in the press, there was never a request for Prime Minister Netanyahu to meet with President Obama in Washington, nor was a request for a meeting ever denied.”
At this delicate time I would have thought that Obama would want to keep Netanyahu at arms length. And what are Netanyahu's motives for trying to stir the pot? Perhaps he would prefer a more pliable, gullible and inexperienced POTUS who he can bully. Because he clearly can't bully this President.They are even asking questions back home. As Shaul Mofaz says;
Shaul Mofaz said:
“Mr. Prime Minister, tell me, who is our biggest enemy, the US or Iran? Who do you want replaced, Ahmadinejad or Obama?” Mofaz asked in the plenum. “How low are you prepared to drag relations with our closest ally?”
unrepentant said:
The White House have denied that a meeting was even requested -
They are even asking questions back home. As Shaul Mofaz says;
And here is something to the contrary: White House spokesperson said:
“Contrary to reports in the press, there was never a request for Prime Minister Netanyahu to meet with President Obama in Washington, nor was a request for a meeting ever denied.”
At this delicate time I would have thought that Obama would want to keep Netanyahu at arms length. And what are Netanyahu's motives for trying to stir the pot? Perhaps he would prefer a more pliable, gullible and inexperienced POTUS who he can bully. Because he clearly can't bully this President.They are even asking questions back home. As Shaul Mofaz says;
Shaul Mofaz said:
“Mr. Prime Minister, tell me, who is our biggest enemy, the US or Iran? Who do you want replaced, Ahmadinejad or Obama?” Mofaz asked in the plenum. “How low are you prepared to drag relations with our closest ally?”
http://news.yahoo.com/unusual-snub-obama-avoid-mee...
Jimbeaux said:
No, the first man to snub a visiting world leader to attend a rapper-hosted dinner; call it what it is, disrespect.
Previous poster called it right, first US leader not to bend over for Israel. I applaud any US president with the balls to treat the situation in the middle east dispassionately. Not saying this will ultimately prove to be the case with Obama but it's a step in the right direction.Jimbeaux said:
The UK leadership has had to endure their share as well from him.
Good, they will invariably have warranted it.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff