I, for one, am sick and tired of the tie between Jews and the Deal because all it does is stoke anti-semitism. Many Jews favor the deal, many non-Jews do not - and NOT because they are at the beck and call of the "Jewish Lobby" or Netanyahu. Please start thinking about consequences when there is article after article after article.
1
If only American Jews found the proposed deal unacceptable, it would be game over; Jews make up only 2.2% of the population.
"August 3, 2015 - American Voters Oppose Iran Deal 2-1, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds . . .
American voters oppose 57 - 28 percent, with only lukewarm support from Democrats and overwhelming opposition for Republicans and independent voters, the nuclear pact negotiated with Iran, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll released today."
Again, July 28, 2015: "CNN/ORC poll: Majority wants Congress to reject Iran deal . . . 52% say Congress should reject the deal . . ."
Yes, American Jews are campaigning against approval of this deal -- as are millions of others. The constant carping at their efforts is whistling in the wind; even if the entire 2.2% Jewish population were against it, there is another 50+% of non-Jews who realize the deal is a complete sell out and will do almost nothing to impede Iran's development of a nuclear weapon. (Which, one must realize, will be designed to fit as the warhead on the Russian ballistic weapons that they will be free to buy -- with their ample oil money, now mostly denied them -- in just eight years.)
So, to those who say Congress should not listen to the 2.2% of Americans who are Jewish but rather to the vox populi: Yes, of course. And the deal would then, as a result, be rejected. As it should be.
"August 3, 2015 - American Voters Oppose Iran Deal 2-1, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds . . .
American voters oppose 57 - 28 percent, with only lukewarm support from Democrats and overwhelming opposition for Republicans and independent voters, the nuclear pact negotiated with Iran, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll released today."
Again, July 28, 2015: "CNN/ORC poll: Majority wants Congress to reject Iran deal . . . 52% say Congress should reject the deal . . ."
Yes, American Jews are campaigning against approval of this deal -- as are millions of others. The constant carping at their efforts is whistling in the wind; even if the entire 2.2% Jewish population were against it, there is another 50+% of non-Jews who realize the deal is a complete sell out and will do almost nothing to impede Iran's development of a nuclear weapon. (Which, one must realize, will be designed to fit as the warhead on the Russian ballistic weapons that they will be free to buy -- with their ample oil money, now mostly denied them -- in just eight years.)
So, to those who say Congress should not listen to the 2.2% of Americans who are Jewish but rather to the vox populi: Yes, of course. And the deal would then, as a result, be rejected. As it should be.
27
Roger Cohen has been a fan of Iran for as long as he's been writing for the Times, if not longer. Roger Cohen has been critical of everything Israel has done for at least the same amount of time. Roger Cohen has been a fan of Barak Obama since the man was nominated by his Party six years ago. Roger Cohen supports J Street. Roger Cohen, not surprisingly is for the Iran deal. None of this is a surprise. The man lacks objective credibility. If Roger Cohen is correct, then my grandchildren will live in a peaceful Middle East with Iran being a benign player. If Roger Cohen is wrong, then my grandchildren will have ended their lives along with millions of others due to an Iranian nuke being dropped on their heads. Based on everything said, there's nothing in Obama's words that would cause me to be optimistic about the future. Based on Iranian words, there's everything that would cause me to be utterly pessimistic about the future. Obama asks that he be trusted. Based on his track record, I wouldn't trust him to say that it's daylight at 12 noon in Washington. Based on the Iranian track record there's nothing that would lead me to distract their stated intentions. I need to ask why Roger Cohen is pushing his agenda when all he risks are the lives of my grandchildren and the millions of others that will potentially die. As for Obama, he's already said that if he's wrong, and Iran gets the bomb, then it will dwell on his conscience. Makes me feel better already.
35
Thanks for naming these two, as we deserve to know the traitors amongst us who would even consider torpedoing our foreign policy in service to a foreign government. Netanyahu is a foreign agent of an apartheid state and should be arrested if he returns to the US for any reason: now that is a better deal.
54
Ever achieving peace in the Middle East, given the centuries old sectarian violence, isn't a possibility; add to the mix the creation of the Jewish state of Israel in 1948 and the largest sponsor of terrorism without financial restraint, its not a matter of if Iran will launch a nuclear weapon/set of dirty bombs, but when.
9
One wonders whether one of the fundamental duplicities of many Jewish Americans who opposes any kind of US effort to bring peace to the middle-east, is due to their primary allegiance to Israel rather than to US, their country of birth. The modern world cannot change the history of holocaust, the heinous crime against humanity, but the US along with other countries made every effort over last seventy years to make Israel a strong country, even providing with secret technology to build Israel’s underground nuclear capability. As a recent article in the Times, based on a recent visit in Iran by the author, reported ordinary Iranians fully understand any attack by their country on Israel will make them equally vulnerable to destruction. It is an absolute shame when Netanyahu attempts to interfere in our internal political discussion, supported by our own citizens of Israeli mind-set. One should never forget the sacrifices made by our young citizens of all faiths in the last world war and we cannot send them to another war that could be avoided through diplomatic conversation.
44
I still like the *idea* of Israel, but current management acts more like an adversary than an ally. Netanyahu has been decidedly off-beam on many recent American foreign policy initiatives, intransigent regarding settlement issues, operating against a Palestinian state, and in general a bad actor on the global stage. One questions the wisdom of providing aid to such a regime.
55
The only criterion that Congress to should apply in determining whether to approve this deal is whether it serves US interests. It should not be based on partisan political considerations, the opinion of an Israeli leader or one's opinion of Obama or Kerry. Sadly, Netanyahu has managed to manipulate the sorry state of our political system to his advantage at the expense of long term Israeli interests and, more importantly, US national interests. He has in the process undermined bipartisan support for Israel as well as the security of Israel. How can we consider Israel an ally when its leader chooses to insult our president and secretary of state on a critical national security issue. Israel will come to regret this latest irresponsible intervention in American politics.
52
As long as Israel is willing to take on Iran on it's own, Bibi can say anything he wants. However, I am angered beyond belief that someone from outside our borders is doing everything he can to drag us into a war, because it's clear to me that this is the only alternative to a peace agreement, unless we're willing to accept Iran with nukes.
Make a choice, Bibi. If you want our continued support in all the ways we help you, then honor our own internal processes of governance. How do you think Israelis would would feel if Obama was actively and directly engaged in subverting your governmental process?
Make a choice, Bibi. If you want our continued support in all the ways we help you, then honor our own internal processes of governance. How do you think Israelis would would feel if Obama was actively and directly engaged in subverting your governmental process?
67
The Obama administration incessantly claims there is no better nuclear deal available with Iran. It would be more accurate to say that there is *no longer* a better deal available: they gave way to Iran on virtually every point that would have strengthened the deal. They painted us all into a corner.
22
Netanyahu and the intelligence services of Israel talked a weak president into attacking and overthrowing Saddam Hussein. This made Iran stronger. Israel needs to grow up and stand for itself in the middle east. I fully support the right of Israel to exist, but I don't support their interference in our countries politics. Israel has what 70-100 nuclear bombs? Iran, zero at this point. I do not appreciate the hypocrisy of Israel's protest about the Iranian bomb.
I believe Iran is more valuable as an ally than all of the other middle eastern countries besides Israel. Lets find common ground with both of them.
I believe Iran is more valuable as an ally than all of the other middle eastern countries besides Israel. Lets find common ground with both of them.
49
I have much respect for the American Jews. Yet, as an outsider I find it totally incomprehensible why they think they should have more say than other Americans. The United States of America belongs to ALL Americans, who TOGETHER shape their country's future and politics.
But it's not their fault! They are being used as pawns by Netanyahu and powerful Jewish lobbyists and reactionaries like Sheldon Adelson.
But it's not their fault! They are being used as pawns by Netanyahu and powerful Jewish lobbyists and reactionaries like Sheldon Adelson.
51
I guess I'm reflective of the rest of the Jewish community because I'm on the fence on this. On the one hand, the same President who negotiated this deal also negotiated the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which turns much of America's sovereignty over to multinational corporations. It's hard to trust someone who would do that.
On the other hand, the same Israeli Prime Minister who so vehemently opposes this deal has interjected himself in American domestic affairs in an unprecedented, boorish manner. He's also ignored lines drawn by agreements with the Palestinians and wantonly demolished Arab villages. He's a really hard dude to trust.
So frankly, I'm not sure whom to believe in this deal; the NYT would serve me and other Americans well with a detailed explanation of the deal.
On the other hand, the same Israeli Prime Minister who so vehemently opposes this deal has interjected himself in American domestic affairs in an unprecedented, boorish manner. He's also ignored lines drawn by agreements with the Palestinians and wantonly demolished Arab villages. He's a really hard dude to trust.
So frankly, I'm not sure whom to believe in this deal; the NYT would serve me and other Americans well with a detailed explanation of the deal.
13
American citizens and the Senate have the right to decide ( and vote) to support the Iran agreement (treaty).
However, I am dismayed to hear some of my friends accuse the President of breaking the law (impeach). The constitutution is clear on this and calling it illegal is treason.
However, I am dismayed to hear some of my friends accuse the President of breaking the law (impeach). The constitutution is clear on this and calling it illegal is treason.
15
We need to hear from more than the Jewish thoughts on this Iran deal: There are many who silently favor the deal, both Jewish and non Jewish, and solid thoughts are desired. It is hard to consider that many of these comments are from persons who could one day run for President of the US. Can we trust someone who seems to be lock step with other countries? Like Tom Cotton?
American first, and verified.
American first, and verified.
13
I am more convinced than ever that Bibi is a politician merely trying to stay at the top; he will do anything, including interfering with internal American politics in a manner we have not seen since the early 1800s. I was never a fan, but this is repulsive and a new low for the leader of "a friend".
President Obama, on the other hand, is reaching for something larger than himself; is he doing this to secure his "legacy"? Oh come on! He is doing this because he is a thoughtful and responsible man who, with another responsible and thoughtful man (John Kerry, Vietnam hero!!), is doing the right thing.
Not the best thing - that would be to have Iran totally disband its nuclear process and come out hand in hand singing "Its a Small World After All". But this is the best we can accomplish. Re-engagement with a people widely said to be very pro-American can only help them. Engagement may help change their choices in government - who knows? But engagement with Iran and engagement with Cuba can only help all of us.
The Republicans and Bibi can bloviate all they wish - they accomplish nothing but to make the work of the real adults harder
President Obama, on the other hand, is reaching for something larger than himself; is he doing this to secure his "legacy"? Oh come on! He is doing this because he is a thoughtful and responsible man who, with another responsible and thoughtful man (John Kerry, Vietnam hero!!), is doing the right thing.
Not the best thing - that would be to have Iran totally disband its nuclear process and come out hand in hand singing "Its a Small World After All". But this is the best we can accomplish. Re-engagement with a people widely said to be very pro-American can only help them. Engagement may help change their choices in government - who knows? But engagement with Iran and engagement with Cuba can only help all of us.
The Republicans and Bibi can bloviate all they wish - they accomplish nothing but to make the work of the real adults harder
53
Iranian citizens may or may not have hatred towards Jews. That does not impact state policy towards Israel. The government is hostile and unfortunately, that is what counts. Has Mr. Cohen noticed how little in our supposed democracy the government reflects the desires of citizens? Not much, at best.
16
Nice one. We should all place loyalty to the US over our religious leanings to support other nations.
22
We should cease sending any money or arms to Israel until it decides to stop: (a) opposing world efforts (and our efforts) to enhance peace and disarmament; (b) interfering with U.S. political decision-making; and (c) attempting to humiliate our elected leaders.
56
As Mearsheimer and Walt ably demonstrate in their must-read The Israel Lobby, AIPAC and other Jewish pressure groups will continue spending billions--yes, billions--to ensure that your exhortation never comes to pass. They buy politicians, buy the narrative your kids are indoctrinated with on college campuses, buy whatever they want. Including US foreign policy.
18
For generations the music of Richard Wagner could not be performed in Israel. Finally, in a stroke of bravery and intelligence, Maestro Daniel Bareboim walked across the street and performed Wagner. In essence he was saying: The fact that Hitler and Goebbels adopted Wagner’s music for their own political/cultural agenda did not, in fact, grant them the copyright to Wagner’s music! The music belonged to a world that had soundly defeated Nazism and could now say ‘In your face, Hitler. Wagner’s music is for all of us.’ No, the Iran nuclear deal doesn’t fall into the category of revisiting of cultural imperatives. However, performing Wagner’s music in Israel said, once and for all: We are not victims. We are strong, we are vibrant, we are smart, we are capable. Supporting “The Deal” would once again show the nations of the world (and it’s squabbling leaders) that Israel remains strong, vibrant, very smart and incredibly capable.
33
I agree totally with you, but the most important is that, as you said it, Netanyahu the PM of a country, receiving billions in aid from the US, is pushing the Jewish Americans to listen to him, instead of their own President, as if he were America's boss, which is insulting to the Americans.
Second, what do you suppose the Americans will think about their Jewish compatriots' preference towards a foreign country, Israel, when they see them obey the Prime Minister of that country?
Second, what do you suppose the Americans will think about their Jewish compatriots' preference towards a foreign country, Israel, when they see them obey the Prime Minister of that country?
39
It’s time for the American Jews to evaluate each and every possibility logically and arrive at the conclusion the President and the rest of the world arrived at together. Yes, every decision we take is fraught with risk, but we need to figure out which one is the minimum risk position for the entire world. I don’t buy Netanyahu’s (and, by default, the Republican Party’s) position on it as his way does not mitigate the current problem at all but escalates it to a level of war. I think American people are tired of wars in Middle East, and we need to try the solution the entire world is positing.
35
History does repeat; placating your sworn enemies does not pay ( Churchill was correct about Neville Chamberlain's delusional overtures to the Nazis). Obama's " Deal Chasing" with Recalcitrant Iranians is equally delusional.
12
Mr. Cohen, being a non-Jewish visitor to Israel on many occasions, at least twice each year. I can say that the majority of Israeli's are appalled at the lack of support for Israel expressed by Jewish Americans. Israeli's are equally appalled by the large scale support of Obama by Jewish Americans.
Obama is anti-Israel. He has been a supporter of Islam to the detriment of Israel and the Jewish people. How and why does he gain such support among the Jewish population in America? It can only be because American Jews are so ill informed that they have no clear understanding of who and what Obama really is.
Netanyahu and Israel are not perfect. Why do we hold them to a standard higher than we hold ourselves? America and it's world partners made an agreement with a terrorist regime in the middle east without giving Israel any say in the matter. That is unconscionable. Israel is the only democracy in the middle east and our only ally. Yet America seems to prefer Islam. Of course Netanyahu must approach the American people with his version of this terrible agreement. It is critical to the survival of Israel. Good grief. Later you will be you will be writing articles about what a tragedy it is that Israel has been destroyed.
Obama is anti-Israel. He has been a supporter of Islam to the detriment of Israel and the Jewish people. How and why does he gain such support among the Jewish population in America? It can only be because American Jews are so ill informed that they have no clear understanding of who and what Obama really is.
Netanyahu and Israel are not perfect. Why do we hold them to a standard higher than we hold ourselves? America and it's world partners made an agreement with a terrorist regime in the middle east without giving Israel any say in the matter. That is unconscionable. Israel is the only democracy in the middle east and our only ally. Yet America seems to prefer Islam. Of course Netanyahu must approach the American people with his version of this terrible agreement. It is critical to the survival of Israel. Good grief. Later you will be you will be writing articles about what a tragedy it is that Israel has been destroyed.
29
So Obama and I (an American Jew) are anti Israel because we don't want to go to war with Iran for the sake of some right wing Israeli politicians. Nonsense.
31
Please Israel destroyed, I think not. Let us say that was even a possibility, Israel would destroy the Arab world with the 300 atom bombs that everyone knows they have. So even if Iran did have a bomb it would be suicide to use it. Israel has been a occupier of foreign lands for over forty years now. All with the support of billions of dollars from the United states {3 billion a year). There is no bigger supporter of Israel then the U.S.
Netanyahu has wanted a war with Iran for a long time now. However he wants a war there Americans take action. Where American lives are lost. Let Israel have it's war and let Israel bleed if it does not want peace not the United States.
Netanyahu has wanted a war with Iran for a long time now. However he wants a war there Americans take action. Where American lives are lost. Let Israel have it's war and let Israel bleed if it does not want peace not the United States.
25
I, like many Americans, am dog-tired of any elected representative who places the interests of any other nation --- Israel included --- above those of the U.S. ; while I hesitate to call such behavior treason, I have no problem calling it irresponsible and counterproductive. Here we are, with intolerable levels of income inequality (and racism), struggling to rebuild an truly democratic (not plutocratic) economy that works for all Americans, and on top of that, we're made to listen to folks whose main concern appears to be Israel, particularly an Israel whose leader is a maniacal authoritarian absolutist. What an enormous waste of energy and a failure to tackle the issues important to the United States of America. Lunacy!
52
What the anti-agreement lobbyists don't mention is that Israeli and US intelligence have said that Iran has NO NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM, that it is Israel who has hundreds of nuclear weapons and is militarily aggressive outside its borders and refuses to sign the non-proliferation treaty.
Iran, OTOH, has not attacked a country outside its borders since the 1700s.
Iran, OTOH, has not attacked a country outside its borders since the 1700s.
40
Right, Bill, Iran "has not attacked a country outside its borders since the 1700's". Better go back and learn some facts. Iran prefers to supply weapons, training and financing to its allies like H Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Shiite militias in Iran, and let others do its dirty work in attacking Israel, killing Jews, and by the way, killing hundreds of American soldiers in Iraq with IED's.
16
Mr. Cohen omitted one of many similar statements about Israel and Jewish Israelis made by the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's Supreme Leader: "This barbaric, wolflike, and infanticidal regime of Israel which spares no crime has no cure but to be annihilated." Mr. Cohen also omitted that Secretary of State Kerry admitted that the Iran regime is anti-Semitic. Reasons enough for Israel to oppose this "agreement" with Iran, which gives them the capacity to purchase more arms, missiles, weapons to relay to Hezbollah and assist them in becoming the predominant power in the Middle East.
25
When I became a naturalized U.S. citizens I had to swear that I would put the interests of the U.S. over that of my fatherland. So why is it legal for certain Jewish Americans to openly pledge legion to another country?
27
What is the plan for Obama administration and Mr. Cohen to defend Israel against Iranian sponsored terrorism empowered by huge influx of cash? Israel can not risk its security based on the vague hope that somehow Iran will change dramatically over the next 10-15 yrs. Se. Sumer and Republicans are right: too much risk, too much at stake. Once Iran becomes economically powerful it will be even more difficult to deal with it. Not Obama, not you will be the victims.
Admiration should have acted in alignment with the congress all along. We can't sacrifice our principles and Israeli security only because the deal is on the table. Moral strength, character and reality are more important than saving face by signing the agreement.
Admiration should have acted in alignment with the congress all along. We can't sacrifice our principles and Israeli security only because the deal is on the table. Moral strength, character and reality are more important than saving face by signing the agreement.
9
Another Op-Ed contributor, Hooman Majdaug, said it best in today's piece, "Iranians Dare to Hope".
I absolutely agree that the thrust of the Iranian population is a return to "normalcy", a normalcy for which they have waited 35 years. It is impossible to believe the people, or even their government, will turn to nuclear weaponry, when, at this moment, their cherished return to trading with the rest of the world has been realized.
The Iran before the revolution was secularized, and its citizens embraced that life. Many Iranians fled, some with their finances intact, to new secular lives in other countries.
After the revolution, it seemed darkness fell on Iran. But surprisingly, 35 years on, Iran has elected governmental bodies at the national, provincial, and local levels. While they can be overruled by the theocratic government, they have more power than elected officials in the Shah's time.
Education of college educated women has exploded since the revolution, 18.4% of whom obtain their diplomas.
This is not to advocate for a theocratic government. It is to highlight the fact that Iran has not lost its long-term desire for trade and education--and a return to normalcy.
Netanyahu's policies of occupation and provocative rhetoric only alienate Israel from its neighbors.
While Tehran happily forms new trade relationships with Europe, Russia and China, the intransigent Netanyahu, and the U.S., sit and watch, left behind as the world moves forward.
I absolutely agree that the thrust of the Iranian population is a return to "normalcy", a normalcy for which they have waited 35 years. It is impossible to believe the people, or even their government, will turn to nuclear weaponry, when, at this moment, their cherished return to trading with the rest of the world has been realized.
The Iran before the revolution was secularized, and its citizens embraced that life. Many Iranians fled, some with their finances intact, to new secular lives in other countries.
After the revolution, it seemed darkness fell on Iran. But surprisingly, 35 years on, Iran has elected governmental bodies at the national, provincial, and local levels. While they can be overruled by the theocratic government, they have more power than elected officials in the Shah's time.
Education of college educated women has exploded since the revolution, 18.4% of whom obtain their diplomas.
This is not to advocate for a theocratic government. It is to highlight the fact that Iran has not lost its long-term desire for trade and education--and a return to normalcy.
Netanyahu's policies of occupation and provocative rhetoric only alienate Israel from its neighbors.
While Tehran happily forms new trade relationships with Europe, Russia and China, the intransigent Netanyahu, and the U.S., sit and watch, left behind as the world moves forward.
28
I was very disappointed to hear that my representative in the House, Congresswoman Nita Lowey, like Schumer, was not going to vote for the Iran nuclear deal. When I wrote to her asking her about this, all she offered as her reasons was vague double-talk and no alternatives. She closed by saying though that she "remained hopeful that the Administration and Congress, in concert with our P5+1 and regional allies, will prevail in preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon." Why is she hopeful and how will this be accomplished? By dropping an H-bomb? This from someone who heretofore has had a sterling record and has been a very thoughtful person. She can't possibly believe anything she is saying and is just counting Jewish votes, which might be understandable if we weren't talking life and death. But I believe she has miscalculated what many Jews want, which is what is best for THIS country. She may face difficulties in the next primary -- at least with me.
41
I know you get the standard boiler plate, Israel has a right to defend itself. I get that all the time. When I point our Israel has gone far beyond self defense they just repeat what they said.
1
I don't understand why Iran shouldn't be allowed to develop some defense capabilities against the vast Israeli nuclear arsenal. If Iran were the Mideast country with nuclear weapons already, then Israel would be screaming for the U.S. to provide Israel with nukes (and searching for more spies like Jonathan Pollard to sell them nuclear secrets).
28
Having read numerous articles by Cohen I have come to believe that he has limited vision or understanding either of Iran and of US meddling, commenting, 'interfering' in the affairs of others. If it is OK for US to pontificate and advocate against another foreign leader on her/his turf, why not Netanyahu? Iran is a terrorist state and while this agreement addresses perhaps the nuclear side of things, the tentacles of Iran into terror across the globe are not addressed. Hundreds of millions of dollars will be released for them to spend as they wish -- guns not butter for their people.
18
@stan levy ohio:
Netanyahu does have a right to voice his opinions. But why would anyone listen to Netanyahu given his track record:
In 1992, then-parliamentarian Netanyahu advised the Israeli Knesset that Iran was “three to five years” away from reaching nuclear weapons capability, and that this threat had to be “uprooted by an international front headed by the U.S.”
1996, Netanyahu addressed a joint session of Congress where he darkly warned, “the deadline for attaining a nuclear bomb is getting extremely close.”
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/03/02/brief-history-netanyahu-cr...
Testifying again in front of Congress in 2002, Netanyahu claimed that Iraq’s nonexistent nuclear program was in fact so advanced that the country was now operating “centrifuges the size of washing machines.”
Netanyahu said in 2002. "If you take out Saddam’s regime, I guarantee you that it will have enormous positive reverberations on the region."
http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/18/opinion/sick-netanyahu-on-iran/
In the meantime, while we were "making the middle east safer" by getting rid of Saddam Hussein, North Korea made its first nuclear bomb in 2006.
Netanyahu does have a right to voice his opinions. But why would anyone listen to Netanyahu given his track record:
In 1992, then-parliamentarian Netanyahu advised the Israeli Knesset that Iran was “three to five years” away from reaching nuclear weapons capability, and that this threat had to be “uprooted by an international front headed by the U.S.”
1996, Netanyahu addressed a joint session of Congress where he darkly warned, “the deadline for attaining a nuclear bomb is getting extremely close.”
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/03/02/brief-history-netanyahu-cr...
Testifying again in front of Congress in 2002, Netanyahu claimed that Iraq’s nonexistent nuclear program was in fact so advanced that the country was now operating “centrifuges the size of washing machines.”
Netanyahu said in 2002. "If you take out Saddam’s regime, I guarantee you that it will have enormous positive reverberations on the region."
http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/18/opinion/sick-netanyahu-on-iran/
In the meantime, while we were "making the middle east safer" by getting rid of Saddam Hussein, North Korea made its first nuclear bomb in 2006.
3
@stan levy ohio:
To Iran, the US looks like a terrorist state.
The UK and US instigated the 1953 coup that overthrew the elected Iranian prime minister.
Under Reagan the US and European countries sold Saddam Hussein the materials and technology to make chemical weapons to use against the Iranians even though chemical weapons were outlawed by the Geneva convention after WWI - truly shameful!
To Iran, the US looks like a terrorist state.
The UK and US instigated the 1953 coup that overthrew the elected Iranian prime minister.
Under Reagan the US and European countries sold Saddam Hussein the materials and technology to make chemical weapons to use against the Iranians even though chemical weapons were outlawed by the Geneva convention after WWI - truly shameful!
1
@stan levy ohio:
The Iranians see the US as a terrorist state.
The UK and US instigated the 1953 coup that overthrew the elected Iranian prime minister.
Under Reagan the US and European countries sold Saddam Hussein the materials and technology to make chemical weapons to use against the Iranians even though chemical weapons were outlawed by the Geneva convention after WWI - truly shameful.
The Iranians see the US as a terrorist state.
The UK and US instigated the 1953 coup that overthrew the elected Iranian prime minister.
Under Reagan the US and European countries sold Saddam Hussein the materials and technology to make chemical weapons to use against the Iranians even though chemical weapons were outlawed by the Geneva convention after WWI - truly shameful.
3
All Americans, including American Jews, are united in our opposition to a nuclear-armed Iran.
We need to recognize that this agreement is a lousy deal - the product of poor negotiating and squandering of the leverage provided by years of painstakingly enacted, unprecedented international sanctions. But that is water under the bridge. The question now is whether it makes more pragmatic sense at this point for Congress to oppose the deal or endorse it, in order to minimize the negative consequences of the agreement and attempt to further our goal of preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.
I think the suggestion by Alan Dershowitz and Thomas Friedman is a sensible first step that Americans on all sides of the debate should support - a Congressional resolution authorizing the President to destroy any attempt by Iran to build a nuclear bomb.
Beyond that, it's hard to know which is best - do we risk further diminishing US influence if the deal is rejected by Congress, or might that provide an opportunity to go back to the negotiating table and improve some aspects of the agreement? I think I'm inclined to trust the instincts and experience of someone like former Senator Joseph Lieberman, who made a strong argument in the Washington Post last week for opposing the deal. But it's a tough call.
The terrible negotiating job by the Obama administration leaves the country with no good or easy options. (PS - I'm a liberal Democrat who voted for Obama twice!)
We need to recognize that this agreement is a lousy deal - the product of poor negotiating and squandering of the leverage provided by years of painstakingly enacted, unprecedented international sanctions. But that is water under the bridge. The question now is whether it makes more pragmatic sense at this point for Congress to oppose the deal or endorse it, in order to minimize the negative consequences of the agreement and attempt to further our goal of preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.
I think the suggestion by Alan Dershowitz and Thomas Friedman is a sensible first step that Americans on all sides of the debate should support - a Congressional resolution authorizing the President to destroy any attempt by Iran to build a nuclear bomb.
Beyond that, it's hard to know which is best - do we risk further diminishing US influence if the deal is rejected by Congress, or might that provide an opportunity to go back to the negotiating table and improve some aspects of the agreement? I think I'm inclined to trust the instincts and experience of someone like former Senator Joseph Lieberman, who made a strong argument in the Washington Post last week for opposing the deal. But it's a tough call.
The terrible negotiating job by the Obama administration leaves the country with no good or easy options. (PS - I'm a liberal Democrat who voted for Obama twice!)
11
All Americans? What country are you living in? Certainly not the U. S. of A.
7
how do you know that it's so bad?
Did you know that this agreement was reached only because of the women diplomats on the P5+1 side? The men could not get their eyes to look ahead, instead apparently trapped in the weight of the past. There would have been no agreement and Iran's accelerated buildup of centrifuge capacity and enriched uranium stockpile would have continued, leading to prevailing estimate of a month to a bomb. If not for these women diplomats, there would have been no agreement. See BBC feature article on this subject. One of the women is from the US.
So, how would you have had them do the negotiating? This wasn't a case where the P5+1 held all the cards. It was a negotiation between adversaries who held cards the other does not want to the other to continue to play. Contrary to the tunnel view of opponents, it was not a negotiation on the terms of complete capitulation on Iran's side.
So, how would you have had them do the negotiating? This wasn't a case where the P5+1 held all the cards. It was a negotiation between adversaries who held cards the other does not want to the other to continue to play. Contrary to the tunnel view of opponents, it was not a negotiation on the terms of complete capitulation on Iran's side.
1
Mostly overlooked in these posts is the value to Iran, and to businesses in the USA, Western Europe, Russia, etc of the lifting of the sanctions. With a once again growing economy, Iran will be able to both increase the availability of consumer goods and services and to become the arms supplier and the source of unrest and discord in the Middle East. Further, they will not be under the threat of nuclear annihilation.
7
Except that they are always under the theat of nuclear annihilation by Israel, and they are well aware of that.
Not just China and Russia would break off. I wouldn't be surprised if the EU moves ahead with closer ties with Iran if the US withdraws. Everybody I know - in government, diplomacy and administration - is quite friendly towards Iran and exasperated or outright hostile towards Israel's current government. Because of historic reasons, these opinions are aired with maximum care and delicacy, but Israel has really pushed things beyond the pale in recent years and the feeling here is that we can't stand for it much longer.
23
It's too bad, isn't it, that Israel annoys you by insisting that it has a right to live in peace and without continual threat to its existence.
3
Being a strong supporter of Obama's Iran deal I still support freedom of speech when it comes to the debate on the merits or lack of by supporters and opponents.
If Netanyahu can derail this deal by merely speaking in opposition then perhaps this deal deserves to be defeated?
Such an important deal on such a subject needs to be scrutinized and the only way to do that is to take it apart and examine it in a public discussion.
Opponents may be wrong but they also may prevail because the supporters arguments were just not convincing enough.
If Netanyahu can derail this deal by merely speaking in opposition then perhaps this deal deserves to be defeated?
Such an important deal on such a subject needs to be scrutinized and the only way to do that is to take it apart and examine it in a public discussion.
Opponents may be wrong but they also may prevail because the supporters arguments were just not convincing enough.
10
Perhaps, as in our election tradition, we should allow and aide Iranian Americans in providing an equal voice to the American population in general. If we can't provide fairness, all propaganda from either side should be banned. This is America afterall and we shouldn't allow ourselves to be swayed solely by the propaganda of any one foreign power.
5
Whenever someone's argument is bombastic and fraught with comtradictioms as Netanyahu's Webcast was, buyer beware. He first states "the deal would give Iran "hundreds of bombs tomorrow" and ends with warning that the agreement will pave Iran's path to a bomb. Netanyahu clearly wants to bomb Iran or rather have the U.S. bomb Iran, his backers are Bill "always wrong" Kristol and Sheldon "free propaganda papers for all" Adelson. For him to claim he wants to prevent war is so ludicrous, it would be laughable if it were 't such a deadly lie. The reason Netanyahu so favors Republican candidates starting with Mitt Romney is he knows that they will be 100% under his control, puppets, Romney said as much during his campaign. To elect any Republican in 2016 is to turn over foreign policy in the Middle East to Netanyahu, pure and simple. How bright will our future be with one ally in the world to back us up?
How many of our soldiers and other innocents must die to feed a war that cannot be won, a war based on lies, as usual.
How many of our soldiers and other innocents must die to feed a war that cannot be won, a war based on lies, as usual.
21
What the impassioned arguments on both sides tell us is that we do not have enough information to determine that one one option is clearly better than another. If we accept the deal, it may pave the way for Iran to make nuclear weapons in the future. If we reject the deal, Iran has no incentive not to race to breakout, which we are told is only a matter of months away. If we choose to prevent Iran from getting the bomb by limited military strikes from the air, we're told that at most it would delay their project by a couple of years, while setting us up for massive retaliation. If we go all in militarily, we've got a much tougher fight on our hands than in Iraq, which means trillions of dollars and thousands of American lives sacrificed on an uncertain outcome. Get the picture? Accepting the deal could lead to a nuclear Iran, rejecting the deal could lead to a nuclear Iran, and intervening militarily could lead to World War III. Anybody got a coin to flip?
4
To fully appreciate what you have said, you need to put the most reliable time estimates for each one: breakout to nuclear bomb without the deal is one month; bombing Iran facilities after breakout (success is low) anytime after breakout if unilateral, maybe never if consensus with allies wanted (and, who does the bombing? Do we even have a smidgen of an idea what happens in the aftermath?); breakout with nuclear deal in place is one year after terms of the deal expire, at least a decade away; bombing facilities with fewer centrifuges in locations now known remains an option then
1
Back on September 15, 1990, the political commentator Patrick J. Buchanan appeared on The McLaughlin Group and claimed that Israel had its 'amen corner' in the United States, a statement for which he was severely criticized, and even accused of anti-Semitism. But aren't the recent activities of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu intended to create such an 'amen corner' to oppose the Iran nuclear deal?
11
Israel has the strongest military and economy in the region by far, so I don't understand how the policy of playing a victim improves its standing in the world or in the eyes of Americans. Also intervening in the domestic affairs of the U.S. and campaigning against its president and commander in chief doesn't sound like a well thought policy. Frankly I don't understand how that's in favor of Jewish people or even Isreal.
We should bring Iran back to our sphere of influence rather than pushing them further towards Russia and China. In my opinion the shortcoming of the deal is the fact that many U.S. sanctions still remain in place and prevent American companies doing business with Iran. This leaves their market open to China and Russia. We should facilitate American goods find their way to the Iranian market and that by itself will change many things in that country.
Sanctions is an outdated policy and we can see what it has produced, look at Cuba, Iraq, ... On the other hand rapprochement has been a better choice, look at China.
We should bring Iran back to our sphere of influence rather than pushing them further towards Russia and China. In my opinion the shortcoming of the deal is the fact that many U.S. sanctions still remain in place and prevent American companies doing business with Iran. This leaves their market open to China and Russia. We should facilitate American goods find their way to the Iranian market and that by itself will change many things in that country.
Sanctions is an outdated policy and we can see what it has produced, look at Cuba, Iraq, ... On the other hand rapprochement has been a better choice, look at China.
17
In as a Jew I'm not a member of the United States of Israel, I am American and don't want to send my son to fight for what Israel wants, as I didn't elect BB to speak for me. If Congress want to be led by the nose and believe everything Israel wants let them move there and run for office. Right now they should be representing me, but instead they all go to Israel. If Israel is a example of good government why have they never approved the two state solution in over sixty years. Israel is no longer a democracy and following their dictate will get us all killed. I lost a son in Iraq, and don't want to lose any more of my kids to mad men for any reason. Since Israel has nuclear weapons then let them use it, leave our children alone.
22
I believe that if the Jewish people who live here want to make this their problem then that if fine with me but do not undermine the policy of my President in this decision. To me there is a fine line between disagreement and traitorous behavior. I will never forgive Netanyahu for speaking to our congress or those that invited him. Our President does not go before his Knesset and make speeches. That was utterly deplorable.
30
(1). President Obama has turned away opportunities to address the Knesset.
(2). Mr Obama is President of this democratic republic. He is not supposed to be a monarch. Speaking against his policies is, therefore, neither treasonous nor criminal.
(2). Mr Obama is President of this democratic republic. He is not supposed to be a monarch. Speaking against his policies is, therefore, neither treasonous nor criminal.
3
As it is now, only those who serve in the military and their families bear the burden of our wars. I am sadden by the parade of young servicemen and women returning from the war zone with broken bodies and tortured minds.
To the politicians of both parties who support war with Iran, I ask the following questions.
First, will you support a war tax applied universally to all American citizens and businesses to pay for the war and the services our returning veterans will require? If not, shame on you.
Second, will your children and grandchildren step up and serve, or will the burden once again fall on the children and grandchildren of others? If not, shame on you.
If we all can't share the burdens of war, shame on us.
To the politicians of both parties who support war with Iran, I ask the following questions.
First, will you support a war tax applied universally to all American citizens and businesses to pay for the war and the services our returning veterans will require? If not, shame on you.
Second, will your children and grandchildren step up and serve, or will the burden once again fall on the children and grandchildren of others? If not, shame on you.
If we all can't share the burdens of war, shame on us.
12
This situation is playing out like many others in our current political climate. One group is so entrenched in its own political ideology that the only response to a conflict and proposed alternative is to discredit others. In short, "It's my way or the highway." In this case it seems even more absurd considering the amount of $, military and political support the United States offers Israel. Why doesn't Netanyahu sit down at the table and offer some reasonable framework for compromise? Much like the Republicans did with health care, tax reform, and now this, they are content to either, one maintain the status quo, or two campaign for even more draconian measures.
7
That American Jews who support Israel and oppose the Iran Nuclear Agreement fail to see the danger is mind boggling. The United States continues to be involved in the chaos and violence of the Middle East. To reject diplomacy in the face of the past decade's failure of military power speaks to a blind reach for power and nothing more. Israel has already created enemies in Europe in their resistance to a Palestinian state and its continued brutal occupation in the West Bank and Gaza. Large portions of the United States are in that camp and angered by Benjamin Netanyahu's interference in our democratic processes and decisions as a sovereign nation. It is Israel who needs the protection of the United States. They have already caused a schism at the very top of American leadership. It is one that will not be repaired easily in the future,particularly if they manage to destroy support for the Iranian Nuclear Agreement. Be wary of what you wish for and Israel, despite the U.S. mantra "we will always support Israel" may rue the day they created the schism between the U.S. and itself.
16
Somehow RC forgets the rather well oiled effort by Obama underlings to sink the recent re-election campaign of the Israeli prime Minister. The animus and then some between them unfortunately is deep and goes both ways. But that is subtext to the issue at hand. The Iran Deal is the culmination of a policy of outreach by the President that began before his first term commenced. It is now on paper as the JCPOA and places all kinds of requirements on Iran in exchange for their promise not to produce a nuclear weapon or weapons grade uranium for 10/15 years in exchange for $150 billion in sanction relief and access to virtually endless additional hundreds of billions in international oil and gas sales. But Iran cheated already and wasn't caught by either the IAEA or the US or even Israel. The deal provides only managed access to Irans roughly 50 military sites and any secret sites and a snapback process that is already unraveling as trade between Iran and Security Council members resumes. I suggest Robert Satloff's answer in the Atlantic; "A Better Deal with Iran is Possible."
6
Larry Snider,
"...well oiled effort by Obama underlings to sink the recent re-election campaign of the Israeli prime Minister."
Put up or shut up. Where is your evidence for such an outrageous claim?
"...well oiled effort by Obama underlings to sink the recent re-election campaign of the Israeli prime Minister."
Put up or shut up. Where is your evidence for such an outrageous claim?
2
Pleasant request. Well last I looked Jeremy Bird/Lynn Tran were pretty involved in the 2012 Obama Campaign. They formed 270 Strategies and went to work for One Voice to defeat a certain once and future Israeli Prime Minister who will remain unnamed.
1
The sad reality is that no one outside of the administration and congress has actually read the agreement. Yet some American Jews are quick to blindly accept the claims of the Obama administration when in its own briefing it admits that Iran can have a nuclear bomb within 12 months. As for being linked for future discussions, I need only point out that this "agreement" is the result of being "linked" to Iran the past 12 years with no noticeable improvement. It is a sad state of affairs when descendants of Israel sell out their native land and remaining relatives.
9
Ultimately if Israel is to survive long-term, it needs a new relationship with its Muslim neighbors. This is what Netanyahu and his type reject. They do not want peace or mutual respect, just land. The deal should be supported because without it war is close. The Arabs and Persians can lose a dozen wars. Israel cannot lose one and survive, hence Bibi's twitchiness but sadly also his folly.
10
States built upon a core religious identity are no longer functional in a world where diversity is enabled by modern transportation and global commerce. Humanity must move beyond these "us and them" concepts that divide us creating fear and hatred.
Israel's body politic, like ours, is divided between two groups: those who take pride in their ethnic identity and the values associated with their heritage but reject sectarian barriers and those who fundamentally see the world defined by religious belief.
This latter group would turn the clock of history back to a more barbarous time where economic conflicts were cloaked and hidden behind religious moral agendas. Bellicose talk and a refusal to compromise will lead to war. The aftermath of war historically has always been a desire for revenge left smoldering among those on the losing side.
Israel's body politic, like ours, is divided between two groups: those who take pride in their ethnic identity and the values associated with their heritage but reject sectarian barriers and those who fundamentally see the world defined by religious belief.
This latter group would turn the clock of history back to a more barbarous time where economic conflicts were cloaked and hidden behind religious moral agendas. Bellicose talk and a refusal to compromise will lead to war. The aftermath of war historically has always been a desire for revenge left smoldering among those on the losing side.
8
The only other foreign entity to attempt to communicate and influence the thinking of individual Americans to the extent Netanyahu has is Al Queda.
7
In 2 decades of running forums on Jewish matters, I have twice encountered almost hysterical, certainly unsupported, even crank, ideas. Once, when a settler shot up a mosque, 2 writers claimed "There have never been Jewish terrorists in Israel". Wonder what the British had in mind when they left. And the other is now when I am inundated with Bibi-GOP assertions of the type Mr. Cohen discusses: Iran is being helped to destroy Israel's Jews, unless this treaty is dropped.
I am ashamed to be a Jew when the GOP and the settlers lie. I am ashamed to be a scholar when people treat propaganda as argument. I am ashamed to be an American when Congress panders to win a small percentage of U/S/ jewish voters and turn FL, OH, and perhaps PA votes to defeat the next nominee for the Democrats. If Israel is endangered by anything, it's not Obama and the U.S. government, it's Bibi, who just made a man opposed to a 22-state solution, the settlers who use arson and intimidation against neighbors, and the Repubs who would kiss any part of a person who gains them victory.
Streetwalkers and ghouls.
I am ashamed to be a Jew when the GOP and the settlers lie. I am ashamed to be a scholar when people treat propaganda as argument. I am ashamed to be an American when Congress panders to win a small percentage of U/S/ jewish voters and turn FL, OH, and perhaps PA votes to defeat the next nominee for the Democrats. If Israel is endangered by anything, it's not Obama and the U.S. government, it's Bibi, who just made a man opposed to a 22-state solution, the settlers who use arson and intimidation against neighbors, and the Repubs who would kiss any part of a person who gains them victory.
Streetwalkers and ghouls.
16
"The best achievable deal" is not necessarily a good deal. If nothing else troubles you, the fact that we'll be releasing 1.5 BILLION so that Iran can buy conventional weapons should make you think. And the Supreme Leader's comments that the treaty will change nothing in Iran's relationship with the US? We're not getting enough out of this. I'm not holding any brief for Netanyahu but the deal should not be judged on what he says. It should be judged on what's in the treaty and whether there is reason to believe that Iran will adhere to those parts of the treaty that it doesn't like.
7
I tried to think of some witty and urbane way to describe it but could only come up with Netanyahu is a self serving jerk with an ego that might surpass Donald Trump's.
Between his meddling with our congress, his dealing with the settlements and the Palestinian people in general, and now trying to undermine the treaty carved out by several nations, he has shown that he is not a leader that really cares for his people as much as his own celebrity.
Israel was recreated by worldwide sympathy for a horrible injustice. Should Netanyahu's callous actions be the proper way to keep the support so generously given?
Between his meddling with our congress, his dealing with the settlements and the Palestinian people in general, and now trying to undermine the treaty carved out by several nations, he has shown that he is not a leader that really cares for his people as much as his own celebrity.
Israel was recreated by worldwide sympathy for a horrible injustice. Should Netanyahu's callous actions be the proper way to keep the support so generously given?
8
I am disturbed by a foreign power trying to manipulate American citizens to do its will. The real purpose of government is to provide for the common defense and promote the general welfare. (Preamble to the Constitution) When a foreign government is actively engaged in promoting its own agenda it is time to see that government as suspect to America's general good.
9
"In the real world, this is the best achievable deal for America and the ally, Israel, it would never forsake."
But where will Israel be if Netanyahu and his extreme Republican friends force the collapse of the peace process? What nation will stand up for Israel if war with Iran is started by Israel? Imagining that their is broad support for war with Iran in American is stupid.
Starting a negotiation with Iran after this "deal" is approved is far better than war.
But where will Israel be if Netanyahu and his extreme Republican friends force the collapse of the peace process? What nation will stand up for Israel if war with Iran is started by Israel? Imagining that their is broad support for war with Iran in American is stupid.
Starting a negotiation with Iran after this "deal" is approved is far better than war.
6
The world is a complicated place. The last thing that we need is a gaggle of Republican simpletons managing our position in it!
We can support and respect Israel, but is is critical to note that it is taxpaying US citizens who decide US policy, not Israel. If Schumer wants to put money over logic, he should grow a pair and fight for a Constitutional amendment to give Israel the vote.
We can support and respect Israel, but is is critical to note that it is taxpaying US citizens who decide US policy, not Israel. If Schumer wants to put money over logic, he should grow a pair and fight for a Constitutional amendment to give Israel the vote.
9
A better deal is possible.
All nations in the Mideast should agree to nuclear inspections. Sen. Schumer has laid out all the requirements for inspections. This inspection regime would be preparatory to regional nuclear disarmament.
Israel is not going to be overthrown as was the British Mandate for Palestine, and its people displaced as were the Palestinian Arabs in 1948. Israel, a major military power, has substantial political control inside the U.S. which means direct offensive action against Israel is direct offensive action against the U.S..
The military action by Israel against Hezbollah in 2006 indicates that military action against Iran within Iran would have a strong possibility of unknown disastrous consequences. Iran contributed greatly to organizing Hezbollah's unanticipated strength.
The offensive nuclear strategy of Israel is not publicly well known. Presumably the proximity of Iran to Israel would suggest the use of neutron bombs. Dealing with the population of Iran at large would generate the sort problems for Israel that it would have if it were to bomb itself.
A defensive nuclear strategy for Israel would inherently be a failure. The only successful Israeli defensive strategy for Israel is to assure that its enemies do not have nuclear arms.
Since the Hotel David bombing in 1946, terrorism has not been amenable to control by nuclear weapons or conventional warfare. The perils of nuclear weaponry have proven subject to careful negotiation.
All nations in the Mideast should agree to nuclear inspections. Sen. Schumer has laid out all the requirements for inspections. This inspection regime would be preparatory to regional nuclear disarmament.
Israel is not going to be overthrown as was the British Mandate for Palestine, and its people displaced as were the Palestinian Arabs in 1948. Israel, a major military power, has substantial political control inside the U.S. which means direct offensive action against Israel is direct offensive action against the U.S..
The military action by Israel against Hezbollah in 2006 indicates that military action against Iran within Iran would have a strong possibility of unknown disastrous consequences. Iran contributed greatly to organizing Hezbollah's unanticipated strength.
The offensive nuclear strategy of Israel is not publicly well known. Presumably the proximity of Iran to Israel would suggest the use of neutron bombs. Dealing with the population of Iran at large would generate the sort problems for Israel that it would have if it were to bomb itself.
A defensive nuclear strategy for Israel would inherently be a failure. The only successful Israeli defensive strategy for Israel is to assure that its enemies do not have nuclear arms.
Since the Hotel David bombing in 1946, terrorism has not been amenable to control by nuclear weapons or conventional warfare. The perils of nuclear weaponry have proven subject to careful negotiation.
1
To be opposed to this deal is to be in favor of war. To be opposed to this deal is be in favor of pumping more hundreds of millions of dollars into the coffers of the military industrial conference and taking campaign money in return. To be opposed to this deal is to be in favor of keeping in place the pulpit from which Netanyahu and the republicans continue their rant against Iran because it sounds good. It gives them power and importance. Tsnatch the pulpit from Netanyahu and what's left for him to talk about? This has been his and AIPAC's obsession for decades. The mechanisms are in place to walk away if Iran cheats. This opens the door to fifteen years of new and better relations with Iran. It's a major breakthrough that was necessary to kill the threat of a nuclear Iran and to save Israel. To oppose the deal is to favor the slow and steady destruction of Israel. With the deal, Israel has to look at itself in the mirror and ask of themselves: who will we be without the threat of Iran eviscerating us? What do we talk about? What do we become in the next 100 years with the threat gone? Its a tough one! It's akin to a spouse, married to an alcoholic who stops drinking: for years they've lived with an alcoholic and all of the pathologies that accompany it. Once the drinking stops, what does the relationship become with the new dynamic, with "order" restored and the "threat" removed. It's a tough one! Ultimately, it's more sane and everyone is better off without the threat.
7
As long as AIPAC remains the most powerful (and invisible) lobby in Washington the USA will continue to be Israel's slavish supporter because of the absolute choke hold they have over Congress.
16
AIPAC "invisible"?
More like the elephant in the room.
More like the elephant in the room.
I'm also an American first and a person of Jewish background second. The deal to curtail Iran's nuclear arms program was not solely negotiated by the U.S., but by the major world powers--the permanent members of the U.N. Security Council (China, England, France, Russia) plus Germany. For Israeli Prime Minster Netanyahu to falsely claim that "the deal 'will give Iran hundreds of [nuclear] bombs tomorrow'" is itself an outrageous misrepresentation as the deal would do the reverse. I am more than ashamed of my Senator Chuck Schumer (I'm a lifelong Democrat, but will never vote for him again) who buys into these fallacious arguments. The reality, if this deal is not approved by Congress (it has been by the entire U.N. Security Council), will be just what Mr. Netanyahu said, Iran will with a matter of a few months have nuclear weapons; Israel and the U.S. will face diplomatic isolation by the rest of the world which will then remove sanctions against Iran; Saudi Arabia will move forward to acquire nuclear bombs thus setting off an arms race in the world's most volatile region. So, the perverse logic of Israel, AIPAC, and Sen. Schumer is that rejecting the deal will actually bring us to the brink of Armageddon rather than providing a pathway to peace in this troubled region.
78
Why should Americans with different ethnic backgrounds take their marching orders from a foreign government? Imagine all the ______ - Americans (fill in the blanks the way you wish) decided to pull the same way, would that not threaten the seams of this nation that bond us together? By the way, I am an immigrant and a US Citizen and proud to support my President.
16
If you are one of the ______ - Americans, then you are not an American! If you were not born here you will never know what being American means. It sounds like YOU are taking your marching orders from a foreign ideology. The majority of AMERICANS keep telling Barry that they do not want the Iran deal the way it is. It's America, learn the rules.
Because the ethnic Jews are the only group that was systematically, industrially exterminated by seemingly civilized countries while others watched. VERY RECENTLY, too. So, to explain to you plainly, when Jews finally fight back against open threats of mass murder, they know from RECENT history what they are talking about. Non-Jews like you take a very cavalier approach to mass murder of Jews. What else is new.
2
Since when is it considered interfering in politics to convince people to vote in support fo your cause? Isnt that the very essence of a free society?
6
Not if you are the head of a foreign government.
4
This is interference by a foreign government for a small minority in Israel.
2
No. It is not. Less sophistry, and more commons sense will help you grow up.
2
This article's rationale is all overwhelming, as Obama's and Kerri's, as many of the 'talkbacks' here.
Except, any one with half way decent knowledge of Muslim countries' 'rationale' could not, agree with all the above, as 20th century politics has shown aplenty how prone Muslim countries are to irrationality, be it 1967 'six-days-war' or the culture of suicide bombing.
Except, any one with half way decent knowledge of Muslim countries' 'rationale' could not, agree with all the above, as 20th century politics has shown aplenty how prone Muslim countries are to irrationality, be it 1967 'six-days-war' or the culture of suicide bombing.
8
In 6-day-war Iran was on the side of Israel and there is NO known Iranian suicide bomber!
What I don't understand is that a foreign country is invited into a debate in this country over how to proceed on foreign policy. I get the feeling that someone is trying to hoodwink the American people in to another open war in the Middle East.
17
Please go to the head of the class. You are the top student.
Notice how Mr Netanyahu keeps pushing for someone else to stir trouble in Iran, then when a war starts he will sit back and watch the spectacle.
Notice how Mr Netanyahu keeps pushing for someone else to stir trouble in Iran, then when a war starts he will sit back and watch the spectacle.
3
Agree, they want another war in the Middle East, this time with the largest one!
Cohen is so sure. He knows for certain. He has powers of prophecy which tell him that Iran will use its one - hundred fifty- billion dollar boon in a peace-loving way. He knows that they will not cheat as they have done for the past twenty years and continue to develop technology to not only manufacture the nuclear device but provide means of sending it to North America. He believes that talking will in the future help the hundreds of thousands are already murdered by the Iranian alliance of Iran- Syria -Hizbollah. He is certain that the Iranians will by being talked to abandon the ideology by which they aim to rule the Middle East and move toward dialogue with their wise Western instructors in the 'democracy' they despise. Cohen is sure he knows more about what is good not only for Israeli security than the Prime Minister of Israel who has dealt with and deals daily with threats to Israel's existence that Cohen could dream of.
He knows and he not simply knows. He shows contempt for the one person in the Jewish world (Prime Minister Netanyahu) who has done more for the state of Israel and the Jewish people in the past decade than any other.
Cohen knows better than the people of Israel eighty percent of whom oppose this deal what is good for them.
What a wise man.
He knows and he not simply knows. He shows contempt for the one person in the Jewish world (Prime Minister Netanyahu) who has done more for the state of Israel and the Jewish people in the past decade than any other.
Cohen knows better than the people of Israel eighty percent of whom oppose this deal what is good for them.
What a wise man.
11
Look back into the history of your own country. Israel was not supposed to have the bomb. However, that was one of the first things they set about to do. We all said, "Tut, tut", then looked the other way. Israel was not part of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. They just went ahead and did it behind everyone's backs. Later N Korea, Pakistan, India followed suit.
The US must never let the head of another government dictate to our President or Congress what decisions to make. Israel is urging US lawmakers now to do just what some feared President Kennedy would do when he was running for President--vote his religion rather that for the good of the US.
The deal with Iran is the best possible. It is also more likely to delay conflict than continued building of new settlements outside its territory as Netanyahu is doing.
The US must never let the head of another government dictate to our President or Congress what decisions to make. Israel is urging US lawmakers now to do just what some feared President Kennedy would do when he was running for President--vote his religion rather that for the good of the US.
The deal with Iran is the best possible. It is also more likely to delay conflict than continued building of new settlements outside its territory as Netanyahu is doing.
4
He also knows Israel has 400 Nuclear bomb.
@Shalom Freedman Jerusalem Israel:
The problem started when the Zionists declared Israel out of Palestinian territory in 1948.
All the rest are details.
The problem started when the Zionists declared Israel out of Palestinian territory in 1948.
All the rest are details.
2
What bothers me most is that there is a sizable contingent of Americans (some hoping to become president) who believe Netanyahu is the president of the U.S.
16
Not only the president, but also representing the entire US population!
1
"we can sit down again over the next several years and talk about the Holocaust, Israel and human rights, and that is why I go along with it.”
Yes, I'm sure those who hold power in Iran are eager to have that conversation. Their public pronouncements make clear how interested they are in opinions different from their own views on those subjects.
"Most young Iranians no more believe in “Death to America” than they believe the Hidden Imam is going to show up tomorrow."
Doesn't matter. The views of those young Iranians are of no consequence to the Guardian Council, which holds all effective power in Iran - and will continue to hold that power until forced out. They will only be forced out by a mass movement greater than has been seen so far - and that will probably only happen if there is economic collapse.
Yes, I'm sure those who hold power in Iran are eager to have that conversation. Their public pronouncements make clear how interested they are in opinions different from their own views on those subjects.
"Most young Iranians no more believe in “Death to America” than they believe the Hidden Imam is going to show up tomorrow."
Doesn't matter. The views of those young Iranians are of no consequence to the Guardian Council, which holds all effective power in Iran - and will continue to hold that power until forced out. They will only be forced out by a mass movement greater than has been seen so far - and that will probably only happen if there is economic collapse.
9
Economic collapse will not do it. Iranians rebel only the feel financially secure as they did during Shah.
Of course that is a bad deal, a very bad one. American negotiators were overcame by a team of better bargainers. They are smartest, not very much honest. They have it all what's needed to achieve their own goals, which american didn't. And now is late. Very much late to achieve a different deal, a better one. No way, it is impossible.
What then? This deal will not avert war. Not today, not tomorrow, but you could ask Mr.Chamberlain. Obama wanted to leave a legacy. He will indeed. But which kind of a legacy? We'll know in a handfull of years.
What then? This deal will not avert war. Not today, not tomorrow, but you could ask Mr.Chamberlain. Obama wanted to leave a legacy. He will indeed. But which kind of a legacy? We'll know in a handfull of years.
9
Bibi and AIPAC would like to preserve the state of perpetual hostility toward Iran that exists now; it keeps the US taxpayers' dollars flowing into Israel.
15
It's time for US taxpayers to firmly insist that no more US tax dollars are to go to Israel for anything. We should also resist buying any products made in Israel.
1
Agrees 100%.
Aipac. ALEC. The anti-Castro faction in Florida. The drug companies. The NRA. What's the difference.
They are all special interest cabals that skew democracy in favor of the loudest, meanest blackmailer who knows he can primary a politician's way to early retirement.
You ask us to imagine how bad it would be if Obama were to call Israelis directly to lobby against legislation in their Knesset, in order to shed some light on what Netanyahu is doing. But the comparison should be to Obama's going directly to Israel and grandstanding in their Knesset, which is what Bibi did when Mr. Netanyahu Came to Washington.
Holocaust victims have my total empathy. An Israel run by BN no longer has.
They are all special interest cabals that skew democracy in favor of the loudest, meanest blackmailer who knows he can primary a politician's way to early retirement.
You ask us to imagine how bad it would be if Obama were to call Israelis directly to lobby against legislation in their Knesset, in order to shed some light on what Netanyahu is doing. But the comparison should be to Obama's going directly to Israel and grandstanding in their Knesset, which is what Bibi did when Mr. Netanyahu Came to Washington.
Holocaust victims have my total empathy. An Israel run by BN no longer has.
17
Agree 100%.
1
Wildebeast writes: The biggest question that Mr Cohen fails to address (and many others as well) is this: what will Obama DO when Iran cheats on the deal? Answer: NOTHING. Iran will be much stronger and the US will be left holding the bag.
Wildebeast of totally missing the point of the "deal": the deal with Iran is like your new refrigerator with its' planned obsolescence. Similarly, the deal is designed to fail and was crafted in such a way to push Iran into some form of negation - the act of which would give the US the "excuse" to blame Iran for the failure and the further "excuse" to start another "pre-emptive war" to keep Iran from those "hundreds of nukes" with which Netanyahu uses to threaten the gullible (failing to mention, of course, the two hundred or so nukes Israel has stockpiled, thanks to our connivance).
So what should American Jews do? Certainly NOT listen to AIPAC or any of the other ultra-right wing Jewish PAC's - whose loyalty and aims are not with the US, but with the military industrial complex and profiting from wars that they won't have to fight, having pushed us into fighting for them.
Wildebeast of totally missing the point of the "deal": the deal with Iran is like your new refrigerator with its' planned obsolescence. Similarly, the deal is designed to fail and was crafted in such a way to push Iran into some form of negation - the act of which would give the US the "excuse" to blame Iran for the failure and the further "excuse" to start another "pre-emptive war" to keep Iran from those "hundreds of nukes" with which Netanyahu uses to threaten the gullible (failing to mention, of course, the two hundred or so nukes Israel has stockpiled, thanks to our connivance).
So what should American Jews do? Certainly NOT listen to AIPAC or any of the other ultra-right wing Jewish PAC's - whose loyalty and aims are not with the US, but with the military industrial complex and profiting from wars that they won't have to fight, having pushed us into fighting for them.
4
I am an American who happens to be Jewish and I say to Netanyahu stay the H out of my country's politics, government and business. We protect you, you don't protect us. And I say to everyone in AIPAC, make a choice of nationality between being an American or being an Israeli.
20
Netanyahu made a few strategic and tactical errors in this whole effort. Surely, he is not worried about Iran's capability to escape inspections in 15 years. A lot can happen in 15 years. What is he really worried about? It could be a number of things. The most obvious is that Iran will be have huge resources almost immediately to contribute to terrorist groups against Israel. That is a real, immediate and troublesome possibility. Why doesn't Netanyahu just say that? Well, it is a non-starter as an argument in international negotiation to stop Iran because it is no different from what many other nations, including the US also do. Secondly, he assumed that the US Jewish community would do his bidding. That is obviously not true. He is not the president of the US even though he went to MIT and Harvard. Most American Jews are Americans first and Jews somewhere down the list. Me too.
Does he expect to have a war with Iran and have young Americans die for Israel? He may want that, but it is not likely, even if one of the Republican bombasts is elected.
Does he expect to have a war with Iran and have young Americans die for Israel? He may want that, but it is not likely, even if one of the Republican bombasts is elected.
6
I hope you are right about Americans dying for Israel in a fight with Iran. Bibi seems to be trying to get the US to fight with Iran so that he can sit back and watch. Then he may direct the Israeli army to move into the US and take it over.
I hope you are right about American Jews being Americans first and Jews somewhere down the list. Many of the ones I see where I live appear to be Jews first in total support of Israel and Americans next.
Why do we allow Israelis to hold dual citizenship when we do not allow those of other nationalities to do so?
I hope you are right about American Jews being Americans first and Jews somewhere down the list. Many of the ones I see where I live appear to be Jews first in total support of Israel and Americans next.
Why do we allow Israelis to hold dual citizenship when we do not allow those of other nationalities to do so?
4
Could it just possibly be that Prime Minister Netanyahu is trying to protect his people and country?
13
Spent the weekend reading the "deal " on whitehouse.gov. We basically pay for all Irans peaceful nuclear program,train their scientists, and leave it to the Iranaians to set up inspections!! New conventional weapons will be bought with their "advance". 150 billion ,which is trillions in Iranian currency. Theirs lots of compliance on the Iraninas part,so much detail,that will never be enforced..
Travel restrictions on terrorist organizations like IRGC, are lifters, the list of companies and people free from sanctions will knock your eyeballs out. It's a BONANAZA for Iran.. We're creating a new modern Persian Empire. in the end ,the dynamic is such that the Muslim nations will have their best shot at destroying Israel...Obamas true intention since day one. Watch out world, if you think the areas in disarray now, "you ain't seen nothin yet"!!!!!!
Travel restrictions on terrorist organizations like IRGC, are lifters, the list of companies and people free from sanctions will knock your eyeballs out. It's a BONANAZA for Iran.. We're creating a new modern Persian Empire. in the end ,the dynamic is such that the Muslim nations will have their best shot at destroying Israel...Obamas true intention since day one. Watch out world, if you think the areas in disarray now, "you ain't seen nothin yet"!!!!!!
12
With such an emotionally charged issue, my first thought is to take a deep breath and a reflective pause. I oppose both J Street and this deal, but support both AIPAC and a vote in favor of it. Why? Successive Bush and Obama Administrations have failed to unremittingly increase sanctions and all other forms of pressure and intimidation on this criminal Iranian regime, a regime that kills its own people with lustful abandon. However, Cohen is correct that a failure to pass it will be a huge mistake for all the reasons he cited. Nevertheless, we should not forget that religious fanaticism, terrorism, and its export are "core organizing principles" of this regime. We have, in typical American fashion, kicked the can down the road. What we do in the post-signing environment should now be our concern. Given our track record, I am not hopeful. Nevertheless, some hope is better than none.
3
Why are Americans citizens looking for guidance from a leader of a foreign country? When Kennedy ran for president, one of the fears was that his allegiance would be with the Vatican. This whole foreign policy issue, with it's implication of us going to war with Iran, should not have to be vetted with Israel. I find it particularly troubling that Jewish politicians appear to be so strongly influenced by a foreign government as to affect their judgement as to what's best for America, the country and people those interest they were elected to protect.
10
Netanyahu needs to know that he is agitating for WW111; he nudges our Congress to vote against our President and the other world powers in favor of war with Iran.
Does he believe Russia will ally with USA and Israel against Iran?
It is so disappointing that the great Senator Schumer, for whom I have cast many a vote for in the past, has chosen Israel over his homeland.
Does he believe Russia will ally with USA and Israel against Iran?
It is so disappointing that the great Senator Schumer, for whom I have cast many a vote for in the past, has chosen Israel over his homeland.
11
Funny how we worried that a Catholic President would favor the Vatican when it came to policy decisions, but we now think nothing of allowing Israel and Bibi to dictate to us regarding Iran.
4
Netanyahu thinks he understands the American mindset, but he is greatly mistaken. American Jews, no matter how observant or non-observant, all know that Jews don't have a "leader" like Catholics have in Pope Francis. Netanyahu has the nerve to put on his tin crown and say he speaks for all Jews, like he was King David or something. He doesn't speak for all Jews, and neither does AIPAC.
I am good and sick of Netanyahu's fear-mongering, he's done it way too many times now. I'm not sure why a nation that has over 150 (uninspected) nuclear warheads should be so afraid all the time, but unfortunately you can't take an entire country and put it on a psychiatrist's couch and force-feed it Prozac.
I am good and sick of Netanyahu's fear-mongering, he's done it way too many times now. I'm not sure why a nation that has over 150 (uninspected) nuclear warheads should be so afraid all the time, but unfortunately you can't take an entire country and put it on a psychiatrist's couch and force-feed it Prozac.
11
Bibi will not be happy until Israel controls the entire Middle East.
He wants the US to take it for him.
He wants the US to take it for him.
3
Plain and simply, Obama is wrong and Netanyahu is right. What's the matter with you. Stop making excuses and do the right thing - reject the deal for something better. It's not the best we could do, it's something along the way and if we had let the time for a settlement lapse, they would have come around with something better. The fact is that negotiations never are cut off for real and let's get real about this deal. Why were the critics so intent on limiting it to the nuclear alternative and not dealt to include all those other things that relate Iran's veracity. If they wanted peace and reconciliation, they should have negotiated for it. They set the rules and we blindly followed. Read the literature, Jew's are hated no less today than ever before and it's as irrational today as it has been before. Don't make it easier for them, take a stand - plain and simply.
6
There is no better. This is the deal or no deal. Can we get the other nations back to the table...not likely. The US is the spoiler.
4
Shouldn't we be primarily looking at the "deal" as what is best for the U.S. and then as to what is good for our allies? I recognize that Israel is a "special" ally, but every day I question why.
7
Sandor Levin and Roger Cohen have drunk the koolaid. One doesn't have to be pleased with Netanyahu to recognize the realities of the situation. The sheer incompetence of the Obama administration in every facet of foreign affairs, most of all in the Middle East, makes it a certainty that this agreement would backfire. Putin knows it, Xi Ping knows it, Khomenei knows it. Only Obama, Kerry, Levin and Cohen are in the dark.
6
@NRroad:
I've come to resent the barrage of insults to the President's intelligence, perseverence, skills and sagacity mindlessly flung about by Republican Party polit-hacks and ignorant observers like yourself.
A bald statement like "The sheer incompetence of the Obama Administration in every fascet of foreign affairs, most of all of in the Middle East ... " is too ridiculous on its face to merit consideration, let alone rebuttal.
As for you knowing what Putin and "Xi Ping" (whoever he is) know, the only thing certain about it is: you don't. Unless they telephone you in the middle of the night and unburden themselves. But that isn't true about what Khomeini knows. Both you and I can be absolutely certain about that because he's dead. Has been for a quarter century.
President Obama was in law school when Ayatollah Khomeini died.
I've come to resent the barrage of insults to the President's intelligence, perseverence, skills and sagacity mindlessly flung about by Republican Party polit-hacks and ignorant observers like yourself.
A bald statement like "The sheer incompetence of the Obama Administration in every fascet of foreign affairs, most of all of in the Middle East ... " is too ridiculous on its face to merit consideration, let alone rebuttal.
As for you knowing what Putin and "Xi Ping" (whoever he is) know, the only thing certain about it is: you don't. Unless they telephone you in the middle of the night and unburden themselves. But that isn't true about what Khomeini knows. Both you and I can be absolutely certain about that because he's dead. Has been for a quarter century.
President Obama was in law school when Ayatollah Khomeini died.
1
Anti Iran is a big business. It raises money, pays lobbyists and allows Netanyahu to stay in office. Fear sells. It sells arms, it plays people against each other. Like Cuba, relations with Iran are plainly stupid. If we can at least start a dialogue the people of Iran will respond. They have a culture and a society above the religious morons. We have a culture above our own religious morons. Take religion out of the equations and it will work. If the world listened to our religious folks, the world would think our country is filled with morns, too.
8
We have also a loyal American Jews for whom America is first. Actually, it might be that majority of Jews are our loyal citizens and not Israel first Jews, American citizens by convenience only, but actually loyal to Isreal and not to as, as this recent pool between our American Jews shows up.
Two recent polls have shown that American Jews support the agreement by considerable majorities, 49 percent to 30 percent in one by The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles, and 60 percent to 40 percent in one sponsored by J Street, which supports the deal. Contrary results were found by a poll taken by The Israel Project, which opposes the deal, 45 percent to 40 percent against the deal. All of these polls make clear that a considerable portion of American Jews support the agreement. Thus, It is reprehensible that a number of Jewish community institutions like AIPAC etc. are lobbying their members to oppose it and are making their facilities available to the well-financed campaign to defeat it, thus conveying the widespread false impression that American Jews are united in opposition.
Two recent polls have shown that American Jews support the agreement by considerable majorities, 49 percent to 30 percent in one by The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles, and 60 percent to 40 percent in one sponsored by J Street, which supports the deal. Contrary results were found by a poll taken by The Israel Project, which opposes the deal, 45 percent to 40 percent against the deal. All of these polls make clear that a considerable portion of American Jews support the agreement. Thus, It is reprehensible that a number of Jewish community institutions like AIPAC etc. are lobbying their members to oppose it and are making their facilities available to the well-financed campaign to defeat it, thus conveying the widespread false impression that American Jews are united in opposition.
7
"In the real world, this is the best achievable deal for America and the ally, Israel, it would never forsake". In the real world? really? in the "real world", after this deal is signed, the Ayatollahs can concentrate on their grand plan to destroy Israel, they say so every day. Ms. Lippy says, "“It’s not a great deal, but it’s enough of a deal to postpone the nuclear situation and “It’s not a great deal, but it’s enough of a deal to postpone the nuclear situation and maybe give us time to work things out,” . Really? "work things out"? with whom? German Jews supported the Hitler-Chamberlain deal as well and why? for the same reasons Ms. Lippy does,"... maybe give (the world and Hitler) time to work things out". Iran is already increasing its activities to strengthen Hezbollah and Hamas and Iraq is just a moment away from turning to an Iranian subsidiary. If Ms Lippy believes that in a case of an all out non-nuclear missile attack on Israel, this time from Hezbollah, the US will intervene, I suggest that she should check the "real world". If she believe that the deal will eliminate attacks on US soil than God helps her and us all.
8
Guess what Shlomo, OUR government works for US, NOT ISRAEL.
Most Americans have NO desire to waste one more drop of our blood or penny of our treasury on your area of the world.
Personally, I am so sick of hearing about the Middle East that if the entire region disappeared tomorrow I wouldn't shed a single tear.
Most Americans have NO desire to waste one more drop of our blood or penny of our treasury on your area of the world.
Personally, I am so sick of hearing about the Middle East that if the entire region disappeared tomorrow I wouldn't shed a single tear.
1
Netanyahu is doing neither Israel nor American Jews any good with his in-your-face attempts to tamper with our government. Resentment over his intrusiveness, rudeness, and outright stupidity in trying to hype fear and send America into another unnecessary war also reflects back on American Jews who welcome and support his offensive behavior.
3
Roger Cohen does not examine Iran and its leaders. This treaty will fall when
the Iranians fail to observe the conditions. Cohen does not examine the
motives and strategies of the Iranian leadership and this is where the
treaty is weak. Obama's administration will be long gone when this
treaty is broken by the Iranians It seems that Cohen has forgotten about
the capture of the U.S. embassy in 1979 and the Iranians who were responsible. Know your enemies. This article is flawed.
the Iranians fail to observe the conditions. Cohen does not examine the
motives and strategies of the Iranian leadership and this is where the
treaty is weak. Obama's administration will be long gone when this
treaty is broken by the Iranians It seems that Cohen has forgotten about
the capture of the U.S. embassy in 1979 and the Iranians who were responsible. Know your enemies. This article is flawed.
9
Netanyahu is doing what Jews have done for 3000 years - survive.
I'm not sure whether Netanyahu is more interested in his own survival or the survival of Israel. He is a consummate politician.
But I sure that no country has more to gain or to lose by this deal than Israel.
The public view towards Israel and Jews in recent years reflect sentiments that have been largely dormant for the past seventy or so years, but are now again rising to the surface. I'm not sure where this is headed. What's old is new again. But I am sure israel and Jews will survive it.
I'm not sure whether Netanyahu is more interested in his own survival or the survival of Israel. He is a consummate politician.
But I sure that no country has more to gain or to lose by this deal than Israel.
The public view towards Israel and Jews in recent years reflect sentiments that have been largely dormant for the past seventy or so years, but are now again rising to the surface. I'm not sure where this is headed. What's old is new again. But I am sure israel and Jews will survive it.
7
Maybe if Israel were a better world citizen, it would not be hated by other countries. But it's always easier to blame anti-Semitism, isn't it?
2
We have also a loyal American Jews for whom America is first. Actually, it might be that majority of Jews are our loyal citizens and not Israel first Jews, American citizens by convenience only, but actually Israel 5th column (spy) between us, as this recent pool between our American Jews shows up.
Two recent polls have shown that American Jews support the agreement by considerable majorities, 49 percent to 30 percent in one by The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles, and 60 percent to 40 percent in one sponsored by J Street, which supports the deal. Contrary results were found by a poll taken by The Israel Project, which opposes the deal, 45 percent to 40 percent against the deal. All of these polls make clear that a considerable portion of American Jews support the agreement. Thus, It is reprehensible that a number of Jewish community institutions like AIPAC etc. are lobbying their members to oppose it and are making their facilities available to the well-financed campaign to defeat it, thus conveying the widespread false impression that American Jews are united in opposition.
Two recent polls have shown that American Jews support the agreement by considerable majorities, 49 percent to 30 percent in one by The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles, and 60 percent to 40 percent in one sponsored by J Street, which supports the deal. Contrary results were found by a poll taken by The Israel Project, which opposes the deal, 45 percent to 40 percent against the deal. All of these polls make clear that a considerable portion of American Jews support the agreement. Thus, It is reprehensible that a number of Jewish community institutions like AIPAC etc. are lobbying their members to oppose it and are making their facilities available to the well-financed campaign to defeat it, thus conveying the widespread false impression that American Jews are united in opposition.
3
Please stop professing to speak for anyone but yourself. You write with prejudice as do most people. You do not KNOW, you have an opinion. You should also stop making the Iran issue a 'Jewish' or even 'Israeli' issue. The factions in the middle east that are supported by Iran will harm many more Arabs, Muslims, Christians, and other foreigners rather than Jews or Israelis.
The world is in danger, in my opinion, from this 'Iranian deal' and the population of the middle east are aware and vocal about this danger. That is why you see armed celebrations in Iran's streets and nowhere else.
The world is in danger, in my opinion, from this 'Iranian deal' and the population of the middle east are aware and vocal about this danger. That is why you see armed celebrations in Iran's streets and nowhere else.
10
Beg to differ, Netanyahu has made this into a 'Jewish'/'Israeli' issue. Enough of his and the Zionists meddling in the affairs of the USA!
1
Left out of the discussion are the neocons and our Military Industrial Complex which generated the drumbeat to war with Iraq. If this deal falls apart, they will be back at it again, only this time Israel and U.S. Jews will be blamed for our war with Iran. Everyone will lose except those corporations receiving single source contracts.
7
Roger Cohen generally reports & avoids a lot of theorizing, but I really like how simply this article is written. Yes, it's complicated. But, the choice is stark.
2
Our European partners couldn't get to Iran fast enough.
Within days of the agreement’s signing, the European Union approved the deal, and senior officials from Germany, France, Italy and the European Union rushed to Tehran to pursue business deals; leaders from Austria, Spain and Sweden are planning to lead trade missions to Iran in September and October.
On August 12, Switzerland — a neutral country that is not a member of the European Union — announced it would unilaterally lift sanctions on Iran effective immediately, presumably providing Tehran with access to technology and the Swiss banking system.
Hard to imagine we could ever get any of these countries to agree on a snapback provision in the future.
Within days of the agreement’s signing, the European Union approved the deal, and senior officials from Germany, France, Italy and the European Union rushed to Tehran to pursue business deals; leaders from Austria, Spain and Sweden are planning to lead trade missions to Iran in September and October.
On August 12, Switzerland — a neutral country that is not a member of the European Union — announced it would unilaterally lift sanctions on Iran effective immediately, presumably providing Tehran with access to technology and the Swiss banking system.
Hard to imagine we could ever get any of these countries to agree on a snapback provision in the future.
7
Israel is really something worth watching and , for some, wondering.
It's ability to cloak its ultimate objectives with words and attitudes that serve only to veil, misguide and deceive is outstanding;though progressively unveiled and blunted to a high degree.
Israel is for a non nuclear Middle East, strongly set and worried about possible nuclear proliferation BUT totally adamant in rejecting universal agreements to that effect and highly insistent on retaining and developing its nuclear arsenal!!!
Israel has reached the stage where it's words are flagrantly bellied by it deeds and practices. but does not care.
It is that eternal yearning for exceptionalism and extra rights with special privileges including merciless consistent violation of others' rights and rule of law when that is of benefit to it!
It is not back to the old pre medieval culture and mentality, for it was never discarded, but a reconfirmation of its history long belief in the Justice and morality of the principle and practice of different punishments for the same crime if committed by a Jew or non Jew.
It's ability to cloak its ultimate objectives with words and attitudes that serve only to veil, misguide and deceive is outstanding;though progressively unveiled and blunted to a high degree.
Israel is for a non nuclear Middle East, strongly set and worried about possible nuclear proliferation BUT totally adamant in rejecting universal agreements to that effect and highly insistent on retaining and developing its nuclear arsenal!!!
Israel has reached the stage where it's words are flagrantly bellied by it deeds and practices. but does not care.
It is that eternal yearning for exceptionalism and extra rights with special privileges including merciless consistent violation of others' rights and rule of law when that is of benefit to it!
It is not back to the old pre medieval culture and mentality, for it was never discarded, but a reconfirmation of its history long belief in the Justice and morality of the principle and practice of different punishments for the same crime if committed by a Jew or non Jew.
4
Omar, your posts leave me speechless, about the only thing to say is that it is complete and total nonsense.
it's being reported that 340 jewish american rabbis just signed on to the deal, 49 of them from new york: http://news.yahoo.com/hundreds-us-rabbis-voice-support-iran-nuclear-deal...
7
Now we know why membership in Synagogues is at historic lows.
Why the opinion of the America Jews should be so important in determining America foreign policy? The total number of Jewish citizen in America is between 6 and 7 million, less than the total New York population.
It should be more appropriate, in my opinion, to write an article on what the American people in general think about the Iran nuclear deal, a deal that is recommended by our president.
It should be more appropriate, in my opinion, to write an article on what the American people in general think about the Iran nuclear deal, a deal that is recommended by our president.
9
Because they are rich and willing to spend money to further their agenda, just like any other lobby.
Many of the commenters here seem to exist in a fantasy world where cliche's and platitudes substitute
for serious observations.
Reporter Olivier Knox has stated twice in the past month that Ariel Sharon, Israeli prime minister at the time of the invasion of Iraq, opposed the Iraq invasion and lobbied against it, so readers who want to pin that fiasco on
Israel might want to think a little deeper. Note that the US was then in a situation much like the present; namely, the head of a league of very reluctant allies who much preferred making money to taking a principled stand on anything. Does anyone deny that? Is that to any great degree different from today?
Israel, one of the few bastions of democracy in the Middle East, is chronically denounced as"apartheid". Israel has never had policies of separate water fountains, lunch
counters or rest rooms for Arab s and Jews, policies that were commonplace in the US well within living memory. No policy of "Arabs to the back of the bus", as was inflicted on American Blacks. There is a billion-deollar-a-year
fund to help Arabs build high-tech businesses. Arabs are encouraged to vote;
what has prevented them is the fear of violent criticism for "collaborating" with Israel . Arabs have been offered a state; the
"Bantustan" charge is a lie, as a map of settlements published by the Times itself several years ago shows
Mr. Gunste calls these policies comparable to 1930s Germany. Really?
arcaneone
Israel
for "collaborating"
for serious observations.
Reporter Olivier Knox has stated twice in the past month that Ariel Sharon, Israeli prime minister at the time of the invasion of Iraq, opposed the Iraq invasion and lobbied against it, so readers who want to pin that fiasco on
Israel might want to think a little deeper. Note that the US was then in a situation much like the present; namely, the head of a league of very reluctant allies who much preferred making money to taking a principled stand on anything. Does anyone deny that? Is that to any great degree different from today?
Israel, one of the few bastions of democracy in the Middle East, is chronically denounced as"apartheid". Israel has never had policies of separate water fountains, lunch
counters or rest rooms for Arab s and Jews, policies that were commonplace in the US well within living memory. No policy of "Arabs to the back of the bus", as was inflicted on American Blacks. There is a billion-deollar-a-year
fund to help Arabs build high-tech businesses. Arabs are encouraged to vote;
what has prevented them is the fear of violent criticism for "collaborating" with Israel . Arabs have been offered a state; the
"Bantustan" charge is a lie, as a map of settlements published by the Times itself several years ago shows
Mr. Gunste calls these policies comparable to 1930s Germany. Really?
arcaneone
Israel
for "collaborating"
7
@arcaneone Israel:
Ariel Sharon was against the Iraq war but Netanyahu was for it.
Testifying again in front of Congress in 2002, Netanyahu claimed that Iraq’s nonexistent nuclear program was in fact so advanced that the country was now operating “centrifuges the size of washing machines.”
Netanyahu said in 2002. "If you take out Saddam’s regime, I guarantee you that it will have enormous positive reverberations on the region."
http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/18/opinion/sick-netanyahu-on-iran/
For this Iran deal, Netanyahu is against it while many Israeli security advisers are for it.
The problem is that here in the US, AIPAC and Republicans really promote what Netanyahu says and most Americans never hear the other view.
Ariel Sharon was against the Iraq war but Netanyahu was for it.
Testifying again in front of Congress in 2002, Netanyahu claimed that Iraq’s nonexistent nuclear program was in fact so advanced that the country was now operating “centrifuges the size of washing machines.”
Netanyahu said in 2002. "If you take out Saddam’s regime, I guarantee you that it will have enormous positive reverberations on the region."
http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/18/opinion/sick-netanyahu-on-iran/
For this Iran deal, Netanyahu is against it while many Israeli security advisers are for it.
The problem is that here in the US, AIPAC and Republicans really promote what Netanyahu says and most Americans never hear the other view.
1
To everybody except the USA the idea that Netanyahu is more trustable with a Bomb than the Mullahs who run Iran is laughable. It is very revealing that when Iran proposed a nuclear free Middle East Israel got the USA to be against such a proposal. The essence of both conservatism and chauvanism is that different rules apply to different sets of people. Apparently Israel gets more rights than Iran, despite Israel's starting more wars in the Middle East as of late than anyone else. A nuclear free Mid East seems like a good place to start. Too bad the USA and Israel do not agree. Iran is a major regional power, even if the USA and Israel ( and Saudi,for different reasons) are against it.
6
In my opinion, the nuclear deal with Iran is not a good one. However, it is the best that the US was able reach under all the circumstances.
If Congress rejects this deal, then what?
If Congress rejects this deal, then what?
6
Personally, I am not a fan of Netanyahu. But that is, at it should be, unrelated to the facts. Netanyahu believes the deal is no good. The belief is not without basis. Obama "believes" that Iran will abide by the agreement. Netanyahu does not believe that the Iranians will abide by it - not difficult to understand given that they are *still* declaring their intent to destroy Israel! An Iranian missile would take the same amount of time Saddam's missiles took to hit Israel - 90 seconds. SCUDS are one thing. Nuclear tipped missiles are another.
Netanyahu is attempting to present the facts and his beliefs to the people who decide the fate of his country. That is not "undermining".
Netanyahu is attempting to present the facts and his beliefs to the people who decide the fate of his country. That is not "undermining".
4
He has been crowing about this for over 2 decades now about how Iran is but a few months from a bomb, and here we have a deal which pushes this out to 10 years, providing a window for dialogue and what does he do?
Worst case scenario, 10 years later, Iran still tries to build the bomb, i.e. status quo. But it buys us atleast 10 years of peace and all that we could achieve in that space. For all its shortcomings, Iran is not a dictatorship. It has a growing middle class which is trying to assert itself and a moderate faction that is increasing in influence.
For all he might say, it is in Netanyahu's interest that Iran remain a threat as it would help him continue to be in power.
Worst case scenario, 10 years later, Iran still tries to build the bomb, i.e. status quo. But it buys us atleast 10 years of peace and all that we could achieve in that space. For all its shortcomings, Iran is not a dictatorship. It has a growing middle class which is trying to assert itself and a moderate faction that is increasing in influence.
For all he might say, it is in Netanyahu's interest that Iran remain a threat as it would help him continue to be in power.
Why would anyone listen to Netanyahu given his track record:
In 1992, then-parliamentarian Netanyahu advised the Israeli Knesset that Iran was “three to five years” away from reaching nuclear weapons capability, and that this threat had to be “uprooted by an international front headed by the U.S.”
1996, Netanyahu addressed a joint session of Congress where he darkly warned, “the deadline for attaining a nuclear bomb is getting extremely close.”
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/03/02/brief-history-netanyahu-cr...
Testifying again in front of Congress in 2002, Netanyahu claimed that Iraq’s nonexistent nuclear program was in fact so advanced that the country was now operating “centrifuges the size of washing machines.”
Netanyahu said in 2002. "If you take out Saddam’s regime, I guarantee you that it will have enormous positive reverberations on the region."
http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/18/opinion/sick-netanyahu-on-iran/
In the meantime, while we were "making the middle east safer" by getting rid of Saddam Hussein, North Korea made its first nuclear bomb in 2006.
In 1992, then-parliamentarian Netanyahu advised the Israeli Knesset that Iran was “three to five years” away from reaching nuclear weapons capability, and that this threat had to be “uprooted by an international front headed by the U.S.”
1996, Netanyahu addressed a joint session of Congress where he darkly warned, “the deadline for attaining a nuclear bomb is getting extremely close.”
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/03/02/brief-history-netanyahu-cr...
Testifying again in front of Congress in 2002, Netanyahu claimed that Iraq’s nonexistent nuclear program was in fact so advanced that the country was now operating “centrifuges the size of washing machines.”
Netanyahu said in 2002. "If you take out Saddam’s regime, I guarantee you that it will have enormous positive reverberations on the region."
http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/18/opinion/sick-netanyahu-on-iran/
In the meantime, while we were "making the middle east safer" by getting rid of Saddam Hussein, North Korea made its first nuclear bomb in 2006.
4
Mr. Cohen should have added that even George W. Bush would not attack Iran, despite the fact his administration was stacked to the rafters with AIPAC and American Enterprise Institute apparatchiks. Nor did the Jewish voters of Florida heed Netanyahu's blatant play for Romney's campaign, as ugly and clumsy as it was. Ultimately Netanyahu cannot grasp with the reelection of President Obama is that America is not going to invade anyone soon---especially a Middle East country over allegations of WMD. Been there done that.
Sure AIPAC has power to get Netanyahu a gig to address a joint session of Congress, populate all media with their messase, but to invade Iran? A majority of Americans won't stand for it and a lot less can stand Netanyahu and his team's meddlesome agenda.
Sure AIPAC has power to get Netanyahu a gig to address a joint session of Congress, populate all media with their messase, but to invade Iran? A majority of Americans won't stand for it and a lot less can stand Netanyahu and his team's meddlesome agenda.
5
Although Israel has obtained its influence over Washington through legitimate political means using among others, American political groups that really are agents of a foreign power.
Because Israel has gained outsized influence on American policy, does that mean we should accept it as a given?
Time to re-appraise this influence as something that needs correcting.
Because Israel has gained outsized influence on American policy, does that mean we should accept it as a given?
Time to re-appraise this influence as something that needs correcting.
3
I would certainly expect ,and rightly so, that Netenyahu will summarily reject any more $3 billion dollar annual gifts from the United States.After all, if the United States approves the Iran nuclear deal, it would only prove how misguided the US's foreign policy has been and will be in the future.
Would Netenyahu accept $3 billion dollars from a country that will have proven its inability to take Israel's interests to heart.
Oh, that's right, he will, gladly. After interfereing in the internal political process of the United States.
What we have here is chutzpah on a grand scale.
Would Netenyahu accept $3 billion dollars from a country that will have proven its inability to take Israel's interests to heart.
Oh, that's right, he will, gladly. After interfereing in the internal political process of the United States.
What we have here is chutzpah on a grand scale.
4
The Iran nuclear treaty is what it is: better than anything else. Several comments deal with the Palestinians, and Nethanyahu's very obvious desire to eliminate them. Under the guise of self defense, Israel has destroyed everything of value, taken their land, and treated them as subhumans, guilty by existence. When they rebel against this, crushing force is applied to civilians, "...not as punishment, but because the bad guys won't come out and fight like real soldiers".
Israel has turned so far to the right that Netanyahu's successor may indeed be facing a choice between Israel becoming a pariah, trade sanctions, travel restrictions, or somehow undo all it has done.
One man's freedom fighters are another's terrorists.
Israel has turned so far to the right that Netanyahu's successor may indeed be facing a choice between Israel becoming a pariah, trade sanctions, travel restrictions, or somehow undo all it has done.
One man's freedom fighters are another's terrorists.
3
How long can Netanyahu play his disingenuous game of implying that there is any alternative to the nuclear deal other than the inevitable military strike by either Israel or the U.S. on Iran's nuclear facilities. After his prolonged charade of being a proponent of a two state solution finally was revealed as a total falsehood during the Israeli election are we now to believe that his hidden motive is anything less then the launching of missiles into Iranian territory.
2
There are so many nonsensical comments in this article and on this comment board that it makes your head spin.
For starters, it is not Netanyahu who is "contemptous" of Obama, it is Obama who is contemptous of anyone who is opposed to his agreement and who points out the flaws in the agreement. It is Obama who has made statements implying that anyone who opposes his deal is a war-monger and/or was bought off by Jewish money. Is that they way to encourage civil dialogue about a very important foreign policy decision?
I keep reading all these outrageous comments about Netanyahu "interfering" in US politics. But this deal is not 'politics', it is a extremely important, potentially life or death issue for Israel, and Netanyahu should feel free to express his concerns, just like Obama and his supporters express their reasons for this deal (while at the same time dismissing anyone opposed to it as "war-monger").
And the notion that the alternative to this deal means war, with US troops invading Iran and thousands of dead Americans, is truly ridiculous. I doubt there is one person in the Middle East who believes that Obama would actually initiate military action against Iran under any circumstances. And Israel won't do it either, as anyone who actually bothers to listen to Israel's military and intelligence chiefs, and who understands Israel's military capabilities, would know.
For starters, it is not Netanyahu who is "contemptous" of Obama, it is Obama who is contemptous of anyone who is opposed to his agreement and who points out the flaws in the agreement. It is Obama who has made statements implying that anyone who opposes his deal is a war-monger and/or was bought off by Jewish money. Is that they way to encourage civil dialogue about a very important foreign policy decision?
I keep reading all these outrageous comments about Netanyahu "interfering" in US politics. But this deal is not 'politics', it is a extremely important, potentially life or death issue for Israel, and Netanyahu should feel free to express his concerns, just like Obama and his supporters express their reasons for this deal (while at the same time dismissing anyone opposed to it as "war-monger").
And the notion that the alternative to this deal means war, with US troops invading Iran and thousands of dead Americans, is truly ridiculous. I doubt there is one person in the Middle East who believes that Obama would actually initiate military action against Iran under any circumstances. And Israel won't do it either, as anyone who actually bothers to listen to Israel's military and intelligence chiefs, and who understands Israel's military capabilities, would know.
3
Netanyahu has no business interfering with OUR political process. He has torpedoed any and every attempt to reach a peace deal with his neighbors. I think he WANTS war with Iran. I wish Israel would dump him as their leader and elected someone who is not constantly beating the drum of fear.
2
Greater love hath no superpower than this, that it would hobble itself, create enemies for itself, act against its own strategic interest, allow a foreign leader to rape its democratic system, throw forth politicians who speak foolishly, all to protect a foreign country that long ago became too dominant in its region to need any more hand-holding.
It has long been clear that some Americans love Israel more than they love their country.
It has long been clear that some Americans love Israel more than they love their country.
3
The very last sentence of this essay expresses an assumption that is the basis for Cohen's belief that the Iran deal is acceptable. Cohen says, in his revealing final sentence, that America would never foresake Israel. Instead of assembling reasoned arguments in support of the dangerous deal, he tells us, don't worry, America will never dump on Israel.
There was a time when America was committed to very few verities in politics and they were: Mother's Day is inviolable, Thanksgiving is wonderful and A) We shall never give up on South Vietnam and B) we shall never accept the Admission of Mainland China into the UN. Although Mother's day and Thanksgiving are still as solid as they were when I was a tyke, South Vietnam and Formosa are things that America gave up on long ago. I have no doubt: As a) the Jewish birthrate in this country continues to decline and Jews make up less and less of America's population, b) Arab immigration to America seems to increase, and c) American sensitivity to Israel declines because of an excess of sympathy for the allegedly dispossessed Palestinian Arabs and the perception that our alliance with Israel is compromising our relations with other nations, America will one day leave Israel down and out and in the cold.
Israel must ultimately craft a policy that will work even if she is friendless. Because it is our holy fate to live in such "Splendid Isolation."
There was a time when America was committed to very few verities in politics and they were: Mother's Day is inviolable, Thanksgiving is wonderful and A) We shall never give up on South Vietnam and B) we shall never accept the Admission of Mainland China into the UN. Although Mother's day and Thanksgiving are still as solid as they were when I was a tyke, South Vietnam and Formosa are things that America gave up on long ago. I have no doubt: As a) the Jewish birthrate in this country continues to decline and Jews make up less and less of America's population, b) Arab immigration to America seems to increase, and c) American sensitivity to Israel declines because of an excess of sympathy for the allegedly dispossessed Palestinian Arabs and the perception that our alliance with Israel is compromising our relations with other nations, America will one day leave Israel down and out and in the cold.
Israel must ultimately craft a policy that will work even if she is friendless. Because it is our holy fate to live in such "Splendid Isolation."
2
@David Gottfried New York City:
The problem started when the Zionists declared Israel out of Palestinian territory in 1948.
All the rest are details.
The problem started when the Zionists declared Israel out of Palestinian territory in 1948.
All the rest are details.
1
In addition to all of the other reasons for supporting they Iran deal there is the idea that future US presidents will have a difficult time negotiating any kind of deal with other nations that requires Ccongressional approval.
Leonard Cohen
Leonard Cohen
1
The biggest question that Mr Cohen fails to address (and many others as well) is this: what will Obama DO when Iran cheats on the deal? Answer: NOTHING. Iran will be much stronger and the US will be left holding the bag.
8
Silly comment. Of course he will do nothing, he will not be President then. It is up to the next President to deal with Iran, whether it cheats or not. And it is not just up to the US to react, all the permanent members of the UN security council have signed onto the deal. The deal includes automatic reimposition of sanctions if Iran cheats so there is little incentive for it to cheat. When negotiations started Iran agreed not to increase its uranium enrichment program. Critics all screamed it was a sham and yet Iran stuck to its promise. The real question is what will the rest of the world do if US reneges on this deal.
22
Why Nothing? How did you get to that conclusion? The treaty addresses that point. If the Deal is not signed, sanctions will be meaningless, China and Russia and ( why not) France or Great Britain will deal with Iran whether we liked it or not. And.. yes, Iran will be much stronger, no treaties to abide by.
1
The US has the power to unilaterally trigger the "snap back" provision to reinstate sanctions without going through the UN Security Council
Not to undermine Obama, but the Iranian nuclear deal.
6
"Rather than listen to Netanyahu, American Jews should listen to the longest-serving Jewish member of the House, Sander M. Levin?"
Nonsense. What American Jews should be doing is what the rest of Americans are doing = weighing the pros and cons of what is best for the United States of America and letting their Senators know.
Nonsense. What American Jews should be doing is what the rest of Americans are doing = weighing the pros and cons of what is best for the United States of America and letting their Senators know.
34
you give people too much credit for thinking. support the deal.
and listening to Sander Levin would be part of that weighing process.
Listen to Sandy Levin? No.
Sandy Levin has been a career politician, serving first in the Michigan Senate in 1965, then getting hooked up by his friends and family (older brother Carl Levin was a long-standing Senator from Michigan), and then elected to the House in 1983.
So this guy has been in a political family, and he himself working for the people of Michigan as a House Rep for over 30 years. During that time Michigan has gone in the tank like few places (does Greece c.2015 come to mind?).
So yeah Mr. Cohen, let's all listen to a plutocrat like Sandy Levin, who has delivered nothing to the people he supposedly represents. What a brilliant idea for Jews in the US to follow that path with nuclear weapons in the balance. With that line of thinking, and any luck, Tel Aviv will be the next Detroit thanks to those like Levin.
Sandy Levin has been a career politician, serving first in the Michigan Senate in 1965, then getting hooked up by his friends and family (older brother Carl Levin was a long-standing Senator from Michigan), and then elected to the House in 1983.
So this guy has been in a political family, and he himself working for the people of Michigan as a House Rep for over 30 years. During that time Michigan has gone in the tank like few places (does Greece c.2015 come to mind?).
So yeah Mr. Cohen, let's all listen to a plutocrat like Sandy Levin, who has delivered nothing to the people he supposedly represents. What a brilliant idea for Jews in the US to follow that path with nuclear weapons in the balance. With that line of thinking, and any luck, Tel Aviv will be the next Detroit thanks to those like Levin.
Too many in this country are putting the interests of Israel ahead of those of its protector, the US. Where do we get the men and women who will fight the middle east wars they would have us fight?
38
Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany signed the Molotov–Ribbentrop non-agression pact in 1939. Two years later they were involved in a war that cost millions of lives on both sides. North Korea signed a nuclear deal with the U.S. and is now testing nukes, long-range missiles, and threatening to use them. Too bad Neville Chamberlain isn't around to become the next U.S. Secretary of State so Americans could look forward to "peace in our time".
14
just because you know the past doesn't mean you see the future. never would have thought of what you thought of, because it doesn't have anything to do with anything in the present day. the world is different.
Do you have a working alternative? It seems MAD does not always relate to nuclear powers.
The problem is not the agreement: it is that the US a history of not backing up the agreement. Two years ago North Korea launched missiles that killed South Korean civilians on an island. That is an act of aggression against an ally- and the US did NOTHING! Also, we cannot control the actions of the Europeans in case the Iranians break the accord. So what does the US get out this agreement exactly?
I'm not a scientist, but I know that 29 of our country's top physicists, including American Jews, agree that we must accept this deal.
On the other hand, what is Netanyahu's record of prediction?
Netanyahu testifying before Congress in 2002: "If you take out Saddam, I guarantee you that it will have enormous positive reverberations on the region."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHmhf_wrcrM
Hmmmm
On the other hand, what is Netanyahu's record of prediction?
Netanyahu testifying before Congress in 2002: "If you take out Saddam, I guarantee you that it will have enormous positive reverberations on the region."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHmhf_wrcrM
Hmmmm
57
Yes you are not a scientist but are you also blind.
These top physicist know a lot about physics but know as much or as little about Iran as people who aren't on this list of top physics.So why should anyone care how these top physicist feel when the issue isn't about physics but is on the development and use of atomic weapons a science that physicist are not experts in unless you are one of those who do work in
that field.
So why do you depend on a list of the names of people who are no more qualified on taking a position on this issue than any list of the names of people who are not qualified
Netanyahu who it appears you do not like has access to information these physicist do not have and does have a understanding of Iran they don't have.
I would take his opinion over these physicist every time.
These top physicist know a lot about physics but know as much or as little about Iran as people who aren't on this list of top physics.So why should anyone care how these top physicist feel when the issue isn't about physics but is on the development and use of atomic weapons a science that physicist are not experts in unless you are one of those who do work in
that field.
So why do you depend on a list of the names of people who are no more qualified on taking a position on this issue than any list of the names of people who are not qualified
Netanyahu who it appears you do not like has access to information these physicist do not have and does have a understanding of Iran they don't have.
I would take his opinion over these physicist every time.
What , wait. Netenyahu's expressed fears - Iran with "hundreds of bombs tomorrow," "terrorist superpower" groups (with Iran's backing), Iran's path to a bomb paved and a nuclear arms race in the middle East - these are the potential conditions we face now without a deal. These are precursors to war. Uh Bibbi, No Thanks!
Maybe he wants the United States to be forced into a military action against Iran? I don't get him at all.
Maybe he wants the United States to be forced into a military action against Iran? I don't get him at all.
15
Maybe Netanyahu could reduce tensions in the Middle East by offering to get rid of Israel's nuclear weapons instead? Doesn't that fuel the competition?
Under the heading "for your information"Article 64 of the Iranian Constitution recognizes the Jewish religion and guarantees representation in the Majlis.
13
And the chant "Death to Israel" heard daily on the streets of Tehran are--what, a figment of our collective imaginations?
I am not aware of an opinion with less factual basis than this one . An example of another self loathing Jew afraid to assert nation or faith. Because this is an existential threat to Israel why pretend that this agreement represents an opportunity for peace.
10
Nathan, which nation are you a member of, the United States or Israel? From your comment, I assume you are an Israeli. Are you here legally?
@Nathan St Louis:
The problem started when the Zionists declared Israel out of Palestinian territory in 1948.
All the rest are details.
The problem started when the Zionists declared Israel out of Palestinian territory in 1948.
All the rest are details.
1
'Because this is an existential threat to Israel'
Well, that is a part of the debate: is this really an existential threat to Israel or is this a path to possible path to peace, as the rest of the world, minus Israel and Iran's Sunni neighbors seem to believe.
I guess your suggestion is that this 'self-loathing Jew' should forget his own intelligence and go along with whatever Israel wants?
Well, that is a part of the debate: is this really an existential threat to Israel or is this a path to possible path to peace, as the rest of the world, minus Israel and Iran's Sunni neighbors seem to believe.
I guess your suggestion is that this 'self-loathing Jew' should forget his own intelligence and go along with whatever Israel wants?
1
Netanyahu has some nerve taking on Obama. Israel's greatest existential threat is Netanyahu. He's even turning American Jews into anti-semites.
38
He has nerve weighing in on a matter that involves the security of Israeli citizens? You have nerve in saying so.
I didn't realize that our foreign policy was determined by the interests of US Jews, who make up 1% of our population. What about the opinions of the other 99%?
30
It's like the money thing. One percenters run our country. The majority of us are just cows to be milked or cattle to be slaughtered.
Given his history and record, if Netanyahu's against something, that's a sure sign that it's a good thing.
22
"Never forsake"? I don't think that can be assumed by any ally.
3
I use to wonder, when a lot of my acquaintances use to say that the Middle East Foreign Policy of the US is made in Israel. I guess they were correct and for once the President of the United States wants to do what is firstly good for the US is being bombarded by the AIPAC and other Jewish lobbies, most of which works for a foreign country, Israel.
Could it be that this time the Jewish lobby is overplaying its hand by dividing the country of ours into two groups, one that supports the Jewish country of Israel and the other who love the US first and foremost.
It is time that the American Public would finally understand where the loyalties of various ethnicity/religious people lie and the loyalty oath proposed by once congresswomen Bachmann should be reconsidered at least for the US Congress and in particular for people like NY Senator Schumer.
Could it be that this time the Jewish lobby is overplaying its hand by dividing the country of ours into two groups, one that supports the Jewish country of Israel and the other who love the US first and foremost.
It is time that the American Public would finally understand where the loyalties of various ethnicity/religious people lie and the loyalty oath proposed by once congresswomen Bachmann should be reconsidered at least for the US Congress and in particular for people like NY Senator Schumer.
20
Writing as an American Jew who supports the deal and who also finds much of Netanyahu's behavior to be appalling, I don't take offense at his lobbying to oppose the deal. Whatever you think of his arguments against the deal, Israel clearly has an interest in the deal. The analogy to Obama interfering in a domestic bill before the Knesset is inapt. The Iranian nuclear deal is not a "domestic" matter; it's an international issue, involving the other major negotiating parties and one that will affect all of the Middle East.
7
The analogy is more adept to Obama lobbying against further Israeli settlements that only worsen any prospect for a lasting peace.The United States clearly has an interest there.
Here O Israel, rise up and toss this demagogue out along with his other fear mongering ministers.
21
Israel on the Iranian question -- led by Benyamin Netanyahu/Likud -- has punched well above its own weight and will lose inevitably.
Israel's awesome lobbying has dominated US Middle Eastern policy since the 1966 war. Iraq/Afghanistan have changed America. Thus, Israel's national interests are no longer aligned with those of America.
The portrait of Israel in the HBO series The Brink indicates the alliance US/Israel is no longer unbreakable.
Israel's awesome lobbying has dominated US Middle Eastern policy since the 1966 war. Iraq/Afghanistan have changed America. Thus, Israel's national interests are no longer aligned with those of America.
The portrait of Israel in the HBO series The Brink indicates the alliance US/Israel is no longer unbreakable.
21
Interesting, isn't it. A handful of Cuban exiles in Florida have dictated our policy with Cuba for half a century and a small number of Jews have dictated our policy on behalf of Israel. The tail wags the dog.
Fortunately, Obama sees further than the narrow interest of both of these parties and is doing what he believes is best for the United States. What a concept!
Fortunately, Obama sees further than the narrow interest of both of these parties and is doing what he believes is best for the United States. What a concept!
There was a war in the Middle East in 1966? Must have been fought very quietly.
Sheldon,
It was on television. You must have been too young to watch it or remember.
It was on television. You must have been too young to watch it or remember.
It's sickening to witness how far right the government of Netanyahu is and how many in Israel support his bellicose actions toward the Palestinian people. A majority of those who identify themselves as Jewish in the U.S. and are young do not support him or his government's right-wing policies.
59
Israel is between a rock and a hard place, and the ONLY answer going forward is federation, not isolationism and war.
Israel might just as well be a well of neighborhood in Baltimore or Newark. The cops alone aren't going to 'fix' the neighborhood by cracking down on the misled, malcontent, and ideologically polarized majority that inhabits the surrounds.
The lightening bolts from God (or from his chosen surrogates) are just not coming. Unpalatable as it is, Obama is offering the only rational answer.
Israel might just as well be a well of neighborhood in Baltimore or Newark. The cops alone aren't going to 'fix' the neighborhood by cracking down on the misled, malcontent, and ideologically polarized majority that inhabits the surrounds.
The lightening bolts from God (or from his chosen surrogates) are just not coming. Unpalatable as it is, Obama is offering the only rational answer.
Young=immature. Most will see things differently as the grow up.
As a Jew of 68 years, I can say that Netanyahu and his government are disgusting bigots and war criminals. They have turned what appears to be a majority of Israelis into fascists who cheer war and support murder.
I would never take Israel's side, especially because it is a state built on ethnocentricity that attacks it's neighbors, assassinates Iranians civilians and is no better that Saudi Arabia in it's brutality towards its Arab citizens than the Jim Crow South was toward blacks, including allowing settlers and soldiers to attack and murder Palestinians with
Impunity.
I would never take Israel's side, especially because it is a state built on ethnocentricity that attacks it's neighbors, assassinates Iranians civilians and is no better that Saudi Arabia in it's brutality towards its Arab citizens than the Jim Crow South was toward blacks, including allowing settlers and soldiers to attack and murder Palestinians with
Impunity.
1
“the best way to achieve the goal of preventing Iran from advancing toward a nuclear weapon." Will somebody please explain how this deal achieves the goal of preventing Iran from advancing toward a nuclear weapon? At best it will delay, not prevent. If the goal was to delay, then say so and stop reinterpreting the true goal of this deal for the benefit of political points. Delay may not be a bad thing, but it is not prevention.
12
Delay is a good start. We get fifteen years to work with a country where 60% of the population is under 30.
1
Do you know of anything that "prevents" the United States from launching a preemptive nuclear strike against any country it chooses. Nothing in this world of individual nation states is "preventable", but the only real way to limit the possibilities is by painstaking diplomatic negotiations which my slowly yield truly meaningful results.
2
It attempts to do the rational thing. Declaring the 'rational thing' to be irrational does not resolve the ideologically driven 'irrationality' that is the politics of the Middle East.
The irony is that the Israeli right wing is diametrically opposed to it's neighbors far fright wings. There is nothing more potent than right against right. It just leaves no 'highway' for the folks who can't get their 'myway'! History has plenty of examples of the implosion that follows colorful displays of self centered, self righteous, certitude.
Obama is correct. We should try everything else first.
The irony is that the Israeli right wing is diametrically opposed to it's neighbors far fright wings. There is nothing more potent than right against right. It just leaves no 'highway' for the folks who can't get their 'myway'! History has plenty of examples of the implosion that follows colorful displays of self centered, self righteous, certitude.
Obama is correct. We should try everything else first.
2
It would surprise no one if, upon Obama's successful use of his veto, Netanyahu pre-emptively bombed Iran, triggering WW III.
13
I see... only the US is allowed to preemptively bomb people. Israel has sat out multiple mideast wars at great detriment to its people. Do you forget the Iraq scud attacks when Israel sat quietly and obeyed the US administration not to respond. Well if Israel feels it is being threatened by the coming influx of Iraninan weapons to Hezbollah and Hamas it has every right to respond. If WWIII results it is only because Obama handed them billions in cash to fund the terror networks bent on destroying the only liberal democracy in the middle east.
1
Well that would show his true colors as a thug, now wouldn't it? Guess how much sympathy Israel (and Jews everywhere) would get then? Stop with the bully mentality and the fear-mongering.
1
Then he may be his country's worst existential threat.
War is never off the table, but it is plain nonsense to ignore a possible peaceful solution.
37
I know of no other foreign leader who gets American citizens on a call-in webcast and lobbies them to not support their own President. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. It is beyond hubris and not the actions of an ally. He is wrong to do so. I think Mr. Cohens analogy of President Obama calling Israelis and encouraging them to dump Mr. Netanyahu is on the mark. It's unthinkable he would do so. So let's stop this right wing nutcase from do so here.
62
He is ridiculous and just plain arrogant. He is as nuts as Putin and the other thug from North Korea. He belongs on FOX News. Thanks to Roger Cohen, once again as the voice of reason.
The Supreme Court has given money the vote, and Israel has just used it to buy a few powerful votes.
When Netanyahu came to Washington, Obama had no time for him. Then he went golfing.
The joke in Israel used to be "two Jews, three political parties." And in fact, freedom to disagree is a wonderful right. So, hooray for J Street, for standing up to the lineup of Mr Netanyahu and the usual suspects among the American Jewish organizations who claim to advocate for Israel.
31
The real casualty in all this is AIPAC. The real casualty is Israel. For far too long this small group of American Jews have bought, intimidate and downright threaten American politicians, of all stripes, to do what they think is good for Israel.
And the arrogance of Netanyahu pushed the normally docile Americans (vis a vis Israel) to push back. He attacked the American President loudly and publicly. He overstayed his welcome. He became too overbearing.
And now he is posturing for more bribes from the US. And what is it can Israel do with all the military might that the US is given Netanyahu? Intermittently bomb Syria? Shoot unarmed Palestinians on a daily basis? His military has no strategic value in an area where he has no friends.
AIPAC has lost its ability to influence America. Israel has lost its ability to dominate the middle east.
And the arrogance of Netanyahu pushed the normally docile Americans (vis a vis Israel) to push back. He attacked the American President loudly and publicly. He overstayed his welcome. He became too overbearing.
And now he is posturing for more bribes from the US. And what is it can Israel do with all the military might that the US is given Netanyahu? Intermittently bomb Syria? Shoot unarmed Palestinians on a daily basis? His military has no strategic value in an area where he has no friends.
AIPAC has lost its ability to influence America. Israel has lost its ability to dominate the middle east.
48
Mr. Change
Had you known the material that Israel gives to your government in many areas of which you have no knowledge of, your foolish claims about more bribes from the US would have been omitted.
Given your average at best way of thinking, keep those thoughts firmly embedded in your shallow head and remember that Israel is a major force in this world of post 9/11
One more thing, try to look beyond the obvious....
Had you known the material that Israel gives to your government in many areas of which you have no knowledge of, your foolish claims about more bribes from the US would have been omitted.
Given your average at best way of thinking, keep those thoughts firmly embedded in your shallow head and remember that Israel is a major force in this world of post 9/11
One more thing, try to look beyond the obvious....
1
Mmmm...that's what a lobby group is supposed to do. Don't blame them for its success. And no, Israel has not lost the ability to dominate the Middle East. It has chosen not to exercise that ability.
America is a politically secular nation that allows its citizens to practice religion freely and at their own discretion. In our system of government, and in our law, no religion is more valuable than the next.
On that principle, it is patently un-American to demand that our government favor the interests of any one religion practiced in this country. It is audacious of American Jews to oppose the Iran deal, which has been driven by our President, acting as the secular leader of all Americans, and the heads of other powerful nations, also acting from a position of religious indifference, in order to pressure our government into some other circumstances, war the most likely, that explicitly defend the Jewish nation of Israel.
It is outrageous for politically powerful American Jews such as Chuck Schumer to put the priorities of their religion and their beloved theocratic foreign country ahead of their priorities as Americans. The risk that many thousands of disinterested, non-Jewish Americans could lose their lives in a war to protect Israel is OK with Schumer and like-minded Jewish leaders. In fact, to them it's as it should be.
American Jews should pay strict attention to that description. Note that "American" is first, "Jews" is last. And "Israeli" is not even a part of it.
On that principle, it is patently un-American to demand that our government favor the interests of any one religion practiced in this country. It is audacious of American Jews to oppose the Iran deal, which has been driven by our President, acting as the secular leader of all Americans, and the heads of other powerful nations, also acting from a position of religious indifference, in order to pressure our government into some other circumstances, war the most likely, that explicitly defend the Jewish nation of Israel.
It is outrageous for politically powerful American Jews such as Chuck Schumer to put the priorities of their religion and their beloved theocratic foreign country ahead of their priorities as Americans. The risk that many thousands of disinterested, non-Jewish Americans could lose their lives in a war to protect Israel is OK with Schumer and like-minded Jewish leaders. In fact, to them it's as it should be.
American Jews should pay strict attention to that description. Note that "American" is first, "Jews" is last. And "Israeli" is not even a part of it.
127
I had always thought that in the United States people were allowed to choose any priorities they wished when deciding their political point of view. I may think they are wrong, but their choices are not "outrageous" There were many Irish-Americans who supported the IRA. Similarly there were many Anglo-Americans who supported the British Empire in World War II. What I do find outrageous is that this commentator single-handedly decided the motives behind those American Jews' decisions to oppose the treaty. Some may honestly thing ii is a bad deal. My own feeling alas is the motives ascribed to my own Senator Charles Schumer are also incorrect. I rather think he took the calculated politician's estimate: where his votes come from and where his money comes from.
1
The Middle East is clear proof that 'conservative values' can be used to justify virtually any form of self serving, intolerant, and irrational governance.
We need more togetherness, and not the molecular kind that comes from nuclear fusion.
We need more togetherness, and not the molecular kind that comes from nuclear fusion.
Excuse me, but which group that opposes the deal in invoke religion into their argument?
It is really amazing that 3 to 4 percent of the U.S population, American Jews, ( and it's less considering children and people that are for the deal ), can determine what our foreign policy should be in the Middle East. Not what they think is best for the rest of the country and the world, just Israel. Honestly I find it down right disgusting. And what's really ironic is that if it ever gets to war, which those against seem to be wanting, Israel will be attacked first in response, it's the easiest target for the Iranians. And with the weapons and the armed forces the Iranians have, they could do some real big time damage to Israel in an all out attack; air force, ballistic missiles, navy, and ground troops. In fact the Jewish State might not be able to recover. Believe me the top generals have thought about this time and again, and that's why they haven't struck the Iranian nukes sites. Plus the fact it would do very little at this point to stop the Iranians, other than provoke a response.
The rest of the world is for this deal, in fact they look at the U.S. and shake their heads wondering how this little country in the middle east dictates what we do. It's just an embarassment. The President was right when he said it really is a no-brainer. We have nothing to lose by going forward, but we and Israel could have everything to lose if we don't.
The rest of the world is for this deal, in fact they look at the U.S. and shake their heads wondering how this little country in the middle east dictates what we do. It's just an embarassment. The President was right when he said it really is a no-brainer. We have nothing to lose by going forward, but we and Israel could have everything to lose if we don't.
50
While the behavior of Netanyahu and AIPAC is destructive and completely out of line, if this deal is blocked it won't be American Jews who block it
1) there are no Republican Jews in Congess, yet every single Republican in the Senate will vote to block it. My guess is that this has at least as much to do with money from arms merchants, oil companies ( bringing Iranian oil on line will lower oil prices) and perhaps even the road to Armageddon than it does AIPAC and Adelson dollars.
2) so far the majority of Democrats who are Jewish who have announced their position support the deal. Of course Republicans may be hoping a bonus will be to frighten Jews into the Republican Party, but the majority of American Jews know too well that the Republican Southern Strategy pandered to white supremacist anti Semites and that Republican policies inflame, they don't heal the world
1) there are no Republican Jews in Congess, yet every single Republican in the Senate will vote to block it. My guess is that this has at least as much to do with money from arms merchants, oil companies ( bringing Iranian oil on line will lower oil prices) and perhaps even the road to Armageddon than it does AIPAC and Adelson dollars.
2) so far the majority of Democrats who are Jewish who have announced their position support the deal. Of course Republicans may be hoping a bonus will be to frighten Jews into the Republican Party, but the majority of American Jews know too well that the Republican Southern Strategy pandered to white supremacist anti Semites and that Republican policies inflame, they don't heal the world
17
Actually Rep. Lee Zeldin of Suffolk County is a Republican Jew. And Rep. Jason Chaffetz of Utah was born to a Jewiah father but converted to Mormonism.
All humans have a "conservative" side, and Schumer (among others) is a carefully bought and paid for Israeli conservative.
I don't even believe that he is actually against the deal. All bets are off the table when one's wallet, career, and social network are in the balance.
Activist Israeli meddling in US demographics, and US politics will not ultimately serve them well.
I don't even believe that he is actually against the deal. All bets are off the table when one's wallet, career, and social network are in the balance.
Activist Israeli meddling in US demographics, and US politics will not ultimately serve them well.
The deal is a defeat for the USA and a victory for Iran. In time many of today's supporters of a the deal will practice the art of revising history.
10
Did you also agree with Netanyahu and support the invasion of Iraq? Nothing has strengthened the Iranian position in the region as much as the Invasion of Iraq.
9
Nonsense.
2
We may be sorry later, but not for want of trying.
We will be faced with walking the 'balanced beam' of nuclear proliferation and the potential for bad actors for as far as the eye can see.
One cannot walk a 'balanced beam' without focusing on the beam.
The alternatives are all ugly.
We will be faced with walking the 'balanced beam' of nuclear proliferation and the potential for bad actors for as far as the eye can see.
One cannot walk a 'balanced beam' without focusing on the beam.
The alternatives are all ugly.
I am at a loss to decide whether Mr. Cohen is:
(1) influenced by the Jewish Democratic presence in New York and among the contributors to this august newspaper, most of whom are left-leaning and making the whole ship list to port; or
(2) concerned about the future geopolitical consequences to the original seat of the Judaeo-Christian traditions, the site of the Kingdoms of Israel and Judea and, later, of the Roman province Iudaea.
(1) influenced by the Jewish Democratic presence in New York and among the contributors to this august newspaper, most of whom are left-leaning and making the whole ship list to port; or
(2) concerned about the future geopolitical consequences to the original seat of the Judaeo-Christian traditions, the site of the Kingdoms of Israel and Judea and, later, of the Roman province Iudaea.
1
Perhaps Mr. Cohen is influenced by common sense and the long list of nuclear scientists and retired military officers who have recently come out in support of the Iran deal.
Ad hominem arguments fail. What do you think of the deal yourself?
1
Few, if any, are open to dialog. We need the dialog regardless of it's inevitably biased, human origin.
The only threat facing Israel comes not from Iran but from Israel and the explosion of right wing extremism which Netanyahu has spend years nurturing. Iran has no nuclear stockpile, it's allowed inspection of its nuclear facilities and fatigued the NPT. Israel should be held to the same standards.
59
God requires perfection. Humans (and all of the rest of nature) are incapable of perfection. Sooner or later all religions learn that tolerance for "others" provides the 'wiggle room' that God needs to survive because without humans, there would be no one and nothing seeking perfection.
When the last human falls in the forest, will God hear it fall?
When the last human falls in the forest, will God hear it fall?
1n 1953, the US and England engineered the overthrow of the democratically elected Mossadegh government in Iran and put the late Shah Pahlevi on a throne because of Moddadegh's audacity for nationalizing the Anglo-American Oil company for its refusal to allow its books to be reviewed for failure to pay adequate royalties. That is what anyone might call aggressive behavior. The current deal with Iran may not satisfy everyone but it;s the best we can get and still maintain our standing as a reliable negotiator in the ME. If Congress kills the deal, nuclear weapon containment will be dead as the Saudis and the Emirates, possibly Egypt as well, race for their bombs. The likelihood of a suicidal nuclear war by the end of the 21st century may well be unavoidable. The issue is not Iran, the issue os a fully nuclear armed Middle East. Bad enough that Pakistan and India, two serious antagonists, have these weapons. But Shia and Sunni with nuclear weapons? Brrrrrr.
11
Will Roger Cohen EVER write a column that isn't negative re Israeli or US Government. A true prisoner of the J Street crowd.
12
Really, weahkee95? And who are you a prisoner of?
Listening to the arguments has brought several issues to the forefront in my mind. 1) War if nothing is done! Well, continuing escalation of sanctions is not working especially if the G5+1 core falling apart may create that inevitability, if no deal! On the other hand, 2) once there is a deal, even the slightest violation of access or terms of the deal should ultimately, ideally, result in military action. Question which outcome to do the hawks choose; war now or later? Which hawks are correct? Either way, we should be confident, unfortunately, that Iran will lie at either turn and not conform to any of the terms of the deal making military action almost inevitable! So what path to peace has Obama actually taken on behalf of the US? What I believe Obama, the NSA, State, and the rest of the Administration have done is given Iran and it's Ayatollahs all the rope to gently place around their own neck, make a nice knot, and they will ultimately be the ones who kick the stool of the international community out from under their own legs. What happens then is the big questions we can not answer at this time! Just what appears to be obvious to me.........
4
Good point. We know the current moment, hour, and day. We can never "know" tomorrow with the level of "certainty" required by 'right wing' thinking.
We will never truly know the certainty of our nuclear future until it arrives, but we do know that we can lift water one bucket at a time, and build pyramids, one stone block at a time.
We should stick to the certainty of building. At the same time, we should remain aware of the never ending possibilities and uncertainties of the future, but only use those possibilities and uncertainties to calculate our risk rather than dictate our direct actions.
The choice between instant cataclysm and future cataclysm is pretty much a 'no brainer' for all but the most ardent ideologues who are CERTAIN that the ultimate outcome will be cataclysm.
We will never truly know the certainty of our nuclear future until it arrives, but we do know that we can lift water one bucket at a time, and build pyramids, one stone block at a time.
We should stick to the certainty of building. At the same time, we should remain aware of the never ending possibilities and uncertainties of the future, but only use those possibilities and uncertainties to calculate our risk rather than dictate our direct actions.
The choice between instant cataclysm and future cataclysm is pretty much a 'no brainer' for all but the most ardent ideologues who are CERTAIN that the ultimate outcome will be cataclysm.
America Jews, like Americans of all religions and non-religions, should listen to the opinion of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who said the JCPOA will reduce the threat of war, over the war mongering P.M. of a foreign country and his AIPAC lackeys, who assert, without any facts, the opposite.
38
Cohen correctly describes Mr. Netanyahu's ongoing fear mongering as a performance. This "performance artist" and his warmongering party have done more to damage US/Israel relations than any prior administration in Israel's history. Those of us who truly care about the safety and future of Israel know that the future will be far better when Mr. Netanyahu is long gone.
37
Amen!!!
'A merit of this deal is that it would condemn the United States and Iran to a relationship'
And that is exactly what Israel and the other (Sunni) Arab countries are afraid of!
If the US establishes any relationship with Iran at all, a relationship that is not always on the brink of war, then the status of all those countries, including Israel, gets taken down a notch. For them, it a zero-sum game. If Iran's status goes up even so slightly, their status inevitably goes down.
And that is the fear - it is not the bomb. They know that Iran can never use an atomic weapon in their own neighborhood just as Israel can never use any of its 100+ nuclear weapons in its immediate neighborhood, without being suicidal.
And that is exactly what Israel and the other (Sunni) Arab countries are afraid of!
If the US establishes any relationship with Iran at all, a relationship that is not always on the brink of war, then the status of all those countries, including Israel, gets taken down a notch. For them, it a zero-sum game. If Iran's status goes up even so slightly, their status inevitably goes down.
And that is the fear - it is not the bomb. They know that Iran can never use an atomic weapon in their own neighborhood just as Israel can never use any of its 100+ nuclear weapons in its immediate neighborhood, without being suicidal.
27
I don't think I've ever seen this point made, in all the commentaries and coverage I've read on this issue. Yes! Making a deal with Iran carries with it the tacit recognition that Israel is not the center of the universe, and that the United States has broader interests in the Middle East. What a shock! Well said, Dreamer!
The readers of the NYT, or at least those who take the trouble to comment, seem to be living in a bubble. Forget Netanyahu and Sheldon Adelson. Polls show that most Americans oppose the deal. On the other hand, most Jews live in the the bubble and support it, or are afraid to oppose it, or want to appease those who believe that Israel is dragging America down--an absurd proposition.
My view is that just as opposing the government of Israel doesn't make one an anti-Semite, opposing the government of the US or some other Western government doesn't make one a Jewish traitor. We all have complexes of interests and have to weigh them in particular situations, and no one should be surprised that Jewish concern for Jewish survival trumps Jewish commitment to "progressive" causes, or even the reluctance to contemplate military conflict.
As I see it, in deciding to confront the US administration, Netanyahu probably knows that getting Congress to override a Presidential veto is a long shot. But if he is successful it will only be because the American people—not American Jews or Israelis—reject this President's foreign policies. Even coming within a nose of success—failing by two or three votes—he will have caused the next administration, of whichever party, to rethink those policies.
My view is that just as opposing the government of Israel doesn't make one an anti-Semite, opposing the government of the US or some other Western government doesn't make one a Jewish traitor. We all have complexes of interests and have to weigh them in particular situations, and no one should be surprised that Jewish concern for Jewish survival trumps Jewish commitment to "progressive" causes, or even the reluctance to contemplate military conflict.
As I see it, in deciding to confront the US administration, Netanyahu probably knows that getting Congress to override a Presidential veto is a long shot. But if he is successful it will only be because the American people—not American Jews or Israelis—reject this President's foreign policies. Even coming within a nose of success—failing by two or three votes—he will have caused the next administration, of whichever party, to rethink those policies.
6
If American Jews should listen to Sander M. Levin ("the longest-serving Jewish member of the House"), as Roger Cohen suggests, then they should not listen to the senior senator from NY, Chuck Schumer (who apparently cannot come up with a viable alternative to the deal he opposes).
14
Here's a novel concept for a future Roger Cohen column -- Iran and Iranian Americans. Why doesn't Roger Cohen ask Iranian Americans what they think Obama/Kerry's Grand Bargain and ask pointed questions about if their loyalty lies with Iran or America. Hey, dual loyalty works with other nationalities too. Maybe part of the problem regarding Iran and American Jews is Israel fatigue. American Jews are getting a little sick and tired of being caught in the crosshairs in the ugly Iran/Israel/American triangle. Major Jewish American organizations are regarded with suspicion. What's worse is that the deadline for whether or nor the Grand Iran Bargain passes or fails coincides with Rosh Hashanah. Scapegoating American Jews should the deal ultimately collapse is an nasty way to begin 5776.
7
Do you mean Iranian-Americans like the Miami Cubans?
Thank you, Mr. Cohen I thought this was the case with many American Jews. I wonder what is the percentage of folks feeling positively about the Iran deal in the Knesset.
6
Most of the former Israeli security and defense establishment is in favor of the agreement with Iran. I trust their opinion more than these senators who are against the accord and whose vote is based entirely on political calculations and wanting to get reelected. The current defense and security establishment are not permitted to speak on this matter. In case you were wondering.
22
Mr. Netanyahu says he rejects the deal to prevent a war. He rationalizes his actions by predicting that Iran will cheat if the agreement is ratified but will not cross the red line if agreement is defeated in the Congress! He is officially the Prime Minister of the State of Israel and in that capacity and as a politician he can be as irrational as he wants. The problem arises when "state of Israel" and "Jewish People" are used interchangeably.
74
In Netanyahu's mind they are interchangeable.
Prime Minister Netanyahu dislikes President Obama for one reason: the president had the audacity to tell him "no," something his spineless predecessor, W., was too afraid to do. Mr. Netanyahu doesn't want Mr. Obama to win this fight because it will, to his limited sightline, embolden future U.S. presidents to tell Israel, "wait, not so fast" on this or that problem. It's more than past time that Israel leave America to Americans. This is not an anti-Jewish accord, it's an anti-bomb deal. Period.
32
Bush/Cheney were not spineless, they started our wars in Afghanistan and IRAQ. Obama has not been spineless, either. With Hillary's fierce and brilliant foreign affairs counsel, he continued his predecessor's wars and lit up the rest of the Middle East.
What this country needs is a spineless President and cabinet that will stop rather than start wars!
What this country needs is a spineless President and cabinet that will stop rather than start wars!
I think this deal is just jiffy. It is a real, serious thing, sweeping away a lot of the glaring mistrust that has existed between our 2 nations. Let bygones be bygones. The bonus part of the is that, in line with other past debunkings of Republican vitriol, this will turn out to be a solid way for us to communicate with a nation and people who are good hearted. True to form, forgiveness will produce miracles.
11
Thoughtful, and helpful in describing the tensions within Jewish organizations.
3
It is no accident that the only senior Republicans, like retired Senators Lugar Warner and Bennett and Israeli officials like retired Mossad Chief Efraim Halevy that support the JCPOA are retired and out of the reach of political reprisals from political organizations like AIPAC, Likud and the GOP.
13
Dear Mr. Cohen:
An Iranian funded, Hamas rocket landed less than a kilometer from me in last year's Gaza War. That's as close to an Iranian funded conventional weapon that I want to get.
I, and many Israelis are not as concerned about a nuclear bomb being dropped on us, as much as conventional weapons, that as far as I can tell, will be much easier for Iran to fund after sanctions are lifted. No one will say that it is great for world peace that they were obliterated by conventional and not nuclear weapons.
Iran has made it perfectly clear that they wish to wipe Israel off the map. When they are caught red handed in murdering a 100 Jews in Argentina, prosecutors who are about to blow the whistle on the connection to Iran get "suicided".
That being said, Mr. Netanyahu's approach to this all seems ham handed at best. I hope the Israeli government has a Plan B ready to go, because this approach is counterproductive.
It is very nice that you found a few Jewish Americans and Senators who support the pact, but it is disingenious not to mention those that don't, or to talk with Israelis of all political stripes, who feel that they will be made to pay the consequences against an enemy sworn to their destruction.
An Iranian funded, Hamas rocket landed less than a kilometer from me in last year's Gaza War. That's as close to an Iranian funded conventional weapon that I want to get.
I, and many Israelis are not as concerned about a nuclear bomb being dropped on us, as much as conventional weapons, that as far as I can tell, will be much easier for Iran to fund after sanctions are lifted. No one will say that it is great for world peace that they were obliterated by conventional and not nuclear weapons.
Iran has made it perfectly clear that they wish to wipe Israel off the map. When they are caught red handed in murdering a 100 Jews in Argentina, prosecutors who are about to blow the whistle on the connection to Iran get "suicided".
That being said, Mr. Netanyahu's approach to this all seems ham handed at best. I hope the Israeli government has a Plan B ready to go, because this approach is counterproductive.
It is very nice that you found a few Jewish Americans and Senators who support the pact, but it is disingenious not to mention those that don't, or to talk with Israelis of all political stripes, who feel that they will be made to pay the consequences against an enemy sworn to their destruction.
27
You speak as if Israel doesn't have 200 nuclear weapons, the most advanced conventional military hardware in the world, thanks to the US and a highly trained fighting force. Your wish to permanently disable Iran is irrational for the rest of the world. If Israel wishes to attempt that then good luck.
The impact of Netanyahu's arrogance, of his party's hubris will cost Israel the loyalty of American citizens. It has always been the United States that has stood by and supported Israel in the face of mutual annihilation when the Soviet Union stood with the Egyptians and their allies against tiny Israel. Yet Netanyahu and Israel disrespect the United States. Netanyahu allies himself and Israel with extremist Republicans and openly defies the twice elected President (with 78% and 69% of Jewish support in the 2008 and 2012 elections.)
War is all that Netanyahu offers. Ask yourself if the American people will support him and his policy. Consider the fact that the celebrated Republican "victory" in the Congress was a consequence of a 38% voter turnout. Arrogance and hubris does not equal intelligence or result in success. Gambling on Netanyahu, on war is foolish. The deal is not the end, but a beginning of negotiations. The major powers are prepared to resume relations with Iran now. American rejection of the deal, Israeli unilateral intervention is an invitation to disaster.
War is all that Netanyahu offers. Ask yourself if the American people will support him and his policy. Consider the fact that the celebrated Republican "victory" in the Congress was a consequence of a 38% voter turnout. Arrogance and hubris does not equal intelligence or result in success. Gambling on Netanyahu, on war is foolish. The deal is not the end, but a beginning of negotiations. The major powers are prepared to resume relations with Iran now. American rejection of the deal, Israeli unilateral intervention is an invitation to disaster.
2
Dear Stuart,
How many American funded Israeli rockets landed in Gaza? Which were delivered by American funded fighter jets and bombers, while Israel is protected by the American funded Iron Dome. Perhaps it's time to give peace a chance, starting with the removal of ALL outside influence in the region.
How many American funded Israeli rockets landed in Gaza? Which were delivered by American funded fighter jets and bombers, while Israel is protected by the American funded Iron Dome. Perhaps it's time to give peace a chance, starting with the removal of ALL outside influence in the region.
1
How is J Street "pro-Israel" when it endorses positions that virtually no Israelis espouse? It can't simply be because J Street says that it cares about Israel: by that token, Netanyahu is "pro-Iran" because he is opposed to the Iranian government, not the Iranian people. Let's stop calling J Street "pro-Israel". It's a lefty American Jewish organization that has its own Israel agenda, but which is seriously out-of-step with almost all Israelis who don't live in Ramat Aviv Gimel.
9
Sorry, Adam, but JStreet has former and current Israelis of military and political importance in its ranks. I believe the founder of JStreet is a former Israeli military chieftain, I do forget his rank. And, yes, it does have the backing of those Israelis against the current philosophy within Israel, of which there are many. All Israelis are not in favor of the current policy. There are many Israeli doves against Netanyahu. JStreet is an American Jew's only rebuttal (alternative, if you will) against AIPAC and other organizations like AIPAC, that seem, want to speak for all Jews. Those Jews against those powerful organizations, finally have a voice in JStreet.
27
"How is J Street "pro-Israel" when it endorses positions that virtually no Israelis espouse?"
What positions does it endorse that "virtually" no Israelis espouse? What do you mean by virtually? I think you might be mistaking Likud and other right-wing parties with Israelis.
What positions does it endorse that "virtually" no Israelis espouse? What do you mean by virtually? I think you might be mistaking Likud and other right-wing parties with Israelis.
2
"How is J Street "pro-Israel" when it endorses positions that virtually no Israelis espouse?"
No Israelis? Oh yeah, I forgot the Jewish Israelis represented by Haaretz and found among artists and intellectuals are nothings and the 20% Israeli Arab part of the population doesn't even exist except when they vote "in droves".
No Israelis? Oh yeah, I forgot the Jewish Israelis represented by Haaretz and found among artists and intellectuals are nothings and the 20% Israeli Arab part of the population doesn't even exist except when they vote "in droves".
2
Cohen makes 2 common errors.
First, Netanyahu is not trying to use American Jews to scuttle the deal negotiated by the world powers with Iran. He has given up on a partnership with American Jews. His focus is on an alliance with the Christian right.
Secondly, we know EXACTLY how representative AIPAC, the AJC the ADL and Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations are of American Jewry. They are NOT representative at all! And the only reason that some people think they are representative is because the media quotes them as if they speak for a community that they have long ceased to represent.
First, Netanyahu is not trying to use American Jews to scuttle the deal negotiated by the world powers with Iran. He has given up on a partnership with American Jews. His focus is on an alliance with the Christian right.
Secondly, we know EXACTLY how representative AIPAC, the AJC the ADL and Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations are of American Jewry. They are NOT representative at all! And the only reason that some people think they are representative is because the media quotes them as if they speak for a community that they have long ceased to represent.
10
I agree with Christian right --- strange bedfellows.
We are still waiting for the right-wingers in Israel and the US to propose a workable alternative to the agreement. They rare invested too deeply in a policy of war over diplomacy. They simply cannot allow what they see as a victory for diplomacy and for the President. A diplomatic solution has to be opposed so it doesn't have a chance to succeed.
This is not an agreement between the US and Iran alone. The other parties to the agreement are firmly in favor of it. They have enforced sanctions on Iran, which is costing them trade, as part of an overall strategy to get Iran to the negotiate. It worked. If this deal is not confirmed by the US, these other countries are not going to keep the sanctions on and go back to the negotiating table. The hardliners in Iran will prevail and they will be unrestrained in their nuclear development. Then what? As John McCain said, "Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran." Maybe we can get another disastrous war going. The last one worked so well.
This is not an agreement between the US and Iran alone. The other parties to the agreement are firmly in favor of it. They have enforced sanctions on Iran, which is costing them trade, as part of an overall strategy to get Iran to the negotiate. It worked. If this deal is not confirmed by the US, these other countries are not going to keep the sanctions on and go back to the negotiating table. The hardliners in Iran will prevail and they will be unrestrained in their nuclear development. Then what? As John McCain said, "Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran." Maybe we can get another disastrous war going. The last one worked so well.
22
And the one before that and the one before that....we are thoroughly stuck to the Near East tarbaby and just keep trying the same thing over and over.
1
To their great regret, many Jews listened to the American government during WW II and many Jews who might have been saved perished as a result. Let's learn from the mistakes of the past.
What is clear is that other American allies besides Israel including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Turkey -- all Sunni Muslim states vs. a Shia Iran -- also want a better agreement with Iran.
It is also clear that the embargo against Iran was not sufficiently strong to give The President the best negotiating position.
Thanks to the new fracking technology, America is producing far more oil than just a few years ago.
The President should temporarily change the export ban on American oil and send that oil as a replacement to countries currently buying Iranian oil. The Saudis should also increase their production to also sell to the current buyers of Iranian oil.
Cut the Iranians totally off of oil. Then negotiate.
What is clear is that other American allies besides Israel including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Turkey -- all Sunni Muslim states vs. a Shia Iran -- also want a better agreement with Iran.
It is also clear that the embargo against Iran was not sufficiently strong to give The President the best negotiating position.
Thanks to the new fracking technology, America is producing far more oil than just a few years ago.
The President should temporarily change the export ban on American oil and send that oil as a replacement to countries currently buying Iranian oil. The Saudis should also increase their production to also sell to the current buyers of Iranian oil.
Cut the Iranians totally off of oil. Then negotiate.
5
So Jews should not listen to Isreal over America? Where does ones loyalties lie? If this is the case, then one should seek to live in Isreal.
"It’s enough to imagine Obama calling thousands of Israelis to encourage them to oppose a piece of sensitive legislation in the Knesset to gauge how inappropriate Netanyahu’s behavior is."
It's worse than that: we all know that under this hypothetical, Israeli Jews would balk at interlopers trying to sway their domestic politics, but American Jews welcome intrusions such as the Netanyahu's conference call, the speech to Congress, and AIPAC's perfidious buying of politicians.
It's no canard to question where these people's loyalties lie. They oppose the deal because they've decided it's bad for Israel. They couldn't care less about the United States.
Odious.
It's worse than that: we all know that under this hypothetical, Israeli Jews would balk at interlopers trying to sway their domestic politics, but American Jews welcome intrusions such as the Netanyahu's conference call, the speech to Congress, and AIPAC's perfidious buying of politicians.
It's no canard to question where these people's loyalties lie. They oppose the deal because they've decided it's bad for Israel. They couldn't care less about the United States.
Odious.
21
As Cohen points out, the generalization above about the position of American Jews is wrong. There are many American Jews who despise Netanyahu and the anti-peace and ultimately anti-Israel settler movement. I am one.
What Cohen fails to mention is that fundamentalist American Christians walk in lock step with Netanyahu because they want to see Jewish domination of the land of Israel followed by the Apocolypse. These strange and dangerous bedfellows dictate today's Republican policies toward Israel.
What Cohen fails to mention is that fundamentalist American Christians walk in lock step with Netanyahu because they want to see Jewish domination of the land of Israel followed by the Apocolypse. These strange and dangerous bedfellows dictate today's Republican policies toward Israel.
There is such a thing as excessive leverage. It happens in finance, it can happen in geopolitics. The deleveraging process is pretty ugly. The wise are careful with this tool.
1
"To jaw-jaw is always better than to war-war" - Sir Winston Churchill, and he was certainly no appeaser.
7
The Prime Minister of Israel is a Republican. He should not be supported by the Democrats.
5
The fact that some Americans would help a foreign nation to work against our interests and not be prosecuted for treason is amazing to me.
17
I find it really disturbing that a foreign power, even an ally, is able to exert so much influence in our country. While I strongly support Israel's security, I think America's national and security interests are paramount. Seeing a prime minister of a foreign country pander to US citizens should be prohibited.
14
Now hear this: US Senators and Congressmen; If you want political donations from Jewish organisations all you need to do is appose the Iran deal. Just appose, no questions asked. Plus just name the amount of contributions you need for your re election.
9
Netanyahu has gone lunatic.
I fret about the future of Israel, if he represents the sense (and intellectual capacities) of that country.
And, by happenstance, half of my genetic estate is located there.
What a change, to feel that the elected government of Iran is more responsible than the elected government of Israel. I can only wonder how the Supreme Leader, on the one hand, and the Chief Rabbi (who does enough damage in his limited capacity, on the other would match up.
I fret about the future of Israel, if he represents the sense (and intellectual capacities) of that country.
And, by happenstance, half of my genetic estate is located there.
What a change, to feel that the elected government of Iran is more responsible than the elected government of Israel. I can only wonder how the Supreme Leader, on the one hand, and the Chief Rabbi (who does enough damage in his limited capacity, on the other would match up.
11
"What a change, to feel that the elected government of Iran is more responsible than the elected government of Israel."
America needs to recognize that every Israeli government since the election of Golda Meir has lied to the Americans about its real policy objectives at every turn. And for the most part, the US government has never had the guts to denounce these deceptions.
I don't believe that any Israeli government since 1967 has ever, even for a moment, been willing to accept a viable independent Palestinian state in exchange for a peace agreement, no matter what its terms. And yes, I include the governments led by Simon Peres and Ehud Barak in that.
Bibi's machinations on the Iran deal at least have the virtue of being transparent. Very unusual for Israel.
America needs to recognize that every Israeli government since the election of Golda Meir has lied to the Americans about its real policy objectives at every turn. And for the most part, the US government has never had the guts to denounce these deceptions.
I don't believe that any Israeli government since 1967 has ever, even for a moment, been willing to accept a viable independent Palestinian state in exchange for a peace agreement, no matter what its terms. And yes, I include the governments led by Simon Peres and Ehud Barak in that.
Bibi's machinations on the Iran deal at least have the virtue of being transparent. Very unusual for Israel.
The inevitable tension between being Jewish and being an American "progressive" is inevitable. As they say in the business world - their interests are not aligned. Any Jewish immigrant who arrived from the Soviet Union noted with amazement the short sightedness of the liberal jewish tradition. We knew that that conflict would be inevitable and it arrived in earnest in 2001. To most of the progressive Jews, being liberal is an article of faith, a sort of a political dogma. Yet the progressive vector has lead to the support of the Palestinian blood war against the jews, blockade of Israel, and now support of the deal which puts Israel into the nuclear cross hairs of the proven terrorist state. Furthermore the atmosphere of political correctness and progressive censorship of any varying opinion is a threat to the Jewish culture, religion, and values, which have always differed form mainstream. The most glaring example of this problem is the overt and critical Jewish support of Obama's candidacy at what proved to be a great peril to Israel's security and interests.
4
"Any Jewish immigrant who arrived from the Soviet Union noted with amazement the short sightedness of the liberal jewish tradition."
And any Jewish American who didn't arrive from the Soviet Union noted and notes with amazement the indifference of many Soviet Jewish immigrants to human rights for anybody other than Soviet Jewish immigrants. And this after western Jewish and non-Jewish adherents to Mr. Yuri's detested liberal tradition fought on human rights grounds for the right of Soviet Jews to leave the Soviet Union.
And any Jewish American who didn't arrive from the Soviet Union noted and notes with amazement the indifference of many Soviet Jewish immigrants to human rights for anybody other than Soviet Jewish immigrants. And this after western Jewish and non-Jewish adherents to Mr. Yuri's detested liberal tradition fought on human rights grounds for the right of Soviet Jews to leave the Soviet Union.
@Yiztei Yuri
Agreed. I am finding myself more and more at odds with liberals and progressives, all intent on being as PC as they can, loving the Palestinians, demonizing Israel, supporting BDS etc etc. While I still side with liberals on domestic issues such as environmental, health care accessibility and birth control, on foreign policy I'm finding myself in the Republican camp; not a place I ever expected to be. Come election time, not sure how it will play out. I was solidly pro-Obama the first time, and sat the second election out, unwilling to vote for him or the opponent. This time, who knows.....
Agreed. I am finding myself more and more at odds with liberals and progressives, all intent on being as PC as they can, loving the Palestinians, demonizing Israel, supporting BDS etc etc. While I still side with liberals on domestic issues such as environmental, health care accessibility and birth control, on foreign policy I'm finding myself in the Republican camp; not a place I ever expected to be. Come election time, not sure how it will play out. I was solidly pro-Obama the first time, and sat the second election out, unwilling to vote for him or the opponent. This time, who knows.....
1
Funny. I don't feel any tension at all. Israel's current policies are bad for Israel. It's not a matter of political correctness. It's a matter of looking twenty years ahead at the full picture painted by the world rather than just one year ahead at the picture I'm painting by myself.
Want to know what's truly scary about the whole Iran deal? It's Obama's patronizing and paternalistic attitude toward American Jews like me who are uneasy when it comes to anything to do with Iran. Obama is treating us as though he was the only adult in the room and American Jews were naughty children who need to spend some time in the naughty chair. All Obama is really doing is kicking the toxic Iranian nuclear can down the road so he can finish his term in relative peace. Let Iran become the headache of President 45 or even President 46. Quite frankly Sander Levin does not represent this American Jew--he comes from Michigan with its growing Arab population. All Levin is doing is supporting this noxious Iran Nuke deal in exchange for Arab/Muslim votes. Levin just wants to be re-elected next year. If that isn't both shameless and opportunistic I don't know what is.
7
Really? That's what's "truly scary" -- Obama's daring to suppose that your "uneasiness" doesn't constitute an argument against the agreement?
As for kicking the can down the road, that is 90% of what successful diplomacy is all about. Generally, in international affairs, "permanent solution" is a euphemism for war.
As for kicking the can down the road, that is 90% of what successful diplomacy is all about. Generally, in international affairs, "permanent solution" is a euphemism for war.
If the agreement is to be rejected, then there are two alternative options: 1) Do nothing and watch the P4+1 drop sanctions and Iran develop a bomb; or 2) Prepare for a war. To make the choice, Chuck Schumer should be offered the opportunity to introduce the Selective Service Act of 2015. Otherwise, I guess he is choosing option 1.
10
Who can count on Chuck Schumer? Not the New Yorkers, not the Israelis. Is he an Irani but stretch of one's imagination, I think may be!!
1
What is so infuriating is the common belief that the alternative to this deal is a strong international sanctions policy that will cripple Iran. This is willful ignorance at best. If this deal falters China and Russia will pull out of the sanctions, Iran will have plenty of markets for their oil and they will rebuild their economy without the reductions in nuclear fuel, enriched plutonium, centrifuges or inspections.
Without this deal Iran will certainly have a bomb within a few years, a desperate, broke administration looking for a scapegoat, and a populace that sees America and Israel as Iran's sole remaining enemies.
Without this deal Iran will certainly have a bomb within a few years, a desperate, broke administration looking for a scapegoat, and a populace that sees America and Israel as Iran's sole remaining enemies.
14
Currently, Israel has enough nuclear weaponry to blow all of the Middle East off the map. It would be fair in this "cold war" if Israel admitted its massive arsenal which could be deployed at the push of Netanyahu's little finger and end the "weak, vulnerable' Israeli lies.
17
I am always struck by the bizarre way Cohen frames this issue - it is all about Israel. I was unaware it was the 51st state or that it had veto power over US foreign policy. This probably is the reason I have difficulty taking Cohen seriously on matters related to Israel. He never seems to ask what is best for us (the US), and I think that is the only question we should be asking. Different people may disagree, but let's talk about what matters. If Israel insists on interfering with our internal politics, I propose we eliminate our $3Bn + annual subsidy - after all, what have they done for us lately but embarrass us?
19
I think you don't understand clearly how influential Jews are in the USA. when you have that clear out you would understand this article better. It should tell you how much influence they have when you have the president of Israel invited to speak agains the President policies to the USA Congress.
I have always admired Chuck Schumer for his intelligence, his stand against gun violence, his reason, but I was surprised when he came out against Obama's efforts to seek compromise with Iran. At the time I wondered if he was under pressure from Netanyahu. I still wonder, and if so, I am disappointed.
21
Actually there should be a looming question right now. Why does Isreal oppose the nuclear deal? Why are they not for controlling nuclear weapons? Why are Chuck Schumer & Bibi opposing the treaty because they are demanding a nuclear free Iran,yet not demanding a nuclear free Mid-East? Can we all agree Justice should apply to all people & nations. Is it just to make demands of Iran & not make them on Isreal? I believe if you could take a vote right now in both Isreal & the US,all would support a nuclear free Mid-East. With people like Bibi, and his ability to press a button on an ICBM launch , is just as scary as an ayotollahs access to the same button.
I also generally admire Sen Schumer, and remain hopeful that if the Congress opposes the deal and the President blocks it, Mr. Schumer will vote his intelligence and his country's best interest so that the veto will stand.
There is a good case to be made that Netanyahu has been driven mad by his hatred of Obama. His rhetoric in the phone call, as described by Roger Cohen is insane, though not without calculation, to wit: an understanding that the American pubiic is the most easily scared in the democratic world, so much so that in the Bush administration numerous democrats, non-Jewish and Jewish, turned to jelly at a previous mention (also a lie) about "yellow cake".
If Netanyahu succeeds in pushing us into another badg war in the Near East, Americans are likely to blame Israel, not the man responsible, shaking the alliance to its foundations. Those Democrats concerned about Israel's future ought to vote for the nuclear accord.
If Netanyahu succeeds in pushing us into another badg war in the Near East, Americans are likely to blame Israel, not the man responsible, shaking the alliance to its foundations. Those Democrats concerned about Israel's future ought to vote for the nuclear accord.
13
Netanyahoo is a paranoid war-monger and should be stopped. See John from Hartford's comments.
11
There is reason to fear that Netanyahu' provocations will poison future US-Israeli relations. Resentments still linger over the sinking the the US navy ship by Israeli planes and torpedo boats in the 1967 Six Day War. Remember the Liberty? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident. Our politicians choose to forget but many US citizens do not.
14
Some critics will oppose any nuclear agreement, regardless of its terms. They will reject it because it is President Obama’s deal, or because they have vested interests in the continuation of the status quo for ideological, geo-strategic or even financial reasons. It is pointless to try to persuade them.
It is also risky, however, to ignore their objections. If left unaddressed, they may poison the atmosphere and derail the deal’s proper implementation.
It is important to isolate the spoilers and highlight that they offer no realistic alternative while irresponsibly putting politics ahead of national interests.
It is also risky, however, to ignore their objections. If left unaddressed, they may poison the atmosphere and derail the deal’s proper implementation.
It is important to isolate the spoilers and highlight that they offer no realistic alternative while irresponsibly putting politics ahead of national interests.
6
As a non-Jewish American I do not understand why the country of "Israel" is our concern? America is making a deal with Iran; I don't see Israel's name in that sentence. If Israel wants to make a deal, or make war, with Iran, it is none of America's business, as well.
I have never been as offended, as a taxpaying citizen, as when Netanyahu had the effrontery to address our congress. American Jews need to examine who holds their allegiance. If it is Israel, then a change of venue is in order.
I have never been as offended, as a taxpaying citizen, as when Netanyahu had the effrontery to address our congress. American Jews need to examine who holds their allegiance. If it is Israel, then a change of venue is in order.
18
Again with the allegiance. I find it frightening that nearly any discussion on Israel brings out a good number of people who actually question American Jewish allegiance to this country. It reminds me of the kind of fear-mongering that led to the incarceration of Japanese Americans. Netanyahu does not speak for most American Jews and many Israeli Jews.
1
SB wrote: "Again with the allegiance. I find it frightening that nearly any discussion on Israel brings out a good number of people who actually question American Jewish allegiance to this country."
What is so difficult to understand? What other nationality in this country has such a powerful lobby to influence the decisions of American legislators toward the land of their ancestry? Italians? Africans? Poles? Germans? Irish? Japanese? A majority of American Jews want Israel treated as the 51st state of the union.
What is so difficult to understand? What other nationality in this country has such a powerful lobby to influence the decisions of American legislators toward the land of their ancestry? Italians? Africans? Poles? Germans? Irish? Japanese? A majority of American Jews want Israel treated as the 51st state of the union.
1
Iran is the most powerful and stable country in the mid-east, and if the U. S. doesn't deal with them diplomatically, then we're out of touch and on the wrong side of history. Of course Israel is opposed to having a rival for influence and power, never mind the question of nuclear weapons. If the Conf. of Presidents... would not admit J Street as a member, it just shows how out of touch they are with reality. The established Jewish organizations and federations are dinosaurs.
8
Let's be fair as to why J Street wasn't welcomed by the Conference: It is a purportedly "pro-Israel" organization that has given a platform to groups that oppose Israel's right to exist. There are plenty of platforms for haters of Israel (and I'm not speaking of people who don't like the current gov't there). These people opposed to Israel's existence don't need to be invited to forums sponsored by supposedly "pro-Israel" Jewish organizations. Some opinions should be beyond the pale. I don't imagine the NAACP invites pro-segregationists to speak at its conventions and meetings, nor do I hear American liberals arguing that the NAACP should.
9
Has Cohen ever written a positive column about Israel?
5
Assuming this deal is 50/50, it needs to be beefed up with more guarantees if/when the Iranians cheat, which they are known to do. Nothing in the agreement forces the Iranian govt. to come clean on their nuclear weaponization program, and the 24 day wait for "immediate" (hah!) inspections can stretch into 3 months, on which Bibi is sadly correct. There are things our Administration, in conjunction with Congress, can do independently of the P5 to show the Iranians we won't tolerate shtick. However, I suspect (as does AIPAC) that the Administration is not interested in anything more, regardless of how slippery the slopes/holes in the agreement. And THAT is why opposition is fierce. President Obama wants to wash his hands of Iran, perhaps the entire Middle East. Nobody has yet invented an anti-"bacterial" soap that will achieve that.
5
Until recently, Israel smartly had diplomats march into the Sunday shows with American accents to solemnly give the truth about Israel's rights as a sovereign state to defend itself while expressing solidarity with the United States. It was never clear, however, what they actually did to support U.S. interests because it was always expressions of how America can help Israel.
Now they have gone counterintuitive, making claims about the Iran nuclear deal that aren't in the document as Fareed Zakaria outmatched Israeli Ambassador Ron Dermer, challenging him on most of his assertions. Zakaria had done his homework and wasn't afraid to confront an Israeli spokesman.
It's difficult to say what the outcome will be but I think President Obama is right that the deal is almost as good as it can be and Cohen is right, perhaps America and Iran should have to deal with each other. I would add that always, America should look at its relationship with other countries from its own interests.
Now they have gone counterintuitive, making claims about the Iran nuclear deal that aren't in the document as Fareed Zakaria outmatched Israeli Ambassador Ron Dermer, challenging him on most of his assertions. Zakaria had done his homework and wasn't afraid to confront an Israeli spokesman.
It's difficult to say what the outcome will be but I think President Obama is right that the deal is almost as good as it can be and Cohen is right, perhaps America and Iran should have to deal with each other. I would add that always, America should look at its relationship with other countries from its own interests.
11
A level-headed piece by Cohen..except no where does mention or highlight isrl's formidable nuclear, chemical and biological arsenals which are driving a nuclear arm's race in the ME.
isrl's loud barking on Iran has a clear objective: so isrl can continue to monopolize nuclear weapons, maintain its occupation of Palestine and maintain its hegemony over the region. In fact IRan's would be nuclear weapon would be good for regional peace and stability thru deterrence: M.A.D. which succeeded during the cold war as a deterrent.
isrl's loud barking on Iran has a clear objective: so isrl can continue to monopolize nuclear weapons, maintain its occupation of Palestine and maintain its hegemony over the region. In fact IRan's would be nuclear weapon would be good for regional peace and stability thru deterrence: M.A.D. which succeeded during the cold war as a deterrent.
5
The Republicans have already been hijacked by the 1 percenters. Our foreign policy is now beholden to a diminutive Israel just because of their financial clout in congress. Small wonder this unfortunately plays into the worst Jewish stereotypes. All Jewish Americans, irrespective of their position on Iran, should write to their congressional reps to vote their conscience and ignore Bibi’s interference.
7
While I happen to support our proposed deal with Iran, telling all Jews what they should do is absurd -- it presumes that all American Jews should feel the same, it insinuates that all Jews have dual loyalties by enjoining Jews to repudiate Netanyahu, and, of course, is says that you, Ms. Kay Dee, know what all 6 or so million of us should do.
1
1 percenters , such as,George Soros,Mark Zuckerberg,Steven Spielberg,Tom Steyer, Jim Simons,Fred Eychaner,Amy Goldman,Chellie Pingree & Donald Sussman?
Excuse my denseness, but where is it written that a state A, seeking the demise of state B and having the bomb, drops said bomb on state B?
History abounds with people wanting to annihilate some or other enemy but not actually doing so.
Is the fear that, if Iran develops a nuclear weapon, it will use it against Israel, and thereby ensure its own destruction? If so, ... Since when have the Iranians revealed themselves to be quite so self-destructive?
History abounds with people wanting to annihilate some or other enemy but not actually doing so.
Is the fear that, if Iran develops a nuclear weapon, it will use it against Israel, and thereby ensure its own destruction? If so, ... Since when have the Iranians revealed themselves to be quite so self-destructive?
13
Whatever the Illusions of the Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu about his Jewish community fellows, at home or abroad, neither they are so dumb nor so irrational as not to be able to see through the game being played by Netanyahu by repeatedly raising the wolf-cry on Iran. The Jews, in America or Israel or elsewhere, know it well that with all its weaknesses, the Iran nuclear deal is a better guarantee for peace in the Middle East and the world than the tension causing incitements by the hawkish Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu.
22
Most Jews in Israel, on the left and the right, oppose the deal.
Professor Sharma, doesn't India have enough problems of its own, especially when it comes to the environment?? I humbly suggest you get your own house in order before embarking on your standard hateful criticism of Israel. When India agrees to dismantle its nukes pointed at Pakistan then you are free to meddle in Israeli internal affairs.
1
Alas, Netanyahu for years has learned he is the President of the United States in its Middle East policy. Why should he behave any differently? \
In 2002 he knew Saddam was the chief bulwark against Iran. He knew Iran was not an existential threat, as it is not now. So he pushed the buttons. The Wash Post was virtually hysterical in the need to overthrow a secular, anti-Islamic dictator who was controlling the Shiites.
Nothing to worry about. Netanyahu's chief public spokesman, Tom Friedman, assured us in his column that Iraq was now secular, that sectarianism was dead.
So by stirring up Islamic conflict and anti-Westernism (that is Netanyahu's policy) he keeps the heat off his 50-year apartheid that obviously should be handled like South Africa's. Now by wildly exaggerating the threat from Iran, he hopes that as a compromise Obama will cave once more and accept the Friedman-Netanyahu "compromise" that gives the new bunker buster to Israel along with Congressional eternal authorization for its use with the slightest hint of a violation of the treaty.
I am glad Cohen is getting nervous. If I were an American Jew, I would be scared to death. I would remember the anti-Semite Brat attack that brought down Cantor. I would see the enormous hostility to Wall Street and know how it is combined with old stereotypes about Jews and banks. Is there no concern about the market being in a bubble? Are the Democrats really now going to elect Schumer as their leader?! Crazy.
In 2002 he knew Saddam was the chief bulwark against Iran. He knew Iran was not an existential threat, as it is not now. So he pushed the buttons. The Wash Post was virtually hysterical in the need to overthrow a secular, anti-Islamic dictator who was controlling the Shiites.
Nothing to worry about. Netanyahu's chief public spokesman, Tom Friedman, assured us in his column that Iraq was now secular, that sectarianism was dead.
So by stirring up Islamic conflict and anti-Westernism (that is Netanyahu's policy) he keeps the heat off his 50-year apartheid that obviously should be handled like South Africa's. Now by wildly exaggerating the threat from Iran, he hopes that as a compromise Obama will cave once more and accept the Friedman-Netanyahu "compromise" that gives the new bunker buster to Israel along with Congressional eternal authorization for its use with the slightest hint of a violation of the treaty.
I am glad Cohen is getting nervous. If I were an American Jew, I would be scared to death. I would remember the anti-Semite Brat attack that brought down Cantor. I would see the enormous hostility to Wall Street and know how it is combined with old stereotypes about Jews and banks. Is there no concern about the market being in a bubble? Are the Democrats really now going to elect Schumer as their leader?! Crazy.
53
Well stated article and well stated opinion by Jerry.
There is huge opposition to Israel in Europe and it's gaining ground in US.
There is also a groundswell of neo-nazism taking place in Europe. Netanyahu is making too much noise and creating too much rhetoric which can and will certainly back fire against the people of Israel.
The nuclear deal is the best possible given the circumstances, and if Congress breaks it, we can kiss goodbye to any deals with Iran or the international community.
Let's be smart and verify the agreement and maintain our position in the international community.
There is huge opposition to Israel in Europe and it's gaining ground in US.
There is also a groundswell of neo-nazism taking place in Europe. Netanyahu is making too much noise and creating too much rhetoric which can and will certainly back fire against the people of Israel.
The nuclear deal is the best possible given the circumstances, and if Congress breaks it, we can kiss goodbye to any deals with Iran or the international community.
Let's be smart and verify the agreement and maintain our position in the international community.
I suspect that Netanyahu would scream foul, if the US started to interfere in the politics of Israel. His activities in trying to influence the Congress and long before has lost Israel my support - LONG AGO. As a country that has ignored dozens of UN Sanctions and still asks for support. As a nation that supports the occupation of territory that is not theirs and confiscates land that is not theirs, outside of Israel, building towns on foreign soil - there is nothing that warrants support for such a country. Their only reason for getting it is that they are the closest thing to an ally we have in the Middle-East - an ally who does not think twice about undermining our government foreign policy.
Perhaps we should cut off their financial support from the taxpayers. Let those who like Israel and its policies pay for them.
Note: I escaped Nazi Germany in 1938, but I certainly would hate to live in Israel which subjugates the Palestinians, just like Jews were treated in the 1930s.
Perhaps we should cut off their financial support from the taxpayers. Let those who like Israel and its policies pay for them.
Note: I escaped Nazi Germany in 1938, but I certainly would hate to live in Israel which subjugates the Palestinians, just like Jews were treated in the 1930s.
98
I do not like Bibi
With dirty tricks he's free,
His predictions are strong
Inevitably wrong,
I do not like Bibi!
With dirty tricks he's free,
His predictions are strong
Inevitably wrong,
I do not like Bibi!
52
Many do not like Obama.
His whims are phenomenal.
He ignores the Constitution.
And it costs astronomical.
Americans no longer trust him.
His whims are phenomenal.
He ignores the Constitution.
And it costs astronomical.
Americans no longer trust him.
Larry (Seuss) Eisenberg – you rock.
Very much in line with Roger Cohen's observations that the Jewish view toward negotiation with Iran is not monolithic, and before buying the proposal that Mr. Netanyahu is eager to enforce by whatever means, including electoral pressures on our Congress, it is useful to note that his point-of-view on this issue is not universally acceptable in Israel itself or in the Jewish diaspora.
Frequent headlines from Haaretz, the admittedly liberal English language publication from Israel, make this clear. “Benjamin Netanyahu Is a Danger to Israel”; “Netanyahu’s anti-Iran Campaign Doesn’t Consider Disastrous Effects on U.S. Jews”; “Netanyahu Must Stop Silencing Intel Chiefs Who Find Iran Deal Acceptable”; the shockingly blunt, “American Jewry Doesn’t Need Israel to Save It”; and as negotiations continue, “Poor Netanyahu, the World Has Taken Away His Most Beloved Toy the Iranian Bomb”. And there are more…
Frequent headlines from Haaretz, the admittedly liberal English language publication from Israel, make this clear. “Benjamin Netanyahu Is a Danger to Israel”; “Netanyahu’s anti-Iran Campaign Doesn’t Consider Disastrous Effects on U.S. Jews”; “Netanyahu Must Stop Silencing Intel Chiefs Who Find Iran Deal Acceptable”; the shockingly blunt, “American Jewry Doesn’t Need Israel to Save It”; and as negotiations continue, “Poor Netanyahu, the World Has Taken Away His Most Beloved Toy the Iranian Bomb”. And there are more…
43
As you said, "…Haaretz, the admittedly liberal English language publication…"
That says it all about their anti-Netanyahu headlines.
Sorry Roger. I disagree. This deal is fatally flawed. The agreement calls for inspections that are not robust, timely or comprehensive enough, and the deal’s life expectancy – 10 to 15 years – means that we could be living with a nuclear Iran shortly thereafter.
This deal does not give international inspectors adequate access to undeclared sites and does not clearly condition sanctions relief on the resolution of questions regarding Iran’s past nuclear weapons work. International sanctions on advanced conventional weapons and ballistic missiles will sunset in five and eight years respectively. The relaxing of these sanctions, coupled with sanctions relief, could embolden Iran’s terrorist proxies and further destabilize the region.
15 years from now, Iran’s leaders will be free to produce weapons-grade, highly enriched uranium without any limitation. This amounts to Iran as a legitimized nuclear threshold state after the year 2030 with advanced centrifuges and the ability to produce without restriction a stockpile of enriched uranium. What is our policy in 15 years? President Obama has not answered that question.
A negotiated solution is the best course of action. That’s the path I believe we should pursue. But after careful consideration, I cannot support this deal and urge Congress to reject it, and also override the president's veto should it come to that.
This deal does not give international inspectors adequate access to undeclared sites and does not clearly condition sanctions relief on the resolution of questions regarding Iran’s past nuclear weapons work. International sanctions on advanced conventional weapons and ballistic missiles will sunset in five and eight years respectively. The relaxing of these sanctions, coupled with sanctions relief, could embolden Iran’s terrorist proxies and further destabilize the region.
15 years from now, Iran’s leaders will be free to produce weapons-grade, highly enriched uranium without any limitation. This amounts to Iran as a legitimized nuclear threshold state after the year 2030 with advanced centrifuges and the ability to produce without restriction a stockpile of enriched uranium. What is our policy in 15 years? President Obama has not answered that question.
A negotiated solution is the best course of action. That’s the path I believe we should pursue. But after careful consideration, I cannot support this deal and urge Congress to reject it, and also override the president's veto should it come to that.
16
@Eugene Gorrin
Union, NJ
Given that this would cause the sanction regime to collapse what would be your alternative? I won't hold my breath because you people never proffer an alternative.
Union, NJ
Given that this would cause the sanction regime to collapse what would be your alternative? I won't hold my breath because you people never proffer an alternative.
60
So although top scientists in this country, including leading nuclear scientists and several Nobel Laureates, wrote that the verification program is a good one and the IAEA was closely involved in the negotiations, as well as all the other highly regarded support by experts, your claim is this is not adequate? Amazing how many people know more than the top experts in the field (who included the secretary of energy, a highly regarded nuclear scientist). Like so many Republican politicians, a number of those who disagree with the agreement never read it, and never read the comments of the leading authorities about the stringent requirements of the agreement.
4
@John, agreed. People who think that the US can unilaterally impose sanctions that will work, especially with our strained, to put it mildly, relations with China and Russia, are totally unwilling to face these facts. With only US sanctions, Iran will not even bother to hide its nuclear program, and I can only see Israel, or the US trying a pre-emptive strike with far less intel than we would have had with the agreement in place. BTW, only the US has the capability to do a non-nuclear strike against hardened targets.
2
Growing up, a friend's father taught me the saying "is it good for the Jews". And I can tell you Netanyahu's behavior is not good for the Jews.
69
Americans should ask "Is it good for America?" Backing out of this deal could be catastrophic for America's future security interests. The Iranian PEOPLE (forget the hardliners) are EXTREMELY pro-American right now, but they won't be if we betray them.
In truth, ISIS is OUR primary enemy right now and in that fight, American and Iranian interests are aligned. I never see ANY mention of that fact in these articles.
In truth, ISIS is OUR primary enemy right now and in that fight, American and Iranian interests are aligned. I never see ANY mention of that fact in these articles.
According to a column in Haaretz by one of Natanyahu's close journalist friends, Mr. Shalev, the PM so far refuses to discuss the additional arms the US offers Israel to cushion the Iran deal. Shalev says that Netanyahu has said that his efforts will so weaken Democrats among Jews (even if the deal passes) that the Obama Administration will give him even better bribes in 2016.
The Jewish organizations, such as the Orthodox Union, the Anti-Defamation League, the Rabbinical Council of America (what do they know about nuclear policy?), etc. parrot Israel's talking points, irrespective of their accuracy. For example, they say that Iran will be able to destroy nuclear material before inspections starts, when, in fact, the US will monitor the nuclear chain constantly and any cheating will remain in the environment for years.
I can only think that: 1) Netanyahu suffers from delusions of grandeur, or 2) he wants to divert attention from making peace with the Palestinians, probably both.
As for the organizations in his thrall, either they think 1) Israel right or wrong, or 2) they want to appease their elderly Republican donors, such as George Klein and Sheldon Adelson, probably both.
Fortunately, the world understands what Cohen says here and Israel will pay the consequences after the deal goes through. The UN will impose a Palestinian state and the EU will boycott Israel.
The Jewish organizations, such as the Orthodox Union, the Anti-Defamation League, the Rabbinical Council of America (what do they know about nuclear policy?), etc. parrot Israel's talking points, irrespective of their accuracy. For example, they say that Iran will be able to destroy nuclear material before inspections starts, when, in fact, the US will monitor the nuclear chain constantly and any cheating will remain in the environment for years.
I can only think that: 1) Netanyahu suffers from delusions of grandeur, or 2) he wants to divert attention from making peace with the Palestinians, probably both.
As for the organizations in his thrall, either they think 1) Israel right or wrong, or 2) they want to appease their elderly Republican donors, such as George Klein and Sheldon Adelson, probably both.
Fortunately, the world understands what Cohen says here and Israel will pay the consequences after the deal goes through. The UN will impose a Palestinian state and the EU will boycott Israel.
48
The "Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations" are hardly in lockstep with Israel. They are in lockstep with Bibi Netanyahu who never passes up an opportunity to insult and interfere with his major, and perhaps single, global ally.
Netanyahu's spectacle is spectacularly ugly as he he connives continually with both hands outstretched: one with open palm up and other in a clenched fist of fratricidal rejection. To such rejection, Netanyahu adds a dour gracelessness seemingly designed to antagonize. No Dale Carnegie, Bibi. No Einstein, either.
If such a path of animosity is perpetuated, the unthinkable may indeed occur. Half of America is already disgusted with Israel; why not an unduly exacerbated US Administration? Next October, Canada might follow. Israel's uncritical apologist, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, might well be voted out of office. Who would then be left as Israel's BFF?
www.endthemadnessnow.org
Netanyahu's spectacle is spectacularly ugly as he he connives continually with both hands outstretched: one with open palm up and other in a clenched fist of fratricidal rejection. To such rejection, Netanyahu adds a dour gracelessness seemingly designed to antagonize. No Dale Carnegie, Bibi. No Einstein, either.
If such a path of animosity is perpetuated, the unthinkable may indeed occur. Half of America is already disgusted with Israel; why not an unduly exacerbated US Administration? Next October, Canada might follow. Israel's uncritical apologist, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, might well be voted out of office. Who would then be left as Israel's BFF?
www.endthemadnessnow.org
72
Well said. Netanyahu is a disgrace to Israel and a bullying attempt to scare, threaten and belittle the US and the other international leaders.
Pay attention to the politics in Israel. The "Left" is just as opposed to the JCPOA as Netanyahu's Likud party. Israelis of all political leanings see this for what it is: a bad deal for everyone other than Iran!
This deal does pose an existential threat....to Netanyahu's political future.
(But maybe that's what you get when you build a career on fear-mongering)
(But maybe that's what you get when you build a career on fear-mongering)
100
Succinct and right on the money, Guest.
The deal is not about Jews, it is about normalizing relationships across the middle east. The problem with Israel is that they can see that their influence is diminishing.
71
The only way that you can be right is by ignoring the fact that Iran has called for their being wiped off the face of the planet, referred to Israel as a 1 bomb country, and promising to do the wiping once they have the bomb, been attacked by their neighbors near and afar repeatedly (1948, 1967, 1973, experienced 2,000 years of hatred from Christianity, watching the rise of antisemitism in Europe which is being encouraged by Obama and Kerry.
1
Prime Minister Netanayhu has made a horrible mistake, which is that he (Israel) loses whether the deal is approved or not. He should have allowed those hands, which are most powerful in foreign policy to remain invisible.
Now the game is up all disguises have been revealed.
And as usual when an old-new revelation is discovered by the masses; there follows anger, disenchantment and sense of deceit - 'how long has this been going they will ask?'
As in many marriages, regardless how a citizen may feel about its leader; they recognize him to be worst of them all, but he is their "dirty-dog" not some other nation's to kick around - regardless of the mood - nationalism does kick - and slights to it are remembered. And in this case because there has been rumor of some types of goodies to placate the Prime Minister; there will be particular attention to what kinds are given after this deal is over. Young folks, minorities and others not disposed to Mr. Netanyahu's disposition are themselves already asking and demanding more US governmental largess; they will be looking intently to what is being given versus what they are denied. Like Bush II with its horrible invading Iraq another Pandora's Box has been opened by Netanyahua and for the first time questioning - Why?
Now the game is up all disguises have been revealed.
And as usual when an old-new revelation is discovered by the masses; there follows anger, disenchantment and sense of deceit - 'how long has this been going they will ask?'
As in many marriages, regardless how a citizen may feel about its leader; they recognize him to be worst of them all, but he is their "dirty-dog" not some other nation's to kick around - regardless of the mood - nationalism does kick - and slights to it are remembered. And in this case because there has been rumor of some types of goodies to placate the Prime Minister; there will be particular attention to what kinds are given after this deal is over. Young folks, minorities and others not disposed to Mr. Netanyahu's disposition are themselves already asking and demanding more US governmental largess; they will be looking intently to what is being given versus what they are denied. Like Bush II with its horrible invading Iraq another Pandora's Box has been opened by Netanyahua and for the first time questioning - Why?
Interesting comment. Israel's influence is diminishing. Hmmm. When have we ever before seen a senior Saudi official on a public stage with an Israeli official? Israel has unprecedented interactions with Arab governments all over the Middle East today because they are finding common cause in their vehement opposition to this "deal".
Is Israel's influence diminishing when 57% of the American public opposes this "deal"?
Is Israel's influence diminishing when a majority of senators and congressmen oppose this "deal"?
Let's leave Israel out of it and talk about the U.S. The JCPOA will leave the U.S. faced with a nuclear-armed Iran in a few years, just like the "deal" with North Korea did. We can no longer attack North Korea because the consequence could be a devastating nuclear explosion in Tokyo or Seoul.
Do you want a state that openly declares "Death to America" the freedom to build ICBM's that can target New York or Miami? Why do you want your children to live under such a threat?
Your statement that this is about "normalizing relationships across the Middle East" sounds vaguely anti-Semitic. Who are we normalizing relationships with? The "Death to America" and "Death to Israel" Ayatollah? Oh, I forgot. Now Israel is closer and closer to Saudi Arabia and Egypt because of this ill advised "deal" so in fact it is about "normalizing relationships"!
Is Israel's influence diminishing when 57% of the American public opposes this "deal"?
Is Israel's influence diminishing when a majority of senators and congressmen oppose this "deal"?
Let's leave Israel out of it and talk about the U.S. The JCPOA will leave the U.S. faced with a nuclear-armed Iran in a few years, just like the "deal" with North Korea did. We can no longer attack North Korea because the consequence could be a devastating nuclear explosion in Tokyo or Seoul.
Do you want a state that openly declares "Death to America" the freedom to build ICBM's that can target New York or Miami? Why do you want your children to live under such a threat?
Your statement that this is about "normalizing relationships across the Middle East" sounds vaguely anti-Semitic. Who are we normalizing relationships with? The "Death to America" and "Death to Israel" Ayatollah? Oh, I forgot. Now Israel is closer and closer to Saudi Arabia and Egypt because of this ill advised "deal" so in fact it is about "normalizing relationships"!
1
In the early 19th century, the Emperor Napoleon had conquered Europe and was advised he had a Jewish problem on his hands. In response, he convened the Second Sanhedrin to ask the rabbis whether Jews owed their primary allegiance to their co-religionists or their country of residence. At the time Jews were not full citizens of their European countries of residence. The rabbis were clear that Jews adhered primarily to the country which housed them. As a result Napoleon declared that Jews were to be granted citizenship of their adherent respective countries, a move that caused many non-Jews,-- notably Catholics at that time --to call him the Anti-Christ.
I am an American. I am also a Jew.
Netanyahu has the intention of trying to influence American Jews and thereby their American representatives to vote against the Iran deal.
He wants to reverse what Napoleon achieved and get Jews in America to place their primary adherence with the present government of Israel.
Netanyahu is the anti-Napoleon.
I am an American. I am also a Jew.
Netanyahu has the intention of trying to influence American Jews and thereby their American representatives to vote against the Iran deal.
He wants to reverse what Napoleon achieved and get Jews in America to place their primary adherence with the present government of Israel.
Netanyahu is the anti-Napoleon.
104
Your history of France is somewhat incomplete. Napoleon's relationship with Jews was much more complicated than you suggest. On the one hand, he had drafted but never issued (due in part to unfavorable military conditions) a proclamation in favor of re-establishing the Jewish homeland in what the West called Palestine. On the other, two years after the Great Sanhedrin you describe, he issued the "infamous decree. Of March 7, 1808 that placed severe restrictions on Jews' civil and economic rights.
Your implication of dual loyalty is in itself shameful, regardless of your supposed religious affiliation. But, in the real world, the nuclear deal affects Israel specifically, yet it was barred from participating in the negotiations. With a majority of Americans opposing the deal, why are you so troubled with Iran's principal target objecting too?
Rather than harkening back to the Age of Napoleon, you might do better to consider Czechoslovakia's situation in 1938.
Your implication of dual loyalty is in itself shameful, regardless of your supposed religious affiliation. But, in the real world, the nuclear deal affects Israel specifically, yet it was barred from participating in the negotiations. With a majority of Americans opposing the deal, why are you so troubled with Iran's principal target objecting too?
Rather than harkening back to the Age of Napoleon, you might do better to consider Czechoslovakia's situation in 1938.
Pure conjecture.
BTW Napoléon disbanded the so called "Sanhedrin" he created.
@RXFWWORLD
And the Jews of Germany and Austria considered themselves to be foremost Germans, or Austrians, and only secondarily Jews. Many in fact, were quite secular. They ended up in the ovens just as fast as the most devout Jews in a Polish shtetl.
And the Jews of Germany and Austria considered themselves to be foremost Germans, or Austrians, and only secondarily Jews. Many in fact, were quite secular. They ended up in the ovens just as fast as the most devout Jews in a Polish shtetl.
Dear Mr. Cohen: and after Iran has lots of money to distribute to terrorists, and can continue its nuclear research without fear of effective inspection or sanctions, let's cheer as American churches divest themselves of Israeli stock and, for its next triumph, the Obama Administration welcomes a new, broke, endlessly aggrieved terrorist Palestinian nation in to the world. We already have president Obama complaining about Jewish money being spent on anti nuclear deal with Iran advertisements, Sec. of State Kerry saying that Israel will be even more isolated in the world community unless they accept this deal, it's all very reminiscent of Hitler thundering, while experiments on killing Germans with disabilities in mass were already underway, "if the Jews bring on a war, the consequences will be on their heads". Is this really where you want to be?
22
@Adrienne Wasserman
Flagstaff, AZ
Godwin's law? However, the almost unbelievable hysteria of your comment does provide an interesting insight into the craziness that exists among opponents of this agreement.
Flagstaff, AZ
Godwin's law? However, the almost unbelievable hysteria of your comment does provide an interesting insight into the craziness that exists among opponents of this agreement.
106
My rule is that whenever people compare something to the Holocaust that is not in any way similar to the Holocaust, it means that they have no rational basis for their arguments.
8
@Adrienne Wasserman Flagstaff, AZ
Maybe the Zionists should have thought of that before declaring Israel out of Palestinian territory in 1948?
Maybe the Zionists should have thought of that before declaring Israel out of Palestinian territory in 1948?
2
Prime Minister Netanyahu is condemned by a disdain of President Obama, that from which ensues inspires his audacity to challenge USA sovereignty representing an extraordinary request of Entitlement. This places Israel's demands against America's status for its peace versus war; its usual automatic rebuke is deflected, presently, by hatred for Obama from whom would normally be appalled at this indiscretion. My country tis indeed, but which of thee do I pledge?
22
Israel is heavily reliant upon us for military, intelligence, diplomatic, and financial support. We are fast becoming its only stalwart global friend. Unfortunately, Netanyahu is part of and represents the racist portion of Israeli society. Being very dependent on the United States, he cannot tolerate a black president. He has tried his best to help the Republicans destroy Obama, despite Obama's Middle East policies being very consistent with those of a long string of presidents of both parties. Israeli Prime Ministers and American Presidents have disagreed before, but it has never been made so personal by an Israeli Prime Minister, nor has an Israeli Prime Minister so obviously interefered with our democratic processes. Netanyahu has transformed Israel's unique relationship with America into his personal relationship with the Republican party, openly joining the partisan fray in our nation. This is unacceptable.
Who challenges US sovereignty? How does our president uphold US sovereignty when he brings the JCPOA (the "deal") to a UN vote BEFORE congress and the senate review it?
Parik, if you live in and care for this country, you must fear an Iran that is free to develop ICBM's which can hit New York. If their intention is a civilian nuclear program, why are they developing ICBM's? What peaceful purpose does an ICBM serve?
Parik, if you live in and care for this country, you must fear an Iran that is free to develop ICBM's which can hit New York. If their intention is a civilian nuclear program, why are they developing ICBM's? What peaceful purpose does an ICBM serve?
Both President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry concede that the current agreement does not conform to their stated goals of two years ago that there would be full, unrestricted open inspections. On that basis alone, the deal should be shredded and redone.
Does anyone really trust the Iranians, given their aggressive behavior towards the United States since 1979 until today? If not, then it's time to dig in and negotiate from a position of strength, which we have. Appeasement is not an option with an inherently weak nation, whose oil reserves are worth a fraction of their historical value.
Does anyone really trust the Iranians, given their aggressive behavior towards the United States since 1979 until today? If not, then it's time to dig in and negotiate from a position of strength, which we have. Appeasement is not an option with an inherently weak nation, whose oil reserves are worth a fraction of their historical value.
21
@ Stop and Think
Obviously not something you do a lot of.
Obviously not something you do a lot of.
96
If the deal is shredded, it will not be redone. Nobody will trust us to accept what is negotiated after tough sessions if we do not stand behind what we negotiated. If Iran cannot be trusted, we must either live with their nuclear weapons or invade them and somehow replace their government with one we will be able to trust after we withdraw. And anyone who really trusts us is delusional; Iran has particularly good reason not to trust us.
22
If we had accepted their offer of a deal during the Bush administration they would have 200 centrifuges now instead of 19,000. Great move. Now let's reject this deal and see what we get!
1
it seems certain that this deal will cause additional Sunni-Shia wars. These wars have killed ~10x more people than the last 100 years of the Arab-Israeli conflict. There should be a discussion of what neighboring states have to say about this deal. The entire debate seems to be about Israelis or even less relevant, Jewish Americans.
12
If I disapprove of Hungary's policies towards refugees and their treatment, I am not considered anti-Magyar; I am seen as having disagreed with a situation. If I disapprove of Israel's policies of interfering with U.S. Congress and public opinion regarding the proposed agreement with Iran, I risk being labeled anti-Semitic. So much for a level field of exchanging perspectives.
60
You are correct and AIPAC (and its apologists) plus a series of Israeli governments have gotten away with that "You are 100% with us or you are an anti-semite" nonsense for a long time.
2
Agreed, but history has a lot to do with what you say as far as the Jews are concerned!
You are absolutely right but I am afraid to say so because then I automatically become an anti-Semite!
Fortunately, I am now retired and no longer need to be extra careful about being casually labeled an anti-Semite and thus likely to lose my job.
Fortunately, I am now retired and no longer need to be extra careful about being casually labeled an anti-Semite and thus likely to lose my job.
1
Robert, I believe that the United States of America is the greatest country in the world, so on that point alone,we disagree. I know Muslims personally, and have worked with them. They respected my traditions as I respected theirs. You are painting all Muslims with the same brush, that of extremism. I offer to you, in light of your inconsolable worry, that you move to Israel, where you can experience rule under the Haredim and Netanyahu's right wing regime. I suggest this move with the kindest of intentions.
26
Yes, salzy, I also believe that 99.999% of the world's Muslims want to live in peace with us.
But when there are over 1 billion of them, this small fraction represents quite a lot of people which can do an awful lot of harm!
But when there are over 1 billion of them, this small fraction represents quite a lot of people which can do an awful lot of harm!
For all of those who are just itching to bomb Iran back to the stone age, why not just go with the deal, catch the Iranians with their hands in the nuclear cookie jar, and than have at it? Or are we in too much of a hurry?
25
I think most people who are against the deal believe that, if Iran were to violate it, the US would do absolutely nothing. I suspect they're right. I think the reason opponents want to sink the deal now is that Iran would probably react by rushing to get the bomb. That, and that alone, might provide cover (and support) for an attack on the Iranian nuclear sites, which is what the opponents want.
The real issue is not whether this is a good or bad deal. The whole farce of the USA demanding from other countries that economic and other sanctions should be placed on Iran to begin is just that: a grossly hypocitical farce.
The reason for the sanctions and the reason for trying to prevent Iran from doing whatever it thinks is appropriate with regard to its military defense and to its energy policies is solely to politically pander to USA Jews.
That is the issue.
Why in the world does USA policy in the Middle East have to depend completely on what a relative handful of USA Jews thinks is important for themselves? Important to themselves apparently extends to Israel, which otherwise has zero to do with the interests of the USA in the Middle East or elsewhere. In fact to the extent that Israel interests have anything to do with USA interests there is significant conflict between the two sets of interests.
Personally I am long sick of this interference from the members of a small group of USA citizens who think that their religio-ethnic allegiance takes precedence over the well-being and interests of the remaining non-Jewish 300 million or so USA citizens. Furthermore the venal, obnoxious fool who is Mr Netanyahu should be banned from travel to the USA and banned from making his outrageous statement to any and all USA news media.
The reason for the sanctions and the reason for trying to prevent Iran from doing whatever it thinks is appropriate with regard to its military defense and to its energy policies is solely to politically pander to USA Jews.
That is the issue.
Why in the world does USA policy in the Middle East have to depend completely on what a relative handful of USA Jews thinks is important for themselves? Important to themselves apparently extends to Israel, which otherwise has zero to do with the interests of the USA in the Middle East or elsewhere. In fact to the extent that Israel interests have anything to do with USA interests there is significant conflict between the two sets of interests.
Personally I am long sick of this interference from the members of a small group of USA citizens who think that their religio-ethnic allegiance takes precedence over the well-being and interests of the remaining non-Jewish 300 million or so USA citizens. Furthermore the venal, obnoxious fool who is Mr Netanyahu should be banned from travel to the USA and banned from making his outrageous statement to any and all USA news media.
79
Great comment.
Cohen, please take the time to reply to Mr. Murray. Do it now. And while you're at it please explain the fact that Israel's bomb is never discussed--quite apart from the hypocrisy of the US and other western powers--all historically colonial, imperialist powers who stomped all over the Third World for no good at all. Explain the fact of Israel jailing a lone, courageous young employee of the Israeli nuclear program who spilled the beans about his nation's secret bomb work. Why do you and every other mealy-mouthed liberal commentator (notably Tom Friedman) write about any issue that involves Israel with the forgone conclusion and ongoing attitude that Israel is even a legitimate nation, that European Jews did not steal homes and land from the Palestinians, that they continue that criminal activity on the West Bank, that no wonder they have labored so defensively over a deep-seeded guilt, that their obsession with survival originates in their guilt, that the US, GB and others share that guilt, a share so large that the US gov't protected Israelis in 1967 when they attacked a defenseless US Navy ship (the Liberty) and murdered and wounded US sailors (the world's greatest) which accounts for the yearly handout to the Israelis. If the Iranians want a bomb, who are we, who are the Israelis to tell them they can't make one? India and Pakistan both made nuclear weapons. Where was the US? Israeli control of US congress and politics has to stop. The gig's up.
Cohen, please take the time to reply to Mr. Murray. Do it now. And while you're at it please explain the fact that Israel's bomb is never discussed--quite apart from the hypocrisy of the US and other western powers--all historically colonial, imperialist powers who stomped all over the Third World for no good at all. Explain the fact of Israel jailing a lone, courageous young employee of the Israeli nuclear program who spilled the beans about his nation's secret bomb work. Why do you and every other mealy-mouthed liberal commentator (notably Tom Friedman) write about any issue that involves Israel with the forgone conclusion and ongoing attitude that Israel is even a legitimate nation, that European Jews did not steal homes and land from the Palestinians, that they continue that criminal activity on the West Bank, that no wonder they have labored so defensively over a deep-seeded guilt, that their obsession with survival originates in their guilt, that the US, GB and others share that guilt, a share so large that the US gov't protected Israelis in 1967 when they attacked a defenseless US Navy ship (the Liberty) and murdered and wounded US sailors (the world's greatest) which accounts for the yearly handout to the Israelis. If the Iranians want a bomb, who are we, who are the Israelis to tell them they can't make one? India and Pakistan both made nuclear weapons. Where was the US? Israeli control of US congress and politics has to stop. The gig's up.
3
This comment is a poster child of what the response will be like if the deal fails. "Jews" will be blamed because the non-Jewish world assumes that the major Jewish organizations and the Prime Minister of Israel speak for all of us. Jews have no Pope. No one speaks for the community. At least half of American Jews support the deal.
1
Generally agree with your post , and that AIPAC is the creature of the Likud party in Israel and should be recognized as an agent of a foreign power. They take their orders from Bibi. However, I don't believe it's American Jews who are driving the pro Israel wagon. It's American evangelical Christians that are at the roots of our uncritical support of Israel. That is where the problem is, and that is why Congress supports Israel even before the US. They're the ones who should be questioned about their loyalty.
I am an American Jew who is on the fence on this issue.
No country has the most to gain or the most to lose by this deal with Iran.
The deal is awful, it gives Iran immediate access to $100 billion and it won't agree not to support terrorism. And it leaves it with the right to acquire interballistic missiles and to continue to enrich uranium.
But what is the alternative? Continue sanction without the rest of the world? Why is the even the choice?
No country has the most to gain or the most to lose by this deal with Iran.
The deal is awful, it gives Iran immediate access to $100 billion and it won't agree not to support terrorism. And it leaves it with the right to acquire interballistic missiles and to continue to enrich uranium.
But what is the alternative? Continue sanction without the rest of the world? Why is the even the choice?
10
If your fence is in America, why worry?
If your fence is in Israel, why worry?
Both Israel and America have nuclear weapons arsenals.
If your fence is in Japan which has 47 metric tons of weapons grade plutonium (enough to make 6000 Nagasaki size nuclear bombs) then you might worry. Because of seismic activity.
If your fence is in Israel, why worry?
Both Israel and America have nuclear weapons arsenals.
If your fence is in Japan which has 47 metric tons of weapons grade plutonium (enough to make 6000 Nagasaki size nuclear bombs) then you might worry. Because of seismic activity.
2
the $100 billion is Iran's money.....unlike the billions of US taxpayers' money siphoned by isrl to consolidate its occupation of six million Palestinians and the daily theft of Palestinian homeland. Iran occupied no one's land.
2
Steven, the $100B belongs to Iran. It was frozen in US banks when the US severed diplomatic relations with Iran. It is simply being given back to them. Similar to artwork taken from Holocaust victims by Hitler being returned.
2
If we can bear and support the longest occupation of an indigenous people in modern history, with generations of kids raised under military law with all it"s trappings, ANYTHING the Israelis do would be acceptable.
32
Bob M - I have to take issue with your use of the term indigenous people. The Israelis are the indigenous people and the so-called Palestinians are the occupiers. Every time that Israel tries to no longer "occupy," such as when they pulled out of Gaza or Lebanon, the results are catastrophic for them. But this isn't about that issue, it's about a country that continually states that its goal is the elimination of both Israel and the United States. So let's agree to disagree on the Palestinian issue for now and agree that as adults, we can simply use our eyes and ears to listen to what the leaders of Iran say continually, and not take any chance with a non-100% safe deal. Nuclear weapons in the hands of people who are willing to use them and have shown over many years now that they will cheat on agreements are too risky, so I for one American Jews say let's not approve the deal.
2
Indigenous to what? Aren't people tired of airing the same phony line. Palestinians are Arabs (who hail from the Arabian peninsula, and who traveled with the Moslem armies across the Middle East)from a myriad of countries close and far away; few have ancestors who lived in this land for centuries. Most of them came in the 1920s and 30s from Syria, Egypt, and Jordan. The actual refugees who left in 1947-48 total approx. 30,000 today. Their descendants are no more Palestinian than I am Lithuanian or Hungarian, my respective parents' countries of birth.
No mention of some Jews who NEVER LEFT the Holy Land; nu, why were they there in the first place? Got lost trying to find the New World? Don't think so.
No mention of some Jews who NEVER LEFT the Holy Land; nu, why were they there in the first place? Got lost trying to find the New World? Don't think so.
1
...like dropping A-bombs on Iran!
This is as much a deflection from the REAL issue out there - proper treatment of the Palestinians - as it has to do with Iran. There may be a little local geopolitics involved with anyone (other than Israel) getting the bomb, but what Israel dreads most is the nations of the world really focusing on the dreadful treatment of the Palestinians, which is worse than the the blacks in South Africa in the 1980s. History is against Israel, and it's just a matter of time before justice comes to the West Bank and Gaza!
24
Post World War II, the US and the victors of the war created the framework for a World Order based on American and (Western) ideals and principals. Institutions such as the UN, World Bank and the IMF were vehicles for passing on those ideals and sought to include all nations, including the defeated countries of Japan and Germany into this world order. It gave all nations a stake at its success. Why is politics interfering with this process that our fathers and grandfathers fought so hard for. Why do our Senators and Representatives flout this process only for the sake of undermining the president, without regard to the country?
By giving nations a stake in preserving the world order, they will strive to make it work. By excluding them from this world order, all they would want to do is to undermine it. This has been the tenet of our policies since 1945. We did not shun our enemies, we give them a stake in the success of the world order.
Shouldn't we do this with Iran too. It will have a big stake in being a member of this club, rather than an outsider. They will not risk jeopardizing their prosperity over disagreements, but would rather work things out.
The US military option is and always will have to be on the table.
Hesky Brahimy
NYC
By giving nations a stake in preserving the world order, they will strive to make it work. By excluding them from this world order, all they would want to do is to undermine it. This has been the tenet of our policies since 1945. We did not shun our enemies, we give them a stake in the success of the world order.
Shouldn't we do this with Iran too. It will have a big stake in being a member of this club, rather than an outsider. They will not risk jeopardizing their prosperity over disagreements, but would rather work things out.
The US military option is and always will have to be on the table.
Hesky Brahimy
NYC
19
Too bad we didn't follow those principles in our actions. Interference in Iran by the CIA and MI5 that overthrew their elected government has had long term consequences. We'd have a lot less problems in the world if we would abide by our high ideals, which we follow only when it suits us.
Well said. I represent the American Jewish vote of one-myself- and I'm with Obama on this deal.
55
Let someone make a list to compare as to what this pip-squeak Senator has done for New York, for US, and for Israel, and is he really needed atall by the three?!
6
So Netanyahu wants to use US Jews to play politics, put pressure on Congressmen and divide the country?
But the ayatollah is not using the leftist readership of the NY Times (and the US-and-Israel-are-evil wing of the Democratic Party) to play politics, put pressure on Congressmen and divide the country?
But the ayatollah is not using the leftist readership of the NY Times (and the US-and-Israel-are-evil wing of the Democratic Party) to play politics, put pressure on Congressmen and divide the country?
11
As a leftist reader of the NYT I think I can speak for the group when I say that the idea that the "ayatollah" is using us to press an agenda is, to put it very mildly, absurd. Where is the Iranian analog to Sheldon Adelson? When did NYT start printing press releases from Tehran?
69
Are you kidding me? You know Znig, sometimes it's difficult to know when people are joking with these letters. I assume you are.
1
...not quite so overtly and successfully!
The Israeli Prime Minister is a bully, a crude character who does no good for Israel's image in the world. I was outraged when he showed up uninvited at the huge rally in Paris to support the victims of the January terrorists attack and press freedom. Then, while in Paris, he suggested that French Jews emigrate to Israel, in the presence of the president and the PM. Sickening! Most French Jews were outraged. This man needs to be put back in his place, which is minor in today's world affairs. My wife, an American was also outraged when he interfered in US home affairs with the complicity of Republicans in Congress. Why are American politicians terrorized by this guy?
24
Sheldon Adelson.
The U.S. can live with the seriously flawed Iran deal with greater confidence that it can manage the consequences of the doom and gloom scenario opponents have painted. For Israel, not so much - as they are directly in the crosshairs of Iran's terror proxies if not necessarily in those of Iran itself for the moment. There is some merit to those who see a slow motion replay of Munich 1938 where the UK and France bargained entirely at Czechoslovakia's expense. The only difference is that we know what Nazi Germany then did. What Iran plans to do remains unknowable, though its rhetoric is not at all encouraging.
If President Obama were truly concerned with Israel's safety, rather than repeat that he has "Israel's back," he could have taken the opportunity at American University to proclaim that any attack on Israel by Iran (or any of its proxies) will be deemed an attack on the United States and will be met with full and overwhelming retaliation. Two things no doubt prevented this statement. First, Israel has never requested such a thing. Second, given President Obama's track record, Iran would simply not believe him.
If President Obama were truly concerned with Israel's safety, rather than repeat that he has "Israel's back," he could have taken the opportunity at American University to proclaim that any attack on Israel by Iran (or any of its proxies) will be deemed an attack on the United States and will be met with full and overwhelming retaliation. Two things no doubt prevented this statement. First, Israel has never requested such a thing. Second, given President Obama's track record, Iran would simply not believe him.
11
It seems mind boggling to believe that the US would not assist Israel in war of defense against Iran. It also is not clear to me how such a thing could happen as they don't share borders. But if it did happen, it is quite clear to every sane and rational human being in the western world that the US would assist Israel.
The last people American Jews should listen to are the Congressional politicians and the lobbyists, most of whom are motivated not by the science and the real national security issues, but by the special interests from which they derive the greatest benefit.
Instead, the American Jews (and everyone else for that matter) should take a very careful read of the key elements of the agreement, as well as the letter crafted and signed by many of this country's eminent scientists. They also should read the statement signed by the three dozen of this country's most senior retired military leaders, as well as the retired military and security leaders of Israel. These people have nothing to gain politically, but continue to be concerned about the world's security from nuclear weapons. The last think we need to see is a nuclear arms race in the Middle East, or a war to prevent such a race, either one of which may well be unleashed if our Congress manages to override the President's veto.
Instead, the American Jews (and everyone else for that matter) should take a very careful read of the key elements of the agreement, as well as the letter crafted and signed by many of this country's eminent scientists. They also should read the statement signed by the three dozen of this country's most senior retired military leaders, as well as the retired military and security leaders of Israel. These people have nothing to gain politically, but continue to be concerned about the world's security from nuclear weapons. The last think we need to see is a nuclear arms race in the Middle East, or a war to prevent such a race, either one of which may well be unleashed if our Congress manages to override the President's veto.
33
The greatest threat to Israel as a democratic Jewish state is Netanyahu himself. His policies are leading Israel to an unsustainable position.
Pogo said, "We have met the enemy and he is us". That could well be Netanyahu's epitaph.
Pogo said, "We have met the enemy and he is us". That could well be Netanyahu's epitaph.
37
The best way to keep Iran without nuclear weapons is to either attack it or make the sanctions even tighter until the Iranian people revolt against their dictators.
Iran will just get nuclear weapons faster this way. Iran will give those nuclear weapons to all the bad players in the area. Iran hates America not just Israel.
The sanctions have been working. They should be made tighter.
Your a fool Roger Cohen if you dont think Iran will have nukes in no time. Dont trust the devil. Especially if you value both America and Israel.
Iran will just get nuclear weapons faster this way. Iran will give those nuclear weapons to all the bad players in the area. Iran hates America not just Israel.
The sanctions have been working. They should be made tighter.
Your a fool Roger Cohen if you dont think Iran will have nukes in no time. Dont trust the devil. Especially if you value both America and Israel.
8
You are the one who is a fool1
6
Some people just don't get it.
Unless Iran is the one to walk away from this deal, international sanctions are over.
China, Russia, Germany, et al, will all resume business with Iran whether America signs this agreement or doesn't.
If America walks away from this deal, the only option we will have to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons is war and an open-ended occupation of the country. A war and an occupation that will have little to no international support or backing. A war that will be condemned by the Security Council and the General Assembly. Once that happens, it will be America and Israel against the world.
Frankly, that's a bad deal for America.
Unless Iran is the one to walk away from this deal, international sanctions are over.
China, Russia, Germany, et al, will all resume business with Iran whether America signs this agreement or doesn't.
If America walks away from this deal, the only option we will have to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons is war and an open-ended occupation of the country. A war and an occupation that will have little to no international support or backing. A war that will be condemned by the Security Council and the General Assembly. Once that happens, it will be America and Israel against the world.
Frankly, that's a bad deal for America.
2
How do you propose to make sanctions tighter without the support of Russia and China? They, France, and the UK have veto power in the UN Security Council. For crying in a bucket will someone please explain how sanctions can be tightened without the full support of the P5? Germany, the +1, and the rest of the EU are chomping at the bit to start exporting to Iran.
First of all, it is disingenuous of the author to write that "Israel" is opposed to this deal. Its current Prime Minister is. Its Labor-led opposition is not and its intelligence community is not. The last polls I saw showed mixed results among its voters as a whole. Likewise, even if the largest Jewish-American organizations have come out against the deal, the implication that they are "in lockstep" with "Israel" (again Israel as a unitary actor representing what used to be called, derisively, "International Judaism") is grossly inaccurate. Its hideously offensive. It's quite true that the accusation "Anti-Semitic" gets thrown around too often, but there are plenty of times where Jews bite their lip unnecessarily, too. On no other issue is the ethnicity and religion of the individuals involved being so discussed.
Sander Levin is my Representative (still not quite sure why my NYT avatar lists me as living in Tampa). He supports this deal for the same reasons Chuck Schumer opposes it--he weighed the pro's and con's, solicited expert advice (inc classified information), and listened to his constituents. It just so happens Levin is the longest-serving Jew in American politics (after his brother Carl retired as Senator). But both Schumer and Levin are acting as Americans concerned out of American interests. It shouldn't surprise any fair observer that two decent, patriotic Americans--who just happen to be Jewish, too--could disagree.
Sander Levin is my Representative (still not quite sure why my NYT avatar lists me as living in Tampa). He supports this deal for the same reasons Chuck Schumer opposes it--he weighed the pro's and con's, solicited expert advice (inc classified information), and listened to his constituents. It just so happens Levin is the longest-serving Jew in American politics (after his brother Carl retired as Senator). But both Schumer and Levin are acting as Americans concerned out of American interests. It shouldn't surprise any fair observer that two decent, patriotic Americans--who just happen to be Jewish, too--could disagree.
13
I agree with most of what you've written but find it difficult to believe that Schumer evaluated the deal and listened to his constituents ... unless by constituents you mean the 60 lobbyists that (according to The Times) visited him in the week before he announced his opposition.
5
Actually, the two largest opposition parties, Labor and Yesh Atid, both agree with Likud's position. And these three parties never agree on anything at all. This should give pause to anyone supporting it. As for the intelligence community, there are voices on both sides, as there are in the United States.
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2015/08/israel-lapid-yesh-atid...
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2015/08/israel-lapid-yesh-atid...
5
If Netanyahoo is against the Iran deal, it must be a good one...sign me up!
40
Netanyahu is playing with fire, and it's worse than counterproductive. The more he campaigns against the treaty the more likely it will pass.
And he should keep quiet for future's sake. Nothing less than American-Israel bilateral relations is on the line here. In a world where perception is often as important as reality, and sometimes more important, any perception that he wantonly meddles in American domestic politics, through AIPAC, would be catastrophic for bilateral relations in the long term.
And he should keep quiet for future's sake. Nothing less than American-Israel bilateral relations is on the line here. In a world where perception is often as important as reality, and sometimes more important, any perception that he wantonly meddles in American domestic politics, through AIPAC, would be catastrophic for bilateral relations in the long term.
14
You offer good advice, Steve Singer, but the damage done to American-Israel relations by Netanyahu is probably permanent. The relations will be there, but they will never again be the same.
it's very sad that netanyahu's personal peevishness vis-a-vis president obama is part of this drama. no deal that involves russia, china, the u.s., iran, france and england can possibly satisfy an israel led by its right-wing. the same can be said for the u.s.: the american right-wing will oppose an agreement. and that is the ultimate point. opposition to the deal comes from the right-wing - in israel, in the u.s. and in iran. some don't like that juxtaposition and have tried called out the president for pointing it out and for stating that the right has no alternative plan but, ultimately, war (yes, listen to those statesmen, lindsey graham and donald trump). well if the shoe fits...
19
How can this deal be good for Israel and the rest of the Middle East? Since the deal was announced, the behavior of Iran’s leaders has lived up to all of our worst expectations. Iran continues to hold Americans hostage and has made no efforts to free them or loosen the policies that imprison thousands of political dissidents, religious and ethnic minorities and scores of others languishing in Iran’s prisons. Iran’s leaders, including its top leader Ali Khamenei, continue a relentless and even more hate-filled diatribe against the West, the U.S. in particular and regularly denounce the very deal they signed. Iran still funds and supports its proxies engaged in brutal sectarian wars in Syria, Iraq and Yemen, going so far as to recruit Afghan mercenaries to fight in Syria. The U.S. can do better; certainly at the very least in getting a deal that correctly links the regime’s conduct in areas such as human rights and support for terror as conditions for getting any kind of economic relief. Quid pro quos are an integral part of international diplomacy and the U.S. ought to demand something, anything from the mullahs in return for the windfall they so hungrily desire. But without any linkage, the mullahs in Tehran are simply enabled and emboldened to act as they always have – with impunity.
11
The nuclear deal concluded in Vienna is not between the US and Iran - it's between six world powers - UK, France, Germany, Russia, China, the US - and Iran. But of course that fact won't be one of the AIPAC / ADL talking points.
1
I am an American Jew who would like Benjamin Netanyahu and his backer, Sheldon Adelson, to get their hands off American politics. I have had to rethink my views on Israeli politics so often my head is spinning. God may have given Israel to the Jews but those two come from something else.
58
Bravo! Bravo!!!Most patriotic and sane comment I have seen in a long time. Thank you.
4
nobody told the Canaanites or the Palestinians about the gift. Abraham stole it, Joshua stole it (right after Moses died), and it was stolen again in 1948. I don't think God had anything to do with slaughter and theft--at least I'd like to think the Almighty had nothing to do with those travesties. Netanyahu is the logical result of a nation's 70 year guilty conscience.
I agree that at this point the Iran deal needs to be approved. But the situation is similar to being in a situation where you cannot pay your mortgage and your real estate broker has agreed to sell your house at 10% of its value, and now you have to choose between getting 10% of the value or losing everything. The real problem is that we have a lousy "real estate broker".
6
Netanyahu is depreciating your real estate.
1
Yes, it's called the other memberss of P5+1.
Bibi and his allies in the Jewish organizations here in the US need to recognize a few facts:
1.America DOES NOT and Should NOT revolve around Israel. Between Israel and the US there is a a total population of about 16,000,000 Jews. The US has a polulation of 320,000,000. 16/320=5%. Do Netanyahu and his BFF's here really believe that 95% of Americans should put Israel first before anything else??
2. America does not need to keep making up for what the Nazis did in WW2 to the jews. For heavens sake America fought against the Nazis and freed those in the camps.
3. Israel receives more foreign aid, monetary and military, from America than any other nation in the world and has been doing so for decades.
4. The nation of Isreal refuses to join with rest of the civilized word, by signing the nuclear non-proliferation pact, by admitting to having secreatly buile 100-200 nuclear bombs and 3 separate delivery systems, and by allowing inspection of its nuclear arsenal amd manufacturing sites.
5. Isreal is building an apartheid nation with its ILLEGAL treatment of Palestinians and by continuously building 'settlements ' on Palestinian land in the West Bank.
6. No other religious group has been given its own nation by the United nations.
Netanyahu and you jewish radicals here in the US - Enough is Enough. You neither appreciate of what has been done for you or respect international law.
No more ANYTHING for Israel from my taxes.
Lifelong progressive American Democrat
1.America DOES NOT and Should NOT revolve around Israel. Between Israel and the US there is a a total population of about 16,000,000 Jews. The US has a polulation of 320,000,000. 16/320=5%. Do Netanyahu and his BFF's here really believe that 95% of Americans should put Israel first before anything else??
2. America does not need to keep making up for what the Nazis did in WW2 to the jews. For heavens sake America fought against the Nazis and freed those in the camps.
3. Israel receives more foreign aid, monetary and military, from America than any other nation in the world and has been doing so for decades.
4. The nation of Isreal refuses to join with rest of the civilized word, by signing the nuclear non-proliferation pact, by admitting to having secreatly buile 100-200 nuclear bombs and 3 separate delivery systems, and by allowing inspection of its nuclear arsenal amd manufacturing sites.
5. Isreal is building an apartheid nation with its ILLEGAL treatment of Palestinians and by continuously building 'settlements ' on Palestinian land in the West Bank.
6. No other religious group has been given its own nation by the United nations.
Netanyahu and you jewish radicals here in the US - Enough is Enough. You neither appreciate of what has been done for you or respect international law.
No more ANYTHING for Israel from my taxes.
Lifelong progressive American Democrat
22
You left one thing out -
Israel DOES NOT and Should NOT revolve around Bibi.
(It's kind of like America revlving around Trump. Both are legends in their own mnds.)
Israel DOES NOT and Should NOT revolve around Bibi.
(It's kind of like America revlving around Trump. Both are legends in their own mnds.)
2
You are not an progressive nor very American; just an anti-Semite.
This is not a knee jerk reaction to your comments. It is evident in that you see Israel a place inhabited by Jews, for whom you have no empathy. But as an American, you should see Israel as a nation whose interest and values completely align with ours here in the US.
I suspect your real motivation is that giving Iran what it wants will save you- but it wont. For you and others may one day learn that Israel is not the reason that the Middle East is on fire, only an excuse.
This is not a knee jerk reaction to your comments. It is evident in that you see Israel a place inhabited by Jews, for whom you have no empathy. But as an American, you should see Israel as a nation whose interest and values completely align with ours here in the US.
I suspect your real motivation is that giving Iran what it wants will save you- but it wont. For you and others may one day learn that Israel is not the reason that the Middle East is on fire, only an excuse.
3
You tend to always write in lockstep against Israel. Your anti-zionist comments are not a reflection of the American jewry, but a reflection of your troubled family background and consistent with the pro muslim movement.
11
Israel as we know it today will likely cease to exist in 50 years, maybe less. We need to what is in the interest of the US, not Israel.
21
How insolent!
This may be your hope, but Israel plans to be a thriving nation for many years to come. It has accomplished and contributed more in its 65 year existence than any nation has over such a short period- and with almost no natural resources.
The world would be a better place if all people worked as industriously to build a nation as the Israelis have. And what some think is aggression is actually survival. It exist on a piece of land the size of NJ, bordered on 3 sides by countries the size of the other 47 contiguous US states who are mostly hostile and often violent.
I encourage to visit Israel and see for yourself. And if your fair minded, I think you will be surprised by what a wonderful place it is.
This may be your hope, but Israel plans to be a thriving nation for many years to come. It has accomplished and contributed more in its 65 year existence than any nation has over such a short period- and with almost no natural resources.
The world would be a better place if all people worked as industriously to build a nation as the Israelis have. And what some think is aggression is actually survival. It exist on a piece of land the size of NJ, bordered on 3 sides by countries the size of the other 47 contiguous US states who are mostly hostile and often violent.
I encourage to visit Israel and see for yourself. And if your fair minded, I think you will be surprised by what a wonderful place it is.
3
Laurence, I've been to Israel on a number of occasions. My comment was not meant to be insolent, merely that the model Israel is pursuing is not sustainable in my opinion. I remain concerned why most of Israel's neighbors are "hostile and often violent." They have reasons for being that way.
1
Israel gets all this airtime in the US, to make a case that is in the end against the best interests of the US. Quiet lobbying is one thing. This is completely another and should be considered unfriendly and hostile interference. But blame the Republicans too. They invited Netanyahu in with open arms. If the Iran deal falls through, Republicans will have partnered with Israel to make the US and Israel less secure and the Middlea East much more dangerous.
23
Isn't it odd, Mr. Cohen, that though Bibi has claimed, for over 20 years, that Iran was "months away" from a nuke, all while building more of his own, refusing inspections, and bulldozing Arab homes to make room for Orthodox Jews "returning" from generations living in Brooklyn and Eastern europe... few simply ask if the man is lying?
Few also seem amazed at the fact that a new, invincible muslim army is doing what Oded Yinon and the fellas at the Zio-con PNAC called for to Israel's neighbors?
http://www.monabaker.com/pMachine/more.php?id=A2298_0_1_0_M
We;re being lied to, Mr. Cohen. About ISIS, and Iran - just as we were lied into Iraq. Just as the same neocons and hyper interventionists tried to lie us into Syria
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line
I think you know this, Mr. Cohen.
I think the issue is are the lying liars who crave YEARS more war based on their sophomoric worldview more of a danger to Israel in the long run than any other force on earth?
I think you know the answer to that one too, Sir.
Few also seem amazed at the fact that a new, invincible muslim army is doing what Oded Yinon and the fellas at the Zio-con PNAC called for to Israel's neighbors?
http://www.monabaker.com/pMachine/more.php?id=A2298_0_1_0_M
We;re being lied to, Mr. Cohen. About ISIS, and Iran - just as we were lied into Iraq. Just as the same neocons and hyper interventionists tried to lie us into Syria
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line
I think you know this, Mr. Cohen.
I think the issue is are the lying liars who crave YEARS more war based on their sophomoric worldview more of a danger to Israel in the long run than any other force on earth?
I think you know the answer to that one too, Sir.
11
The deal is not a great deal, but the Administration supposedly did the best they could. We realistically can't walk away now. Getting to a deal was important, I blame the Administration for agreeing prematurely to an unfavorable deal that is too short and lifts too many sanctions too quickly.
The fact that the Administration negotiated a deal that a majority of Congress will vote to disapprove and will barely skirt the veto-override line should be an indication that they didn't do a very good job.
The fact that the Administration negotiated a deal that a majority of Congress will vote to disapprove and will barely skirt the veto-override line should be an indication that they didn't do a very good job.
1
@ John
So there were no representatives from Germany, the UK, France, Russia or China involved in this deal then? And the chairman of the Joint chiefs and the 36 retired senior generals and admirals (who include a rabbi) are talking out of their hats are they? And the fact that all Republicans are going to vote against it for purely political reasons is your yardstick for making value judgments? Hey you sound like a really smart guy capable of making sound evidence based decisions.
So there were no representatives from Germany, the UK, France, Russia or China involved in this deal then? And the chairman of the Joint chiefs and the 36 retired senior generals and admirals (who include a rabbi) are talking out of their hats are they? And the fact that all Republicans are going to vote against it for purely political reasons is your yardstick for making value judgments? Hey you sound like a really smart guy capable of making sound evidence based decisions.
22
There are an estimated 4,700 retired generals in the United States. What about the 4,664 who chose not to voice their support for the deal?
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2006/04/rumsfe...
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2006/04/rumsfe...
The Republicans in congress disapprove the deal because it was negotiated by Mr. Obama, not because it is a bad deal. (This shows how much respect I have for the Republicans in congress.)
Bibi should be scared of Iran: 50% of them are under 26 years of age. They are liberal, pro western, educated, and restless to join the free world. When their maniical gov't changes--and it will--Iran will become a major ally of the west.
16
Question on Verification: If we can't inspect a military site without 24 days' notice followed by an appeal process that could be time consuming, doesnt that mean there is no real inspection of underground sites? A nuclear bomb related facility is, by definition, a military site.
If Iran wants to cheat, they will put their cheating activities in an underground site, and if we suspect it, we can't go in because they will declare it is a military site, and then they will endlessly appeal and delay while cleaning up.
Is that wrong thinking? Isn't any place Iran cheating to make a bomb a military site?
If Iran wants to cheat, they will put their cheating activities in an underground site, and if we suspect it, we can't go in because they will declare it is a military site, and then they will endlessly appeal and delay while cleaning up.
Is that wrong thinking? Isn't any place Iran cheating to make a bomb a military site?
4
It is impossible, as noted recently by noted nuclear scientists, to remove all traces of a nuclear production facility in 24 days or in six months for that matter.
1
I think if you knew about the process of refining uranium - which is really the only challenge with building a nuclear weapon (well, delivery vehicles can be an issue to if building icbms), you would not be as worried about this point. You can't make centrifuges and reactors disappear rapidly nor can you get rid of the trace uranium.
Netanyahu is from Israel's right-wing party. They have 61/120 seats in parliament; not exactly a mandate. Obama is from the US's left-wing party; an overwhelming majority of US Jews voted for Obama, twice. This agreement reflects a right/left divide, not a US/Israel divide. Is it a good deal ... who knows? Only history will tell because, despite what the US does, it will go forward. I do know it would be foolish to allow Iran to acquire nuclear bombs and those here who write that somehow promotes "fairness" are naive at best or, more likely, delusional: that promotes war, as likely against the US as against Israel.
6
Read "The Trouble with Israel: Netanyahu takes the country to the brink." by Bernard Avishai, an Israel.
New insights for me, anyway.
http://harpers.org/archive/2015/08/the-trouble-with-israel/1/
New insights for me, anyway.
http://harpers.org/archive/2015/08/the-trouble-with-israel/1/
8
I'm really tired about reading yet more articles about how this Iran deal affects Jews and Israel. It's almost as if we forgot that we need to primarily focus on *America's* interests- not the interests of 1% of its population or of a Mediterranean country the size of new Jersey.
23
If this deal were with Hitler in 1933, would it have been a good deal?
7
Germany lacked the capacity to build such a weapon then. We did cut similar arms control deals with the Soviet Union who was more powerful and more aggressive than Iran and we are now better for it.
That doesn't make a lot of sense...but if we want to use the measuring stick of munich, then yes, this is light years better.
Do Chinese Americans get invites to listen to webcasts from President Xi where he urges them to vote against American interests? Do Russian Americans do the same with Putin?
Why does a foreign head of state have such pull with prominent Americans?
Why does a foreign head of state have such pull with prominent Americans?
13
DOESN'T EVERYBODY REALIZE THAT PRESIDENT OBAMA HAS ACHIEVED “PEACE IN OUR TIME?”
But only for the next ten years and then Iran can have nuclear weapons in accordance with this agreement!
Iran does not have intercontinental ballistic missile delivery systems, but they can afford to rent a van for a suicide bomber instead!
This treaty is a great diplomatic victory for the Obama Administration!
The USA, France, Germany, England, China and Russia did all get together and then all agreed in essence to "Give away everything Iran wants in return for a ten year pause before Iran is allowed to have nuclear weapons with the capability to destroy the USA!"
The US agrees to release Iran from Iran’s treaty obligations under the existing non-nuclear-proliferation treaty that Iran previously signed!
The US agrees to lift trade sanctions against Iran that were implemented against Iran for Iran’s capture of the US embassy in Iran and Iran's failure to comply with Iran’s obligations that Iran agreed to comply with as a part of the previous non-nuclear-proliferation agreement that Iran signed! This will give Iran the economic capability to arm and finance many more religious fanatics around the world. How will the USA ever deal with a bunch of nuclear armed religious fanatics?
The US agrees to allow Iran to have Nuclear Weapons ten years after this treaty is agreed and ratified by all of the governmental parties to this agreement!
But only for the next ten years and then Iran can have nuclear weapons in accordance with this agreement!
Iran does not have intercontinental ballistic missile delivery systems, but they can afford to rent a van for a suicide bomber instead!
This treaty is a great diplomatic victory for the Obama Administration!
The USA, France, Germany, England, China and Russia did all get together and then all agreed in essence to "Give away everything Iran wants in return for a ten year pause before Iran is allowed to have nuclear weapons with the capability to destroy the USA!"
The US agrees to release Iran from Iran’s treaty obligations under the existing non-nuclear-proliferation treaty that Iran previously signed!
The US agrees to lift trade sanctions against Iran that were implemented against Iran for Iran’s capture of the US embassy in Iran and Iran's failure to comply with Iran’s obligations that Iran agreed to comply with as a part of the previous non-nuclear-proliferation agreement that Iran signed! This will give Iran the economic capability to arm and finance many more religious fanatics around the world. How will the USA ever deal with a bunch of nuclear armed religious fanatics?
The US agrees to allow Iran to have Nuclear Weapons ten years after this treaty is agreed and ratified by all of the governmental parties to this agreement!
5
Actually you are spouting non-factual propaganda. The agreement does not, at the end of 10 or 15 years let them get a bomb. Rather it ends the period of inspections so, in some manner, we will return to the situation we were in for many years until November 2013 when the interim agreement was signed putting the first actual curbs on their ability to enrich uranium. Of course, if the opponents of the deal prevail - whether it is based on their actual viewpoint of their reflexive hatred of all things Obama - the Iranians will be able to resume enrichment in months and will, based on many estimates, have a bomb in a year and a half. I suppose you are fine with them getting the bomb so faxt.
82
This is incorrect. Under the agreement Iran will sign the Additional Protocols which tighten restrictions on their ability to refuse inspection. Read the Additional Protocols, available on the IAEA website.
It is obvious that you did NOT read the agreement, nor a level headed summary of it. (hint: the US reserves the right of a military intervention, if necessary, to prevent the Iranians from getting a nuclear weapon ANY time, within the 10 year period and beyond. What is permitted is that Iran can pursue the peaceful use of nuclear technology under the watchful eyes of the International Atomic Energy Agency.) This is a much stricter approach than the one accorded to the North Korean, who even under severe sanctions and without international inspection managed to build and test their atomic bombs and are now developing delivering systems, while being openly hostile to the US and its allies. Yet the public hardly reacts to those threats, threats easily comparable to a nuclear Iran- perhaps even more dangerous considering the sanity of their leadership. The Iran agreement in contrast provides the methodology of intense and wide-spread inspection of their nuclear programs with the option to reinstate sanctions if they are caught cheating. A rejection of the agreement by the US will collapse all but the US sanctions, as the EU, Russia and China would be more than willing to resume near-normal trade with Iran and leave the US as the odd-man out, diplomatically weak, untrustworthy and economically short-changed in terms of trade with Iran.
1
So, if the Congress votes it down, Obama will return to them with a declaration of war? Now who’s being contemptuous?
2
Roger's argument in favor of the deal seems to hinge around Netanyahu's tactics against it. But he conveniently overlooks the fact that the overwhelming majority of Israelis oppose the deal INCLUDING strong opponents of Netanyahu such as Isaac Herzog and Tzipi Livni -- the Left candidates Roger Cohen supported in Israel's last election. The only difference between their opposition and Netanyahu's is that they prefer not to confront Obama head-to-head in public. Perhaps Roger can explain why even they are against the deal? Could one reason be they live a lot closer to Iran than Jews living in Scarsdale or Los Angeles and so have much less room for error if the supporters of this deal prove to be wrong?
7
JW,
Fear of change is fairly universal. Is there something special about Israel that would make its populace respond with more insight and intelligence when placed under stress? I am proud of the Israelis who have responded with so much restraint and dignity for 67 years but I think Netanyahu and his coalition is a far greater danger to Israel and my fellow Jews than the Ayatollahs much as ISIS is much less a danger to the US than the GOP.
Fear of change is fairly universal. Is there something special about Israel that would make its populace respond with more insight and intelligence when placed under stress? I am proud of the Israelis who have responded with so much restraint and dignity for 67 years but I think Netanyahu and his coalition is a far greater danger to Israel and my fellow Jews than the Ayatollahs much as ISIS is much less a danger to the US than the GOP.
More to the point, the majority of American Jews support the agreement. Perhaps since Mr. Cohen is writing about an American agreement, that is more pertinent. More than 300 Jewish rabbis just wrote a letter of support for the agreement.
Netanyahu and the war mongers and lobbyists represent a minority in this country but are throwing their money around in an anti-American way.
Netanyahu and the war mongers and lobbyists represent a minority in this country but are throwing their money around in an anti-American way.
As stated by the leadership of Iran, its desire to wipe Israel from the map, expresses a political stance, not a plan to perpetrate a murderous act of genocide achieved through a nuclear weapon. Iran is stating a desire to replace the Jewish state of Israel with a state of Palestine in a rejection of the UN resolution that established the State of Israel.
Israel, in the person of Benjamin Netanyahu, wants to destroy the economy of Iran, which has been clearly state by Netanyahu. Economic destruction is a much more likely aggression, than nuclear war - see mutually assured destruction. The success of economic warfare on Iran would also destroy the lives of Iranian citizens regardless of their individual politics. So, the leaders from both countries mutually want their adversary to lose political and/or economic power. The nuclear arms control agreement will lessen the probability of a nuclear attack on Israel. From Netanyahu's perspective it will also allow Iran to function at a higher economic level and improve the lives of Iran's citizen, which would stifle Netanyahu's desire to punish Iranians. The nuclear arms deal represents a nascent opportunity for mutual tolerance.
Israel, in the person of Benjamin Netanyahu, wants to destroy the economy of Iran, which has been clearly state by Netanyahu. Economic destruction is a much more likely aggression, than nuclear war - see mutually assured destruction. The success of economic warfare on Iran would also destroy the lives of Iranian citizens regardless of their individual politics. So, the leaders from both countries mutually want their adversary to lose political and/or economic power. The nuclear arms control agreement will lessen the probability of a nuclear attack on Israel. From Netanyahu's perspective it will also allow Iran to function at a higher economic level and improve the lives of Iran's citizen, which would stifle Netanyahu's desire to punish Iranians. The nuclear arms deal represents a nascent opportunity for mutual tolerance.
1
It will be a better day for the US when we realize that Israel is not an ally, but beneficiary of our aid. I hope we scrape them off our shoe.
7
At a time when more stability is a such a necessity in the Middle East, this deal lays the groundwork for MORE security for the region and in turn the world. Israel and Netanyahu specifically should take the responsibility to become realists about shifting geopolitics, starting with a two state solution. The animosity he's shown towards Obama is deeply counterproductive. Pleas of "Never Again" would take on far more nuance relative to the Iran deal, if starting with the situation at home, Israel's leaders and citizenry were not so seemingly indifferent to crimes committed of late on their own soil.
I actually did write my senator (Schumer), and was disappointed that he chose to buy into Netanyahu’s nonsensical argument. I can’t say I was surprised, but I was certainly disappointed.
The so-called “better deal” is simply opponent-speak for no deal. When the details of the deal first came out, we heard a collective gasp because the inspection regime was so thorough. It was hard to take issue with a deal that had more than the critics had been demanding. So back to the opposition drawing table… and the new buzzword became a “better deal.” Change the buzzword to “no deal,” and that would at least be an honest position.
It’s hard to understand how anyone can oppose the deal with a straight face. Senator Schumer, it’s not to late to do the right thing.
The so-called “better deal” is simply opponent-speak for no deal. When the details of the deal first came out, we heard a collective gasp because the inspection regime was so thorough. It was hard to take issue with a deal that had more than the critics had been demanding. So back to the opposition drawing table… and the new buzzword became a “better deal.” Change the buzzword to “no deal,” and that would at least be an honest position.
It’s hard to understand how anyone can oppose the deal with a straight face. Senator Schumer, it’s not to late to do the right thing.
23
I wrote to Senator Schumer as well, urging him to reconsider his position on the Iran deal. While I appreciated that I got a response that addressed the issue, the only explanation he or his staffer who wrote the response provided for his stance was that he "believe[s] that Iran will not change" and that the deal will not hinder their ability to make a nuclear bomb in any way. He also said he wants to "go back to the bargaining table". I am baffled by the naïveté and lack of nuance in the Senator's beliefs that Iran is totally immune to any change, that this deal would be completely ineffective in changing their timetable for building a bomb, and that he could get a better deal by rejecting this one and going back to the table. I've lost a great deal of respect for the Senator, and will probably abstain from voting for him from now on.
Good point. Netanyahu uses the same logic in pretending to be working towards a two-state solution, while he just keeps moving the goalpost anytime a solution is within reach.
Israel (or at least Netanyahu) has apparently decided that the Israeli-US relationship is no longer worth cultivating. I am beginning to agree with that position.
It's time to cut Israel loose. Sixty-seven years of helping that country get and stay on its feet is enough.
It's time to cut Israel loose. Sixty-seven years of helping that country get and stay on its feet is enough.
22
What baffles me most is why are we holding Iran to a totally different yardstick. Agreed. Iran is supporting some regimes we totally want extinct. But there are other countries with nukes who are way more vicious and dangerous. But we conveniently turn a blind eye without demanding anything to contain them. Israel is one those offenders. But we passive aggressively acquiesce to their rights and so called needs to be the ONLY country in the ME to have them. They have gotten so bold and their audacity to demand and interfere in our foreign policy to scuttle the Iran Deal is beyond sheer audacity. It's time we got our country back before this New Jersey size country and it's warmonger pushes us over the cliff. How? It's beyond me when our own ( Senators and House Representatives )helps with an extra shove. A house divided cannot stand by itself and the wily Netanyahu knows that, much to our peril.
18
I recently wrote to Senator Schumer urging him to change his mind and support the treaty with Iran. This treaty is our best chance to prevent a nuclear armed Iran. If the US fails to support this treaty, sanctions will start to fail as European allies start to break ranks with the US. Sanctions hurt everyone, not just Iran. Iran will bury its nuclear program underground and become an undeclared nuclear state, like Israel. Americans will never support another Middle East ground invasion given our track record and the resulting loss of life and the huge waste of resources.
Paranoia makes people and government act irrationally, against their own best interests. Instead of coolly thinking things through, we shoot from the hip, wildly. Netanyahu is a prime example.
Israel is demonstrably less safe today after the Iraqi war than it was before. This war was urged on the US by Israeli supporters fearful that Saddam had a nuke and would target them. Can anyone argue that Iraq is better off today than it was before we invaded? All we did was hand Iran another ally, the puppet state of Iraq. With the fall of Syria and the rise of ISIS, Israel has much worse problems on its borders than it had before.
Frankly, I am sick and tired of the United States being treating as a proxy defense force for Israel. Give peace a chance.
Paranoia makes people and government act irrationally, against their own best interests. Instead of coolly thinking things through, we shoot from the hip, wildly. Netanyahu is a prime example.
Israel is demonstrably less safe today after the Iraqi war than it was before. This war was urged on the US by Israeli supporters fearful that Saddam had a nuke and would target them. Can anyone argue that Iraq is better off today than it was before we invaded? All we did was hand Iran another ally, the puppet state of Iraq. With the fall of Syria and the rise of ISIS, Israel has much worse problems on its borders than it had before.
Frankly, I am sick and tired of the United States being treating as a proxy defense force for Israel. Give peace a chance.
11
Bibi is the boy that always cries wolf, that in itself gives me doubts. Imagine having the most powerful friend in the world, and then, because of a disagreement, treat this friend like an incompetent loser, for all to see. That is what Bibi is doing, I cannot disagree more, this behavior does not help Israel goals in any way, shape or form. That is not what friends do. Give the deal a chance, all other options are still going to be available, anyways.
4
What's amazing to me is the way in which no one towing the Likudnik line about the eeevil Iranians, how they are religious nuts, and bent on destruction - is perterbed by the complete lack of evidence that Iran has, wants, or would ever use a nuclear weapon.
Meanwhile, Israel has hundreds, won't end its brutal occupation, and is supporting Al Qaeda fighters in Syria.
If your identity is all tied up with Israel, I suppose it is easy to be blind to its dishonesty and malfeasance.
But newsflash" Netanyahu and Israel have hundreds of nukes and are not threatened by Iran, which has none.
Period.
If Israel is so worried about what Iran might decide to one day do... why not negotiate seriously, in terms of its own nukes, or the Occupation, or Sheba farms?
We're being lied to by some of the best liars on earth, and a massive media campaign.
Israel has done this for decades -
https://consortiumnews.com/2012/11/19/how-israel-out-foxed-us-presidents-2/
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2014/11/23/israel-americas-biggest-fr...
LIED to us and harmed our interests, that is.
I suggest taking a step back and focusing on why a tiny foreign ethnarchy with hundreds of nukes and a penchant for war crimes and framing aggression as defense has ANY SAY in how these United States of 320 million people conducts its diplomacy?
How about AIPAc should be made to register as a foreign agent, JINSa too, and all the neocons deported to Israel?
I like my plan much better than Bibi's.
Meanwhile, Israel has hundreds, won't end its brutal occupation, and is supporting Al Qaeda fighters in Syria.
If your identity is all tied up with Israel, I suppose it is easy to be blind to its dishonesty and malfeasance.
But newsflash" Netanyahu and Israel have hundreds of nukes and are not threatened by Iran, which has none.
Period.
If Israel is so worried about what Iran might decide to one day do... why not negotiate seriously, in terms of its own nukes, or the Occupation, or Sheba farms?
We're being lied to by some of the best liars on earth, and a massive media campaign.
Israel has done this for decades -
https://consortiumnews.com/2012/11/19/how-israel-out-foxed-us-presidents-2/
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2014/11/23/israel-americas-biggest-fr...
LIED to us and harmed our interests, that is.
I suggest taking a step back and focusing on why a tiny foreign ethnarchy with hundreds of nukes and a penchant for war crimes and framing aggression as defense has ANY SAY in how these United States of 320 million people conducts its diplomacy?
How about AIPAc should be made to register as a foreign agent, JINSa too, and all the neocons deported to Israel?
I like my plan much better than Bibi's.
3
Because of the proximity of Iran and Israel, it is likely that a nuclear armed missile launched by either one will reach its target before countermeasures can stop it. That insures a successful nuclear retaliation by the other. It is quite possible that the nuclear exchange will grow beyond the region.
That makes diplomacy, not military measures, the only sane way to resolve this standoff. When Israel rejects this agreement, Israel makes itself the greater problem.
That makes diplomacy, not military measures, the only sane way to resolve this standoff. When Israel rejects this agreement, Israel makes itself the greater problem.
4
Without anytime, anywhere, any place verification 24/7 the treaty is not worth the paper it is written on.
5
But there is anytime, anywhere, any place verification 24/7. Haven't you read it?
William Gill, the declared sites will be subject to such inspections. Delay of inspections at any undeclared sites we learn about, will trigger the snapback of sanctions. Obviously, based on your view, you are FINE with them getting a bomb in the next year or so as the rejection of the deal would give Iran that opportunity.
And yet most of the leading nuclear scientists in this country as well as several Nobel Laureates and the IAEA all have decided that the deal makes stringent verification requirements. They are knowledgeable experts, not propagandists. Many who oppose the deal absolutely do not know what is in it, whether it is about the verification or other aspects.
Israel has lied to and manipulated US presidents for decades
https://consortiumnews.com/2012/11/19/how-israel-out-foxed-us-presidents-2/
all the while, it has never shown itself as unduly concerned with American national security interests, from the Lavon Affair, to the USS Liberty failed false flag, to selling missile tech to China.
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2014/11/23/israel-americas-biggest-fr...
Israel is not an "ally"in any common sense of the word. It is an ungrateful, spoiled, and belligerent child.
And the more it cries and stamps its feet and demands to rule American foreign policy - the more Americans will see Israel as being a parasite that hates its host, and craves endless war, paid for and bled for by American soldiers and Marines - very few of whom, by the way, are Jewish.
https://consortiumnews.com/2012/11/19/how-israel-out-foxed-us-presidents-2/
all the while, it has never shown itself as unduly concerned with American national security interests, from the Lavon Affair, to the USS Liberty failed false flag, to selling missile tech to China.
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2014/11/23/israel-americas-biggest-fr...
Israel is not an "ally"in any common sense of the word. It is an ungrateful, spoiled, and belligerent child.
And the more it cries and stamps its feet and demands to rule American foreign policy - the more Americans will see Israel as being a parasite that hates its host, and craves endless war, paid for and bled for by American soldiers and Marines - very few of whom, by the way, are Jewish.
6
Mr. Cohen, a great writer, is gravely mistaken.
You cannot make a deal with this country, Iran.
The premise is entirely fallacious.
Period.
QED
You cannot make a deal with this country, Iran.
The premise is entirely fallacious.
Period.
QED
4
So we can have treaties with Russia but not Iran?
It's a done deal, no matter what Congess does. Sanctions are already being lifted elsewhere in the world and maintaining sanctions by the US will be as effective as they have been for Cuba. That is to say, not very. Can we move on and discuss the use of the influx of money into Iran now? Will Asad be further propped up? Will the general population of Iran benefit? And if so, in what specific ways? And one other question: how will Iran use the uranium it will be allowed to enrich? Anyone know of facilities built/being built for development of electrical energy from nuclear energy for example?
3
I would like to tweak this conversation a bit toward Senator Schumer. I also call on my fellow Democrats to question his motives for being against the Iran deal. Remember this man is set to take over Senator Reid's leadership. We need to dig further as to why he is so adamant about this particular issue. And we need to ask if we want a leader who will succumb to special interests. This reader believes that his political philosophy is narrower - and more discriminatory - than he seemingly professes. I suggest to Mr. Schumer that perhaps it would be in many Democrats' best interest to step aside so we can have a leader who is not so hawkish, one who believes in diplomacy, and, most importantly, one who believes that this deal is better than what we were faced with before. We need someone who allows our president to lead rather than the head of Israel's government.
5
Senator Schumer is probably afraid of a primary challenger heavily financed by AIPAC and its chief backer Sheldon Adelson in 2016 if he does not toe the AIPAC line.
Regardless of the final decision on the Iran nuclear deal, Kathy Lollock, many of us Democrats will make a concerted effort to keep Senator Schumer out of any further leadership roles in the Senate -- ever. Schumer's disloyalty is beyond defense.
Iran acquiring nuclear capability is not an existential threat to Israel. It is rather, a rejiggering of the balance of power in the Middle East, a change unfavorable to Israel which Netanyahu hates because Israel then would then have to think twice before they treat the Palestinians like dirt under their feet.
And that is also why Netanyahu is pulling out all the stops in scaring American Jews into lobbying enough Democratic senators to vote against the deal. He knows this is the last chance for him, if he can't stop it here, he will not launch a unilateral raid on Iran's facilities because absent the bogus trumped up existential threat, a slight recalibration of the balance of power isn't worth total war with Iran.
Despite Bibi's doomsday rhetoric, one day after the agreement goes into effect, Israel remains the overwhelming nuclear and military power in the Middle East. But maybe, instead of treating the Palestinians like grasshoppers, they'll behave just a wee bit better.
And that is also why Netanyahu is pulling out all the stops in scaring American Jews into lobbying enough Democratic senators to vote against the deal. He knows this is the last chance for him, if he can't stop it here, he will not launch a unilateral raid on Iran's facilities because absent the bogus trumped up existential threat, a slight recalibration of the balance of power isn't worth total war with Iran.
Despite Bibi's doomsday rhetoric, one day after the agreement goes into effect, Israel remains the overwhelming nuclear and military power in the Middle East. But maybe, instead of treating the Palestinians like grasshoppers, they'll behave just a wee bit better.
1
If, as you claim, Israel treats Palestinian Arabs as "dirt under their feet," how then would you describe their treatment at the hands of their Arab brethren who treat them exponentially worse?
1
No one in the United States, including Roger Cohen, has any business judging the Israeli Prime Minister's opposition to this deal (or the Israelis, who uniformly oppose the deal). When Roger Cohen lives in Israel, a stones throw away from a nation that repeatedly has called for your annihilation and is now poised to acquire billions of conventional arms, ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons in the span of less than 15 years, then I'd be interested in hearing from him.
5
That would be all fine and good if the Israeli government and its lobbying arm AIPAC didn't interfere with both domestic and international policies of the United States. You don;t like Roger Cohen? Then don't read him.
So Israel shouldn't sign the deal. Mr. Cohen is writing about America and five other world powers as well as the United Nations who do support the deal. Perhaps Israel should not be so involved in American politics?
As one American of entirely Jewish ancestry I am saddened to see the so-called leaders of the Jewish community operating in such a high-handed and even irresponsible manner. It only confirms my continued distain for their approach to the issues raised by the Israeli-Palestinian dilemma and the broader problems in the Middle East. They seem determined to ignore the real views of the American-Jewish community in their eagerness to be received graciously by the right-wing government now in power in Jerusalem.
7
He who has the gold makes the rules.
Not sure what your purported Jewishness has to do with anything, but a far larger percentage of non-Jewish Americans oppose the deal than do Jewish-Americans. As for Israel, the entire political spectrum, Labor to Likud, opposes the deal, so your statement about currying favor with a right wing Israeli government is a leap in logic. At least you correctly place the seat of Israel's government in Jerusalem, so there is that.
3
Why? Because sanctions on Iran will fall apart as Russia and China conclude the United States is not serious about a compromise with Tehran
NOT SO!
Russia wants to sell arms to Iran. Without actual money, with what can Iran pay?
China wants to buy oil from Iran. But what does Iran want with Chinese money? What can Iran purchase with Chinese money? If isolated from the rest of the world's economies the only thing Iran may use Chinese money for is to buy Chinese consumer goods.
Do NOT underestimate the extreme power that US sanctions have on Iran and those who would deal with it!
NOT SO!
Russia wants to sell arms to Iran. Without actual money, with what can Iran pay?
China wants to buy oil from Iran. But what does Iran want with Chinese money? What can Iran purchase with Chinese money? If isolated from the rest of the world's economies the only thing Iran may use Chinese money for is to buy Chinese consumer goods.
Do NOT underestimate the extreme power that US sanctions have on Iran and those who would deal with it!
3
Iran could use Chinese money to buy weaons from Russia. Russia could then use the Chinese money to buy consumer goods from China. US sanctions aren't all that powerful when the rest of the world does not join in.
68
should read weapons
Within 10 years countries will be buying weapons with bitcoins.
August 17, 2017
America Jewish diversity's political interest historically accommodates its unique relations to geopolitical international positions taken by the governing power especially with a not monolithic Israel statement in every major existential crisis. Truly amazing American power politics of interest groups – and in this case of the Iran nuclear deal keeping American International participation in the UN’s aegis to resolve in consolidated minds of all signatories to the deal. It took Einstein to figure the General and the Special forces at play heuristics in space and time and it’s sure related to our down to earth powers in the political science realities. It would behoove B. Netanyahu to give pause and thought to grand theories that may never be unified but do come close to resolving needs of avoiding the black holes of chaos – especially in regional terrain.
jja Manhattan, N.Y.
America Jewish diversity's political interest historically accommodates its unique relations to geopolitical international positions taken by the governing power especially with a not monolithic Israel statement in every major existential crisis. Truly amazing American power politics of interest groups – and in this case of the Iran nuclear deal keeping American International participation in the UN’s aegis to resolve in consolidated minds of all signatories to the deal. It took Einstein to figure the General and the Special forces at play heuristics in space and time and it’s sure related to our down to earth powers in the political science realities. It would behoove B. Netanyahu to give pause and thought to grand theories that may never be unified but do come close to resolving needs of avoiding the black holes of chaos – especially in regional terrain.
jja Manhattan, N.Y.
I think this is the straw that may break my friendship of a lifetime. My pro-isreal friends will not give up the fight against Iran. There is no rational reason not to support this deal. Israel, under Bibi N, wants to take Iran out. They have no qualms about starting a third world war. They may believe they need a greater land grab to sustain their "nation." I believe their extreme interests of late are dangerous to themselves, the world, and certainly our own foreign policy. There is no gray here. The Iran deal is a good one. To not take it is to set up an inevitable war with no good end.
3
The crux of Lippy’s support is ““It’s not a great deal, but it’s enough of a deal to postpone the nuclear situation and maybe give us time to work things out,” Lippy told me. “While they’re being sharply reduced in their nuclear capacity, we can sit down again over the next several years and talk about the Holocaust, Israel and human rights, and that is why I go along with it.”
And that is exactly the weakness of this position. It assumes that Iran negotiated in good faith and is not already cheating on its terms. When Lippy says “we”, she cannot include Israelis.
Cohen goes on to say, “Most young Iranians no more believe in “Death to America” than they believe the Hidden Imam is going to show up tomorrow.” Most Germans did not believe in the Final Solution either.
He adds, “The alternative to this deal, as Obama said, is war.” The alternative is return to the status quo prior to the agreement; more stringent sanctions; a naval blockade of arms shipments, with the military option on the table. It was this policy that brought the Iranians to engage in talks and would continue to reign in their adventurism.
Netanyahu is a bad statesman. His tactics are abominable. While most Israelis oppose him politically, they are united in support of his views on Iran. He is an Israeli patriot charged with the responsibility of Israel’s security. No American Jew, either pro or antagonist of the Iran nuclear deal can appreciate the gravity of Israel’s fears.
And that is exactly the weakness of this position. It assumes that Iran negotiated in good faith and is not already cheating on its terms. When Lippy says “we”, she cannot include Israelis.
Cohen goes on to say, “Most young Iranians no more believe in “Death to America” than they believe the Hidden Imam is going to show up tomorrow.” Most Germans did not believe in the Final Solution either.
He adds, “The alternative to this deal, as Obama said, is war.” The alternative is return to the status quo prior to the agreement; more stringent sanctions; a naval blockade of arms shipments, with the military option on the table. It was this policy that brought the Iranians to engage in talks and would continue to reign in their adventurism.
Netanyahu is a bad statesman. His tactics are abominable. While most Israelis oppose him politically, they are united in support of his views on Iran. He is an Israeli patriot charged with the responsibility of Israel’s security. No American Jew, either pro or antagonist of the Iran nuclear deal can appreciate the gravity of Israel’s fears.
2
Leaving Israel's concerns aside, can anyone deny that Obama granting Iran's last minute demand that they be allowed a near term ability to acquire ICBMs, gives Iran the ability to ultimately nuke NYC? Thus, who is the real traitor, Obama or those who oppose NYC being vulnerable to Iran's nukes-in-waiting? Clearly, Obama and left wing Democrats favor Iran's wishes over America's needs, Americans' safety and America's survival.
5
Hopefully by the time Iran gets ICBMs, we will have a fully functioning missile defense system and the mad Mullahs of Iran will have enough sense to know that if they try to nuke NYC the US will launch a nuclear strike that will completely destroy Iran. Due to Iran's high population density it has been estimated that it would only take 14 x W88 nuclear warheads, the payload of only two Trident missiles, to completely destroy Iran.
On the contrary, with regards to the Iran Deal it is Netanyahu who is wrong and outrageous. With his rhetoric groundless, insane and his intentions clear he is downright dangerous. He is the one FOR WAR, wars he expects us to wage for him. With our Senators and House Representatives discussing and taking orders from Netanyahu on how to vote for the Deal is a horrible and terrible precedent for our country's likelihood of being in a perpetual state of war. American Jews are too cerebral to be taken in by his exaggerated gloom and doom. They are Americans first and Jewish later. I hope they will prevail upon our so called representatives to act wisely. Our Senators and House Representatives are handing our country on a platter to Netanyahu. He is becoming our defacto President. Just imagine Netanyahu with his hand on the red button. Nightmarish to say the least. I am extremely saddened, being from New York my State Senator and House Representative have joined this motley crew and are not like the wise AMERICAN Senator Levin. Being American allegiance is to America first. Allegiance to any other country is treason.
1
You have to wonder why Roger Cohen even bothered. Without him so much as uttering one syllable we know his position on this issue. What a lame piece. Roger found two Jews who were among the thousands who listened to the Prime Minister's talk who didn't agree with the Prime Minister's position. I am sure there were others who fall into that category; just as I am certain that many who participated agree with the Prime Minister and the majority of our elected representatives -- most of whom are not Jews. Roger -- your opinion -- like anyone else's -- rises or falls on the merits of the agreement -- not on whether Americans of any particular faith support or oppose the agreement. We are entitled to honest and reasoned discourse -- and that we did not get today from Mr. Cohen.
5
Israel is a multi-billion dollar nation with 8 million people, whose #1 strategic interest is having US support. Without this, Israel is in danger.
Therefore, this powerful, talented nation undoubtedly would want to devote significant resources into securing American foreign policy support and perhaps also influence/capture Jewish-American organizations to advocate strongly for it.
Whatever the reason for this advocacy, it shouldn't just be a mouthpiece for the Israeli PM -especially if one of the hidden agendas within hard-line Israeli policy may be to slowly gain as much land as possible -- which would necessitate spurring on decades of more conflict & contention, precluding a goal for any negotiated treaties with its neighbors.
The American perspective should be important -- for many reasons, including the fact that not being under constant siege may give America more insight into avenues for peace. And that America may value a stable & safe peace over the potential of more land for Israel.
Israel's safety shouldn't be in question, but America shouldn't be treated as a door-mat, and Israel shouldn't regard our military, our international interests, and our checkbook as theirs to spend away as they wish.
Therefore, this powerful, talented nation undoubtedly would want to devote significant resources into securing American foreign policy support and perhaps also influence/capture Jewish-American organizations to advocate strongly for it.
Whatever the reason for this advocacy, it shouldn't just be a mouthpiece for the Israeli PM -especially if one of the hidden agendas within hard-line Israeli policy may be to slowly gain as much land as possible -- which would necessitate spurring on decades of more conflict & contention, precluding a goal for any negotiated treaties with its neighbors.
The American perspective should be important -- for many reasons, including the fact that not being under constant siege may give America more insight into avenues for peace. And that America may value a stable & safe peace over the potential of more land for Israel.
Israel's safety shouldn't be in question, but America shouldn't be treated as a door-mat, and Israel shouldn't regard our military, our international interests, and our checkbook as theirs to spend away as they wish.
2
Mr. Cohen cites Ms. Lippy as saying, "It's not a great deal, but it's enough of a deal to postpone the nuclear situation and maybe give us time to work things out." Notice the word Ms. Lippy is using: "postpone." Thereafter, Mr. Cohen offers a comment: "She's right. A merit of this deal is that it would condemn the United States to Iran to a relationship -hostile, but still a framework for airing differences and doing business - over the next 15 years." Notice the words of Mr. Cohen: "...over the next 15 years."
Now, what will happen after this interval of time? Mr. Obama himself has said in an NPR interview aired on August 10th, 2015, that Iran's "breakout time" will be roughly where it is now. So we will eventually be where we are now. What are our options then? U.N. sanctions cannot be reinstated. Iran will have a stronger economy. And Iran will have more weapons, including more ballistic missile technology.
Mr. Cohen gives us some insight into his thought on "the day after tomorrow": "Most young Iranians no more believe in "Death to America" than they believe the Hidden Imam is going to show up tomorrow." Mr. Cohen has the hope that Iran's regime will change. But it is nothing more than that. It is conceivable that the same regime is more entrenched in power after 15 years. Mr. Cohen, as other Mr. Obama supporters, is gambling. What is certain is that, given the lifting of sanctions, these next 15 years will be littered with human casualties. Will it be worth it?
Now, what will happen after this interval of time? Mr. Obama himself has said in an NPR interview aired on August 10th, 2015, that Iran's "breakout time" will be roughly where it is now. So we will eventually be where we are now. What are our options then? U.N. sanctions cannot be reinstated. Iran will have a stronger economy. And Iran will have more weapons, including more ballistic missile technology.
Mr. Cohen gives us some insight into his thought on "the day after tomorrow": "Most young Iranians no more believe in "Death to America" than they believe the Hidden Imam is going to show up tomorrow." Mr. Cohen has the hope that Iran's regime will change. But it is nothing more than that. It is conceivable that the same regime is more entrenched in power after 15 years. Mr. Cohen, as other Mr. Obama supporters, is gambling. What is certain is that, given the lifting of sanctions, these next 15 years will be littered with human casualties. Will it be worth it?
4
The effect of the deal will be to bring Iran towards a normal existence and therefore a normal and peaceful (if sometimes hostile) relationship to the United States. The effect of no deal will be to maintain an unstable and bitter feud, and to maintain the weird constitutional set-up in Iran. Anyone desiring peace also desires a normal Iran with a normal relationship to the U.S. Keeping up the feud will never achieve this.
1
Mr. Netanyahu wants to keep Iran destitute and isolated. Otherwise, he fears Iran will become just like Israel.
3
Is there a rule written somewhere saying the United States must be shackled to one or another competing power in the Middle East? The idea that we must dabble in Middle East politics to secure energy interests is a short-sighted view. Much of the basic technology exists to ween ourselves off fossil fuel, there simply needs to be a public will to do it. In the short term, the US has its own production (some exported to China, according to previous NYT article.)
I hope the Iran-deal signals a move toward the US disentangling itself from the Middle East. Sadly, it seems merely a change of dance partners, and the nuclear-arms agreement is being used as a sales pitch on how enthusiastic we should be about playing for our new team.
I hope the Iran-deal signals a move toward the US disentangling itself from the Middle East. Sadly, it seems merely a change of dance partners, and the nuclear-arms agreement is being used as a sales pitch on how enthusiastic we should be about playing for our new team.
3
I don't see letting fall apart international cooperation to try to contain Iran behavior we've seen in the sanctions and then the negotiations. I don't doubt that Israel often feels alone, but trying to get the U.S. to produce that result for ourselves too doesn't seem like a constructive strategy even from the point of view of Israel's interests. I think there are a lot of lessons to be learned from the weaknesses of the deal that the sanctions strategy led to, but I think moving forward involves endorsing the deal and trying to strengthen our hand as we proceed.
9
As I see TV ads in Montana ( population less than 1 million) stating that all politicians who vote for the agreement with Iran will have " blood on their hands",I wonder what kind of leaders of Israel ( and The US Jewish organizations) attack the leaders of the US who have been their steadfast ally .. Perhaps the alliance is no more and the US needs to go its own way. Israel is a nuclear power and capable of its own defense. We do not need this abuse from an alleged ally.
64
The United States is about 320 million people, and is about 97.5% non-Jewish.
Basically the entire world is for this deal, this agreement, which entitles Iran to do what it was already legally entitled to do.
But Israel, and its 5th Column sayanim in the US, UK, and elsewhere, are against the deal.
This isnt because Iran has nukes, or will build them, or would use any they built.
It's because Israel wants regime change in Iran to soften up Hezbollah, because right wing Zionism has pined for Lebanon to the Litanti since the 1880s.
Water and gas, some arable land... what's not to love?
Basically the entire world is for this deal, this agreement, which entitles Iran to do what it was already legally entitled to do.
But Israel, and its 5th Column sayanim in the US, UK, and elsewhere, are against the deal.
This isnt because Iran has nukes, or will build them, or would use any they built.
It's because Israel wants regime change in Iran to soften up Hezbollah, because right wing Zionism has pined for Lebanon to the Litanti since the 1880s.
Water and gas, some arable land... what's not to love?
22
I can understand some arguments in support of the deal, even though I myself find it to be dangerous. And not just perilous for Israel, but the entire Middle East as Iran will now have the economic capability to further destabilize the region.
That aside, when I see commentaries such as that by Ms. Faoudhagin implicitly calling Jews in the US an Israeli "5th Column," I see the old canard of Jews not being loyal to their country again expressed. This is anti-Semitism at its worst and Ms. Faoudhagin and others who share her view should hang their anti-Semitic heads in shame. In this great nation, we have no more room for such bigotry...
That aside, when I see commentaries such as that by Ms. Faoudhagin implicitly calling Jews in the US an Israeli "5th Column," I see the old canard of Jews not being loyal to their country again expressed. This is anti-Semitism at its worst and Ms. Faoudhagin and others who share her view should hang their anti-Semitic heads in shame. In this great nation, we have no more room for such bigotry...
1
Like you, I support the nuclear deal that Congress is debating. But your references to fifth column sayanim (?) and right-wing Zionism "pining" for Lebanese territory carry a strong whiff of anti-Semitism. You can dislike Netanyahu, Israeli policy toward the Palestinians, and organizations that oppose the nuclear deal without conjuring up imaginary Jewish conspiracies. Or do you also believe in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion?
1
How can anyone back these war mongers without giving peace a chance. I think the real fear that Bibi has is that Iran may some day overtake Israel in trade and decrease Israel's importance. This deal will also start to expose how nasty Israel has been in treating its Palestinian population.
31
We should all thank God that Israel doesn't have nuclear weapons...it wouldn't be fair at all for them to have nuclear capability, while insisting that their neighbors don't have the right to such weapons. That wouldn't be fair, would it?
15
Lurleen,
Guess what? Israel does have nuclear weapons. Lot's of them. Thank the
Lord for that. And if Iran attacks them they will respond appropriately.
I see a possible nuclear holocaust in the future!
Guess what? Israel does have nuclear weapons. Lot's of them. Thank the
Lord for that. And if Iran attacks them they will respond appropriately.
I see a possible nuclear holocaust in the future!
Israel has nuclear weapons.
Netanyahu has utter gall to continually inject himself and his onesided views into our domestic politics. While not a great deal it is a start and delays both the nuclear spread and gives Iranians a path to joining the world community and becoming one with the rest of the community
37
As an American Jew, I know that the Likud expects me to take my marching orders on the Iran accord from the Great Leader (not Obama), who proved to be a true sage about the Iraqi situation. Okay, I get that - who wants to be labeled a self-hater? - but does this requirement stop with Iran or am I also supposed to cheer on the expulsion of the African asylum seekers back to war crimes-rich Darfur and Sudan while I complain about the inhumanity of the allied governments in refusing Jewish immigration during the Holocaust?
36
The African refugees are not all asylum seekers. They are not all from Darfur. And they are 'stealing' Israel's border from Egypt. Their life is not threatened by Egypt. they can be 'asylum seekers' in Egypt.
They are sneaking into Israel for a jobs to better their lives. I can certainly sympathise with them.
Comparing this to denial of entry to jews during the Holocaust is a bit vicious. Countries that did accept Jews during WW2 were not always too accommodating. Switzerland extradition Jews to Germany when caught crossing the borders from France! Once you managed to sneak into Switzerland, you spent your time in force labour camps. Considering the alternative, that was great.
Israel does not extradite these refugees to be exterminated anywhere.
They are sneaking into Israel for a jobs to better their lives. I can certainly sympathise with them.
Comparing this to denial of entry to jews during the Holocaust is a bit vicious. Countries that did accept Jews during WW2 were not always too accommodating. Switzerland extradition Jews to Germany when caught crossing the borders from France! Once you managed to sneak into Switzerland, you spent your time in force labour camps. Considering the alternative, that was great.
Israel does not extradite these refugees to be exterminated anywhere.
1
As an Israeli(and former US)Jew, I ask you to be a little less sensitive to charges of "self-hating" and a little more sensitive to the need of an isolated country the size of New Jersey to avoid a tidal wave of refugees from countries like Sudan and Eritrea-Muslim-majority countries that have long since proclaimed their enmity to Israel. The Sudanese are not trying to enter Israel because there is no place else safe for them. To get to Israel, they walk right through Muslim
Egypt, where they are already safe from the Sudanese government. Why is it Israel's responsibility to save people who are already safe? Why does no one seem to expect this from the Arabs?
arcaneone
Israel
Egypt, where they are already safe from the Sudanese government. Why is it Israel's responsibility to save people who are already safe? Why does no one seem to expect this from the Arabs?
arcaneone
Israel
1
Netanyahu is against a balance of power in the Middle East. He wants Israel to exist as a bully nation, above international law. Hence his opposition to ANY Iran deal.
47
If a person is anti-semetic if they do things not in the best interest of Israel are the people opposed to this agreement anti-semetic? For, it is in Israel's best interest to proceed down the diplomatic path than to stir up more military aggression in the Middle East. All the peoples of the Middle East should have the opportunity to live in peace and live in a democratic society regardless of their religious affiliation. Hardliners in Israel need not foment War with the expectation of neverending support from the United States.
25
It must be difficult for the Jewish population in the diaspora to realize that an Israeli prime minister is selling them and the rest of the world an unrealistic bill of goods. It is a shame that this realization came so long after the show of shows in the U.S. Congress . Maybe this time he will be placed in his proper and limited situation. It can only help us ...........
40
If Mr Cohen doesn't think that the United States interferes with and seeks to influence Israel's foreign policy and strategic decisions, he doesn't remember the First Gulf War very well. Israel -- a noncombatant -- was struck by dozens of Iraqi SCUD missiles, with many of them landing in her cities. Any state similarly under attack would respond. The USA pushed very hard for Israel not to respond. The Israeli air force stayed home.
53
That wasn't a "strategic" or "foreign policy" matter, it was common sense, given that with Israeli counterattacks the coalition may have started to unravel. You know this, right?
3
That's true, indeed. But the REASON Israel was asked to sit out the first Gulf war was in order for G. H.W. Bush to maintain the coalition with Arab states. This also maintained the international consensus that the war was not American Imperialism, but rather a United Nations (in particular Arab States) defending the sovereignty of an existing state.
Moreover, GHW Bush did ask the Israeli government to sit out the war, he did not circumvent the government and appeal to a small minority of the people.
Netanyahu is appealing only to the Jewish minority of the US. Consider the head of another governement (say Prime Minister of China or India or even an ally like Germany), appealing directly to Americans of Chinese, Indian or German descent (second generation or whatever) to lobby the US government. This would be bother any American, to be sure.
Furthermore, let us be clear that Netanyahu is head of government, not head of state. He speaks for his governing coalition - not the state of Israel as a whole - that's the role of the President of Israel.
Moreover, GHW Bush did ask the Israeli government to sit out the war, he did not circumvent the government and appeal to a small minority of the people.
Netanyahu is appealing only to the Jewish minority of the US. Consider the head of another governement (say Prime Minister of China or India or even an ally like Germany), appealing directly to Americans of Chinese, Indian or German descent (second generation or whatever) to lobby the US government. This would be bother any American, to be sure.
Furthermore, let us be clear that Netanyahu is head of government, not head of state. He speaks for his governing coalition - not the state of Israel as a whole - that's the role of the President of Israel.
3
That was pretty much like someone telling his little brother to stay out of a fight and let big brother handle it. The consequences, were little brother to attempt to join, would be most unfortunate - for little brother.
I suspect the Israelis may have been grateful to the Bush Administration for giving them cover to stay out of the conflict.
I suspect the Israelis may have been grateful to the Bush Administration for giving them cover to stay out of the conflict.
3
Stepping back from the rhetoric one needs to appreciate the stance of Benjamin Netanyahu as great theatre. He is not worried about Iran attacking Israel with one or even ten nuclear weapons as he knows very well the Iranian leadership is quite conservative and more concerned with internal tensions than a conflict with Israel. He may be somewhat concerned additional financial resources might enable Iran to assist Hezbollah more than in the past but it is not clear how much more money Hezbollah could absorb; no-one is going to buy a carrier fleet.
This is about 3 very different concerns:
A) It provides leverage for pressing the Obama Administration for more assistance, more weapons, more opportunities, and other support as a way of demonstrating his stance has tangible payoffs. If there were a real threat Netanyahu would not put a price on Israel's future.
B) It is great blackmail for US tolerance of Israeli expansionism and abuse of the Palestinians. He knows President Obama opts to try to control the possibility of a nuclear Iran rather than protect the Palestinians where he has little overt leverage. Keep the US focused on Tehran, not Gaza and the West Bank.
C) It is great exchange with supporters in Congress and elsewhere. He provides a plausible rationale for opposing the agreement, they assure him of a high-visibility embrace to use at home and abroad. Both elements can make Obama look bad without really worrying about Iran's nuclear capability. It's all theatre.
This is about 3 very different concerns:
A) It provides leverage for pressing the Obama Administration for more assistance, more weapons, more opportunities, and other support as a way of demonstrating his stance has tangible payoffs. If there were a real threat Netanyahu would not put a price on Israel's future.
B) It is great blackmail for US tolerance of Israeli expansionism and abuse of the Palestinians. He knows President Obama opts to try to control the possibility of a nuclear Iran rather than protect the Palestinians where he has little overt leverage. Keep the US focused on Tehran, not Gaza and the West Bank.
C) It is great exchange with supporters in Congress and elsewhere. He provides a plausible rationale for opposing the agreement, they assure him of a high-visibility embrace to use at home and abroad. Both elements can make Obama look bad without really worrying about Iran's nuclear capability. It's all theatre.
26
Netanyahu wants to be center stage on the world stage.
Agree with much but "plausible"? One must argue that this agreement does what it says, stop a nuke for at least 10 years or longer or it allows them to get one in six months plus sanction relief.
Only argument being that makes sense is Trump. He's simply making the case that he's a better negotiator and on all fronts will get better "deals". It's hard to argue against this deal on merit and even Trump is smart enough not to make that mistake. He just states he'd be better at enforcing the deal.
I'm happy my draft numbers will be high as this is all crazy.
Only argument being that makes sense is Trump. He's simply making the case that he's a better negotiator and on all fronts will get better "deals". It's hard to argue against this deal on merit and even Trump is smart enough not to make that mistake. He just states he'd be better at enforcing the deal.
I'm happy my draft numbers will be high as this is all crazy.
"Don't bother me with the facts, son, I've already made up my mind." Said Foghorn Leghorn a Warner Brothers animated cartoon chicken.
That's, to a tee, my impression of Mr Netanyahu and others including Republicans regarding their decision to just saying no to the Iran deal--and just about everything else Obama.
And it's because of their closed minds and habitual Obama obstructionism that I personally give as much credence to what comes out of of their collective mouths as I would Mr. Foghorn Leghorn.
Reaching any serious conclusion based on bias without a solid understanding of facts, is not only frustrating but also potentially dangerous as a blind drive to reject the Iran deal would I believe turn out to be.
That's, to a tee, my impression of Mr Netanyahu and others including Republicans regarding their decision to just saying no to the Iran deal--and just about everything else Obama.
And it's because of their closed minds and habitual Obama obstructionism that I personally give as much credence to what comes out of of their collective mouths as I would Mr. Foghorn Leghorn.
Reaching any serious conclusion based on bias without a solid understanding of facts, is not only frustrating but also potentially dangerous as a blind drive to reject the Iran deal would I believe turn out to be.
21
And people like Scott Walker going to Israel and trying to schmooze with Netanyahu don't really help the situation. Many Jewish people here in the United States (and in Wisconsin) have no use for Walker.
17
it was so simple as taking candy away from a baby if we only followed the blueprint . China did it. Why can't we do it? Successful capitalists reaping rich rewards while we keep the people happy content not in the way of our success strategies for our modern world. Look how now China can patiently wait for the death of the Dali Lama to choose the next one.
Our problem was not ISIS but IRAN . Look how easy it was to remove the elected ruler from Egypt and bring back the General. In time the ISIS Caliphate could be removed by poison if we lost patience or by his death and we could appoint a new one fast friends with the Kings of Saudi Arabia.
Iran is the problem. We can't control Iran unless we make the right conditions for them to go by and put their King on the Throne under our control
As America moves closer to China the people will know they do not have our abilities to be successful capitalist as we are. Every resistance wiped away , and let them be grateful they are not ruled like Egypt , Saudi Arabia , or China and let all the rebels who want to rebel flee to Alaska as the world will see them as the new ISIS and at the right time we will appoint a Messiah for them to keep them under our control.
But a problem has now surfaced with Turkey claiming to wage war with our ISIS creation. What to do?
Our problem was not ISIS but IRAN . Look how easy it was to remove the elected ruler from Egypt and bring back the General. In time the ISIS Caliphate could be removed by poison if we lost patience or by his death and we could appoint a new one fast friends with the Kings of Saudi Arabia.
Iran is the problem. We can't control Iran unless we make the right conditions for them to go by and put their King on the Throne under our control
As America moves closer to China the people will know they do not have our abilities to be successful capitalist as we are. Every resistance wiped away , and let them be grateful they are not ruled like Egypt , Saudi Arabia , or China and let all the rebels who want to rebel flee to Alaska as the world will see them as the new ISIS and at the right time we will appoint a Messiah for them to keep them under our control.
But a problem has now surfaced with Turkey claiming to wage war with our ISIS creation. What to do?
1
Incoherent ramblings of a delusional mind....
I completely agree. Failure to approve this deal would be a disaster, not just for Israelis or American Jews, but for all of us. Shame on the Republicans, many of whom surely know what the right thing to do is, for opposing this just because it's Obama's, and shame on Netanyahu for all of his inappropriate and ill-conceived actions against this deal.
31
Netanyahu’s intrusiveness in U.S. politics is nothing more than the placement by a national leader of the interests of his nation, as he perceives them, above those of all other interests—including civility. One might as well chide Vladimir Putin for being so rambunctious.
Sen. Levin’s belief that the Iran deal represents “the best way to achieve the goal of preventing Iran from advancing toward a nuclear weapon, so making the Middle East and Israel far more secure” is valid only to those who believe, as Mr. Obama apparently does, that there is NO alternative to war that is more “outrageous” and unacceptable as war.
If you foreclose the possibility of war as an alternative to seeing Iran build a bomb – and let’s not be children, this administration has accepted that Iran will develop a bomb and delivery vehicles, and has said so for years as an exculpation for dealing with them – because you regard war as being so “outrageous” that it can’t be contemplated under any circumstances short of an invasion of U.S. territory, then what’s the point in maintaining an immense military and making at least an ATTEMPT at keeping relatively stable a world on which we depend for our own prosperity in the teeth of DEstabilizing influences that are numerous and intense?
Iraq, Syria and Iran. The world is melting, Iran will get a bomb, likely FAR sooner than Mr. Obama claims, and all because we twice elected a president who will suffer any consequence so long as he avoids war.
Sen. Levin’s belief that the Iran deal represents “the best way to achieve the goal of preventing Iran from advancing toward a nuclear weapon, so making the Middle East and Israel far more secure” is valid only to those who believe, as Mr. Obama apparently does, that there is NO alternative to war that is more “outrageous” and unacceptable as war.
If you foreclose the possibility of war as an alternative to seeing Iran build a bomb – and let’s not be children, this administration has accepted that Iran will develop a bomb and delivery vehicles, and has said so for years as an exculpation for dealing with them – because you regard war as being so “outrageous” that it can’t be contemplated under any circumstances short of an invasion of U.S. territory, then what’s the point in maintaining an immense military and making at least an ATTEMPT at keeping relatively stable a world on which we depend for our own prosperity in the teeth of DEstabilizing influences that are numerous and intense?
Iraq, Syria and Iran. The world is melting, Iran will get a bomb, likely FAR sooner than Mr. Obama claims, and all because we twice elected a president who will suffer any consequence so long as he avoids war.
4
Such nonsense I've never heard. What you want Mr. Luettgen, is war; pure and simple. If your point of view wins out on this issue, I hope you and your sons and daughters are the first to don the uniform and equipment needed to fight Iranians on Iranian soil. Then, I suspect, you'll be happy.
I am curious what you think about israel's large nuclear weapons stockpile and refusal to join the NPT?
Mr. Luettgen---would you prefer a leader who would suffer any consequence if it achieves war?? And as an American, why are you so comfortable with a foreign leader injecting himself into our political process in such a heavy handed, melodramatic manner? And finally---must the best interests of Israel take primacy over what is best for THIS nation?? If your answer is yes, I would consider a change of citizenship.
If you're a supporter of the deal, then let your congressional representative know it, as I did last weekend. As a New York native who moved to California a long time ago, I was very, very disappointed by Chuck Schumer. But I think we can expect more such disappointments if we don't flood these politicians' offices with letters of support for diplomacy, not endless war, in the Middle East.
27
The danger with Cohen's line "Most young Iranians no more believe in 'Death to America'.." assumes that the youth in Iran have great influence on the politics of their country and can sway the conscience of the autocratic theocracy. This is patently false. The Grand Ayatollah and his chosen minions are the runs controlling thought, strategy and policy. Their views are unambiguously anti-American, and have been since 1979. The cynic in me believes Iran will follow the rules of the deal until they get all their frozen money back, and then expand dramatically their militarism both within Iran and through their terrorist proxies in the Middle East.
11
The realist in me sees the absurdity in your views and is glad that you don't determine our policy.
If you are that concerned you should volunteer for the IDF. We've done enough of their dirty work.
They may not now have influence but they will in 10 years and we ought to be cognizant of that.
Twenty years of Bibi crying wolf
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/03/02/brief-history-netanyahu-cr...
after being implicated in a nuclear smuggling ring
http://original.antiwar.com/smith-grant/2012/07/03/netanyahu-worked-insi...
after testifying, with great panache, that there was 'no doubt' that Hussein, the new New Hitler, was a madman who was developing nukes {he was not}.
A man who has pursued a policy of building Jewish only roads and colonies, patrolled by right wing fundamentlists who burn toddlers to death and go unpunished, who built more of his own nukes, and committed a series of war crimes attested to by his own military...
The question is - why is ANYONE taking this man seriously?
As for Israel - let Americans vote on the "unbreakable bond" and the free billions from Uncle Sugar and see what happens.
I support a strong and secure Israel, but not this absurd situation of a tiny foreign ethnarchy maintaining a brutal occupation and colonization policy based on racist myths - on *my* dime.
Anyone with evidence, meanwhile, that Iran is working on or intends to work on a nuclear weapon to defend itself, perhaps, from the Anglo-Zionist war machine... ought to let Mossad know.
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/03/02/brief-history-netanyahu-cr...
after being implicated in a nuclear smuggling ring
http://original.antiwar.com/smith-grant/2012/07/03/netanyahu-worked-insi...
after testifying, with great panache, that there was 'no doubt' that Hussein, the new New Hitler, was a madman who was developing nukes {he was not}.
A man who has pursued a policy of building Jewish only roads and colonies, patrolled by right wing fundamentlists who burn toddlers to death and go unpunished, who built more of his own nukes, and committed a series of war crimes attested to by his own military...
The question is - why is ANYONE taking this man seriously?
As for Israel - let Americans vote on the "unbreakable bond" and the free billions from Uncle Sugar and see what happens.
I support a strong and secure Israel, but not this absurd situation of a tiny foreign ethnarchy maintaining a brutal occupation and colonization policy based on racist myths - on *my* dime.
Anyone with evidence, meanwhile, that Iran is working on or intends to work on a nuclear weapon to defend itself, perhaps, from the Anglo-Zionist war machine... ought to let Mossad know.
14
Why would Iran come back to the table when the Russians, Chinese and other "allies" resume doing business? We don't do business with Iran now so not having us back won't hurt much. To cite Schumer is a joke. His core constituency is made up of hard line zionists and his loyalty leans to Israel rather than his own country.
Mr. Cohen conveniently chooses two Jewish Americans and a Jewish member of Congress to make his case in doing the President's bidding to support the nuclear deal with Iran (he conveniently did not mention Senator Schumer (also Jewish), who meticulously laid out why this deal is not good for the United States or the world). With all due respect to Mr. Cohen, no deal is better than a deal which is so flawed that even the President of France's chief diplomat suggested that Congress should vote the deal down. Jacques Audibert, the senior diplomatic adviser to France's President said if Congress votes down the deal, "there will be some saber-rattling and some chaos for a year or two, but in the end nothing will change and Iran will come back to the table to negotiate again and that would be to our advantage.” In essence, he said that if the Congress voted it down, then a better deal could be negotiated. History has demonstrated that over the years the Senate has required changes in more than 200 submitted treaties before giving its consent. Although this agreement is not a 'treaty', there is precedent to review and make changes to agreements. I read all 159 pages of the agreement twice. Anyone who reads it will see the flaws which just permeate the entire document. Bottom line is that with this agreement, Iran is given the green light towards becoming a nuclear threshold state.
7
According to other press reports that I have seen, Mr. Audibert denies ever having said anything of the kind.
Thank you, Roger Cohen, for this straight-forward and totaling sensible editorial. As Ms. Lippy says, it's common sense to see that we (and Iran plus the international community, and Israel) will have plenty of time and room to (a) see how the deal is enforced and (b) extend it, make it permanent in the future, including resolving the "flaws" it may have. The world, the U.S., Europe, Russia, the Israel will be much safer with this agreement. I understand Israel's very real fears, but Israel will be safer, with at least its "existential threat" from an Iranian bomb removed, and the U.S. will in any case continue to back Israel to the hilt on all security concerns. Iran's rivals in the region (Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia in particular) should face no internal pressures to develop their own nuclear weapon. The whole deal is so sensible, and I would say heroic given the adversarial position of the Iranian leader, that it's hard to give much credence to the virtually automatic "no" reaction of our own Republican party. Why is there not some support by at least some Republicans for the deal? If it were not negotiated by "Obama" and the Democrats, but instead by a Republican president, would there still be the same "no" reaction?
7
Sorry for the typo in the first sentence, which should read "totally" sensible.
Iran continues to spin its centrifuges. Iran continues to support Hezbollah, Al Nusra, Alqaeda, Assad and other known terrorist groups and organizations. Iran still announces that it will annihilate the Jews and wipe the Jewish state off the map. Iran continues to help those who attack American in Iraq. Iran is still seeking to import and export arms including sophisticated missiles both offensive and defensive.
The best deal and the possibility of attaining the best deal were swept off the table when Mr. Obama decided to negotiate and grant concession after concession. America got nothing. Iran got everything including $150 billion with which to purchase more arms.
What will definitely happen next is crystal clear. As Iran continues to advance toward assembling it's first bomb, the Israelis, not the Americans, will launch a pre-emptive strike against Iran. Instead of a pin-point, limited strike it will be broad in scope to destroy not just centrifuges but to also destroy all of the infrastructure that supports the Iranian bomb quest. The result will be catastrophic war in the Mid-East.
Mr. Obama thinks he's achieved a landmark deal to prevent Iran from building a nuclear bomb. He's dreaming. Iran will come close to succeeding and Israel, facing destruction will act. Mr. Obama has guaranteed war.
The best deal and the possibility of attaining the best deal were swept off the table when Mr. Obama decided to negotiate and grant concession after concession. America got nothing. Iran got everything including $150 billion with which to purchase more arms.
What will definitely happen next is crystal clear. As Iran continues to advance toward assembling it's first bomb, the Israelis, not the Americans, will launch a pre-emptive strike against Iran. Instead of a pin-point, limited strike it will be broad in scope to destroy not just centrifuges but to also destroy all of the infrastructure that supports the Iranian bomb quest. The result will be catastrophic war in the Mid-East.
Mr. Obama thinks he's achieved a landmark deal to prevent Iran from building a nuclear bomb. He's dreaming. Iran will come close to succeeding and Israel, facing destruction will act. Mr. Obama has guaranteed war.
7
Then let Israel act. It's their backyard, not ours.
Are you even familiar with the terms of the deal? And several Nobel Laureates say that the verification procedures are good ones.
It's hard to fathom why there is so much opposition to Iran having a bomb when rogue nations such as North Korea and Pakistan can have it. Israel uses the pretext that a nuclear armed Iran is an existential threat when Israel itself has the stockpile of nuclear arsenal that can completely destroy Iran perhaps 10 times over. If any two nations that could face the most immediate threat from Iran becoming nuclear they should be Russia and China who also happen to face insurgencies or revolts from Islamic groups. The fact that they have been signatories to this deal should speak volume of its merit. The more Netanyahu lambasts the deal, the more he sounds like a crying baby. Americans should be smart enough not to be fooled by politicians and interest groups who had previously led this country to a disastrous war with Iraq.
28
No one in the free world is exactly happy that N. Korea and Pakistan have nuclear weapons. The difference is that Iran has been threatening for years to commit genocide against Israel.
I still don't understand why the USA, Russia, China, Britain, France, India, Pakistan, Israel, North Korea (apologies to any country I left out) can have The Bomb, but that it is so important that Iran not have the bomb. Most of the members of the nuclear club have engaged in horrible aggression and human rights violations. Apart from providing assistance to its proxies (something that all the the club members with the possible exception of NK have done), Iran has not under the current regime launched any aggressive wars.
All that said it is nice to limit proliferation, and if this delays Iran's possession of a bomb, well fine. If not, so be it. I don't like it, but I don't like all the other thugs having the bomb either.
All that said it is nice to limit proliferation, and if this delays Iran's possession of a bomb, well fine. If not, so be it. I don't like it, but I don't like all the other thugs having the bomb either.
12
This deal trades real stuff: money and end to sanctions, for unreal one: Iran's promises. Of course there is no evidence that one can trust them. If the sanctions continued and were maximized, hopefully the tired Iranians would end the ayatollahs' regime and join the family of democratic nations. However, if Obama would not sign the deal, our "friends": France, China, etc. would happily end the sanctions on their own in order to get lucrative business with Iran and their cheap oil. So, we are stuck.
4
The deal is verifiable and we can always opt out, even respond with an air strike if they lie.
"there's no evidence" they are working on a nuke either.
as to trust - do you think we should trust israel?
why?
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2014/11/23/israel-americas-biggest-fr...
because they're jews and jews are always honest but muslims lie?
Got racism?
as to trust - do you think we should trust israel?
why?
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2014/11/23/israel-americas-biggest-fr...
because they're jews and jews are always honest but muslims lie?
Got racism?
Recently RAND published a study of the benefits and costs of a two state solution. The study concluded that Israel estimated the benefits to Israel to be over $170 billion. The benefits and costs of the Iran deal may not be as easy to estimate, but don't the experts think it's a net benefit. Why, then, doesn't Netanyahu support the Iran deal and work harder to find a two state solution? Why does he permit enlargement of the settlements? I think he has the same aims as the settlers and is willing to risk permanent damage to Israel's welfare to achieve those aims.
14
How is Israel supposed to make any reasonably secure deal with the "Palestinians" who in the 20-odd years since Oslo have yet to produce a
government that is legitimate even by their own standards? "Let's pretend" is a
kids' game.
arcaneone
Israel
government that is legitimate even by their own standards? "Let's pretend" is a
kids' game.
arcaneone
Israel
Mr Cohen draws an unfair inference about Netanyahu's involvement in the political debate in the US. Other than determining who's a Jew, which Jews should keep their eye on in an increasingly fundamentalist Israel, there's not much in the knesset that would warrant US interference. This deal clearly involves Israel and its existence and it's reasonable for Israel to weigh in. In 1940-41 when the US was debating entering WWII, Britain waged a low visibility effort to get the US to enter the war in spite of considerable anti-British sentiment that dated back to the thought that the US was connived into WWI to protect and anachronistic British empire. The problem is not Israel's involvement in the US political system, but rather Netanyahu's approach to it. He clearly stepped over the line is support of his buddy Romney. However, will there be a lasting bitterness about this between the US and Israel? Unlikely. Facts on the ground concerning real military, intelligence, and economic cooperation are far too significant. So, really this as much about symbolism and rhetoric vs. actual issues.
6
I think you underestimate how disgusted Americans are with Netanyahu's efforts to undermine the President of the United States.
I for one, have totally changed my view of Israel
I for one, have totally changed my view of Israel
Has anyone highlighted Donald Trump's very rational answer to Chuck Todd about this deal? We all mock the guy when he says stupid things, and we mock him a lot. But he said something more rational, even thoughtful, than ANY of the other Republican candidates, that needs to be talked about at least half as much as his bloviation.
1
Sooooo, what did he say?
Do you have some secret translator when you listen to Donald Trump? I have yet to hear a credible response from him on any subject, only bombast and unsubstantiated blather.
A true patriot never puts the interests of a foreign country above his/her own. Any US citizen who puts the interest of a foreign country, whether that country is Israel, Mexico, China, or [insert country name], above our own should consider where their true loyalties lie, and whether they belong in America at all. If you don't like the Iran deal on its merits, fine. If your primary issue is based on some sort of theoretical threat to Israel (a foreign country), your loyalty is in question as you are saying Israel is more important than the interests and well being of America. These folks need to do some serious soul searching, and should take a look at the country stamped on their passports.
49
It is time to sever this view with Israel as deserving some special interest. I am disgusted by the spending of money to buy all the politicians voting against this deal. I have friends doing this and they are wrong. They are pushing an agenda which is bad for the US and also bad for Israel. Are these Americans working against American interests? I do believe they are.
There is so much to parse in this discussion:
1. Given their history in such matters, Jews everywhere have a legitimate right to doubt this deal with Iran. As humans our emotions trump all reason, until we find a way to read those emotions and understand what they are really "telling us".
In this case, supporters of the deal have to ask their Jewish doubters what sort of deal they would accept. Is there ANY deal that would not give them that sick feeling? It will not win everyone over, but it will give something to reflect rationally.
2. Jews who are in favor of the deal, like everyone else, are counting on the younger generation of Iranians to make their country more democratic, less theocratic, and more tolerant. That is a big if, but given trends in the last 25 years (ISIS notwithstanding) there is cause for cautious optimism on that front.
3. Mr. Netanyahu seems to be working very hard to isolate Israel from her allies. He has forced doubts on Jewish commitment to true Democracy at a time when the West is trying to impress the benefits of Democracy to his neighbors. With settlements, occupation, and overt racist campaign tactics, he is making Israel's brave experiment with liberal democracy endangered. The American Right has weird fantasies of Armageddon, but what are Mr. Netanyahu and his supporters trying to achieve?
This deal buys time, and legal credibility. If we must indeed bomb Iran, it will be with cause and not trumped up charges.
1. Given their history in such matters, Jews everywhere have a legitimate right to doubt this deal with Iran. As humans our emotions trump all reason, until we find a way to read those emotions and understand what they are really "telling us".
In this case, supporters of the deal have to ask their Jewish doubters what sort of deal they would accept. Is there ANY deal that would not give them that sick feeling? It will not win everyone over, but it will give something to reflect rationally.
2. Jews who are in favor of the deal, like everyone else, are counting on the younger generation of Iranians to make their country more democratic, less theocratic, and more tolerant. That is a big if, but given trends in the last 25 years (ISIS notwithstanding) there is cause for cautious optimism on that front.
3. Mr. Netanyahu seems to be working very hard to isolate Israel from her allies. He has forced doubts on Jewish commitment to true Democracy at a time when the West is trying to impress the benefits of Democracy to his neighbors. With settlements, occupation, and overt racist campaign tactics, he is making Israel's brave experiment with liberal democracy endangered. The American Right has weird fantasies of Armageddon, but what are Mr. Netanyahu and his supporters trying to achieve?
This deal buys time, and legal credibility. If we must indeed bomb Iran, it will be with cause and not trumped up charges.
14
The whole thrust of Netanyahu, Abelman and AIPAC to undermine the Iran treaty is to attack the corrupt heart of the US gov't; the US Congress. Netanyahu never shies away from ridicules hyperventilated hyperbole. That is the mark of the man. Many people in Israel realize that and certainly many American Jews do as well. The threat of Iran is wildly overstated by the Obama Administration. The idea that Iran is the center of International terrorism is totally unfounded. Chuck Schumer has diminished his stature in the Senate with his lame opposition to the treaty.
26
Schumer just wants the money. He has shown himself to be beneath contempt.
Every time Netanyahu opens his mouth and starts ranting and raving I wonder what new created "fact" is he trying to cover-up. If he gets the world all lathered up over the Iran negotiations then we won't be so quick to notice some new project he's building or some new deal he's making....
24
Netanyahu is in danger of doing lasting damage to the relationship between Israel and the democratic party and American liberals in general.
There could come a time when we throw up our hands and let Israel go it alone.
For me that time approaches quickly.
The republican party is no friend to the Jewish people, they support Israel only because it aligns with their fantasy about an approaching apocalypse, the goal of which allows the destruction of Israel anyway. The only difference; it will be the hand of Jesus instead of the hand of Allah.
There could come a time when we throw up our hands and let Israel go it alone.
For me that time approaches quickly.
The republican party is no friend to the Jewish people, they support Israel only because it aligns with their fantasy about an approaching apocalypse, the goal of which allows the destruction of Israel anyway. The only difference; it will be the hand of Jesus instead of the hand of Allah.
29
Roger Cohen is not a voice Jews anywhere in the world should take seriously.
He is one of the premier voices of the growing 'blame Israel' media gang. He is a strong supporter of J Street; a group that masquerades as pro-Israel, pro-peace, but if one examines closely, has never uttered a word favoring Israel.
He never seriously considers the threats and dangers faced by Israelis, and would have them give in to all Palestinian demands for territory without any assurances of long-term peace.
I make these accusations against him, even though I warily support the Iran deal, realizing it is weak, and has serious flaws in implementation.
However; for Cohen and others to state that the alternative is war with Iran, and that Netanyahu wants this war, is brazen anti-Israel bias.
He is one of the premier voices of the growing 'blame Israel' media gang. He is a strong supporter of J Street; a group that masquerades as pro-Israel, pro-peace, but if one examines closely, has never uttered a word favoring Israel.
He never seriously considers the threats and dangers faced by Israelis, and would have them give in to all Palestinian demands for territory without any assurances of long-term peace.
I make these accusations against him, even though I warily support the Iran deal, realizing it is weak, and has serious flaws in implementation.
However; for Cohen and others to state that the alternative is war with Iran, and that Netanyahu wants this war, is brazen anti-Israel bias.
8
So, if the deal is not approved, and Iran goes forward with enrichment, what do you think Israel will do???
I submit that it will try to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities.
I submit that it will try to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities.
Canadian Jews are much more pro Netanyahu because of Harper. So most likely most are against this deal. I am disappointed with the shift of Canadian government under Harper to a militaristic one rather than its peace keeping past.
Bad mouth Cohen all you like. I think he is 100% right regardless. Of course the only alternative is a war, and, yes, Netenyahu wants one. He has been itching to strike Iran for years. This isn't even news. You are a willing idiot.
I am an American Jew in full support of the Iran deal. I have visited Israel and seen firsthand the strife that exists within the country itself, outside enemies notwithstanding. What I know to be true is that the Netanyahu regime is controlled heavily by the Haredi, the ultra Orthodox, in Israel. Secular Israeils with the education and means, are leaving Israel, so that they do not have to live under the unreasonable laws and restrictions, not to mention the high taxes to support the Haredi, that make their lives miserable Mostly, I resent Netanyahu's interference with our President and his alliance with the right wing Republicans in our country.
36
Israeli religious recently burned a baby to death and stabbed a teenage girl at a gay pride parade.
Since when is the litmus test for whether or not a deal should be taken its achievability rather than what it achieves?
The deal itself does not meet President Obama's own, oft stated goal - preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Instead it provides them with a blueprint to become a legitimate nuclear power in a little more than a decade.
Every single benefit cited by Mr. Cohen and other supporters of this dangerous deal are only valid if Iran abides by the terms, which is certainly not guaranteed by the lackluster inspection terms in this agreement.
Make no mistake, rejecting this deal in its current form is not a rejection of peace, because this is not a peace agreement. It does not address Iran's regional aggression, human rights violations, or even the plight of Americans being held prisoner in Iranian jails. In this deal, Iran gets their money, and gives us their word. That’s it.
There is no drumbeat for war with Iran coming from Israel or Republicans, instead, there is a concerted effort by Obama loyalists to foist a hastily cobbled, loophole-laden, toothless agreement on the world for political gain and personal legacy.
The deal itself does not meet President Obama's own, oft stated goal - preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Instead it provides them with a blueprint to become a legitimate nuclear power in a little more than a decade.
Every single benefit cited by Mr. Cohen and other supporters of this dangerous deal are only valid if Iran abides by the terms, which is certainly not guaranteed by the lackluster inspection terms in this agreement.
Make no mistake, rejecting this deal in its current form is not a rejection of peace, because this is not a peace agreement. It does not address Iran's regional aggression, human rights violations, or even the plight of Americans being held prisoner in Iranian jails. In this deal, Iran gets their money, and gives us their word. That’s it.
There is no drumbeat for war with Iran coming from Israel or Republicans, instead, there is a concerted effort by Obama loyalists to foist a hastily cobbled, loophole-laden, toothless agreement on the world for political gain and personal legacy.
7
Of course there is no drumbeat for war from the opposers I'd the Aidan deal. Even though Obama clearly and logically delineated the domino effect of events that would lead to war, the
Gary-
You have apparently not read the agreement which specifies that Iran must take all identified steps to dismantle it's nuclear weapons industry before the sanctions are lifted.
You have apparently not read the agreement which specifies that Iran must take all identified steps to dismantle it's nuclear weapons industry before the sanctions are lifted.
Not so fast!
First of all, what alternatives to this deal (such as it is) are there? Last time I looked, none. Zilch. Nada. Bupkis.
Second...Notyetyouyahoo (as has been mused not only by me, but others, whether by anecdote, or documented fact) would love nothing more than to go to war with Iran - using American ground troops, while leading
from behind.
Finally....don't blame Obama for the testy realtionship with Bibi. He brought it on
himself; between his meddling in American politics (his publicized preference for Romney in '12; and his accepting Boehner's invitation to
speak before congress, as a snub to Obama, he's not helping his cause at all.
Putting it in simple terms Benjamin Netenyahu is equal parts interloper, chickenhawk, and someome who badly needs to shut up.
First of all, what alternatives to this deal (such as it is) are there? Last time I looked, none. Zilch. Nada. Bupkis.
Second...Notyetyouyahoo (as has been mused not only by me, but others, whether by anecdote, or documented fact) would love nothing more than to go to war with Iran - using American ground troops, while leading
from behind.
Finally....don't blame Obama for the testy realtionship with Bibi. He brought it on
himself; between his meddling in American politics (his publicized preference for Romney in '12; and his accepting Boehner's invitation to
speak before congress, as a snub to Obama, he's not helping his cause at all.
Putting it in simple terms Benjamin Netenyahu is equal parts interloper, chickenhawk, and someome who badly needs to shut up.
1
As with any other group, whether it's Blacks, gays, women, immigrants, or whatever, there are Jewish organizations which claim to speak for the entire group. And, as with other groups, the truth is often far from the self-serving claims of these organizations, which are often and largely power aggrandizing bureaucracies.
The Conference of Jewish Majors, Sheldon Adelson, and Benjamin Netanyahu would very much like to perpetuate the myth that they speak for American Jews. The reality is to the contrary, as their fear of J Street -- almost as great as their fear of Iran -- makes only too apparent.
Yes, most American Jews support Israel as an independent country. But, that's as far as the agreement goes, and it most certainly does not mean the large majority of Jews support any given, let alone Netanyahu's, government.
The Conference of Jewish Majors, Sheldon Adelson, and Benjamin Netanyahu would very much like to perpetuate the myth that they speak for American Jews. The reality is to the contrary, as their fear of J Street -- almost as great as their fear of Iran -- makes only too apparent.
Yes, most American Jews support Israel as an independent country. But, that's as far as the agreement goes, and it most certainly does not mean the large majority of Jews support any given, let alone Netanyahu's, government.
26
When considering Netanyahu and American politics, perhaps additional insight may be obtained with this web search:
ron dermer republican party
Ron Dermer is the American born Israeli Ambassador to the United States.
ron dermer republican party
Ron Dermer is the American born Israeli Ambassador to the United States.
11
you can also gain insight into Jewish Privilege by looking into Martin Indyk - who was granted US citizenship 10 days before being appointed ambassador for Israel.
http://www.wrmea.org/1993-march/clinton-s-indyk-appointment-one-of-many-...
Could Abe Foxman himself claim that he, or that other triple-citizen, now 2nd in charge at the Fed, Stan Fischer
http://irmep.org/fischer_aipac.htm
Really have America's best interests as his primary concern?
what we have is a Jewish community that gives a disproproportionate amount of money to both of our two parties, plus the "Christian" Zionists, fooled by the Scoffield Bible for Warmongers, plus guys like Adelson and hundreds of large donors whose concern for Israel is the number one issue...
and they are listening to Bibi, who is an inveterate liar who wants to smash Israel's neighbors and begin the expansion process.
Iraq was base don lies, Syria and Libya were, and Iran will be.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/greater-israel-the-zionist-plan-for-the-mid...
did I miss anything?
http://www.wrmea.org/1993-march/clinton-s-indyk-appointment-one-of-many-...
Could Abe Foxman himself claim that he, or that other triple-citizen, now 2nd in charge at the Fed, Stan Fischer
http://irmep.org/fischer_aipac.htm
Really have America's best interests as his primary concern?
what we have is a Jewish community that gives a disproproportionate amount of money to both of our two parties, plus the "Christian" Zionists, fooled by the Scoffield Bible for Warmongers, plus guys like Adelson and hundreds of large donors whose concern for Israel is the number one issue...
and they are listening to Bibi, who is an inveterate liar who wants to smash Israel's neighbors and begin the expansion process.
Iraq was base don lies, Syria and Libya were, and Iran will be.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/greater-israel-the-zionist-plan-for-the-mid...
did I miss anything?
If you want an insight to Ron Dermer, his interview with Fareed Zakaria yesterday provides it. Full blooded ideologue, doesn't need facts, already has the answers.
The majority of the American Jews support the deal and the support for the deal is higher among American Jews than the general population. Unfortunately, the massive and well-funded campaign of misinformation by AIPAC and the unprecedented meddlesomeness of Benjamin Netanyahu in US domestic politics may cause reasonable people to doubt the ability of American Jews to defend US interest. If the deal collapses, the world will blame the State of Israel and Jews. I do not see how this is in the long-term interest of Jews or the State of Israel.
63
You are correct. This is an interesting article which supports you argument.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/on-the-iran-deal-american-jewish...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/on-the-iran-deal-american-jewish...
2
It is frightening to hear of the potentially lethal situations that might arise if the deal is rejected. It shows how combustible and fragile the "peace" gained from the deal will be.
8
Nancy Coleman
CA
Less lethal than the more or less certainty of a war should the deal not go ahead?
CA
Less lethal than the more or less certainty of a war should the deal not go ahead?
11
What do the knowlegable folks say?
24 of the countries top scientists with degrees in physics and many who helped develop the nuclear weapons have sent a letter supporting the deal.
The body of the letter praises the technical features of the Iran accord and offers tacit rebuttals to recent criticisms on such issues as verification and provisions for investigating what specialists see as evidence of Iran’s past research on nuclear arms.
The deal’s plan for resolving disputes, the letter says, greatly mitigates “concerns about clandestine activities.” It hails the 24-day cap on Iranian delays to site investigations as “unprecedented,” adding that the agreement “will allow effective challenge inspection for the suspected activities of greatest concern.”
It also welcomes as without precedent the deal’s explicit banning of research on nuclear weapons “rather than only their manufacture,” as established in the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty, the top arms-control agreement of the nuclear age.
find that the deal includes important long-term verification procedures that last until 2040, and others that last indefinitely.”
Ten members of Congress who have accessed the most sensitive information about Iran's nuclear program believe the recent deal to cap that program will work --
"Our work on the Intelligence Committee and the insights it has given us into Iran's nuclear program -- the confidence it gives us that this agreement cuts off Iran's access to the bomb,
24 of the countries top scientists with degrees in physics and many who helped develop the nuclear weapons have sent a letter supporting the deal.
The body of the letter praises the technical features of the Iran accord and offers tacit rebuttals to recent criticisms on such issues as verification and provisions for investigating what specialists see as evidence of Iran’s past research on nuclear arms.
The deal’s plan for resolving disputes, the letter says, greatly mitigates “concerns about clandestine activities.” It hails the 24-day cap on Iranian delays to site investigations as “unprecedented,” adding that the agreement “will allow effective challenge inspection for the suspected activities of greatest concern.”
It also welcomes as without precedent the deal’s explicit banning of research on nuclear weapons “rather than only their manufacture,” as established in the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty, the top arms-control agreement of the nuclear age.
find that the deal includes important long-term verification procedures that last until 2040, and others that last indefinitely.”
Ten members of Congress who have accessed the most sensitive information about Iran's nuclear program believe the recent deal to cap that program will work --
"Our work on the Intelligence Committee and the insights it has given us into Iran's nuclear program -- the confidence it gives us that this agreement cuts off Iran's access to the bomb,
47
The duty of all Americans is first to the United States. PM Netanyau should take care of his own country. It is outrageous that dozens of Republican lawmakers (including my representatives) get flown to Israel as part of a propaganda package.
The leading scientists of this country including several Nobel Laureates consider the verification measures of the deal to be good ones. Some 100 former ambassadors familiar with the intricacies of international negotiations consider the deal to be a good one. Leading former military officers familiar with the Middle East consider the deal to be a good one. The international partners of the United States and the United Nations have all agreed to the deal.
The only voices in opposition of an international deal worked out across years by dedicated negotiators are the war mongers and Israel lobbyists -- the very same group with much the same outrageous claims that created the catastrophic Iraq War.
It is deeply shameful and outrageous that Sen. Schumer betrayed his country, and echoed the lies of the lobbyists instead of the calm reason of the scientists, diplomats, and military personnel. This deal accomplishes a lot, and other options are always open.
The leading scientists of this country including several Nobel Laureates consider the verification measures of the deal to be good ones. Some 100 former ambassadors familiar with the intricacies of international negotiations consider the deal to be a good one. Leading former military officers familiar with the Middle East consider the deal to be a good one. The international partners of the United States and the United Nations have all agreed to the deal.
The only voices in opposition of an international deal worked out across years by dedicated negotiators are the war mongers and Israel lobbyists -- the very same group with much the same outrageous claims that created the catastrophic Iraq War.
It is deeply shameful and outrageous that Sen. Schumer betrayed his country, and echoed the lies of the lobbyists instead of the calm reason of the scientists, diplomats, and military personnel. This deal accomplishes a lot, and other options are always open.
86
The Iran deal is, indeed, the best we can have, diplomacy trumping war anytime, provided we can verify that the agreement is followed; take the deal away, and everybody will repent losing the chance to make sure nothing 'out of the ordinary' occurs. What is most galling is the fact that the republicans have condemned the deal even before knowing its content and value, making them hypocrites at best, spiteful at worst (towards Obama), a shameful willful ignorance, tremendously dangerous to all of us, Israel included. Where did our decency go? And if no decency, common sense? And if no common sense, reality and truth?
23
Our "do nothing" congress members have nothing better to do than be puppet of Prime Minister of a foreign country who is known to be ruthless cruel committing genocide agianst Palestinian people. These guys have no shame or sense of prestige. Their loyalty Netanyahu (not Israel) is absolutely stupid and to be condemned. Netanyahu should not be allowed to intervene,interfere and medling in our internal politics and policies. We should do whatever is best for our country.
40
could you have made your point without using the word "genocide"?
1
As an American Jew, I agree 100% with this article. It's time for AIPAC to take it's head out of the sand.
64
How bad is this deal? Apparently, Trump is right that Iran gets $100-150 billion even if the Iran deal is rejected.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/16/donald-tr...
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/16/donald-tr...
5
Well it is their money.
7
Did you actually read the article you referenced? The money is Iranian frozen assets. It's their money. They will eventually get these frozen assets if the deal is approved and they abide by it. If the deal is rejected they may still get part of their frozen assets if other countries decide to unfreeze Iranian assets in their countries even without the agreement and even if the U.S. doesn't unfreeze the Iranian assets in the U.S.
One of the benefits of the argument over the Iran deal is that it has stripped away pretense and made clear that AIPAC et al act on Israeli orders. They told Netanyahu it was an uphill fight to defeat President Obama, but he told them they had to do it, and they have. They should have to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act.
81
Cohen: '[Sandra Lippy’s] not about to get on the phone to her representative to press for Congress to condemn the deal.'
Yes, nor is she going to call her congressman to tell him to support the deal. Anti-Jewish, I'm guessing. And therein lies the problem -- the age-old problem, I believe it's called.
Lippy: "... we can sit down again over the next several years and talk about the Holocaust...”
That's the problem too. (Not age-old, but....)
Yes, nor is she going to call her congressman to tell him to support the deal. Anti-Jewish, I'm guessing. And therein lies the problem -- the age-old problem, I believe it's called.
Lippy: "... we can sit down again over the next several years and talk about the Holocaust...”
That's the problem too. (Not age-old, but....)
3
Mr Cohen: Your views are quite naive in this situation. Antisemitism has existed for thousands of years and will likely continue to exist as long as we Jews exist, which will likely be forever. I think you are making up your 'fact' that most young Iranians don't want death to America. I do not think you have any way of gauging the true feelings of most young Iranians. When I see a rally with their leaders shouting 'Death to America' and 'Death to Israel', I believe that that is what they want. Reminds me of Hitler and Nazi Germany. You could argue that most of the people pf Nazi Germany were not in agreement with Hitler, but that won't win you any friends or believers in France, or Norway or Sweden or Russia or Hungary or Poland or any other European country that suffered at their hands. Your own paper estimates that there are one billion Moslems in the world, and 30-40% are radicalized. that means 300,000,000 to 400,000,000 people hate you, me and every one else who is not them. You forget your history when you look at the modern world. You think 'It can't happen here', as many Jews did in Nazi Germany. The fact is that it can and probably will happen here, unless radicalism is stopped at its borders. Perhaps you should go back to Hebrew school and relearn your history. I think you have forgotten too much.
7
As an American Jew, I feel sorry that you do not have any sense of security in the U.S. and imagine that we Jews will be sent to the gas chambers again. I wish you peace and hope that you can truly deal in reality and not suffer such delusions. Your extreme positions are fortunately not shared by the vast majority of American Jews.
4
So then what do you propose?
1
I have a tremendous sense of security living here. I just returned from Israel yesterday, where I shared that sense of security. Israel is the greatest country in the world. We, the strongest country in the world, must continue to support Israel, not from an extremist position, but from a position of conservatism. If you think my views are extremist, you do not understand that Israel is the only democracy in the region. It is the only country where people have the right to vote. It is the only country where freedom of all religions is practiced. It is the country to which Arab women travel to get driver's ed. It is the only country in the region where gay people are allowed to live freely and are not assassinated for their sexual preferences. There is clearly much that you, Salzy. do not understand. However, you also misread my words. I do not imagine that I will be sent to a gas chamber. However, I can imagine our country with a very strong Moslem population that will not have any sympathy for Jews. Currently, our populations are roughly equal in the United States. What do you think will happen when Moslems outnumber Jews in this country by say, 10:1? Our political power will begin to fade long before that happens. Look at the issues being experienced by every European country due to their increasing Arab populations that do not wish to assimilate. Fortunately, there is, and will always be, an Israel, where all Jews are and will be welcome.
1
The reason that the largest American Jewish organizations seem unrepresentative of American Jews is that a huge number of American Jews are those whose only connection to Judaism is a Hannukah menorah lit to balance out their Christmas tree, and bagels and cream cheese on an occasional Sunday morning. J Street may well represent them, but they will not represent their children, because their children will not be Jewish.
For committed Jews leading Jewish lives -- and they can be Reform, Conservative, or Orthodox -- what's troubling is that the broad sweep of Israeli political opinion, whether left, center, or right, is against this deal.
Were it just Likud and Netanyahu being hysterical, it would be a different story. When even the Labor party and Meretz say it doesn't protect the people it intends to protect, attention must be paid. This is not a matter of Israeli interest; it is a matter of American interest.
For committed Jews leading Jewish lives -- and they can be Reform, Conservative, or Orthodox -- what's troubling is that the broad sweep of Israeli political opinion, whether left, center, or right, is against this deal.
Were it just Likud and Netanyahu being hysterical, it would be a different story. When even the Labor party and Meretz say it doesn't protect the people it intends to protect, attention must be paid. This is not a matter of Israeli interest; it is a matter of American interest.
8
The only question American Jews should be considering is whether the Iran deal is better for America than having no deal, that is, if they are for America first. Putting the interests of a foreign nation ahead of the interests of this nation is not a good move for American Jewry to make if they want to maintain the goodwill of non-Jewish Americans. That doesn't mean that American Jews have to support the deal, but it does mean that they must show that rejecting the deal is good for America, not because it is good for Israel. The rest of America is watching to see where Jewish loyalties are invested.
33
I would hope that my fellow American Jews are loyal first and above all to this country, as I am.
1
Really? So, if people were to argue that this deal puts Lebanon (especially Lebanese Christians) Christians at greater risk of being absorbed into a defacto greater Iran, would they be putting Lebanon in front of the U.S.? Were people who said the Munich agreement sold the Czecks down the river putting them ahead of England? Were American Catholics of Irish descent who supported their co-religionists attempt to reunite their country against the strong position of our ally, GB, puttin Irish interests ahead of America's. When I read comments like yours, it's difficult to feel
1
Nations have interests but no friends. Israel is not our friend and the interests of the U.S. and Israel are not the same. While both countries will assert they want “peace in the Middle East,” the definitions of such a chimerical beast are not the same. Israel is committed to absorbing the entire West Bank and maintaining a militarized authoritarian state in which anyone who is not an Orthodox Jew will be a second or third class citizen. Israel also intends for the U.S. to maintain its security indefinitely even if that requires several new wars in the Middle East. Finally, Israel intends to retain its nuclear supremacy at any cost and will enter into unholy alliances with anyone in order to do so (John Boehner? Mike Huckabee? Scott Walker? Seriously?) It will be interesting to see how many Congressmen and Congresswomen have been bought and paid for by AIPAC, Adelson, or some other toady for Netanyahu, the world’s biggest liar.
49
It is instructive to remember what our "friend" Israel did with the most sensitive secrets they learned from the information that the traitor Jonathan Pollard sold to them.
The Israelis exchanged highly classified data on the means and methods used by the United States to track enemy nuclear ballistic missile submarines to the then Soviet Union for permission for Jewish nuclear scientists to emigrate to Israel.
Thirty years ago the Israelis clearly put their own self-interests above those of their supposed ally and friend the United States. Prime Minister Netanyahu is doing the same now with his efforts to persuade the American Congress to reject the agreement with Iran. It is time for the United States to place American self interests at the top of its policy agenda by finally saying no to unquestioned and blind support for Israel.
The Israelis exchanged highly classified data on the means and methods used by the United States to track enemy nuclear ballistic missile submarines to the then Soviet Union for permission for Jewish nuclear scientists to emigrate to Israel.
Thirty years ago the Israelis clearly put their own self-interests above those of their supposed ally and friend the United States. Prime Minister Netanyahu is doing the same now with his efforts to persuade the American Congress to reject the agreement with Iran. It is time for the United States to place American self interests at the top of its policy agenda by finally saying no to unquestioned and blind support for Israel.
According to the ADL, it is "anti-Semitic" to believe that American Jews have "too much" financial, social, political, etc. power.
I read this newspaper, and many others. I'm intelligent, considerate, and I think fair.
And I strenuously disagree with the ADL.
It is absundantly clear that the Jewish/Zionist lobby holds far, far too much sway.
Not because of their religious faith or genes but because they are a minority of the broader population and unduly concerned, and apologists for, a tiny foreign state whose leash should have been yanked 20 years ago.
And consider - for all the ink spilled about what American Jews think, there are more American Jews in the IDF than in the US Army.
Just sayin,' Mr. Cohen.
It is also the case that were our media - let me pull this band aid off quickly - less under the influence of pro-Israel zealots, and those who cater to them, americans would have a fuller and fairer understanding of the way in which the Israel Lobby is doing its best, again, to exaggerate a threat.
After 20 years of crying wolf, Mr. Cohen - might I not fairly wonder if Netanyahu is *lying* about Iran
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-08-17/turkey-declares-curfew-latest-w...
And that what he really wants is for the American goys to destroy another military, and economic rival.
Well, right wing Zionists have sure dreamed of what has been happening in the Middle East for quite some time:
http://tinyurl.com/oxczudg
How about Iran and Americans?
I read this newspaper, and many others. I'm intelligent, considerate, and I think fair.
And I strenuously disagree with the ADL.
It is absundantly clear that the Jewish/Zionist lobby holds far, far too much sway.
Not because of their religious faith or genes but because they are a minority of the broader population and unduly concerned, and apologists for, a tiny foreign state whose leash should have been yanked 20 years ago.
And consider - for all the ink spilled about what American Jews think, there are more American Jews in the IDF than in the US Army.
Just sayin,' Mr. Cohen.
It is also the case that were our media - let me pull this band aid off quickly - less under the influence of pro-Israel zealots, and those who cater to them, americans would have a fuller and fairer understanding of the way in which the Israel Lobby is doing its best, again, to exaggerate a threat.
After 20 years of crying wolf, Mr. Cohen - might I not fairly wonder if Netanyahu is *lying* about Iran
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-08-17/turkey-declares-curfew-latest-w...
And that what he really wants is for the American goys to destroy another military, and economic rival.
Well, right wing Zionists have sure dreamed of what has been happening in the Middle East for quite some time:
http://tinyurl.com/oxczudg
How about Iran and Americans?
23
apologies - if the moderator might indulge me, the first link was incorrect {though pretty interesting}.
I intended to reference the seemingly very important fact Mr. Netanyahu has been singing the same song for 20 years.
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/03/02/brief-history-netanyahu-cr...
Given his similar, incorrect claims about Iraq - one has to wonder if the nuclear issue is largely a pretext, and the real issue is Iran's ongoing support for Hezbollah - a primarily defensive, resistance force.
I intended to reference the seemingly very important fact Mr. Netanyahu has been singing the same song for 20 years.
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/03/02/brief-history-netanyahu-cr...
Given his similar, incorrect claims about Iraq - one has to wonder if the nuclear issue is largely a pretext, and the real issue is Iran's ongoing support for Hezbollah - a primarily defensive, resistance force.
We can't just make a deal for the sake of having a deal, and this is not a personality issue. The fact is that the talks were flawed. Concession after concession was made. Please read Ronen Bergman's summary in Tablet Magazine. There, instead of getting impressions, you'll get real information about what the deal actually says.
5
Mr. Bergman's piece is in no way an accurate assessment of the JCPOL. He simply dismisses the agreement --not what it actually says. It is interesting that the article is based on information from Israeli information sources ( but denies that they were spying on the US). Obviously a trustworthy source without any preconceived motives-right. He also acknowledges that Israel has assassinated at least six Iranian scientists. I wonder if the same sauce applies to the goose in this case.
Mr. Bergman and his ilk will be happy to fight until the last American. The Israeli First cabal is willing to allow the US to pay the economic and, political costs as well.
Mr. Bergman and his ilk will be happy to fight until the last American. The Israeli First cabal is willing to allow the US to pay the economic and, political costs as well.
1
Alan Dershowitz got it right!
Obama backed us into a deal which should never have been on the table.
We have played Iran's game and they are laughing all the way to the stockpile!
In the end the bunker busting bombs will have to drop!
Obama backed us into a deal which should never have been on the table.
We have played Iran's game and they are laughing all the way to the stockpile!
In the end the bunker busting bombs will have to drop!
4
@dave nelson
CA
Another example of Republican intelligence?
CA
Another example of Republican intelligence?
6
Dershowitz is a tireless, shameless shill for Israel's increasingly racist, myopic, and dissembling right wing.
And Norman Finkelstein should have won the Nobel Prize for his treatment of Dershowitz's scholarship in "Beyond Chutzpah"
And Norman Finkelstein should have won the Nobel Prize for his treatment of Dershowitz's scholarship in "Beyond Chutzpah"
I'm a lefty!You are obviously in a Chomsky Bubble.
1
Israel has no argument here. Its them against the world.
Israel doesn't want this deal because if they don't have the boogieman Iran, the world attention will get redirected on their arsenal of 300 nukes and their horrific treatment of the Palestinians.
Israel doesn't want this deal because if they don't have the boogieman Iran, the world attention will get redirected on their arsenal of 300 nukes and their horrific treatment of the Palestinians.
53
No doomsday scenario, simply a bad deal which, like many other issues facing the country, is kicked down the road for another generation to deal with. It seems we are always searching for an easy out rather than face complicated issues. That this is the nature of photo-op politics of late, it needn't be applauded.
People who favor this deal are naive when they characterize it as the best deal available and ignore the danger of a financially revitalized Iran without requisite return for their new impunity. Sanctions brought Iran to the table and only sanctions will hold them to toe the line.
People who favor this deal are naive when they characterize it as the best deal available and ignore the danger of a financially revitalized Iran without requisite return for their new impunity. Sanctions brought Iran to the table and only sanctions will hold them to toe the line.
4
I am a lifelong Democrat & voted for President Obama twice. But the president's rhetoric on the Iran deal has turned me against him. The rhetoric is manipulative & clearly suggests antisemitic tropes. As a son of a Holocaust survivor, & someone who works often in Europe, I am confident in my ability to detect antisemitism. I have lived in the US for more than 6 decades & have not ever heard such innuendo from a president before. Both Kerry & Obama have crossed a line.
As for Netanyahu, I see him as being a brave fighter for Israel. To disparage him for meddling in American politics is crazy. Of course he is meddling, he faces serious existential threats to his country. Any responsible leader of a country that is so threatened would and should meddle.
As for the deal itself, what I find most disturbing is the fervor with which proponents & opponents make their case, expressing such certainty over what will happen. The reality is no one can know the outcome of this deal. There are too many moving parts. It is a gamble & serious discussion should portray it that way & give all options consideration. Any serious sports fan knows that big decisions are highly contingent, & you do your best to assess the probabilities. Neither side is doing that. I haven't yet decided what I think of the deal itself. But I find the president and the New York Times to be pushing me against the deal because of their very disturbing and alienating rhetoric.
As for Netanyahu, I see him as being a brave fighter for Israel. To disparage him for meddling in American politics is crazy. Of course he is meddling, he faces serious existential threats to his country. Any responsible leader of a country that is so threatened would and should meddle.
As for the deal itself, what I find most disturbing is the fervor with which proponents & opponents make their case, expressing such certainty over what will happen. The reality is no one can know the outcome of this deal. There are too many moving parts. It is a gamble & serious discussion should portray it that way & give all options consideration. Any serious sports fan knows that big decisions are highly contingent, & you do your best to assess the probabilities. Neither side is doing that. I haven't yet decided what I think of the deal itself. But I find the president and the New York Times to be pushing me against the deal because of their very disturbing and alienating rhetoric.
9
Firstly, I don't doubt your sincerity that you voted for Obama twice. Having said that every thing else you say makes me doubt your sincerity. To say that what Obama and Kerry say has antisemitic tropes is not only insulting but manipulative. Both have done more for Israel's security. As for Netenyahu he openly insulted Obama and the institution of the presidency itself. He is a total ingrate, so no matter what he says no one should really pay any attention to.
9
I think this is a tired line of argument. Basically, this agreement is a gamble that Iran will become "reasonable" before it gets nuclear weapons. There's nothing other than hope to suggest that this will happen. Hence, the increasingly personal attacks on Netanyahu and anyone else who tells the truth about the agreement. It simply isn't persuasive, and the more people learn about the agreement, the more they agree.
6
This may not be "the best deal," but it's absurd to conclude that President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry -- neither of whom is or will be running for office -- would sacrifice US national security to make a bad deal with Iran. It's too late to return to the negotiating table; the UN and our partners in the Iran negotiations have approved the deal and will start doing business with Iran. There's no reason to Cubanize that country.
18
Making this about the Jews is very comforting. It is why historically antisemitism has been successful. It gives people easy answers.
The US and NYT focus on Israel in the Iran deal may not be motivated by hatred of Jews but it is a tact used, consciously or not, like antisemitism, to avoid the real issues for the US.
The issue is loss of the Middle East and what that means for the American empire.
The deal is really just a piece of paper. Sanctions by other than the US would never have continued. Iran will do as it likes. The deal presents an illusion of control and success.
The US in its previous moves in the ME has showed its Arab allies that it is not dependable. Those monarchs will cut a deal with Iran to survive and become their clients.
In future, there will be no appetite in the US for any involvement in the ME and going by proxy will be more difficult because the US has lost its traditional allies and no one else will trust them.
Russia and China will compete for oil contracts and to supply arms. The Europeans will deal with their new best friends because they need oil.
Iran seeks an empire. Israel is a sideshow like when the Czar used to rile up the peasants.
The US is losing in Asia in the competition with China. It is broke. Its citizens falling behind in education. Control of the ME through traditional alliances gave the US power. That is over.
So let's make this about the Jews. Less scary.
The US and NYT focus on Israel in the Iran deal may not be motivated by hatred of Jews but it is a tact used, consciously or not, like antisemitism, to avoid the real issues for the US.
The issue is loss of the Middle East and what that means for the American empire.
The deal is really just a piece of paper. Sanctions by other than the US would never have continued. Iran will do as it likes. The deal presents an illusion of control and success.
The US in its previous moves in the ME has showed its Arab allies that it is not dependable. Those monarchs will cut a deal with Iran to survive and become their clients.
In future, there will be no appetite in the US for any involvement in the ME and going by proxy will be more difficult because the US has lost its traditional allies and no one else will trust them.
Russia and China will compete for oil contracts and to supply arms. The Europeans will deal with their new best friends because they need oil.
Iran seeks an empire. Israel is a sideshow like when the Czar used to rile up the peasants.
The US is losing in Asia in the competition with China. It is broke. Its citizens falling behind in education. Control of the ME through traditional alliances gave the US power. That is over.
So let's make this about the Jews. Less scary.
9
Nonsense. Have you checked the groups who are financing the opposition to the tune of $25-$40 million? In case you and the other Israel Firsters who are commenters haven't noticed these groups support the interest of Israel over those of the US. You might be interested in this article.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/on-the-iran-deal-american-jewish...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/on-the-iran-deal-american-jewish...
Ahh the Israel Firsters. Yes, anyone who discusses Iran and America as a geopolitical issues for America is part of the secret Zionist cabal.
Thanks for making my point for me. May your beliefs comfort you if you are young enough that you will live to see American power decline.
Thanks for making my point for me. May your beliefs comfort you if you are young enough that you will live to see American power decline.
1
There are five unassailable facts:
1- This has never been a "Jewish issue" (although many have tried to manipulate the facts otherwise) because Iran has NEVER had any conflict with Jews. Country of Israel's government and their policies is another matter.
2- No one can get ANY OTHER political deal from Iran, regardless of the nonsense noises in US.
3- The ONLY ALTERNATIVE to the current deal with Iran is a war, regardless of how some members of congress are trying to hide and lie about this.
4- The Iran deal will go ahead regardless of what US Congress decide.....The US Congress "punch-and-Judy" show is for internal political consumption.
5- Even if US government "renege" on their own negotiated agreement, the rest of the P4+1 will go ahead.....regardless.....
1- This has never been a "Jewish issue" (although many have tried to manipulate the facts otherwise) because Iran has NEVER had any conflict with Jews. Country of Israel's government and their policies is another matter.
2- No one can get ANY OTHER political deal from Iran, regardless of the nonsense noises in US.
3- The ONLY ALTERNATIVE to the current deal with Iran is a war, regardless of how some members of congress are trying to hide and lie about this.
4- The Iran deal will go ahead regardless of what US Congress decide.....The US Congress "punch-and-Judy" show is for internal political consumption.
5- Even if US government "renege" on their own negotiated agreement, the rest of the P4+1 will go ahead.....regardless.....
18
Cohen's arguments for supporting the deal would have been more persuasive if in stating that 5 Jewish senators have announced their support of the deal he also shared that Senator Schumer is opposed and his reasons in opposition. Providing a more complete picture is necessary for credibility.
3
Likely he doesn't take Schumer seriously for having any reasons other than AIPAC.
5
Iranians and American Jews know that Israel has nuclear weapons and the most powerful military in the Middle East.
They both know that the 6 million Christian or Muslim Arab Palestinians under Israeli dominion by occupation, blockade/siege, exile and 2nd class citizenship are denied their self-evident truthful divine natural certain unequal rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Both groups know that Iran has no nuclear weapons and is a party to all of the WMD treaties involving nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. Both groups know that Iran has been the target of 60+ years of American covert and overt regime change war.
Both groups know that 80% of the world's 16 million Jews are evenly divided between America and Israel. Both groups know that 98% of Americans are not Jews. Both groups know that America does not need a Zionist Jewish Israel.
What do Americans who are not Jews know about Iran and Israel?
The original Zionist movement was a European theologically secular ethnocentric left-wing socialist movement that sought a land that was safe for the Jews. Rather than a nation that was defined as being primarily and forever Jewish by law. America is the nation state dream fulfillment of the original Zionists.
Are Jews in America American? Or are they Israeli? Do American Jews believe that their Messiah is going to show up tomorrow? Do American Jews believe in a one-state civil secular plural egalitarian democratic solution?
They both know that the 6 million Christian or Muslim Arab Palestinians under Israeli dominion by occupation, blockade/siege, exile and 2nd class citizenship are denied their self-evident truthful divine natural certain unequal rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Both groups know that Iran has no nuclear weapons and is a party to all of the WMD treaties involving nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. Both groups know that Iran has been the target of 60+ years of American covert and overt regime change war.
Both groups know that 80% of the world's 16 million Jews are evenly divided between America and Israel. Both groups know that 98% of Americans are not Jews. Both groups know that America does not need a Zionist Jewish Israel.
What do Americans who are not Jews know about Iran and Israel?
The original Zionist movement was a European theologically secular ethnocentric left-wing socialist movement that sought a land that was safe for the Jews. Rather than a nation that was defined as being primarily and forever Jewish by law. America is the nation state dream fulfillment of the original Zionists.
Are Jews in America American? Or are they Israeli? Do American Jews believe that their Messiah is going to show up tomorrow? Do American Jews believe in a one-state civil secular plural egalitarian democratic solution?
8
Step back, connect the dots, follow the money.
Who benefits most from the collapse of the deal? Oil companies. Who has the most to lose if it goes forward? Oil companies.
With the collapse of demand in China and oil flirting with $40/barrel, oil giants desperately need conflict or the threat of conflict to make markets nervous and boost oil prices. Killing the deal does this. Conversely, if the deal succeeds, Iran adds its oil to a flooded world market, further depressing prices.
In other words, if the deal succeeds, the Republicans' biggest benefactors lose their economic oxygen supply, damaging their ability to spend billions on the 2016 election.
Why else would they -- and Bibi -- be going so bat-crazy stomping over each other to prove how rabidly zealous each is to kill this good deal?
Who benefits most from the collapse of the deal? Oil companies. Who has the most to lose if it goes forward? Oil companies.
With the collapse of demand in China and oil flirting with $40/barrel, oil giants desperately need conflict or the threat of conflict to make markets nervous and boost oil prices. Killing the deal does this. Conversely, if the deal succeeds, Iran adds its oil to a flooded world market, further depressing prices.
In other words, if the deal succeeds, the Republicans' biggest benefactors lose their economic oxygen supply, damaging their ability to spend billions on the 2016 election.
Why else would they -- and Bibi -- be going so bat-crazy stomping over each other to prove how rabidly zealous each is to kill this good deal?
11
Here's some back-up on this principle: the economy does better under Democratic presidents than Republicans in large part because there are more oil shocks under Republicans than Democrats.
http://www.vox.com/2014/7/29/5945583/the-us-economy-grows-faster-under-d...
Hmm, more oil shocks under Republicans presidents, which wreck the economy but benefit the strongest Republican party donors, what a coincidence...
http://www.vox.com/2014/7/29/5945583/the-us-economy-grows-faster-under-d...
Hmm, more oil shocks under Republicans presidents, which wreck the economy but benefit the strongest Republican party donors, what a coincidence...
3
it is so hard to know where to go with this column. Cohen is so anti-Israel that is rare that it is worth listen to what he has to say about the Middle East. It is also true that J-Street way too often sounds like it is on Palestinians payroll. That say Netanyahu has been continually wrong about Iran for years. That American Jewish groups line up behind him without thought is appalling. Other than Americans going to war how exactly will Iran be stopped? Who will continue the sanctions. How will Russia and China be made to stay on board. When and if Israel is no more, it will be the likes of Netanyahu, Dermer and the Jewish groups that refuse to think that will have to look in the mirror.
7
Perhaps it is time to say that Iran must be stopped by Israel unleashing its own holocaust of 300+ nuclear weapons and its own vaunted IDF on the ground to mop up. The U.S. has no obligation , moral or geopolitical, to pull Isreal's chestnuts out of the fire. Let Israel fight its own fights with its own money and its own sons, daughters, fathers, and mothers. If they will not do it on their own, then they should shut up already!
The countries that are really opposed to Iran gaining a nuclear weapon are the Arab countries. Israel is doing the heavy lifting for the Saudis, Egypt and a host of other Sunni Arab countries. It is one of the reasons why the U.S. is so involved in preventing Iran from gaining nuclear weapons. If it comes to it, Israel will do exactly what you suggest.
1
Nobody asked me but, if the JCPOL is rejected and bad things happen as a result, Israel and American Jews will be blamed by the American public. Of course, being a capricious bunch, they will conveniently forget that polls indicate that the public wants to reject the deal. Think back to Iraq--what was Bush's popularity, about 90% when he announced Mission Accomplished? Also, what happens if the deal is nixed and Israel decides to attack Iraq for restarting its nuclear program? Do the R's and the Israeli Firsters pressure the US to defend Israel? Will the American public support that action?
2
Mr. Cohen or anyone else for that matter please tell me in modern history say the last 200 years where did capitulating to a maniacal,psycotic, regime end in anything good for the world? We as American's made it to step foot on the moon, and we can't lead the world to a better deal than in 10 to 15 years Iran will have a nuclear weapon or before if they cheat. If we forget about the Bomb and concentrate on $150 Billion to start and heaven only knows the income they will receive by again selling oil legally on the world market. Scares the bejesus out of me more than the bomb. May I suggest that everyone check out Iran and state sponsored terrorism.Google only has 6,730,000 results for this search.We know that Russia and China would never be against this deal so they can continue to sell armaments. But interesting that we here almost nothing from the French,English, or German. I think the Guardian said it best "The historic nuclear deal between the west and Iran got a mixed reception from Britain’s national press.All recognised what it means for US president Barack Obama. It could well be the legacy that defines his presidency in the future."
4
By maniacal, psychotic regime were you referring to Netanyahu's regime? Thought so!
How ,exactly, is Iran a greater threat to the US than the USSR of the 1970's and 80's. Ever hear of the SALT? Iran is not a military threat to the US.
Those who oppose the deal are perpetuating two obvious untruths.
Firstly the deal puts Israel at risk.Not so.Israel is the only nuclear power in the Middle East and its conventional forces dwarf all others in the area, thanks in good part to the USA. In fact Israel is now exporting arms to India for one.
Secondly a better alternative is to go back to the negotiation table and get a better deal .This is Senator Schumer,s position.
Well if we tried this we will go back to an empty negotiating table.
Russia and China will not be there nor will Germany , France ,the European Community and the UK.
They will be in adjacent rooms negotiating new trade deals and working out how they can bypass the USA banking system.
I just wonder if Schumer has actually consulted with our other allies or has he limited himself to just thinking about Israel
If he did let me give him another scenario, if the deal goes through we bring 80 million Iranians into the global economy,we postpone the potential of Iran developing a bomb for at least 15 years, all prices go down a further stimulant for the global economy, Israel can continue to build trading ties to China and Russia . Israel and the USA gets this and gives up nothing.
If Congress kills the deal, it kills peace ,puts Israel at risk as Iran will develop nuclear capability in months.
Israel will become an International pariah as sanctions will collapse ,the rest of the world will trade with Iran as we the USA sits in the sidelines and sulk
Firstly the deal puts Israel at risk.Not so.Israel is the only nuclear power in the Middle East and its conventional forces dwarf all others in the area, thanks in good part to the USA. In fact Israel is now exporting arms to India for one.
Secondly a better alternative is to go back to the negotiation table and get a better deal .This is Senator Schumer,s position.
Well if we tried this we will go back to an empty negotiating table.
Russia and China will not be there nor will Germany , France ,the European Community and the UK.
They will be in adjacent rooms negotiating new trade deals and working out how they can bypass the USA banking system.
I just wonder if Schumer has actually consulted with our other allies or has he limited himself to just thinking about Israel
If he did let me give him another scenario, if the deal goes through we bring 80 million Iranians into the global economy,we postpone the potential of Iran developing a bomb for at least 15 years, all prices go down a further stimulant for the global economy, Israel can continue to build trading ties to China and Russia . Israel and the USA gets this and gives up nothing.
If Congress kills the deal, it kills peace ,puts Israel at risk as Iran will develop nuclear capability in months.
Israel will become an International pariah as sanctions will collapse ,the rest of the world will trade with Iran as we the USA sits in the sidelines and sulk
9
Several days ago, little but very rich neutral Switzerland has already lifted their sanctions against Iran. One had to read foreign papers, though, in order to find that out.
Are our NO screaming politicians really so naive as to think that the majority of all sanctions by both the UN and other countries against Iran won't be lifted?
We know we have a Klown Kar running right now, but what about the Klowns in the legislature buttering up to them and their low-information voter base with a drumbeat of hate, fear and paranoia.
Are our NO screaming politicians really so naive as to think that the majority of all sanctions by both the UN and other countries against Iran won't be lifted?
We know we have a Klown Kar running right now, but what about the Klowns in the legislature buttering up to them and their low-information voter base with a drumbeat of hate, fear and paranoia.
2
Switzerland is especially important because its high tech industries and banking services are world leaders in exactly the things Iran now needs. The only thing the Swiss can't provide is oil drilling tech.
The US may lead in oil tech, but most of the world manages to pump oil. It has always been fairly easy tech to pump oil in Iran, which is why it had one of the world's first oil industries.
The US may lead in oil tech, but most of the world manages to pump oil. It has always been fairly easy tech to pump oil in Iran, which is why it had one of the world's first oil industries.
1
Interestingly, Roger never mentions Senator Schumer and his opposition to the Iran deal, but, instead, once again relies on "longest-serving Jewish member of the House," as if that really matters.
Roger thinks "it's war" or "an imperfect Iran deal." a false dichotomy rejected by Schumer and most American Jews.
Roger should practice what he preaches and stop with the hysterics and war mongering.
Roger thinks "it's war" or "an imperfect Iran deal." a false dichotomy rejected by Schumer and most American Jews.
Roger should practice what he preaches and stop with the hysterics and war mongering.
1
Netanyahu (not my favorite politician) has never tried to "undermine" Netanyahu. He has tried to get support for not approving the agreement, as it is currently written.
That is not "undermining" anybody. Use of "undermining" is a lame attempt to frame this as "them" vs "us". If the deal goes bad, Israel is up the proverbial creek without a paddle. DC is 7000 miles away. If Iran launches a missile against TelAviv there is, at best, 5 minutes warning. Iran funds several organizations that openly call for Israel's destruction and have tried to do just that (2 wars with Hizbollah, 2 or 3 with Hamas, constant threats by Assad, etc., etc.).
Do you really think that Netanyahu objects to the agreement for no real reason other than to "undermine" Obama? Do you really think that Iran will suddenly be a Boy Scout and stop exporting terror?
When Iran calls to "destroy the "cancer" that is Israel" - do you think that Israel should not take them seriously?
That is not "undermining" anybody. Use of "undermining" is a lame attempt to frame this as "them" vs "us". If the deal goes bad, Israel is up the proverbial creek without a paddle. DC is 7000 miles away. If Iran launches a missile against TelAviv there is, at best, 5 minutes warning. Iran funds several organizations that openly call for Israel's destruction and have tried to do just that (2 wars with Hizbollah, 2 or 3 with Hamas, constant threats by Assad, etc., etc.).
Do you really think that Netanyahu objects to the agreement for no real reason other than to "undermine" Obama? Do you really think that Iran will suddenly be a Boy Scout and stop exporting terror?
When Iran calls to "destroy the "cancer" that is Israel" - do you think that Israel should not take them seriously?
1
The Iran agreement prohibits Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons forever, not 20--30 40years, but forever in the words of the agreement, these are facts. Some of the opposition have used time frames mentioned in the agreement to falsely claim that they give Iran leeway to obtain nuclear weapons, none of these time frames have to do with Iran obtaining nuclear weapons. WAKE UP TO REALITY
6
Mr. Cohen's article pinpoints the struggle peace advocates continuously have with American legislators and journalists who favor Likud, which is just one faction within Israel, over the best interests of the United States and the world. Put more simply, Israel is not the 51st state of the union.
14
Before the Iraq War, Netanyahu testified to Congress (with his political hack, Dermer, sitting smugly behind him). He pleaded with Congress for America to attack Iraq. His testimony included: “There is no question whatsoever that Saddam is seeking and is working and is advancing towards the development of nuclear weapons — no question whatsoever...(Saddam) is pursuing, pursuing with abandon, pursuing with every ounce of effort, the establishment of nuclear weapons...Saddam is hell-bent on achieving atomic bombs as soon as he can...He is feverishly developing a bomb...If you take out Saddam’s regime, I guarantee you that it will have enormous positive reverberations on the region… The task and the great opportunity and challenge is not merely to effect the ouster of the regime, but also to transform the region...I think the choice of (war with) Iraq is a good choice. It is the right choice.”
Netanyahu's swaggering assertion of his absolute, unassailable certainty of Saddam's actions and Saddam's intentions regarding a nuclear bomb is a masterful Netanyahu performance. What sickens me is his indifference to the consequences of his sophistry — the tens of thousands of lives lost or destroyed and bodies mutilated. It was, of course, shown conclusively that there was no Iraqi nuclear bomb. And now Netanyahu has the chutzpah, the conscienceless chutzpah, to once again insert himself directly, forcefully, into American consideration of an issue of war and peace.
Netanyahu's swaggering assertion of his absolute, unassailable certainty of Saddam's actions and Saddam's intentions regarding a nuclear bomb is a masterful Netanyahu performance. What sickens me is his indifference to the consequences of his sophistry — the tens of thousands of lives lost or destroyed and bodies mutilated. It was, of course, shown conclusively that there was no Iraqi nuclear bomb. And now Netanyahu has the chutzpah, the conscienceless chutzpah, to once again insert himself directly, forcefully, into American consideration of an issue of war and peace.
9
The Prime Minister of Israel is a warmonger. Enough of his meddling in US policies!
16
The deal certainly has its significant pros and significant cons. And I don't think anyone can be confident as to the best path to a peaceful outcome. But I take great exception to Mr. Cohen and other like-minded people who think it's inappropriate Netanyahu to loudly state his views with the goal of influencing the U.S. Congress. Cohen makes a comparison of "Netanyahu's performance" with "Obama calling thousands of Israelis to encourage them to oppose a piece of sensitive legislation in the Knesset". It's specious and Cohen's knows that, which makes him dishonest. Allow me to frame a more accurate comparison... Suppose Israel was a great military power with significant influence in world affairs. Further suppose, a country located approx 750 miles from a major US city (say Haiti to Miami which is comparable with Iran to Tel Aviv) was developing nuclear capability which could be used to make a bomb and its leaders frequently called for death to America. If Israel was a major player in a negotiation to contain Haiti's nuclear proliferation wouldn't American leaders rightfully try to influence Israeli politics? We are talking about a matter that affects one's very existence, aren't we?
2
Obama says now that the alternative to this deal is war. And this may be true at this stage of the game because, as Cohen points out, the Russians and Chinese will not reinstate sanctions once they have lifted them, so if the US backs out of the deal Iran will in fact sharply increase its number of centrifuges.
The true alternative to this deal was for the Obama team not to so hellbent on concluding this deal by the deadline that only they felt was important. And the reason they held it was so important was for Obama be secure in the deal being reached in time for him to claim this deal as his legacy. This was, for example, the only reason they agreed to lift the arms embargo on Iran, when that was not at all a subject of the talks.
And this was the only reason that what Obama and the international community promised to achieve through the sanctions, that Iran will "never" get a nuclear weapon did not happen. Its the reason that it was the US, dragging with it the other 5, compromised on just about every issue despite coming from the position of power. We had something that Iran needed and Iran had nothing that we did.
And this promised to never allow Iran to get a nuclear weapon was one that Obama promised over and over on his trip to Israel, and to Netanyahu in particular.
It is thus dishonest for Obama, after having rushed into a deal for the sake of his legacy, to now claim that because he reached this deal the choice is now between his deal and war.
The true alternative to this deal was for the Obama team not to so hellbent on concluding this deal by the deadline that only they felt was important. And the reason they held it was so important was for Obama be secure in the deal being reached in time for him to claim this deal as his legacy. This was, for example, the only reason they agreed to lift the arms embargo on Iran, when that was not at all a subject of the talks.
And this was the only reason that what Obama and the international community promised to achieve through the sanctions, that Iran will "never" get a nuclear weapon did not happen. Its the reason that it was the US, dragging with it the other 5, compromised on just about every issue despite coming from the position of power. We had something that Iran needed and Iran had nothing that we did.
And this promised to never allow Iran to get a nuclear weapon was one that Obama promised over and over on his trip to Israel, and to Netanyahu in particular.
It is thus dishonest for Obama, after having rushed into a deal for the sake of his legacy, to now claim that because he reached this deal the choice is now between his deal and war.
4
this deal took over 4 years to negotiate. That's a rush?
3
"Obama, after having rushed into a deal"
Two years of talks with multiple extensions is hardly rushing into a deal.
Furthermore, those now opposed to the deal were also opposed to the extensions. They wanted to rush things, and Obama refused to be rushed.
Two years of talks with multiple extensions is hardly rushing into a deal.
Furthermore, those now opposed to the deal were also opposed to the extensions. They wanted to rush things, and Obama refused to be rushed.
3
The deal took more than two years to complete. Chances of war are higher if the U.S. jumps ship, lower if we battle it out at the negotiating table. But Obama's war rhetoric inflamed the hawks, and that wasn't helpful.
"Rather than listen to Netanyahu, American Jews should listen to the longest-serving Jewish member of the House, Sander M. Levin,"
Rather than listen to Netanyahu, Americans (Jews and gentiles) should listen to President Obama.
Rather than listen to Netanyahu, Americans (Jews and gentiles) should listen to President Obama.
32
Not a perfect deal,but possibly a good start, and delays/? prevents Iran getting the bomb.
The main line Jewish organizations do NOT speak for me.
The main line Jewish organizations do NOT speak for me.
3
Netanyahu has been emboldened by the servile posture of
republicans. They invited him to give a speech to the
congress to poke their dirty fingers in Obama's eyes.
They are always ready to dance to the tune of their
wealthy donors who are Jewish and work for the
interest of Israel. For them USA is just the place
to make money. Their heart and loyalty is with Israel.
Sadly this problem will get worse unless campaign
donations are eliminated and replaced by the public
financing. On the tax return we check the donation
box but the donations continue and politicians are
willingly sell themselves. Last year the corporations
spent $3.2B on lobbying. This is the price of US govt.
Will \Rogers famously said that US has the best govt.
money can buy.Indeed US govt. has morphed into
a commercial enterprise.
republicans. They invited him to give a speech to the
congress to poke their dirty fingers in Obama's eyes.
They are always ready to dance to the tune of their
wealthy donors who are Jewish and work for the
interest of Israel. For them USA is just the place
to make money. Their heart and loyalty is with Israel.
Sadly this problem will get worse unless campaign
donations are eliminated and replaced by the public
financing. On the tax return we check the donation
box but the donations continue and politicians are
willingly sell themselves. Last year the corporations
spent $3.2B on lobbying. This is the price of US govt.
Will \Rogers famously said that US has the best govt.
money can buy.Indeed US govt. has morphed into
a commercial enterprise.
10
“They are always ready to dance to the tune of their
wealthy donors who are Jewish and work for the
interest of Israel. For them USA is just the place
to make money. Their heart and loyalty is with Israel.”
Let’s get a few things straight, SAK. Your assessment of the Republicans in Congress looking for chances to oppose President Obama on everything and their chronic susceptibility to campaign donations from lobbyists and wealthy Americans is right. The rest of your comment – including the sentences in the quoted portion above – is vile, anti-Semitic hogwash. People expressing this kind of bigotry feed into the tactics of groups like AIPAC, which dismiss any criticism of the regime in Israel as mere anti-Semitism.
The Iran nuclear agreement ought to be approved because it is in the very best interests of America, the Middle East and Israel. If some of our fellow citizens who happen to be American Jews oppose the agreement, that does not signify some sort of slavish devotion to Israel. It only means those fellow Americans have either succumbed to the fear tactics and campaign of misinformation thrown at them by the Republicans and by Prime Minister Netanyahu or they just haven’t thought it through.
wealthy donors who are Jewish and work for the
interest of Israel. For them USA is just the place
to make money. Their heart and loyalty is with Israel.”
Let’s get a few things straight, SAK. Your assessment of the Republicans in Congress looking for chances to oppose President Obama on everything and their chronic susceptibility to campaign donations from lobbyists and wealthy Americans is right. The rest of your comment – including the sentences in the quoted portion above – is vile, anti-Semitic hogwash. People expressing this kind of bigotry feed into the tactics of groups like AIPAC, which dismiss any criticism of the regime in Israel as mere anti-Semitism.
The Iran nuclear agreement ought to be approved because it is in the very best interests of America, the Middle East and Israel. If some of our fellow citizens who happen to be American Jews oppose the agreement, that does not signify some sort of slavish devotion to Israel. It only means those fellow Americans have either succumbed to the fear tactics and campaign of misinformation thrown at them by the Republicans and by Prime Minister Netanyahu or they just haven’t thought it through.
1
I suspect that 99% of these people have never read the agreement or read an honest appraisal. Ignorance is a real burden.
3
Imagine the reaction of the non Jewish world if the Iran deal collapses and, in fact, another middle east war occurs. Regardless of the outcome, the death and serious life long injury to the US military, allied and enemy forces and destruction of major cities and infra-structure will be blamed on the Jews, even if the majority of the worlds Jewish population support the deal. This is a no win situation for the Jewish community and another reminder that history always repeats itself.
6
one might recall that most American Jews were against the Iraq War, but as they sat on their couches, right wing Zionist Jews, the neocons, absolutely were critical in lying us into Iraq, for Israel, even as bin Laden remained at large.
"The Lie Factory" was set up by people notable for being unqualified and for being disproportionately Jewish Zionists with ties to Israel.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2004/01/lie-factory
They were part of a broader group of neocons, itself a Jewish movement
http://www.voltairenet.org/article178638.html
Let me be clear, no one should, and few, will, I think "blame the Jews" -but at the same time, Houston, We Have a Zionism Problem.
Look, there's no non-Jewish lobby groups like ADL or JINDA or the dozens of others who act in the interests of a small foreign country that, as I view, it, has an absolutely craxy right wing leadership.
But when American Jews are the loudest, and most well funded cheerleaders [along with their Southern Evangelical useful idiots, who want world war 3 so Jesus can come back and throw you guys in the fire] and I am told that it is "anti-Semitic" to mention the Jewishness of the neocons, or the Zionism at work in Balkanizing Israel's neighbor's -
sorry, I mean I'm just not intimidated anymore.
Israel Firsters are a bigger danger to this country than Iran, or Russia.
By far.
And it's be nice for left-leaning Jews to more loudly condemn the right wing warmongers.
"The Lie Factory" was set up by people notable for being unqualified and for being disproportionately Jewish Zionists with ties to Israel.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2004/01/lie-factory
They were part of a broader group of neocons, itself a Jewish movement
http://www.voltairenet.org/article178638.html
Let me be clear, no one should, and few, will, I think "blame the Jews" -but at the same time, Houston, We Have a Zionism Problem.
Look, there's no non-Jewish lobby groups like ADL or JINDA or the dozens of others who act in the interests of a small foreign country that, as I view, it, has an absolutely craxy right wing leadership.
But when American Jews are the loudest, and most well funded cheerleaders [along with their Southern Evangelical useful idiots, who want world war 3 so Jesus can come back and throw you guys in the fire] and I am told that it is "anti-Semitic" to mention the Jewishness of the neocons, or the Zionism at work in Balkanizing Israel's neighbor's -
sorry, I mean I'm just not intimidated anymore.
Israel Firsters are a bigger danger to this country than Iran, or Russia.
By far.
And it's be nice for left-leaning Jews to more loudly condemn the right wing warmongers.
1
Of course, blame the Jews. The Holocaust succeeded because of that mentality. Jews have been the scapegoats for everything, recessions disease droughts, etc. for thousands of years.
The problems in the Middle East don't exist because of Israel; Jews are just scapegoats. If the countries in the Middle East and others really cared about Palestinians, they'd welcome them into their own countries and provide funding for them to prosper. Instead they keep them quarantined in a dense area and only supply them with weapons to attack Israel.
The problems in the Middle East don't exist because of Israel; Jews are just scapegoats. If the countries in the Middle East and others really cared about Palestinians, they'd welcome them into their own countries and provide funding for them to prosper. Instead they keep them quarantined in a dense area and only supply them with weapons to attack Israel.
1
Gee, all those Congressfolk - Democrats and Republicans - who went to Israel recently to hear Netanyahu make his case and respond to quetions - came away very impressed. Guess they must have heard a different Netanyahu.
It's well to remember that Mr. Cohen is going to cite examples of, and quote those, who minimize the other side of an issue - including making that side look foolish. He could have cited others on the phone call who were able to articulate strong opposition to the deal. Two points left out by Mr. Cohen: a) it's clear from recent actions by Russia and Italy (covered in the Times) that the snapback provision is a dead letter, and b) the weakly negotiated inspection regime virtually assures cheating by Iran to the extent that prohibited nuclear work will continue just as if there were no deal.
It's clear that Mr. Obama was going to have his deal regardless of what he had to sacrifice. His oft-repeated comment that he'd rather have no deal than a bad deal was for political consumption only. It mght be useful for some news organization to go back and quote all those "red lines" which, if insisted on by the Iranians, would have caused Mr. Obama to walk away.
But he never was going to walk away - and the Iranians knew that. I don't want Mr. Trump for President any more than the next NY Times reader, but he's right about one thing - America is paying dearly for a President with such poor negotiating skills.
It's well to remember that Mr. Cohen is going to cite examples of, and quote those, who minimize the other side of an issue - including making that side look foolish. He could have cited others on the phone call who were able to articulate strong opposition to the deal. Two points left out by Mr. Cohen: a) it's clear from recent actions by Russia and Italy (covered in the Times) that the snapback provision is a dead letter, and b) the weakly negotiated inspection regime virtually assures cheating by Iran to the extent that prohibited nuclear work will continue just as if there were no deal.
It's clear that Mr. Obama was going to have his deal regardless of what he had to sacrifice. His oft-repeated comment that he'd rather have no deal than a bad deal was for political consumption only. It mght be useful for some news organization to go back and quote all those "red lines" which, if insisted on by the Iranians, would have caused Mr. Obama to walk away.
But he never was going to walk away - and the Iranians knew that. I don't want Mr. Trump for President any more than the next NY Times reader, but he's right about one thing - America is paying dearly for a President with such poor negotiating skills.
36
the hypocrisy of Israel is that it does not claim to have nuclear weapons itself.
Why has it not admitted to it's stockpile? Why not signed the non- proliferation treaties? I fear Israel's itchy finger on the button more than Iran's.
( Do Not) Trust and Verify applies equally to Israel.
Why has it not admitted to it's stockpile? Why not signed the non- proliferation treaties? I fear Israel's itchy finger on the button more than Iran's.
( Do Not) Trust and Verify applies equally to Israel.
4
they're all bought and paid for by Israeli lobby. they listen to where the money is not their constituents.
3
Did they tour Dimona and see Israel's nuclear weapons?
Did they tour Gaza or the Palestinian cities of the West Bank, and walk through some checkpoints with Palestinians?
Netanyahu can be impressive if you listen ONLY to what he wants you to hear. Check all questions of balance at the door.
Did they tour Gaza or the Palestinian cities of the West Bank, and walk through some checkpoints with Palestinians?
Netanyahu can be impressive if you listen ONLY to what he wants you to hear. Check all questions of balance at the door.
3
Will Netanyahu just leave? Most of the world got over the horrors of WWll ages ago. His aging supporters do not represent the world as it is today. The settlers are fundamentalist crazies upsetting the world balance, just as the nutcase right wingers deflect attention away from Americas true issues - the economy, jobs, infrastructure, education, the role of police in civil society.
Interestingly I have noticed that my one, now quite old, Holocaust survivor friend is much more worldly and open than his kids, who were weaned on Never Again, and did not stop to think the persecution mentality does noone any good, hey there have been a gazillion Holocausts and civizilization continues to limp along. Why can we not just get along! Diplomacy is less dramatic than arms but lots easier in the long run.
Interestingly I have noticed that my one, now quite old, Holocaust survivor friend is much more worldly and open than his kids, who were weaned on Never Again, and did not stop to think the persecution mentality does noone any good, hey there have been a gazillion Holocausts and civizilization continues to limp along. Why can we not just get along! Diplomacy is less dramatic than arms but lots easier in the long run.
3
"Most young Iranians no more believe in “Death to America” than they believe the Hidden Imam is going to show up tomorrow."
Thanks for mentioning this. Our Senior Senator, Charles Schumer, seems to have not gotten that memo.
Schumer has written to his constituents who support the agreement that he opposes the deal because "I believe that Iran will not change."
One wonders where the senator was when young Iranians were in the streets not so long ago demonstrating against their own government. They are potentially Iran's leaders of the future.
The nuclear agreement is an opportunity for some positive movement in our relations with Iran if we make this small gesture now.
If not, the hardliners on both sides will win.
Thanks for mentioning this. Our Senior Senator, Charles Schumer, seems to have not gotten that memo.
Schumer has written to his constituents who support the agreement that he opposes the deal because "I believe that Iran will not change."
One wonders where the senator was when young Iranians were in the streets not so long ago demonstrating against their own government. They are potentially Iran's leaders of the future.
The nuclear agreement is an opportunity for some positive movement in our relations with Iran if we make this small gesture now.
If not, the hardliners on both sides will win.
356
Schumer is up for re-election next year. One need only to follow the money to understand his position on a negotiated deal that is embraced by retired generals and admirals, by the majority of Jewish U.S. Senators, and a large group of the world's leading physicists and nuclear scientists.
1
Senator Schumer is best known for years of positioning himself to be prominently in front of any nearby television cameras for all group shots, even when he is a peripheral part of the group, at best. He never has been, nor ever will be, confused with a courageous public servant.
Schumer accepts the campaign donations and probably votes exactly how his donors want him to vote. There is a certain squalid honesty to that.
Frankly, most Democrats would prefer if Senator Schumer just took up residence on the Republican side of the aisle, and skipped the charade.
Schumer accepts the campaign donations and probably votes exactly how his donors want him to vote. There is a certain squalid honesty to that.
Frankly, most Democrats would prefer if Senator Schumer just took up residence on the Republican side of the aisle, and skipped the charade.
SDW, I have to disagree with your last statement. Without parsing each and every one of Senator Schumer's votes, he does vote with the Democratic Caucus on a number of key issues of importance to progressives, such women's reproductive rights. And he holds a number of other positions that would not make him welcome on the GOP side of the aisle.
But when it comes to the Middle East, Senator Schumer is siding with the neocons again, just as he did on the Iraq War resolution.
And that is truly sad.
But when it comes to the Middle East, Senator Schumer is siding with the neocons again, just as he did on the Iraq War resolution.
And that is truly sad.
It really is sad that the Jewish lobby has spoken so forcefully against the Iran deal and has had no problem manipulating our domestic politics for their short term security needs. Sad because it makes it look (falsely) like the Jewish community is filled with extremists that place loyalty to their religious tribe above loyalty to the interests of their country. Israel is loosing support from younger generations and even young Jewish friends are increasingly skeptical of Israels foreign policy. They are playing a dangerous game and it wont end well for them.
9
i like your tone. what is really in shambles is the american political system and the level of corruption that exists therein. take schumer for instance - where is he at? is his disapproval because in his heart(if he has one) he believes it is a "bad"deal or does he have to play to the the jewish supporters of n y s to get future funding and voting support from that self same community. if americans want to have a political system that organises itself around american peoples needs then money has to be gotten out of elections. it really doesn't work otherwise(for american folks).
I know more about anti-Semitism--and the Final Solution--than most people around these days because it was taught both on network TV in 1950s documentaries (such as CBS's "The 20th Century"), my high-school history studies, and memories of survivors and others being widely circulated in my neighborhood in Westchester County, New York. I also know how it can be exploited by politicians, even those who claim they "support" the Jews.
This is why I distrust the claimed GOP "love" of Israel. Let's say Jeb Bush actually wins the 2016 presidential race and has a clear GOP majority in Congress. Hubris repeats itself and the war in Iraq he and his Project for the New American Century fellows Cheney and Rumsfeld started repeats in Iran after Bibi launches the first strike. This is done with the "justification" of protecting Israel and the Jews. We have the same problems as in Iraq, all because the United States' leadership in its hubris makes the wrong decisions and think (like Napoleon and Hitler in Russia) that distance to the battlefield doesn't count and that our "enemies" are somehow people of no account or sophistication.
Our stock market crashes, American troops redeployed once too often return home to no jobs and no aftercare for their injuries. To keep the whole rotten edifice together and protect the 1%, the powers that be decide to jettison the Jews and keep their monies.
It happened before, and could happen here.
This is why I distrust the claimed GOP "love" of Israel. Let's say Jeb Bush actually wins the 2016 presidential race and has a clear GOP majority in Congress. Hubris repeats itself and the war in Iraq he and his Project for the New American Century fellows Cheney and Rumsfeld started repeats in Iran after Bibi launches the first strike. This is done with the "justification" of protecting Israel and the Jews. We have the same problems as in Iraq, all because the United States' leadership in its hubris makes the wrong decisions and think (like Napoleon and Hitler in Russia) that distance to the battlefield doesn't count and that our "enemies" are somehow people of no account or sophistication.
Our stock market crashes, American troops redeployed once too often return home to no jobs and no aftercare for their injuries. To keep the whole rotten edifice together and protect the 1%, the powers that be decide to jettison the Jews and keep their monies.
It happened before, and could happen here.
6
The arrogance and chutzpah of Netanyahu and his Likud party is astounding. The US has given almost unconditional support to Israel for decades. Netanyahu feels free to undermine the US and degrade the power of our president. He works through the Congress which seems to take voting directions from him in the hopes of scoring big campaign dollars from Israel's supporters in the US.
Underneath it all is the irony and disgrace that it was Israel that introduced nuclear weapons to the Middle East in the first place. Why should they have any voice? Israel should sign the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, allow inspectors into their facilities and work toward making the region nuclear free.
Underneath it all is the irony and disgrace that it was Israel that introduced nuclear weapons to the Middle East in the first place. Why should they have any voice? Israel should sign the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, allow inspectors into their facilities and work toward making the region nuclear free.
20
Just as the Islamic nations must control their extremists, so must Israel control its extremists.
Radical, violent Jews are as big a threat to Israel as are radical, violent Muslims.
Radical, violent Jews are as big a threat to Israel as are radical, violent Muslims.
11
Bibi better bring a palette of crayons to the UN this Seppt. to follow Iran's path to the bomb in 10-15 years. He'll need to draw lines from Germany,France,the UK ,Spain,Italy, Norwayl,let alone China,Russia,Iraq,to name just a few of the countries whose businessmen have already inked deals with Iran or booking their tickets.
What will happen in less than 4 years,( let alone 10,) is that Iran will have mutually profitable trade relations with most of the world,incuding the USA
Why would they then commit economic & political suicide?
What will happen in less than 4 years,( let alone 10,) is that Iran will have mutually profitable trade relations with most of the world,incuding the USA
Why would they then commit economic & political suicide?
7
roger : If the majority of Iranians no longer shout " death to America", where are they. Or, how has the arab spring, the turn to democracy worked out.
Iran is a state ruled by right wing religious zealots, who answer to and are controlled by the Ayatollah. He has clearly and consistently reiterated his goals: destruction of the state of Israel, and death to America.
Your blind idealism is wrong.
Iran is a state ruled by right wing religious zealots, who answer to and are controlled by the Ayatollah. He has clearly and consistently reiterated his goals: destruction of the state of Israel, and death to America.
Your blind idealism is wrong.
2
What about the unbending Jewish/Israeli position that "GOD" gave them all the land in what they call Judea and Israel? What about Israel's stated goal to force all the Palestinians, who historically were there before the Jews, out of the lands claimed by Israel by any means, including murder to reach that goal? What about your blind idealism? Why has Israel made absolutely no progress in finding the Israeli terrorists who firebombed a Palestinian home killing a small child and a father?
It is true that inflammatory statements have been made by different senior Iranian leaders about Israel and the US over the years, but the Iranians have also reached out to improve relations with the US and Israel. In particular they tried to improve relations with the US after 9/11, but this approach was rejected.
Senior American and Israeli officials also make many inflammatory comments about going to war and bombing Iran. John McCain, one of the most senior US foreign policy senators, famously sang his song about "Bomb, bond, Iran".
Both sides use rhetoric to appeal to their hardliners, but it does not mean that they will actually go to war. Iran has used proxies against Israel around the world, but Israel has also supported terrorist groups within Iran and has assassinated Iranian scientists. There are few angels in the Middle East or anywhere for that matter. It is time to see if peace rather than further bloodshed can improve our relations with Iran. America has the overwhelming strength to go to war at any time that it is really threatened by Iran.
Senior American and Israeli officials also make many inflammatory comments about going to war and bombing Iran. John McCain, one of the most senior US foreign policy senators, famously sang his song about "Bomb, bond, Iran".
Both sides use rhetoric to appeal to their hardliners, but it does not mean that they will actually go to war. Iran has used proxies against Israel around the world, but Israel has also supported terrorist groups within Iran and has assassinated Iranian scientists. There are few angels in the Middle East or anywhere for that matter. It is time to see if peace rather than further bloodshed can improve our relations with Iran. America has the overwhelming strength to go to war at any time that it is really threatened by Iran.
Israel is a state ruled by right wing religious zealots who answer to and are controlled by Netanyahu . He has clearly and consistently reiterated his goals I.e. destruction of any middle eastern neighbor that dares to acquire a nuclear weapon that threatens Israel which has >300 nuclear weapons of its own and the genocide of the Palestinian people's who were living peacefully in Palestine before being forced out of their ancestral homelands by the perfidy of Britain and France geopolitics based on oil.
When Roger Cohen will the Jewish Faith concede that all are created equal.
and really be democrats...and when will the Muslim Faith also concede this
same prinicipal...of government by the people for the people is the only
solution in any nation...Israel is a refuge not a "right" for the Jewish people.
There are Christians and Muslims in Israel...Oh when will the angst of
the Israelites cease...and allow peace in our time.???
and really be democrats...and when will the Muslim Faith also concede this
same prinicipal...of government by the people for the people is the only
solution in any nation...Israel is a refuge not a "right" for the Jewish people.
There are Christians and Muslims in Israel...Oh when will the angst of
the Israelites cease...and allow peace in our time.???
1
As the child of a Jewish father and a Catholic mother, I have no spiritual connection to either Israel or the Vatican. I am an American first. If I criticize the Catholic church, I am not branded anti-Christian. If I criticize the US Senate or certain US government policies, I am exercising my patriotic and democratic freedom. If I criticize Israel and its leadership, I would be branded a self-loathing (half) Jew or an anti-Semite by many people like Netanyahu. Yes, Israel is an ally but American foreign policy cannot be dictated by well-funded lobbyists for this country. And it is infuriating and insulting that Netanyahu is so meddlesome in US politics. Equally outrageous is that he preys upon the fears and ignorance of the American population whether they be Jewish or not. (When there was a push for Scottish independence, I don't recall anyone calling my mother telling her that it was in the best interest of all Scottish Americans to urge the US to support this effort.) It is disgusting that so many members of Congress are in lock step with Netanyahu and members of AIPAC and employ insidious and predatory tactics to push for their selfish agenda.
29
Ok, let's say Roland Moskowitz and Sandra Lippy call their representatives and ask them not to approve the deal; and as a result, suppose there are enough votes to override the presidents veto; now what? With the rest of the world approving the deal we will look like fools. This deal has the blessing of all who are experts in the field.
Prime Minister Netanyahu would do the United States and the rest of the world a great service if he devotes his energy to working on the two state solution.
Prime Minister Netanyahu would do the United States and the rest of the world a great service if he devotes his energy to working on the two state solution.
12
Courageous voices here, undeniably beautiful. Who can imagine the ordeal of being hounded as these witnesses have been, to adopt a lesser standard for themselves, by a figure they deserve to trust. How unpardonable it has been of an Israeli prime minister to contest that virtue at such a time, is not for one to say. But it is more bizarre than one can believe, that Speaker Boehner should appraise him as a Winston Churchill. Thank you for sharing these citizens' witness, it can only help to sustain the bond you close with.
2
Netanyahu insisted, against all evidence, that he rejects the deal “because I want to prevent war.”
So - what evidence do yo have that the country that still, today calls for the physical destruction of Israel and clearly and explicitly says that it will continue to work against US interests and has lied and cheated about it nuclear program until now - will honor the agreement?
And - anyway - the agreement allows Iran to do anything they want in 10 years. Not to mention the secret parts of the agreement. Do you have access to them? If not - then why are you so supportive of what you do not know?
I generally vote democratic but it seems to me that fat too many people view this agreement as just a part of the game "I am against all of them" played by the GOP and the Dems.
That is not a good enough reason to support the agreement!
So - what evidence do yo have that the country that still, today calls for the physical destruction of Israel and clearly and explicitly says that it will continue to work against US interests and has lied and cheated about it nuclear program until now - will honor the agreement?
And - anyway - the agreement allows Iran to do anything they want in 10 years. Not to mention the secret parts of the agreement. Do you have access to them? If not - then why are you so supportive of what you do not know?
I generally vote democratic but it seems to me that fat too many people view this agreement as just a part of the game "I am against all of them" played by the GOP and the Dems.
That is not a good enough reason to support the agreement!
no evidence, sir.
except the world, the 5 major powers, are all in favor of this, and if iran does as you fear they will be a bigger pariah than ever. and in that case, unlikely i think, we will have time to respond, given the unprecedented surveillance regime created by this treaty.
the physical destruction of israel is ugly rhetoric but just rhetoric. just ask Shin Bet. and the 60% of iranians under 35 are more interested in joining the world at large than risking an nuclear conflagration.
in the worst case scenario, also, isn't war later better than war this year? it's not like our overwhelming superiority will change over the next 15 yrs
except the world, the 5 major powers, are all in favor of this, and if iran does as you fear they will be a bigger pariah than ever. and in that case, unlikely i think, we will have time to respond, given the unprecedented surveillance regime created by this treaty.
the physical destruction of israel is ugly rhetoric but just rhetoric. just ask Shin Bet. and the 60% of iranians under 35 are more interested in joining the world at large than risking an nuclear conflagration.
in the worst case scenario, also, isn't war later better than war this year? it's not like our overwhelming superiority will change over the next 15 yrs
1
The statement was that there is some kind of "evidence". I would like to what the evidence is.
Personally, I see no evidence and Mr Cohen presented none. I would like to be made aware of whatever it is that Mr Cohen says is evidence so that I can judge for myself.
Personally, I see no evidence and Mr Cohen presented none. I would like to be made aware of whatever it is that Mr Cohen says is evidence so that I can judge for myself.
"the agreement allows Iran to do anything they want in 10 years"
No. It includes a permanent ban on nuclear weapons.
Other nations to support their own safety would help support that.
They won't help us ruin this deal.
No. It includes a permanent ban on nuclear weapons.
Other nations to support their own safety would help support that.
They won't help us ruin this deal.
1
I would be very interested to know how Mr.
Cohen knows what most Americans want. This column is just another opinionated, unsubstantiated piece of propaganda.
Cohen knows what most Americans want. This column is just another opinionated, unsubstantiated piece of propaganda.
2
Totally agree with Mr. Cohen. Bibi has flaunted his power, insulted Pres. Obama, and consequently, the American people. Jews are divided. For many, it's JStreet that speaks to/for Jews, yet JStreet is denied a legitimacy among powerful Jewish organizations. Jews don't follow lockstep with everything Israel does, because some things it does are wrong. During negotiations with Kerry, Bibi announced new housing on the West Bank, a deliberate insult to the negotiator and this country. We support Israel with money and our vote wherever necessary, the UN primarily, making enemies all the way. Israel simply believes we must follow whatever it does. Sen. Schummer is following blindly, even going so far as to tell his constituency that he will protect "Eretz Yisroel"(sp?). The question comes down to: Whose interests do we serve, ours or Israel's? Are we being pushed to fight Israel's war? I don't want that and I think many Americans Jews and others are against another war, now, involved as we are in 2/3 losing or holding situations. What many fail to understand is that the Evangelical right, Republicans, for biblical reasons unquestionably support Israel. Jesus is supposed to arrive after all the biblical territory (Greater Israel) is achieved.
SS system, Medicare/Medicaid are said to be in financial trouble, our infrastructure is in a perilous situation, and still...we give money to Israel...and other countries...and wars? Can we not get our priorities right?
SS system, Medicare/Medicaid are said to be in financial trouble, our infrastructure is in a perilous situation, and still...we give money to Israel...and other countries...and wars? Can we not get our priorities right?
15
This is not an issue that requires approval by the American Jewish community. The only question is whether this deal is good for the United States. The answer is no. It is not easy to dismiss the chants of Death to America by declaring that Iranians love America. Really, says who? You say so but how do we know it's true? These "negotiations" were endless, over ten years. And whom do we have as participants? China and Russia- the biggest troublemakers in the world. Stop with the Jews. It is irrelevant what a Cleveland MD or a Boca retiree think. Just as it is irrelevant what Sander Levin thinks. He represents no one but his district and I doubt that he has any particular nuclear knowledge. We still live in a democracy and loyalty to America is much more important that loyalty to the Democratic Party and its lame duck incumbent.
Anti-Semites are having a field day with charges of Dual loyalty. Write about that canard instead. Is any other American group condemned in such a manner? It is politically incorrect. Are Latinos who support amnesty for illegal immigrants attacked because they are Latinos?
Remember Yuri Andropov-he was supposed to be a secret liberal because he drank Scotch whisky. There is just as much reason to believe that the Iranians love America because they use the internet. That is nonsense.
I am just wondering what Eduard Benes, Jan Masaryk and a generation sacrificed to Nazi Germany's diplomacy would have to say about this.
Anti-Semites are having a field day with charges of Dual loyalty. Write about that canard instead. Is any other American group condemned in such a manner? It is politically incorrect. Are Latinos who support amnesty for illegal immigrants attacked because they are Latinos?
Remember Yuri Andropov-he was supposed to be a secret liberal because he drank Scotch whisky. There is just as much reason to believe that the Iranians love America because they use the internet. That is nonsense.
I am just wondering what Eduard Benes, Jan Masaryk and a generation sacrificed to Nazi Germany's diplomacy would have to say about this.
1
This is all politics and I'm fine with it including the horrible adds that are being financed by the pro-Israeli lobby to kill this deal. We have free speech in this country.
The reality is the war mongers have weekend the US considerably. We have had 2 failed wars, our economy was brought to the brink of destruction and our countries infrastructure is failing down. Our hand has been weekend by the war mongers on both sides of the aisle.
I believe the President has made the best deal possible under the circumstance he has been put under by the mistakes of military intervention by both the Bush administration and his own administration.
The President seems to finally get it after escalating in Afghanistan and wrongly taking sides in a civil conflict in Libya.
With the exception of the war monger right in the US the rest of the world knows the US is a paper tiger. Paper deals are the best we can do. It's time we stopped pretending that we are the biggest bully on the block. How many times do we need to get knocked down to know it's time for another approach?
The reality is the war mongers have weekend the US considerably. We have had 2 failed wars, our economy was brought to the brink of destruction and our countries infrastructure is failing down. Our hand has been weekend by the war mongers on both sides of the aisle.
I believe the President has made the best deal possible under the circumstance he has been put under by the mistakes of military intervention by both the Bush administration and his own administration.
The President seems to finally get it after escalating in Afghanistan and wrongly taking sides in a civil conflict in Libya.
With the exception of the war monger right in the US the rest of the world knows the US is a paper tiger. Paper deals are the best we can do. It's time we stopped pretending that we are the biggest bully on the block. How many times do we need to get knocked down to know it's time for another approach?
6
The ADL is a joke. They were organized to combat Anti-Semitism But they have adopted the NEW-Anti-Semitism as the object of their anger. The New Anti-Semitism is a construct of the Israeli foreign ministry used to attack any foreign opponent of Israeli government policy whether it is opposition to the "deal" or opposition to a just resolution of the Palestinian occupation.
18
I recall in the sixties and early seventies Israel was calling for the Palestinians to recognize Israel's "right to exist ". When Sadat pulled Egypt out of the permanent war against Israel, the weight of the threat had diminished. The Palestinians by this time had recognized Israel's right to exist, but without Egypt threatening the Southern flank the Israel was increasing settlements in the West Bank and making plans to incorporate it into Israel.
Bibi and his party oppose the Iran Deal because they want the USA to fight Iran for them, because Iran remains their greatest threat, and because Israel now wants to steal the West Bank. The GOP is Bibi's natural ally because the war profiteers who contribute to and own the GOP are quite content to fill their pockets with a trillion dollars or more every ten or fifteen years from a war in the Mideast.
The irony of it all is that the relationship between Israel and Iran has been cooperative at times. Iran is the strongest power in the Middle East since W and his neocons invaded and neutralized Iraq, Iran's historic enemy. The big game in the Middle East is the eternal war between Shiite and Sunni. Israel could ally with Saudi Arabia on the Sunni side. Don't rule out that Israel could at some point ally with Iran on the Shiite side. Presumed bitter enemies often ally in the Middle East when interest dictates. Christian Crusader Kingdoms often allied with Muslim Kingdoms against each other when it was expedient.
Bibi and his party oppose the Iran Deal because they want the USA to fight Iran for them, because Iran remains their greatest threat, and because Israel now wants to steal the West Bank. The GOP is Bibi's natural ally because the war profiteers who contribute to and own the GOP are quite content to fill their pockets with a trillion dollars or more every ten or fifteen years from a war in the Mideast.
The irony of it all is that the relationship between Israel and Iran has been cooperative at times. Iran is the strongest power in the Middle East since W and his neocons invaded and neutralized Iraq, Iran's historic enemy. The big game in the Middle East is the eternal war between Shiite and Sunni. Israel could ally with Saudi Arabia on the Sunni side. Don't rule out that Israel could at some point ally with Iran on the Shiite side. Presumed bitter enemies often ally in the Middle East when interest dictates. Christian Crusader Kingdoms often allied with Muslim Kingdoms against each other when it was expedient.
6
I don't understand all this hostility and resentment to Netanyahu, and by implication, to Israel. Netanyahu's lobbying against the Iran deal is no different from any other case of one government trying to influence the decisions of another government in its favor. Netanyahu claims that the deal is bad for both the US and Israel, but obviously he is looking out for the interests of Israel first and foremost. And he perceives that there are many US citizens - many, though certainly not all Jews - who also care about Israeli interests, in addition to caring about American interests.
If Japan were to lobby the US, in part by getting American-Japenese citizens to speak up on behalf of Japanese interests, against a deal that the Japanese government believed would significantly skew the regional balance of power in favor of its rival, China. Would we be seeing vicious attacks on PM Shinzo Abe? No. We'd say: "yes, of course, it's his job as Japan's PM to do everything he can to protect Japanese security interests." And of the American-Japanese citizens we'd say, given their heritage, cultural and familiar ties to Japan, they have an understandable stake in the issue, and can of course help make the case on behalf of Abe's government.
That, my friends, is how international politics works. We too would do the exact same thing if we weren't a superpower.
But when it's the Jews, then all of a sudden the language of treason, dual loyalty, and pernicious subversion come rushing in.
If Japan were to lobby the US, in part by getting American-Japenese citizens to speak up on behalf of Japanese interests, against a deal that the Japanese government believed would significantly skew the regional balance of power in favor of its rival, China. Would we be seeing vicious attacks on PM Shinzo Abe? No. We'd say: "yes, of course, it's his job as Japan's PM to do everything he can to protect Japanese security interests." And of the American-Japanese citizens we'd say, given their heritage, cultural and familiar ties to Japan, they have an understandable stake in the issue, and can of course help make the case on behalf of Abe's government.
That, my friends, is how international politics works. We too would do the exact same thing if we weren't a superpower.
But when it's the Jews, then all of a sudden the language of treason, dual loyalty, and pernicious subversion come rushing in.
5
This is a poor comparison and is off the mark.
1. If any foreign Prime Minister or King or President caucuses with the opposition party, and blatantly tries to interfere in internal US affairs (elections, deals, etc.) then he or she will be similarly condemned. As far as I can search and tell no one other than Netanyahu has done so, has gone so far and been so blatant in doing so.
2. Japan does not receive $billions in cash, military aid, loans that are later forgiven and other benefits from the US Taxpayer, beyond WWII events and the Marshall plan. Japan is self-sustaining; Israel is not.
3. Japan lost a war and since then has become a Pacifist nation and even though that may be changing, there has been no harm - so to speak - from Japan. GM and Ford may dispute that but their gripe is economic at best and not political or military.
4. Japan does have some territorial issues with neighbors over a few Islands but as opposed to Israel they do not occupy and suppress an entire people and keep doing so for 50 years.
5. Finally, the issue is not with Jews or Japanese and their race, religion or belief system. The issue is what Israel has done, is doing everyday and keeps promising to do. It is the ACTIONSZ of this country's (Israel) government on a day to day basis that brings such condemnation not the looks or the books or the beliefs or moses or buddha.
1. If any foreign Prime Minister or King or President caucuses with the opposition party, and blatantly tries to interfere in internal US affairs (elections, deals, etc.) then he or she will be similarly condemned. As far as I can search and tell no one other than Netanyahu has done so, has gone so far and been so blatant in doing so.
2. Japan does not receive $billions in cash, military aid, loans that are later forgiven and other benefits from the US Taxpayer, beyond WWII events and the Marshall plan. Japan is self-sustaining; Israel is not.
3. Japan lost a war and since then has become a Pacifist nation and even though that may be changing, there has been no harm - so to speak - from Japan. GM and Ford may dispute that but their gripe is economic at best and not political or military.
4. Japan does have some territorial issues with neighbors over a few Islands but as opposed to Israel they do not occupy and suppress an entire people and keep doing so for 50 years.
5. Finally, the issue is not with Jews or Japanese and their race, religion or belief system. The issue is what Israel has done, is doing everyday and keeps promising to do. It is the ACTIONSZ of this country's (Israel) government on a day to day basis that brings such condemnation not the looks or the books or the beliefs or moses or buddha.
1
OK, what evidence do you have the French, German, British, or any other government spends enormous sums creating and supporting shell groups in the US to influence US policy? There are not any.
1
"Netanyahu's lobbying against the Iran deal is no different from any other case of one government trying to influence the decisions of another government"
Yes, it is different. Night and day different. No other country could or would dare do what Israel is doing.
Yes, it is different. Night and day different. No other country could or would dare do what Israel is doing.
1
YES! Every Jew like Schumer (and every American) should ask himself why the Republicans are 100% lined up to vote no. Is the folly of the deal so 100% certain? Of course not, most knowledgably people are in favor. The Republicans regimented response is based upon their oft stated view that Republicans should always oppose Obama "even when his proposals are for what is best for the country." It is shameful for a man like Schumer or any "Jewish leader" to give in to this Republican orchestrated pressure, a real "Profile in Cowardice'.
19
I often wonder why we should care what Israelis thinks about America’s relations with other countries. But we do, thanks to the realities of the power of fat purses and a political system that can’t be sustained without massive amounts of cash.
Some Jewish people are concerned that anything less than a war for regime change in Iran is an existential threat to Israel. Mr. Cohen and others make a convincing case that is not necessarily so. Try as I might I can’t see a significant downside to approving the agreement negotiated by the P5+1. Only a tiny group of supporters of Bibi Netanyahu seem to disagree. Sorry, we can’t stop the world and let you off, although that might have its merits.
It would help if all sides toned down the belligerent rhetoric. An Iranian threat/claim that “the Zionist regime will disappear from the pages of time” (which Israelis have conveniently translated as a threat to “wipe Israel off the map”), and to retaliate in kind should Israel attack, perhaps would not have been made if Israel would stop assassinating Iran’s scientists, hacking into and destroying Iranian equipment, targeting Iran with air and sea borne missiles, and periodic war gaming for an attack on Iran. Give peace a chance.
Some Jewish people are concerned that anything less than a war for regime change in Iran is an existential threat to Israel. Mr. Cohen and others make a convincing case that is not necessarily so. Try as I might I can’t see a significant downside to approving the agreement negotiated by the P5+1. Only a tiny group of supporters of Bibi Netanyahu seem to disagree. Sorry, we can’t stop the world and let you off, although that might have its merits.
It would help if all sides toned down the belligerent rhetoric. An Iranian threat/claim that “the Zionist regime will disappear from the pages of time” (which Israelis have conveniently translated as a threat to “wipe Israel off the map”), and to retaliate in kind should Israel attack, perhaps would not have been made if Israel would stop assassinating Iran’s scientists, hacking into and destroying Iranian equipment, targeting Iran with air and sea borne missiles, and periodic war gaming for an attack on Iran. Give peace a chance.
4
The anecdotal references by Roger Cohen today capture the brazen efforts by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to pit American against American for the purpose of defeating approval of the Iran nuclear agreement. He has played upon Republican opposition on Capitol Hill to anything President Obama proposes on any subject to bolster their opposition to a deal which virtually every independent expert agrees is the best result for the security of both Israel and the United States. In a similar fashion, Netanyahu has tried to manipulate the fears of American Jews to pressure friends and family to follow his lead – regardless of its dearth of persuasive facts.
For those of us who know the individuals profiled and interviewed in today’s column, their conscientious attempts to make the correct decision about this crucial agreement are not surprising. How proud we are that they are resisting the heavy-handed pressure of Netanyahu, a self-interested politician whose vision for Israel has always been short-sighted, narrow and crude!
For those of us who know the individuals profiled and interviewed in today’s column, their conscientious attempts to make the correct decision about this crucial agreement are not surprising. How proud we are that they are resisting the heavy-handed pressure of Netanyahu, a self-interested politician whose vision for Israel has always been short-sighted, narrow and crude!
5
I do not agree with Prime Minister Netanyahu's approach, but after reading a lot about the deal, I do not believe it is the best deal that could have been achieved and that it will allow Iran a path to the bomb, international legitimacy and, yes, large sums of money to fund Bashar Assad, Hezbollah and the Houthis. If Ms. Lippy thinks that talking with Iran's leaders - anti-Semitic, Holocaust deniers, and serious violators of human rights - will make a difference, I believe she is naive
4
No one has said that this is the best deal that could have been achieved. However, it is the deal that has been achieved and if the sanctions fall away, there is no better deal. The alternative will be war.
"I do not believe it is the best deal that could have been achieved"
It is not the best deal that can be imagined by opponents. It is the best that could be achieved, after two years and many extensions. It is the best we could get from Iran. It satisfied everyone else.
That money it allows Iran is because Iran is one of the original oil rich petro states. It is rich. It will be rich until oil runs out. All of that money is their money for oil they already sold and delivered. Netanyahu wants to somehow change that reality. Impossible.
It is not the best deal that can be imagined by opponents. It is the best that could be achieved, after two years and many extensions. It is the best we could get from Iran. It satisfied everyone else.
That money it allows Iran is because Iran is one of the original oil rich petro states. It is rich. It will be rich until oil runs out. All of that money is their money for oil they already sold and delivered. Netanyahu wants to somehow change that reality. Impossible.
1
Coming from the most influential power on earth that "this is the best achievable deal for America" only shames us. What's even worse is that with only a few
upgrades that would have been inline with Obama's own redlines, as well as those of the UN IAEA, it could have been a good treaty, even one the people of
Israel could trust.
What's even more shameful is that what I call "upgrades" are really deletions
we made in caving into such stringent Iranian demands that that you'd think
Teheran, not DC, held most of the cards, not the other way round.
Until now I have yet witness the phenomenon of both our leaders and many of the treaty's supporters feeling the need to apologize for a major diplomatic initiative that might otherwise have proven a triumph and led to more fruitful American led diplomacy between Israelis and Palestinians.
And while your correspondent asserts Israel might still have America's eye, diplomatically we just sold it down the river. Not since Eisenhower-Dulles, who in 1956 forced Israel out of Sinai upon the strength of guarantees that were not upheld thereby causing the Six Day War, has this occurred. Ironically, it was also Eisenhower-Dulles who were responsible for the overthrow of a democratically elected government in Iran, which is what brought the Shah then the Mullahs to power in the first place.
in the first place.
upgrades that would have been inline with Obama's own redlines, as well as those of the UN IAEA, it could have been a good treaty, even one the people of
Israel could trust.
What's even more shameful is that what I call "upgrades" are really deletions
we made in caving into such stringent Iranian demands that that you'd think
Teheran, not DC, held most of the cards, not the other way round.
Until now I have yet witness the phenomenon of both our leaders and many of the treaty's supporters feeling the need to apologize for a major diplomatic initiative that might otherwise have proven a triumph and led to more fruitful American led diplomacy between Israelis and Palestinians.
And while your correspondent asserts Israel might still have America's eye, diplomatically we just sold it down the river. Not since Eisenhower-Dulles, who in 1956 forced Israel out of Sinai upon the strength of guarantees that were not upheld thereby causing the Six Day War, has this occurred. Ironically, it was also Eisenhower-Dulles who were responsible for the overthrow of a democratically elected government in Iran, which is what brought the Shah then the Mullahs to power in the first place.
in the first place.
4
Regardless of the annoying personalities involved (and Bibi, IMO, is annoying), I think that history must be the best measure of what the future will look like. In this view, history must be at the heart of our discussion, whether or not we like the picture it paints. There are a few examples in the 19th and 20th centuries that are disturbingly analogous to the situation faced by Israel. In particular, the guarantee that the Western World would defend Czechoslovakia against the Nazis (Nazi leadership clearly stated their intentions, as does the Iranian leadership), comes to mind. Here is the problem - in spite of noble intentions by the US (and I believe that intentions are good, including the intentions of Cohen's article), the facts on the ground are nearly always historically far less noble. Will it be different this time?
28
Equating the relationship between the U.S. and Israel today with that Between the Czechs and Britain in the 1930s involves a serious distortion of the facts. The U.S. has provided enormous financial and military aid over many years to the Israelis; supported them, sometimes virtually alone, in international disputes; and remains today committed to the welfare of their country. The British and the French grudgingly extended guarantees to the Czechs as a way to halt Hitler, but there was no history of close ties between the two parties to the agreement.
To imply that the current agreement resembles Munich defies logic. In the first place, the accusation casts unjust aspersions on the integrity of President Obama. In the second place, it ignores the highly relevant fact the Israel deploys a far stronger military force than Iran, a force that includes numerous nuclear weapons.
To imply that the current agreement resembles Munich defies logic. In the first place, the accusation casts unjust aspersions on the integrity of President Obama. In the second place, it ignores the highly relevant fact the Israel deploys a far stronger military force than Iran, a force that includes numerous nuclear weapons.
Neither al Qaeda nor ISIS/ISIL nor Iran are an existential threat to Israel on par with Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan or the Soviet Union.
And Israel with it's nuclear arsenal and the most powerful military in the Middle East is no Czechoslovakia, Poland, France, Holland, Belgium or United Kingdom.
Cut the Munich Chamberlain and Hitler comparison historical nonsense.
What Germans did to fellow Germans was the issue.
No one knows better the ugly evil wrought by "facts on the ground" than the Palestinians living under Israeli dominion in the West Bank and Gaza
And Israel with it's nuclear arsenal and the most powerful military in the Middle East is no Czechoslovakia, Poland, France, Holland, Belgium or United Kingdom.
Cut the Munich Chamberlain and Hitler comparison historical nonsense.
What Germans did to fellow Germans was the issue.
No one knows better the ugly evil wrought by "facts on the ground" than the Palestinians living under Israeli dominion in the West Bank and Gaza
I think the worrisome WWII analogy is to be found earlier in history than the Munich Agreement. The Treaty of Versailles, with its punishing sanctions on Germany, led to economic catastrophe in Germany which led directly to the rise of the Nazis, their scapegoating of the Jewish population and the invasion of the Sudetenland and beyond. If we isolate Iran and punish Iran more, I wouldn't want to see that or worse happen there, either.
With an "ally" like Israel, we don't need enemies.
22
Fareed Zakaria defended the deal poignantly on CNN yesterday--in a response to Senator Schumer's opposition ("We must have read a different treaty...").
I discussed the deal with members of my newly formed Havurah in Wake Forest, NC yesterday--taking a straw poll before and after the discussion. Support and opposition were equal at the beginning of the discussion. At the end there was a slight shift in favor of the deal.
I discussed the deal with members of my newly formed Havurah in Wake Forest, NC yesterday--taking a straw poll before and after the discussion. Support and opposition were equal at the beginning of the discussion. At the end there was a slight shift in favor of the deal.
6
President Obama chose to make this agreement into a partisan issue that is further dividing the nation and making it more respectable for people to make borderline anti-Semitic remarks and get away with it. Left unexplained is why he did not follow the reasoning of Alexander Hamilton In Federalist Paper 75 and submit it to Congress as a treaty. I guess Obama is much wiser than Hamilton was. However, I do wonder whether Hamilton would have been buddy-buddy for over 20 years with the likes of Rev. Wright. I will never understand how American Jews have twice voted for a man who exhibited such obscene judgment. True patriotism does not mean always following the party line, whether Democratic or Republican. Alas, what does this writer, a former USAF officer, know about such things?
3
The level of antisemitism in America is the lowest in history.
The level of criticism of Israel is the highest in history.
The ploy of shutting people up by accusing them of antisemitism will no longer work!
The level of criticism of Israel is the highest in history.
The ploy of shutting people up by accusing them of antisemitism will no longer work!
1
Worse than becoming an isolated shtetl Israel, failure to ratify the Iran deal may ultimately cause an upsurge of resentment and antisemitism in this country, particularly if we are later obliged to spend lives to rectify the situation. Israel should never roll over and play dead in order to satisfy the rest of the world, but it should avoid the trap that Jews have occasionally fallen into historically which is to put themselves in a position where they can only reap hatred.
9
The gr eat thing about this deal is that it will show the world that Obama, Kerry and the rest of the Left are a bunch of fools. It is not the best way to achieve the goal of preventing Iran from getting the bomb, because it won't achieve it. As soon as the sanctions are lifted, Iran will probably go on its merry way, believing that the deal is illegitimate and knowing that it is unenforceable. Sanctions won't snap back, because the Russians have promised them otherwise, and even if they did, they are no deterrent as Obama has proclaimed, and no real punishment. And they know that Obama won't attack them if they violate the deal. They will probably wait until Obama and Kerry are out of town, but soon afterwards they will probably go for the bomb, and challenge the next president and or Netanyahu to attack them. And Israel either alone or with our help or maybe the help of the Saudis will attack because Israel, unlike us, can not rely on MAD to deter the mullahs if they get the bomb. They may truly be as fanatical as they profess to be.
So the deal means war and maybe a nuclear war in rather short order unless the mullahs recognize and are willing to acknowledge that they need the bomb like they need a hole in the head and make it clear to the world , a la Khadafi, despite the deal, that they don't have any nukes nor any plans to develop a nuke by dismantling their program and allow anytime anywhere inspections.
So the deal means war and maybe a nuclear war in rather short order unless the mullahs recognize and are willing to acknowledge that they need the bomb like they need a hole in the head and make it clear to the world , a la Khadafi, despite the deal, that they don't have any nukes nor any plans to develop a nuke by dismantling their program and allow anytime anywhere inspections.
3
Mr. Netanyahu and his American fans are big gamblers. In 2012 he gambled he could unseat President Obama, a bad bet as his candidate (per 538.com) never for even one day came within striking distance.
In trying to kill the Iran deal, he is betting the next U.S. president will be a Republican who will almost immediately launch a massive military strike against all of Iran's known nuclear facilities. If that doesn't happen -- either because a Democrat becomes president or a Republican president does a sober rethink when no longer chasing voting blocks -- Netanyahu's gamble will have disastrously backfired. The sanctions regime will be abandoned by Russia and China. Iran will get a bomb. And Netanyahu will be blamed. Justly.
In trying to kill the Iran deal, he is betting the next U.S. president will be a Republican who will almost immediately launch a massive military strike against all of Iran's known nuclear facilities. If that doesn't happen -- either because a Democrat becomes president or a Republican president does a sober rethink when no longer chasing voting blocks -- Netanyahu's gamble will have disastrously backfired. The sanctions regime will be abandoned by Russia and China. Iran will get a bomb. And Netanyahu will be blamed. Justly.
5
Bibi Netanyahu does not speak for all Jews. He does not even speak for all Israelis. Nor do either Sheldon Adelson nor Chuck Schumer nor even Abe Foxman speak for all American Jews. They certainly don't speak for ME.
Spending millions of dollars to say they want "a better deal" is worse than counter-productive when the opponents of THIS deal refuse to indicate WHAT would go into "a better deal" -- that Iran and/or our partners (they're certainly not all allies) in THIS deal would go along with. Crickets.
We should also remember that a great many of the people pushing for rejection of the deal, which realistically means military action, are the same people whose call for the invasion of Iraq, based on lies, has also resulted in making Iran the predominant military power in the region and for the growth of Al Qaeda and ISIL. Not a great endorsement.
And many of the others are explicitly motivated by a preference that the country fail rather than allow an uppity president to succeed. This is exacerbated by the fact that some of them are driven less by a love for Jews and the State of Israel than by a theology that sees a major war in the Middle East as a necessary precursor to the return of their savior, which in turn will be marked by the evaporation of those of us Jews who don't see their savior as the Messiah. (It would also result in the end of American society, but to fundamentalist Congresspeople, so what?)
There is no VALID reason to reject the deal.
Spending millions of dollars to say they want "a better deal" is worse than counter-productive when the opponents of THIS deal refuse to indicate WHAT would go into "a better deal" -- that Iran and/or our partners (they're certainly not all allies) in THIS deal would go along with. Crickets.
We should also remember that a great many of the people pushing for rejection of the deal, which realistically means military action, are the same people whose call for the invasion of Iraq, based on lies, has also resulted in making Iran the predominant military power in the region and for the growth of Al Qaeda and ISIL. Not a great endorsement.
And many of the others are explicitly motivated by a preference that the country fail rather than allow an uppity president to succeed. This is exacerbated by the fact that some of them are driven less by a love for Jews and the State of Israel than by a theology that sees a major war in the Middle East as a necessary precursor to the return of their savior, which in turn will be marked by the evaporation of those of us Jews who don't see their savior as the Messiah. (It would also result in the end of American society, but to fundamentalist Congresspeople, so what?)
There is no VALID reason to reject the deal.
31
As Thom Freidman wrote in the NYT`s in 2003 "if the top 25 members of the American Jewish organizations had been banished to an island there would have been no US invasion of Iraq. These same people & orgs have been pushing Congress to do trash Iran.
Ban AIPAC & its ilk . Regain control of Congress from AIPAC. No more US wars for Israel.
Ban AIPAC & its ilk . Regain control of Congress from AIPAC. No more US wars for Israel.
Thank you for bringing up the End Times belief. It is pernicious and frightening.
This has nothing to do with Netanyahu. Just about all political parties in Israel; right, left, and center oppose this deal. Rarely do Israelis agree on anything. That is a deep testimony to the extent they feel this is a bad deal.
If anything this is about Kerry's negotiating skills. He's not a good negotiator. Hillary would have done a better job. My local car dealer would have done a better job. My 5 year old does a better job when he wants a lollypop.
The feeling is that Kerry made it clear from the get-go that he was coming out with a deal. Everyone, including the Iranians, sensed that. The deal itself reflects that clearly.
Review the main points: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/07/14/world/middleeast/iran-nucl...
Arms embargo- Lifted after a few years.
Economic sanctions- Lifted.
Nuclear inspections- No anytime-anywhere. Instead a bizarre 24 day waiting period beholden to a complex bureaucratic process.
Developing Advanced Centrifuge- In ten years they are good to go.
Iran’s Past and Future Nuclear Work- Kerry caved. Again. No reports.
Release of Hostages- Again Kerry falls off the bike.
What to do now? At least plug the biggest holes in the deal. Get rid of the bizarre 24 day waiting period. Add a clause that extends the 10 year path. Blame congress. Tell Iran if they don't agree the US will unfortunately have to walk away and will not be responsible if the Israelis launch an air-raid next month. Use your leverage.
If anything this is about Kerry's negotiating skills. He's not a good negotiator. Hillary would have done a better job. My local car dealer would have done a better job. My 5 year old does a better job when he wants a lollypop.
The feeling is that Kerry made it clear from the get-go that he was coming out with a deal. Everyone, including the Iranians, sensed that. The deal itself reflects that clearly.
Review the main points: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/07/14/world/middleeast/iran-nucl...
Arms embargo- Lifted after a few years.
Economic sanctions- Lifted.
Nuclear inspections- No anytime-anywhere. Instead a bizarre 24 day waiting period beholden to a complex bureaucratic process.
Developing Advanced Centrifuge- In ten years they are good to go.
Iran’s Past and Future Nuclear Work- Kerry caved. Again. No reports.
Release of Hostages- Again Kerry falls off the bike.
What to do now? At least plug the biggest holes in the deal. Get rid of the bizarre 24 day waiting period. Add a clause that extends the 10 year path. Blame congress. Tell Iran if they don't agree the US will unfortunately have to walk away and will not be responsible if the Israelis launch an air-raid next month. Use your leverage.
4
Stunning. I can't believe that Netanyahu recycled Dick Cheney's old line about yellowcake.
Netanyahu ought to be smart enough to know that a substantial portion of the American electorate despises Dick Cheney. When my teenage son recounted the highlights from John Stewart's final show on Comedy Central, the first thing he told me about was the skit in which Darth Vader called in to complain about having been likened to Dick Cheney.
My son was six years old when Cheney left office.
Do you think Netanyahu is senile?
Netanyahu ought to be smart enough to know that a substantial portion of the American electorate despises Dick Cheney. When my teenage son recounted the highlights from John Stewart's final show on Comedy Central, the first thing he told me about was the skit in which Darth Vader called in to complain about having been likened to Dick Cheney.
My son was six years old when Cheney left office.
Do you think Netanyahu is senile?
7
Without a deal war becomes more likely. Well, that's exactly what Netanyahu wants, for the U.S. to go to war against Iran. Then Israel can commit atrocities against its neighbors with even greater impunity.
With "friends" like Israel and Saudi Arabia...
With "friends" like Israel and Saudi Arabia...
11
If I were trying to convince American Jews to support this deal I'd take a different tack. Ask them if they're tired of American youth being killed and maimed in wars with no moral purpose. Ask them if they're tired of wasting trillions of dollars to support fear mongering. Ask them if Bibi has a better plan for peace. And remind them they're Americans.
13
May I suggest you all read the article by the Iranian journalist Amir Taheri
Opinion: When Obama adopts the mullahs’ style
http://www.madisdead.blogspot.co.il/2015/08/opinion-when-obama-adopts-mu...
Opinion: When Obama adopts the mullahs’ style
http://www.madisdead.blogspot.co.il/2015/08/opinion-when-obama-adopts-mu...
2
To paraphrase an Israeli joke, Netanyahu's idea of focusing on the long-term is making sure his government makes it to the next Shabbat. For example, permanent occupation of the West Bank is not a viable solution, and Netanyahu's plan is to entrench it with more settlements. The Iran deal is intended to provide a 15 year window in which Iran does not build a nuclear bomb. What is Netanyahu's alternative? If it is for the US to bomb Iran on Israel's behalf perhaps he should say so, and also explain what he expects the outcome of that will be over the next 15 years. But even worse may be his foolhardy injection of partisanship into the Israel-US relationship. Only one of these countries needs the other, and the Jewish vote, which is not all in agreement with Netanyahu's worldview in any case, is not growing relative to the US population. Even if the Democrats had not won the popular vote in 5 out of the last 6 presidential elections, it's reasonable to assume that they will hold at least some of the levers of power at different times in the next 30-40 years. As an Israeli columnist wrote in the Times a few months ago, Israel is free to disagree with the US, but sometimes as the junior partner you just have to accept that the senior partner has made a decision and try to go along with it. Unless, of course, Netanyahu has a better long-term plan for Israel's security. Perhaps it might help his argument if he told us what that might be.
20
I'm a long-time supporter of Israel, but Netanyahu's lunatic intervention into our poltical conversation has made me rethink all of this. I'm coming to view the Israeli's as an extension of the right wing Republican Party. If Bibi wants to play this game, I think we ought to call his bluff and cutoff military aid to Israeal to teach them a lesson. No more American boys put on the line to support Israeli obstinance. See if the Israelis prefer to live in a world without the United States as a supporter. It might make them think a bit before ole Bibi shoots off his mouth again.
55
So you would jeopardize the security of an entire nation of 7 million innocent people for the actions of one man and a government? Wow. What a sound argument. You're quite the politician. I can imagine you're also a sound patriot coming from a country that invaded multiple nations and meddled in the politics of two soverign countries. Should the world have cut off all ties with your nation for that and ruined your life too for actions that were outside your control? Yes, yes, by all means, stand on the mountaintop and preach your moronic political ideals, blithe prophet. I'm sure you're sitting pretty in Nebraska, but some people in this world have bigger things to worry about than corn.
1
The Times has become a newspaper that is unable to report the weather without saying something derogatory about Mr. Netanayahu, and you do it here again today. He fought hard and will probably lose this round, but deserves great credit for making the deal a far better one than it otherwise would have been.
Looking ahead, I think it is a safe bet that Mr. Netanyahu will be making you and your readers unhappy on many more occasions in the future.
Looking ahead, I think it is a safe bet that Mr. Netanyahu will be making you and your readers unhappy on many more occasions in the future.
6
Netanayahu cannot open his mouth without saying something derogatory about anyone who disagrees with him.
When he insults POTUS he disrespects all Americans as well as the country he represents. What a blow hard. Netanayahu and Trump have a lot in common. Big egos and unrealistic expectations.
He's also an alarmist who's been consistently wrong. What is BiBi's plan? Do nothing and maintain the status quo?
Is this really what you admire and look for in a leader?
When he insults POTUS he disrespects all Americans as well as the country he represents. What a blow hard. Netanayahu and Trump have a lot in common. Big egos and unrealistic expectations.
He's also an alarmist who's been consistently wrong. What is BiBi's plan? Do nothing and maintain the status quo?
Is this really what you admire and look for in a leader?
1
"I think it is a safe bet that Mr. Netanyahu will be making you and your readers unhappy on many more occasions in the future."
Yes, he is a nasty piece of work. He's destroying all that generations of American Jews built as support in America. That was supposed to be used to establish Israel in safety, not to isolate it from the world with vetoes and defiance.
Yes, he is a nasty piece of work. He's destroying all that generations of American Jews built as support in America. That was supposed to be used to establish Israel in safety, not to isolate it from the world with vetoes and defiance.
1
You're partially right, A. Stanton. Every time Netanyahu opens his mouth, he makes us "unhappy" and has the same effect on thinking people everywhere. Hopefully, in the near future, Netanyahu will be only speaking as a private citizen, rather than as the leader of Israel.
I am an Oregonian. I just sent Senator Wyden a letter reminding him that he represents the citizens of Oregon, not the radicals of Israel. Oregon's senators have a fine record of opposing war: Senators Mark Hatfield and Wayne Morse both opposed the Vietnam war; Senator Wyden himself was one of 23 senators who voted against the Iraq war. I don't understand why the senator is undecided. The people of Oregon have consistently opposed war.
57
What does Netanyahu want, as an alternative to this deal? Notice that he doesn't say. The only thing I can see consistent with his position is for the U.S. to start a major war with Iran, to invade it and demolish its present nuclear hardware. That is what Netanyahu really wants to drag the U.S. into.
22
He's trying to manipulate the next president's administration into destroying Iran for him.
In a speech he delivered on June 23, 2015, Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei said that the American administration had initiated the nuclear talks with Iran during Ahmadinejad's term in office, based on a U.S. recognition of a nuclear Iran.
So according to MEMRI and Khamenei the whole Iran Deal is a farce. Everything was decided already in 2011 in secret negotiations. Don't Americans care that they have been bamboozled?
So according to MEMRI and Khamenei the whole Iran Deal is a farce. Everything was decided already in 2011 in secret negotiations. Don't Americans care that they have been bamboozled?
4
Nothing was 'decided' in so-called secret negotiations The two countries didn't negotiate directly with each other at all in 2011, but tried to open the door a bit for direct negotiations further down the road through middlemen of the Government of Qatar.
It appears that, by "moving in lockstep with Israel", the US's "major Jewish organizations" (Aipac, the American Jewish Committee and the Anti-Defamation League) are acting as agents of a foreign power, and ought to register as such.
64
Netanyahu alienates non-Jewish supporters of Israel! His disrespect for our President is obnoxious! His right wing policies are dangerous.
62
I agree. I may never again have automatic support for Israel after Netanyahu's open and repeated acts of disrespect for President Obama and for democracy in this country. His insults to the president and acceptance of Republican invitations to interfere in this country's political affairs are not the actions of an ally and friend.
There is no mention, in all of the so-called debate about this agreement, of the 100-200 nuclear warheads that Israel already has but will not admit to having. Israel has not signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty, nor has it signed the International Atomic Energy Agreement. Iran is a signatory to both agreements. I fear the use of nuclear weapons by Israel, especially under the leadership of a warmonger like Netanyahu, than I do their use by Iran. We negotiated with a sworn enemy, the USSR, that had thousands of nuclear warheads and the ICBMs capable of delivering them anywhere in the world. These negotiations, as ferociously opposed in the 1980s as the negotiations with Iran are today, made the world safer for all of us.
10
The Soviet Union and the United States were allies during World War II. Not exactly sworn enemies.
Why is Bibi not worried about Russia with a massive nuclear stockpile? And what about the rogue Pakistan army with nuclear weapons? Has Bibi ever been to Pakistan? They are far more anti-Israel and anti-American than Iranians!
4
Jacque
Pakistan & Israel have an understading.
Pakistan & Israel have an understading.
The polls on US Jews are worthless, as Nathan Guttman writes in The Forward (no friend of Mr. Netanyahu)
http://forward.com/news/318762/nathan-polls/
American Jews can decide whether the deal is good for them qua Americans/American Jews/Democrats/Republicans/whatever.
They cannot decide whether the deal is good for Israel.
It is not. Not a single Israeli party has come out in its favor. Some in Israel have claimed that it is a done deal so why keep fighting, or it is necessary to make up with Mr. Obama or that opposition puts American Jews in an uncomfortable position. The generals or other leaders who come out in "favor" of the deal are of this ilk. As for the deal itself, it is bad and Israeli polls, for whatever they are worth, put the opposition close to the 80 per cent.
So American Jews, decide what you want, how you want, but do not try and convince me that you have my best interests at heart if you support the deal, but your call.
http://forward.com/news/318762/nathan-polls/
American Jews can decide whether the deal is good for them qua Americans/American Jews/Democrats/Republicans/whatever.
They cannot decide whether the deal is good for Israel.
It is not. Not a single Israeli party has come out in its favor. Some in Israel have claimed that it is a done deal so why keep fighting, or it is necessary to make up with Mr. Obama or that opposition puts American Jews in an uncomfortable position. The generals or other leaders who come out in "favor" of the deal are of this ilk. As for the deal itself, it is bad and Israeli polls, for whatever they are worth, put the opposition close to the 80 per cent.
So American Jews, decide what you want, how you want, but do not try and convince me that you have my best interests at heart if you support the deal, but your call.
5
There is always the assumption based on nothing that countries like the United States and Israel (as well as Russia, France, India and Pakistan and whoever else) somehow are rational and not murderous and have leaders that are responsible and sane. The leaders in Iran of course are not any better. These countries and leaders share so much in common.
The U.S. an out of control humiliated nuclear power waged (still waging ) two wars of aggression against Iraq and Afghanistan. Two countries that neighbor Iran. There had been debate when things were at their worst whether or not to use tactical nuclear weapons. All the while presidential candidate John McCain was singing little ditties about bombing Iran. And of course the U. S. has already dropped two atomic bombs so it is perfectly capable of doing almost anything and rationalizing it away.
This deal re-enforces the notion that the leaders of nuclear powers somehow are mature and not driven by power needs, paranoia and and murderous desire to impose their will on vulnerable populations. A totally ridiculous assumption. Sadly most of the opposition to the deal is based on wanting an even more belligerent and bullying foreign policy. A very destructive and dangerous stance.
The U.S. an out of control humiliated nuclear power waged (still waging ) two wars of aggression against Iraq and Afghanistan. Two countries that neighbor Iran. There had been debate when things were at their worst whether or not to use tactical nuclear weapons. All the while presidential candidate John McCain was singing little ditties about bombing Iran. And of course the U. S. has already dropped two atomic bombs so it is perfectly capable of doing almost anything and rationalizing it away.
This deal re-enforces the notion that the leaders of nuclear powers somehow are mature and not driven by power needs, paranoia and and murderous desire to impose their will on vulnerable populations. A totally ridiculous assumption. Sadly most of the opposition to the deal is based on wanting an even more belligerent and bullying foreign policy. A very destructive and dangerous stance.
1
In the early 19th century, the Emperor Napoleon had conquered Europe and was advised he had a Jewish problem on his hands. In response, he convened the Second Sanhedrin to ask the rabbis whether Jews owed their primary allegiance to their co-religionists or their country of residence. At the time Jews were not full citizens of their European countries of residence. The rabbis were clear that Jews adhered primarily to the country which housed them. As a result Napoleon declared that Jews were to be granted citizenship of their adherent respective countries, a move that caused many non-Jews,-- notably Catholics at that time --to call him the Anti-Christ.
I am an American. I am also a Jew.
Netanyahu has a Napoleon complex.
I am also a psychiatrist.
Unfortunately, I've met people like him before . It seldom ends well because delusions are not easily treatable.
I am an American. I am also a Jew.
Netanyahu has a Napoleon complex.
I am also a psychiatrist.
Unfortunately, I've met people like him before . It seldom ends well because delusions are not easily treatable.
5
Netanyahu has a "Napoleon Complex"?
Hardly. General Bonaparte, a successful army commander, overthrew his superiors then attempted to harness the power unleashed by the French Revolution to install himself and members of his immediate family as the premier royal dynasty in Europe. His were actually a series of brief, violent campaigns the French call "coups de main". The "Napoleonic Wars", as they are now known, were actually a series of attacks by him against long-established European royal dynasties that rejected him as a social upstart, "the new kid on the block", if you will.
Netanyahu's world view is entirely different. He sees himself as the guardian and savior of the Jewish People. His is a Messianic Complex.
Hardly. General Bonaparte, a successful army commander, overthrew his superiors then attempted to harness the power unleashed by the French Revolution to install himself and members of his immediate family as the premier royal dynasty in Europe. His were actually a series of brief, violent campaigns the French call "coups de main". The "Napoleonic Wars", as they are now known, were actually a series of attacks by him against long-established European royal dynasties that rejected him as a social upstart, "the new kid on the block", if you will.
Netanyahu's world view is entirely different. He sees himself as the guardian and savior of the Jewish People. His is a Messianic Complex.
Excellent, thoughtful article that should be read by every American Jew. US should not be tied at the hip to Israel as the GOP is attempting to do, American Jews can support Israel without compromising their patriotism for this country. Truman put an embargo on US arms when Israel was formed and was desperately unprepared to defend itself. Eisenhower made Israel, Britain and France back down in 1956 when they invaded Egypt. Reagan condemned Israel for bombing Iraq's nuclear reactor and instead gave arms to Iran. Nixon almost let Israel be overrun in 1972 before sending military aid. HW Bush would not let Israel retaliate when it was being bombed by Iraqi Scuds. W pushed for Israeli withdrawal in Gaza and a cease fire when Israelis were beating Hezbollah in Lebanon. So why all the Israeli anger and hatred at Obama? Or is this the GOP cancer of obstinence and hatred for Obama spreading like a disease to our close allies?
US - Soviet relations in the Mideast have driven every major war and shift in policy since World War II. Iran isa prime example with both Russian and allies invading Iran during World War II and trade with Germany. Syria is a similar example. Perhaps US security priorities dictate closed ties with Iran and Russia to solve the Syrian and Iraqi mess. Perhaps US should distance itself from the Saudis who have promoted radical Muslim hatred of infidels and Jews for decades and continue to do so in American Mosques.
US - Soviet relations in the Mideast have driven every major war and shift in policy since World War II. Iran isa prime example with both Russian and allies invading Iran during World War II and trade with Germany. Syria is a similar example. Perhaps US security priorities dictate closed ties with Iran and Russia to solve the Syrian and Iraqi mess. Perhaps US should distance itself from the Saudis who have promoted radical Muslim hatred of infidels and Jews for decades and continue to do so in American Mosques.
2
Netanyahu understands that this so-called "treaty" with Iran is a betrayal of Israel. Why do most Americans not realize it? Has anti-Israeli sentiment reached such a strong point in America that this "treaty', which weakens Israel, can be supported?
This anti-Israel mentality probably has a lot to do with Obama's election. May the Rebuplicans win both the executive and house and insure that this treaty is trashed and Israel's secuirty is increased as a result. The very fact the Boehner and the Republican leadership have meetings with and accept Netanyahu's advice should be all the more reason for American's to vote for them. Plus it would make up for the election of Obama.
This anti-Israel mentality probably has a lot to do with Obama's election. May the Rebuplicans win both the executive and house and insure that this treaty is trashed and Israel's secuirty is increased as a result. The very fact the Boehner and the Republican leadership have meetings with and accept Netanyahu's advice should be all the more reason for American's to vote for them. Plus it would make up for the election of Obama.
3
And should President Obama accept the advice of a foreign leader, Yoda, what do you think the reaction of the Republicans might be? Want to hazard a guess?
Sounds to me like you're living in the wrong country, Yoda.
p.
Sounds to me like you're living in the wrong country, Yoda.
p.
Mental health professionals describe Munchausen Syndrome as a condition wherein a person inflicts harm on himself or a close relation in order to gain sympathy. "Poor Israel" has been and will continue to be Benjamin Netanyahu's ploy.
11
Israel has, for 20-plus years now, been using the frank scam of an always-imminent Iranian nuke as a mallet to drive a stake through the heart of Iran's geopolitical future. Israel hasn't feared an Iranian nuclear attack, it has feared that Iran would rise to the regional geopolitical level that a nation of 80 million with an educated populace and abundant natural resources might ordinarily occupy. It has, at last, lost this battle.
But Israel, famously, has a strong and unhealthy need for enemies. The job today must be to convince Israelis, through whatever channels may still exist, that this loss is not worth setting the region on fire. This would not necessarily involve getting rid of Netanyahu-- merely neutralizing him would be enough.
But Israel, famously, has a strong and unhealthy need for enemies. The job today must be to convince Israelis, through whatever channels may still exist, that this loss is not worth setting the region on fire. This would not necessarily involve getting rid of Netanyahu-- merely neutralizing him would be enough.
20
While there are certainly some aspects of the deal that may be fairly criticized, I am outraged by Netanyahu's blatant meddling into the internal politics of our country. No country in the world has done more for Israel than the United States. Instead of gratitude we get outrageous over the top statements by Netanyahu. Its time that he start acting like a junior partner. The acid test is not whether this deal is in Israel's best interests, but whether it is in America's. No one has any realistic alternatives to the deal and America will lose a great deal of credibility in the unlikely event that Congress were to override what will be a certain presidential veto.
24
Israel is the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. aid since WWII. Cut it, or at least use it as leverage.
“As long as the United States continues unconditionally to provide the subsidies and political protection that make the Israeli occupation and the high-handed and self-defeating policies it engenders possible, there is little, if any, reason to hope that anything resembling the former peace process can be resurrected.”
~ CHARLES W. FREEMAN JR.
Former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia; president of the Middle East Policy Council since 1997.
“As long as the United States continues unconditionally to provide the subsidies and political protection that make the Israeli occupation and the high-handed and self-defeating policies it engenders possible, there is little, if any, reason to hope that anything resembling the former peace process can be resurrected.”
~ CHARLES W. FREEMAN JR.
Former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia; president of the Middle East Policy Council since 1997.
49
American Jews beware. The problem the deal has been made not that the deal is still in negotiations.
The deal makes war more possible not the other way around. If the deal was still in negotiations the United States if not so bound to the Obama legacy negotiate harder for more restrictive conditions. Instead the deal is set. The risks to the United States remain no matter what Sec. of State Kerry & the President say, there is no way to be sure Iran is not cheating.
Even if Iran is not cheating, this deal gives Iran "Super Power" status in the region & enable it to blackmail its neighbors into becoming slaves to Iran's goal of hegemony in the region and alignment with its aims.
Promises also made since the agreement make claims that arms shipments to Hezbollah and Hamas will be stopped thus protecting Israel from future wars. This is a lie. Arms shipments to Iran's proxies have never been stopped unless Israel interceded to protect itself.
Israel's people are opposed to this deal because it does nothing to prevent Iran and its proxies from continuing its gorilla war against Israel. Nor eliminate the nuclear threat.
American Jews should understand 15 Years is a minute in history not a lifetime. Nuclear blackmail is still alive and well even with this agreement because Iran retains all the equipment it needs to make the final rush to a bomb. The centrifuges will spin again in 10 years to build up its enriched uranium or do it in hidden site unknown to us.
The deal makes war more possible not the other way around. If the deal was still in negotiations the United States if not so bound to the Obama legacy negotiate harder for more restrictive conditions. Instead the deal is set. The risks to the United States remain no matter what Sec. of State Kerry & the President say, there is no way to be sure Iran is not cheating.
Even if Iran is not cheating, this deal gives Iran "Super Power" status in the region & enable it to blackmail its neighbors into becoming slaves to Iran's goal of hegemony in the region and alignment with its aims.
Promises also made since the agreement make claims that arms shipments to Hezbollah and Hamas will be stopped thus protecting Israel from future wars. This is a lie. Arms shipments to Iran's proxies have never been stopped unless Israel interceded to protect itself.
Israel's people are opposed to this deal because it does nothing to prevent Iran and its proxies from continuing its gorilla war against Israel. Nor eliminate the nuclear threat.
American Jews should understand 15 Years is a minute in history not a lifetime. Nuclear blackmail is still alive and well even with this agreement because Iran retains all the equipment it needs to make the final rush to a bomb. The centrifuges will spin again in 10 years to build up its enriched uranium or do it in hidden site unknown to us.
4
"But most Jews who are active in Jewish life oppose this deal because they are well informed and they understand that this deal leads to very frightening outcomes".
Wrong!
They are well informed with the propaganda of Bibi and the fifth column of Americans whose first allegiance is to israel!
Wrong!
They are well informed with the propaganda of Bibi and the fifth column of Americans whose first allegiance is to israel!
5
My heart goes out to Jewish Americans. This deal wieghs on thier loyalty to the ideal of Israel and love of America. No hyphenated American is free of such tensions. Irish Americans have given support to the IRA despite its status as s terrorist organization. German Americans were often sympathetic to Germany in bothvworld wars. So forth and so on.
And lifting the sanctions on Iran will give it the funds to threaten Israeli interests. But the sanctions were devised to end Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons. "mission accomplished.
And lifting the sanctions on Iran will give it the funds to threaten Israeli interests. But the sanctions were devised to end Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons. "mission accomplished.
2
Imagine if the first principle of foreign policy among states was loyalty! Loyalty counts so long as it serves the national interest. History is replete with examples of how quickly loyally can be tossed aside. What we have here are divergent interests that appear to be irreconcilable. Yet, even as we speak, strategists in Washington, Jerusalem, and Teheran are already planning policy for the new conditions. Everyone knows that, including Netanyahu. What he cannot admit publicly is that he failed to upend the deal. Meanwhile, the American Jewish establishment will fight the deal to the bitter end? Why? Because of knee-jerk reactions or habit or lack of thinking? Or, is it such that come election time this will be a reminder of clout? What is clear is that there is also a generational shift among American Jews, a shift from top down structures to a more a pluralist and nuanced view. The old status quo is crumbling. Does that mean "the end" of Israel? No. What it means is that the Israelis, particularly leaders like Netanyahu cannot take American Jewry for granted and have to come up with facts and alternatives, not scary phrases and one-liners.
Regarding the polls you refer to, Mr. Cohen:
Everyone knows that you can always find polls that will tell you whatever you want to be told about American Jews or anything else.
But I find it interesting nonetheless that the Times and its many liberal readers rarely, if ever, acknowledge the fact that large numbers of Americans, in responding to polls on the Iran question, have indicated a great distrust of
Iran, along with a strong disinclination to believe the U.S. will be able to successfully monitor the deal, as well as strong negative feelings regarding the way it was handled by the President.
For the Times, its liberal readers and yourself, the opinions of Americans who oppose the deal simply don't count. No effort is ever made to engage with these people. No serious arguments are put forward to counter their arguments.
All of we ever get from people like yourself is a tired rehash of the same old assertions. People who oppose the agreement are being duped by the Republicans, or by Mr. Netanyahu, or by AIPAC, or simply lack the knowledge and experience needed to appreciate how good the deal really is.
To me, this represents a display of outright contempt for the wisdom and common sense of millions of Americans thought by liberals to be members of America's "lower" class and Tea Party class; and I believe it helps explain why Donald Trump is currently having so much success as a presidential candidate.
http://www.pollingreport.com/iran.htm
Everyone knows that you can always find polls that will tell you whatever you want to be told about American Jews or anything else.
But I find it interesting nonetheless that the Times and its many liberal readers rarely, if ever, acknowledge the fact that large numbers of Americans, in responding to polls on the Iran question, have indicated a great distrust of
Iran, along with a strong disinclination to believe the U.S. will be able to successfully monitor the deal, as well as strong negative feelings regarding the way it was handled by the President.
For the Times, its liberal readers and yourself, the opinions of Americans who oppose the deal simply don't count. No effort is ever made to engage with these people. No serious arguments are put forward to counter their arguments.
All of we ever get from people like yourself is a tired rehash of the same old assertions. People who oppose the agreement are being duped by the Republicans, or by Mr. Netanyahu, or by AIPAC, or simply lack the knowledge and experience needed to appreciate how good the deal really is.
To me, this represents a display of outright contempt for the wisdom and common sense of millions of Americans thought by liberals to be members of America's "lower" class and Tea Party class; and I believe it helps explain why Donald Trump is currently having so much success as a presidential candidate.
http://www.pollingreport.com/iran.htm
4
Opposition to the Iran Deal enables its opponents worst fears Nuclear weapons are far more dangerous than most alive realize. My generation was the one hiding under our school desks. My generation perfected mutually assured destruction (MAD) which guaranteed national destruction to our nation and the attacker. A generation of military personnel was committed to destruction on a global scale. The times were scary and the more that you knew the more scary the times.
Without the five power nuclear deal with Iran, only one thing is certain - Iran will make a nuke sooner rather than later. There is little risk to a deal when the alternative remains the opponent's worst fear. Sanctions will not be maintained by the other nations when Iran has made serious concessions.
Without the five power nuclear deal with Iran, only one thing is certain - Iran will make a nuke sooner rather than later. There is little risk to a deal when the alternative remains the opponent's worst fear. Sanctions will not be maintained by the other nations when Iran has made serious concessions.
5
You claim that Prime Minister Netanyahu's efforts to have American Jews join him in urging members of Congress to vote against the Iran nuclear deal is the equivalent of President Obama "calling thousands of Israelis to encourage them to oppose a piece of sensitive legislation in the Knesset." That is specious. Prime Minister Netanyahu is not lobbying members of Congress on the Keystone pipeline or US immigration policy. The Iran nuclear deal affects the security of Israel much more than it affects the security of the United States. The bigger question is why President Obama would try to force Israel, one of its staunchest allies , to accept an agreement that Israel reasonably believes is a threat to its very existence.
3
Netanyahu is a deeply flawed individual. His brother was not only brilliant, a war hero but also a martyr. We have seen the same here with JFK and Joe the martyr and Nixon who had a brother much favored by his parents die tragically.
Bibi wants to appear to his followers in Likud as the mensch that not only stood up to POTUS but defeated and humiliated him. The agreement with Iran is he vehicle not the cause.
The USA is the only significant friend Israel has. He is making Israel less safe by endangering that relationship.
Congress will reject the agreement. the veto will be sustained and those of us who always supported Israel will remember.
Bibi wants to appear to his followers in Likud as the mensch that not only stood up to POTUS but defeated and humiliated him. The agreement with Iran is he vehicle not the cause.
The USA is the only significant friend Israel has. He is making Israel less safe by endangering that relationship.
Congress will reject the agreement. the veto will be sustained and those of us who always supported Israel will remember.
3
Bibi has two degrees from MIT.
So, that makes him normal?
As we in America at last have a public debate about whether "what Israel wants is always right, otherwise you are an anti-semite", media should look at the Israel-Palestine issue though a different lens than they have done so far.
To say that an injustice was committed against the Palestinians after WWII is not to deny Israel's right to exist. When one admits a mistake, one is in a different frame of mind during negotiations for reparations.
America stands to gain a lot if it prods Israel to acknowledge this truth. The world will see America as an honest broker in Israel-Palestine negotiations and it will damp down much of the hostility it faces on the Arab street.
Israel too will gain as well as Jewish people the world over when influential Jewish people acknowledge the suffering of others. Jews have had to endure centuries of discrimination, mostly in Europe, based on Christianity. Jews were far less victimized in Asia and Arab lands as a minority.
It is time that Israel-Palestine conflict is brought to an end.
To say that an injustice was committed against the Palestinians after WWII is not to deny Israel's right to exist. When one admits a mistake, one is in a different frame of mind during negotiations for reparations.
America stands to gain a lot if it prods Israel to acknowledge this truth. The world will see America as an honest broker in Israel-Palestine negotiations and it will damp down much of the hostility it faces on the Arab street.
Israel too will gain as well as Jewish people the world over when influential Jewish people acknowledge the suffering of others. Jews have had to endure centuries of discrimination, mostly in Europe, based on Christianity. Jews were far less victimized in Asia and Arab lands as a minority.
It is time that Israel-Palestine conflict is brought to an end.
2
A familiar list of neocons met with Netanyahu to plan the Iraq war, in 1998. This same group is currently planning the Iran war, for when they defeat the President and other world leaders in negotiating a road to peace.
2
Given the fact that Netanyahu knows Jews are less than 2% of the population, I wonder why he thinks their will, even if they all agreed with him, should sway a decision on the deal one way or another.
6
Netanyahu's nervousness over this deal is perfectly understandable, given the fact that Israel faces the gravest risks. The problem the U.S, confronts, however, is that he has displayed no willingness to accept any agreement that Iran would agree to endorse. No country would tolerate the humiliating conditions the Israeli government demands of the Tehran regime.
What seems intolerable, however, is the Israeli prime minister's obvious contempt for President Obama, if not for the U.S. No country has provided more aid or demonstrated such steadfast support for Israel as the U.S., but Netanyahu's response borders on outright disrespect. He dismisses requests that his government curtail expansion of settlements; refuses to honor the passports of American citizens of Palestinian ancestry; and intervenes in our politics as if Congress were a branch of the Knesset. This behavior reflects his belief that no consequences will result, an impression that only retaliation will correct. A cut in aid, combined with state department restrictions on how many Israelis could enter the country at any given time, might get the message across. We should do nothing that would put Israel at risk, but it is past time for both Israelis and American supporters of Israel to recognize that the chief responsibility of the U.S. government is to the welfare of its own citizens.
What seems intolerable, however, is the Israeli prime minister's obvious contempt for President Obama, if not for the U.S. No country has provided more aid or demonstrated such steadfast support for Israel as the U.S., but Netanyahu's response borders on outright disrespect. He dismisses requests that his government curtail expansion of settlements; refuses to honor the passports of American citizens of Palestinian ancestry; and intervenes in our politics as if Congress were a branch of the Knesset. This behavior reflects his belief that no consequences will result, an impression that only retaliation will correct. A cut in aid, combined with state department restrictions on how many Israelis could enter the country at any given time, might get the message across. We should do nothing that would put Israel at risk, but it is past time for both Israelis and American supporters of Israel to recognize that the chief responsibility of the U.S. government is to the welfare of its own citizens.
497
Israel is doing everything to put itself at risk. America should pull the financial, arms and diplomatic plug on it's morally diplomatically militarily socioeconomically politically most worthless costly "ally" A tiny tyrant nation with fewer people than NYC that spends most of American largesse on oppressing and killing Palestinian civilian men, women and children.
Let Netanyahu and Israel get a "better" deal with Iran by putting all of their blood and treasure at risk in bilateral dealings with Iran.
Let Netanyahu and Israel get a "better" deal with Iran by putting all of their blood and treasure at risk in bilateral dealings with Iran.
Israel is simply a petulant teenager - it wants the keys the car, a roof over its head, and unconditional support. But don't ever think you can tell them what to do! How dare the US do such a thing!
Your assessment that their complete dismissal of our Commander in Chief is disrespectful couldn't be more spot on. Israel needs to stop biting the hand (and pocketbook) that feeds it.
Your assessment that their complete dismissal of our Commander in Chief is disrespectful couldn't be more spot on. Israel needs to stop biting the hand (and pocketbook) that feeds it.
'Because sanctions on Iran will fall apart as Russia and China conclude the United States is not serious about a compromise with Tehran '
The reason that Russia and China will not stick with a sanctions regime is not that it would conclude that the US is not serious about any compromise with Iran; the reason it would no longer abide by the US's goals is that it would simply conclude that no matter what the US may really want at heart, it simply has to submit to the wishes of tiny Israel, which is probably not a country they admire very much.
The reason that Russia and China will not stick with a sanctions regime is not that it would conclude that the US is not serious about any compromise with Iran; the reason it would no longer abide by the US's goals is that it would simply conclude that no matter what the US may really want at heart, it simply has to submit to the wishes of tiny Israel, which is probably not a country they admire very much.
Check this out from Ayatollah Khamenei. Enough said.
https://twitter.com/khamenei_ir/status/633216914458853376/photo/1
https://twitter.com/khamenei_ir/status/633216914458853376/photo/1
1
When Netanyahu claimed, earlier this year, to speak not just for Israeli Jews but for Jews everywhere, it was clear he had an agenda of manipulation (and striking that he was unwilling to listen to Jews' oppositional views, even as he declared himself a spokesman). But in addition to the cynical ploy of claiming to represent individuals he does not, he also uses Congress and the GOP (see: Mike Huckabee re. ovens), for whom any slap in President Obama's face is a win. Bibi, you speak only for your cynical views, not an entire group, and are also not part of my country's leadership!
7
Hi Roger,
I agree the United States would never forsake Israel as long as there is a Republican in the White House. Long before Netanyahu, the Liberal element in the Democratic Party was anti Israel, & under Obama they have become more out spoken, embolden by Obama's anti Israel's position,which began before the Iranian deal was orchestrated.Obama & Kerry wanted Israel to go back to the original Partition lines the UN voted for ,that the Arabs did not accept & tried to murder the remnants of the Holocaust, by sending Three Arab Armies to annihilate them, the rest is History.It's Jews like you & Mrs. Moskowitz, that shuffled into the Gas Chambers, never again.
Dear Editors,
I don't expect you to publish my comments, & if you do bury them at the end of the favorable comments about Obama.
I agree the United States would never forsake Israel as long as there is a Republican in the White House. Long before Netanyahu, the Liberal element in the Democratic Party was anti Israel, & under Obama they have become more out spoken, embolden by Obama's anti Israel's position,which began before the Iranian deal was orchestrated.Obama & Kerry wanted Israel to go back to the original Partition lines the UN voted for ,that the Arabs did not accept & tried to murder the remnants of the Holocaust, by sending Three Arab Armies to annihilate them, the rest is History.It's Jews like you & Mrs. Moskowitz, that shuffled into the Gas Chambers, never again.
Dear Editors,
I don't expect you to publish my comments, & if you do bury them at the end of the favorable comments about Obama.
4
First, you are clearly not an ultraliberal.
Second, the substance of your argument seems to be locked In the time between 1947 and 1967. Things have changed and Israel's treatment of the Palestinians post 1967 has been appalling and - considering the Holocaust - sadly ironic.
And, finally, the NYT has a good deal more honesty and integrity than you and your argument.
Second, the substance of your argument seems to be locked In the time between 1947 and 1967. Things have changed and Israel's treatment of the Palestinians post 1967 has been appalling and - considering the Holocaust - sadly ironic.
And, finally, the NYT has a good deal more honesty and integrity than you and your argument.
1
Actually it was Bush the father who stood up to Israel more than anyone since, much more than Clinton or Obama. Bush actually cut off the money over settlements.
1
Dear Cogit,
First your correct i am hardly Ultraliberal, although, it was not too long ago that I was a Liberal Democrat. That changed when I recognized the Anti- Jewish sentiment, of the liberal Democrats, by the way to quote The Great Martin Luther King, " You can't hate Israel & not hate the Jewish people, they are synonymous."
.Before, you accuse me of being more concerned about Israel than the United States, I served honorably in the United States Army during the Korean War. America is my first and only home, which I cherish.
First your correct i am hardly Ultraliberal, although, it was not too long ago that I was a Liberal Democrat. That changed when I recognized the Anti- Jewish sentiment, of the liberal Democrats, by the way to quote The Great Martin Luther King, " You can't hate Israel & not hate the Jewish people, they are synonymous."
.Before, you accuse me of being more concerned about Israel than the United States, I served honorably in the United States Army during the Korean War. America is my first and only home, which I cherish.
4
When Netanyahu says "never again" is he talking about never again for everybody or just never again for right wing Jewish people?. I don't remember Netanyahu speaking out against Rwanda, Bosnia, Syria, Sudan etc. Unfortunately we've seen many attempts at genocide since the Holocaust and not a single word of condemnation from this man. He is only interested in war mongering in order to stay in power by appeasing the Likud. This type of man is ruthless but not intelligent. He needs to go away.
19
When Netanyahu says never again he means that Jews would not allow themselves to be slaughtered indiscriminately again as happened in the Holocaust. Phrase for Jews is a Jewish thing.
Mr. Netanyahu has spoken at great length re Syria and Israel has treated refugees in its hospitals. There are Sudanese refugees in israel. And for the rest, how long do you think that Mr. Netanyahu has been Prime Minister?
Bosnia for instance was over 20 years ago. Rwanda the mid-1990s.
Mr. Netanyahu has spoken at great length re Syria and Israel has treated refugees in its hospitals. There are Sudanese refugees in israel. And for the rest, how long do you think that Mr. Netanyahu has been Prime Minister?
Bosnia for instance was over 20 years ago. Rwanda the mid-1990s.
We are NOT a Jewish nation...We Are America.
Obama understands this and will do what is right and correct for America.
If that means he agrees to the Iran deal, then so be it.
Obama understands this and will do what is right and correct for America.
If that means he agrees to the Iran deal, then so be it.
32
"...Most young Iranians no more believe in “Death to America” than they believe the Hidden Imam is going to show up tomorrow...."
Meanwhile, the Times has published stories over the past couple of days concerning five young people from the US, and UK who aimed to travel to the Middle East in order to join ISIS.
Meanwhile, the Times has published stories over the past couple of days concerning five young people from the US, and UK who aimed to travel to the Middle East in order to join ISIS.
4
The IS is a totally different story as it is Sunni.
To a Sunni, a Shiite is not just a bad Muslim but a Kufr, someone who fell from the path of the real belief, and has to be killed for his sins.
Strange, but there you have religion.
To a Sunni, a Shiite is not just a bad Muslim but a Kufr, someone who fell from the path of the real belief, and has to be killed for his sins.
Strange, but there you have religion.
The US should not be the bagman for Likud.
29
In the 1980s, the Ragan administration resisted sanctions against South Africa, perferring that "constructive engagement" would open the government to abolishing apartheid. This approach was found to be incorrect, and sanctions brought down apartheid. Constructive engagement didnt work for Germany in the 1930s, S Africa in the 1980s, North Korea in the 1990s. It is hard to understand why it would work now. In addition, the failure to bring back 4 Americans held hostage in this deal as a token of goodwill enhances the chances that Iran will cheat on the deal. The reason for this is if America doesnt have the self respect to bring back its hostages, why would Iran respect America?
3
American Jews should perhaps also consider what the American Jewish Committee has to say about the Iran nuclear deal: http://goo.gl/SqiwBO
1
One fact that is sadly lacking in these discussions: The State of Israel currently has 75-200 nuclear bombs. This fact should be a part of the context.
406
75-200 nuclear bombs are you head of the CIA, Mossad? Please reference any article where the Israeli government declared they have a functioning nuclear weapon.
1
Israel will never give up its nuclear weapons inventory -- nor should it in light of recent history in that strife-torn region. One need only look at the disintegration of post-Great War European-created (Sykes-Picot) states like Syria and Iraq, obviously failing post-colonial states like Libya, Tunisia, and tottering Egypt; forget the Holocaust.
1
Also that Israel's implicit threat is "if you try to destroy us, we will destroy you first." (Their landmass and population are too small to risk engaging in war with their larger neighbours and so their strategic interest is deterrence.) This neatly juxtaposes with the Iranian government's official position of threatening to destroy Israel.
There are many countries with nuclear weapons (including, I believe, yours but not mine.) The question is how they are likely to use them.
There are many countries with nuclear weapons (including, I believe, yours but not mine.) The question is how they are likely to use them.
2
Israel is a foreign country. Is is grotesque to allow Netanyahu to lobby against the Iran deal by meddling in our domestic politics. When politicians like Chuck Schumer vote with Netanyahu it is reasonable to ask: are they with us or against us?
Most Jewish Americans support the Iran deal because it is the best deal available, and it is good for the US as well as its Mideast allies...including Israel.
Lobbies like AIPAC have managed to get away with their nefarious behavior by claiming to be domestic lobbies, when in reality they should be classified as foreign lobbies.
Most Jewish Americans support the Iran deal because it is the best deal available, and it is good for the US as well as its Mideast allies...including Israel.
Lobbies like AIPAC have managed to get away with their nefarious behavior by claiming to be domestic lobbies, when in reality they should be classified as foreign lobbies.
68
The United States of America (in separate immigration events) saved my family from the pogroms of Russia in the 1890's and from the burgeoning crisis in Poland in the 1930's. We all have varying identities. But, this country is my home, it has been good to us, and my family and I are (while still Jewish) American above all.
Yes, the U.S.A. and Israel are allies. However, they remain sovereign nations, whose interests occasionally diverge. (I don't believe this is an instance where those interests diverge, and firmly believe that this is a good deal for both nations and the world at large.) Nonetheless, for me, on occasions when those interests diverge, it is a no-brainer. I support my country, the U.S.A.
I realize that others may feel differently. That's fine, but those who put Israel's interests first should consider exercising their birthright option and becoming Israeli. Please leave the rest of us alone and stop providing reasons for anti-Semitic people to question our status as true Americans.
Yes, the U.S.A. and Israel are allies. However, they remain sovereign nations, whose interests occasionally diverge. (I don't believe this is an instance where those interests diverge, and firmly believe that this is a good deal for both nations and the world at large.) Nonetheless, for me, on occasions when those interests diverge, it is a no-brainer. I support my country, the U.S.A.
I realize that others may feel differently. That's fine, but those who put Israel's interests first should consider exercising their birthright option and becoming Israeli. Please leave the rest of us alone and stop providing reasons for anti-Semitic people to question our status as true Americans.
69
As one of those American Jews who supports Israel wholeheartedly but opposes Netanyahu's policies, I am totally supportive of this deal. It will help deescalate the tensions in the Middle East, tensions largely created by the invasion of Iraq which was also something Netanyahu preached for, something he claimed would bring peace and prosperity and long-term security to Israel.
How long are we going to listen to this warmonger? If he turned his attention to bringing about an accord with the Palestinians instead of trying to force the United States into a war with Iran, Israel and Jews around the world would be safer. Netanyahu and his policies are heating up an atmosphere of anti-semitism that has been largely dormant since WW2.
In addition, right wing Republicans are listening to their evangelical base which apparently believes that wide-spread war in the Middle East will bring about Armageddon and the second coming of Christ. Surely that is not justification for America starting a war against the entire Muslim world.
How long are we going to listen to this warmonger? If he turned his attention to bringing about an accord with the Palestinians instead of trying to force the United States into a war with Iran, Israel and Jews around the world would be safer. Netanyahu and his policies are heating up an atmosphere of anti-semitism that has been largely dormant since WW2.
In addition, right wing Republicans are listening to their evangelical base which apparently believes that wide-spread war in the Middle East will bring about Armageddon and the second coming of Christ. Surely that is not justification for America starting a war against the entire Muslim world.
37
Sander Levin is my congressman and am proud of him. I am not Jewish. I am upset with the lobbying going on by Jewish community organizations and beginning to wonder whether they should be registered as a Foreign Agent. An example is a recent guest commentary in the Detroit Free Press by Dr. Richard Krugel, president of the Jewish Community Relations Council of Metropolitan Detroit..... http://goo.gl/P8fgi7
We forget that around the time the United States and Britain supported the creation of the modern state of Israel we instituted a coup to overthrow the democratically elected President of Iran to get our hands on free oil. (http://lstrn.us/1EnHgyR)
We forget we bare much of the blame for today's Iran.
We forget that around the time the United States and Britain supported the creation of the modern state of Israel we instituted a coup to overthrow the democratically elected President of Iran to get our hands on free oil. (http://lstrn.us/1EnHgyR)
We forget we bare much of the blame for today's Iran.
29
In 1906 there was a popular demand in Iran for
a constitution and democracy. British sabotaged
it successfully. They rigged the elections to get the
party in power supportive of their interests. Eventually
they put an army general Reza Khan in charge who
later styled himself as shah and somehow became
a royalty. His son,till overthrown in 1979, was
a tyrant and oppressive and his secret service
SAVAK practiced torture without any restriction.
However, USA gave unflinching support to this
tyrant. Amazingly, Americans naively ask why Iranians
don't like USA. There are many reasons mostly
historical.
a constitution and democracy. British sabotaged
it successfully. They rigged the elections to get the
party in power supportive of their interests. Eventually
they put an army general Reza Khan in charge who
later styled himself as shah and somehow became
a royalty. His son,till overthrown in 1979, was
a tyrant and oppressive and his secret service
SAVAK practiced torture without any restriction.
However, USA gave unflinching support to this
tyrant. Amazingly, Americans naively ask why Iranians
don't like USA. There are many reasons mostly
historical.
1
Yes, we Americans can forget when we so choose.
Would a nuclear Iran pose a greater threat to the US or Israel? Not the US. No more than North Korea's nukes are a threat to the US. Israel is the one more affected by the deal. Yet Israel had practically no role in negotiating the deal. How come? Why isn't it obvious that the US is the one meddling in Israeli affairs and not the other way around? Just like the US constant meddling in the "peace process" is meddling. The harping on the tried and failed "two state solution" is nothing but meddling, but the US continues unabated on this. Indeed, US foreign policy in the Administration and for as far back as the eye can see is nothing but meddling in other people's affairs. So let's stop with the meddling complaining. It's just stupid
We should be discussing the merits of the Iran deal. Both sides are overselling their positions. In truth the deal kicks the can down the road and that makes it better than no deal, which likely would make Iran a nuclear power in short order. So this American Jew is for it. But let's not pretend like this is a great achievement. And next time let's include the party with the most to lose in the negotiation. We are not Israel's big brother, mother or father. Let's treat Israel like an equal. Maybe if we do, we will get more respect and less "meddling."
We should be discussing the merits of the Iran deal. Both sides are overselling their positions. In truth the deal kicks the can down the road and that makes it better than no deal, which likely would make Iran a nuclear power in short order. So this American Jew is for it. But let's not pretend like this is a great achievement. And next time let's include the party with the most to lose in the negotiation. We are not Israel's big brother, mother or father. Let's treat Israel like an equal. Maybe if we do, we will get more respect and less "meddling."
3
Even if Iran get the bomb eventually it is unlikely
to use against Israel because Israel can retaliate
and the fall out will affect whole of Middle East, not
just limited to Israel. The only effect will be the
loss of military option that Israel threaten
against Iran. Israel wants to preserve its nuclear
monopoly.This is what Netanyahu's game is.
to use against Israel because Israel can retaliate
and the fall out will affect whole of Middle East, not
just limited to Israel. The only effect will be the
loss of military option that Israel threaten
against Iran. Israel wants to preserve its nuclear
monopoly.This is what Netanyahu's game is.
We may not be Israel's big brother, mother or father, but we are its biggest piggy bank. We give millions of dollars every year to Israel, and we provide endless military support (even though Israel has a robust military industry--jets, etc.). And, still Israel thinks we owe it. Maybe if we plugged up the piggy bank, we would get more respect and less "meddling."
What a dilemma. I am a firm supporter of Israel and its 100 percent right to exist within defensive borders. At the same time, i see the Palestinian side and the need for a two-state solution that is fair and equitable to both sides. Then we have to throw in a bunch of other things, such as radical Islam, terrorism, radical Jews, etc. etc. Finally, we come to the 800-pound elephant in the room: Iran.
More than anything I want to believe that this deal will work; that it will slow the Iranians down and they will come to their senses and stop this nonsensical talk about destroying Israel. That they will now move on from this and focus and rebuild their economy' that they will stop funding terrorism, that they will live in peace with ALL of their neighbors. Geez, wouldn't that be great?
So where do we go from here? Frankly, I don't know. Is this Munich 1938 all over again? Or is this the start of a new era? The only thing I know is that if we do move forward with this accord, Obama and friends better be right. There will be no second chances.
More than anything I want to believe that this deal will work; that it will slow the Iranians down and they will come to their senses and stop this nonsensical talk about destroying Israel. That they will now move on from this and focus and rebuild their economy' that they will stop funding terrorism, that they will live in peace with ALL of their neighbors. Geez, wouldn't that be great?
So where do we go from here? Frankly, I don't know. Is this Munich 1938 all over again? Or is this the start of a new era? The only thing I know is that if we do move forward with this accord, Obama and friends better be right. There will be no second chances.
37
Iran might be the 800 pound elephant in the room, but it stands in the shade of a much larger elephant named Saudi Arabia.
Seth, the ad infinitum analogy of the accord between the P5+1 and Munich in 1938 is utterly ridiculous. The Munich agreement actually helped the UK to re-arm their military for a whole year before Germany's invasion of Poland one year later. Obama is not Chamberlain, nor are the leaders of Iran another Hitler.
Both the US and Israel are armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons, and the Iranian's a far too intelligent to risk outright war with either of these nations.
Both the US and Israel are armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons, and the Iranian's a far too intelligent to risk outright war with either of these nations.
1
Neither a Zionist Jewish state of Israel nor an Islamist Muslim state of Palestine could ever be confused with a civil secular plural egalitarian democracy. Any more than slave and Jim Crow era America and apartheid South Africa were democratic. Any state defining itself by race, color, ethnicity or faith denies the self-evident truth that all are created equal with certain unalienable rights. The two-state delusion must be replaced by the one-state solution.
5
I saw an interview with Shimon Peres on PBS many years ago. How can Israel ever make peace with the Palestinians? the interviewer asked. After all the hatred, all the children and grownups killed, all the destruction, how could peace ever be achieved? Peres said you don't make peace with your friends. You make peace with your greatest enemies. And making peace is like falling in love, he said, you close your eyes a little bit.
We do this deal with Iran not because they're our friends, or because they will love us as a result. We close our eyes a little bit and make peace because in this case peace with our enemy is better than war. One can be Jewish, as I am, and believe this.
We do this deal with Iran not because they're our friends, or because they will love us as a result. We close our eyes a little bit and make peace because in this case peace with our enemy is better than war. One can be Jewish, as I am, and believe this.
19
Sometimes it is easier to make peace. The US is easily at peace with Canada, Britain, the EU, and a host of other countries.
It is more difficult and more dangerous to make peace with other countries. All the PC speech did not make the US buddy up with Saddam. Just one example. The UK tried with Hitler. What came of that?
Sometimes you bar the windows, lock the doors, make a house of brick not straw and buy a good gun. Iran is not Canada or the UK or the EU, etc. They are not S. America either. They are much closer to good old Adolf and Stalin than anybody else. Their repression at home is a hint.
It is more difficult and more dangerous to make peace with other countries. All the PC speech did not make the US buddy up with Saddam. Just one example. The UK tried with Hitler. What came of that?
Sometimes you bar the windows, lock the doors, make a house of brick not straw and buy a good gun. Iran is not Canada or the UK or the EU, etc. They are not S. America either. They are much closer to good old Adolf and Stalin than anybody else. Their repression at home is a hint.
Mr. Cohen supports the Iran deal.
Many Times readers support the Iran deal.
Most Americans oppose the Iran deal.
Most Israelis oppose the Iran deal.
Mr. Netanyahu opposes the Iran deal.
Why is it that Mr. Cohen and many Times readers continue to denounce Mr. Netanyahu when it is he, and not President Obama, who is
advocating what most Americans and Israelis want?
Many Times readers support the Iran deal.
Most Americans oppose the Iran deal.
Most Israelis oppose the Iran deal.
Mr. Netanyahu opposes the Iran deal.
Why is it that Mr. Cohen and many Times readers continue to denounce Mr. Netanyahu when it is he, and not President Obama, who is
advocating what most Americans and Israelis want?
8
You know, that despite some people's views, it is not always a the correct answer to shout "One, hundreds of them" when your car radio tells you that there is a ghost driver on the road you are driving on.
1
And where, Stanton, did you get your statistics? From the twitter account of Bibi?
6
Because, as an American Jew, I can tell you it is Obama and not Netanyahu, who is advocating for what I want: Peace and reconciliation. Rather than Netanyahu's outrageous assertions about Iran's nuclear capabilities that, over the years, has been shown to have no basis in fact. And I'm not alone. There are many American Jewish organizations that support the deal and are openly lobbying for its passage. One of them is J Street, and it is as Jewish and American as chicken soup.
1
I do not care what the American "Jewish" lobby wants. The vast majority of Americans - which they are - want this deal approved and want to find a way to peace in the world, as President Obama and any rational human being wants. BN is an ALEC/Wall Street/Koch brothers et al operative, put in place to create chaos so they can make more money. United States Congress members - APPROVE THIS DEAL! NOW!!
9
Israel has counted the nuclear warheads and really isn't worried about a missile coming at them from Teheran. The real worry is that companies are already lining up to do business with Iran (and don't doubt that there are business people in Israel that would leap at the chance to sell to a country of seventy million people, half of them under forty), and that in ten years, Iran may be a much more westernized place, having normal relations with the rest of the world, and a booming economy.
217
Exactly on point. "It's the economy stupid." Netanyahu has used the Iranian nuclear bomb threat as a distraction of his poor domestic leadership for 10 years. When the economy is in trouble, war is always the answer.
Those countries were all doing business with Iran until a few years ago. That never presented an existential threat to Israel or the Middle east. Why would it now?
1
@Ben Martinez
Other than Turkey, please site me an example of a "Westernized Muslim Country" in the middle east.
But Iran Isn't Turkey with a one foot in Europe. Iran is a Theocracy with a ruthless Quds Force
You are dreaming.
Other than Turkey, please site me an example of a "Westernized Muslim Country" in the middle east.
But Iran Isn't Turkey with a one foot in Europe. Iran is a Theocracy with a ruthless Quds Force
You are dreaming.
2
The Holocaust?
The Iran deal is in no way connected to the Holocaust, neither is Iran itself.
Next thing you know Netanyahu will require Iran to lower gravity in order to be accepted back into the International community.
The problem for Netanyahu is that he has used an image of a dangerous Iran as means for domestic politics.
For this he has been rather successful even to use US politics for his own domestics political strategies and power games.
Now that the worst case scenario for Netanyahu, a deal with Iran and no war, looks feasible, he has to realize that it is an old fact in politics, that you:
Can fool all people once
Can fool some people forever
But you cannot
Fool all people for ever
Netanyahu has simply lost his game and it is time to accept this.
The Iran deal is in no way connected to the Holocaust, neither is Iran itself.
Next thing you know Netanyahu will require Iran to lower gravity in order to be accepted back into the International community.
The problem for Netanyahu is that he has used an image of a dangerous Iran as means for domestic politics.
For this he has been rather successful even to use US politics for his own domestics political strategies and power games.
Now that the worst case scenario for Netanyahu, a deal with Iran and no war, looks feasible, he has to realize that it is an old fact in politics, that you:
Can fool all people once
Can fool some people forever
But you cannot
Fool all people for ever
Netanyahu has simply lost his game and it is time to accept this.
26
Israel already has a nuclear capacity that no one mentions. That information should be a part of the discussion.
44
Israel (unlike Iran) has not threatened to wipe any country off of the face of the planet. Even when attacked ('56, '67, '73, Lebanon 1, Lebanon 2, Gaza 1, Gaza 2, etc., Israel has not rolled out a single nuke. Ever. Israel has not invaded another country except when attacked and only in response to attacks by Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon. Still - no nukes. Israel does not chop off heads or hands as punishment for anything. All prisoners can be visited, the press is free, journalists (foreign and domestic) are not accompanied by official "minders", the courts are open and independent, etc., etc., etc.
Little things.
Little things.
1
The "no's" need to pound the idea that the world will continue sanctions if the US rejects the deal. Otherwise,.....
This American Jew is totally in favor of this Iranian deal, and completely appalled at the actions of Bibi Netanyahu.
29
Benjamin Netanyahu fears we'll reduce our military support for Israel, perhaps even "pull the plug", as soon as the "deal" gets passed in Congress. As long as Israel remains a "victim", he can milk the Munchausen self-induced "victim" stnce for all it is worth and further drain our nation of resources better used here.
13
It is past time for American Jews who do not march in lockstep with AIPAC and Israel's policy of why talk when we can hit, to speak up. Armed to the teeth with the most advanced offensive and defensive weapons provided by the U.S., and their own 200 nuclear warheads, Israel's mindset is that all its problems can be answered by war. American Jews have been the leaders in every endeavor in the U.S to promote justice have turned a blind eye to Israel's behavior since 1982. Recall what Prof. Tony Judt tried to remind us, "When Israel behaves badly, it is bad for all Jews." I would add it is bad for all Americans as we are seen as aiding and abetting.
19
"Most young Iranians no more believe in “Death to America” than they believe the Hidden Imam is going to show up tomorrow." while i agree with everything you said Mr. Cohen, belittling their beliefs is hardly a way to reconciliation.
3
" ... belittling their beliefs is hardly a way to reconciliation. ..."
Which is true entirely as there are of course many young Iranians that do believe very firmly in the teachings of Islam, still, there are many more young Iranians that simply crave for getting back to the world and join in for fast food, youporn, nice cars and Hollywood movies.
What quite a few people do not understand about Iran is that this is not a contradiction to their beliefs and that many young Iranians have also shed quite a bit of their beliefs since they are simply fed up with the revolution.
So no, it is not exactly a winning idea of Mr. Cohen's but at the same time also true.
Iran is so full of contradictions that one has had to be there a few times only to start to see the tip of the iceberg.
Which is true entirely as there are of course many young Iranians that do believe very firmly in the teachings of Islam, still, there are many more young Iranians that simply crave for getting back to the world and join in for fast food, youporn, nice cars and Hollywood movies.
What quite a few people do not understand about Iran is that this is not a contradiction to their beliefs and that many young Iranians have also shed quite a bit of their beliefs since they are simply fed up with the revolution.
So no, it is not exactly a winning idea of Mr. Cohen's but at the same time also true.
Iran is so full of contradictions that one has had to be there a few times only to start to see the tip of the iceberg.
Is Mr. Netanyahu secretly as welcoming of the Four Horsemen as some of the extreme Christian cultists in America? It seems he, as much as they, might welcome Israel's destruction as first sign of the arrival of some perverse prophet. Or is his goal only to provoke Iran to the point of making excuse for an Israeli nuclear attack there? Is any nation but Russia under Putin as dangerous to world peace?
6
It looks like this deal will go through, for better or worse. I have my misgivings, neither Pres. Obama nor Sec, Kerry are very good negotiators, and the Iranians are. But I think it is a done deal, so we need to move on.
What comes next is a windfall for the Iranian Mullahs. They will shower tons of new weaponry upon their puppets; Hezbollah and Assad and other terrorists around the world. The result will be thousands of dead Arabs at the hands of Assad and Nasrallah. Maybe tens of thousands. I look forward to this author leading the charge against this new level of violence with the same energy and focus he uses in parading around Israel's mistakes. I also look forward to weekly op-eds in the NYTimes against this forthcoming massacre, enabled by this Iran deal.
We can't know the long term impact of this Iranian deal, but it is clear that the short term impact will fall largely on those who oppose Assad and Nasralah. It is incumbent upon those who have promoted this deal, suggesting that those who oppose it are pro-war (they aren't) to answer to those who are collateral damage (dead) to this deal. This especially applies to those with a lofty perch on the editorial pages of the NYTimes.
What comes next is a windfall for the Iranian Mullahs. They will shower tons of new weaponry upon their puppets; Hezbollah and Assad and other terrorists around the world. The result will be thousands of dead Arabs at the hands of Assad and Nasrallah. Maybe tens of thousands. I look forward to this author leading the charge against this new level of violence with the same energy and focus he uses in parading around Israel's mistakes. I also look forward to weekly op-eds in the NYTimes against this forthcoming massacre, enabled by this Iran deal.
We can't know the long term impact of this Iranian deal, but it is clear that the short term impact will fall largely on those who oppose Assad and Nasralah. It is incumbent upon those who have promoted this deal, suggesting that those who oppose it are pro-war (they aren't) to answer to those who are collateral damage (dead) to this deal. This especially applies to those with a lofty perch on the editorial pages of the NYTimes.
5
I largely agree with Roger Cohen’s concerns regarding the role of Jewish organizations in advocacy on the Iran deal. Groups like AIPAC are designed to analyze Israel’s interests and advocate based on its conclusions. When it does so, it is living up to its charter and the expectations of its donors. On the other hand, umbrella Jewish organizations that create the image of unanimity where none exists and speak on behalf of their constituents in a manner with which at least some, if not many, of their individual members would disagree, do a disservice to political discourse and act unfairly with the resources they derive from their diverse constituency.
Rabbi Noah Gradofsky
Rabbi Noah Gradofsky
14
Words fail me as I attempt to digest Mr. Netanyahu's latest chutzpah. The arrogance, the deaf ear to protocol, the desperate attempt to change US policy to his view of the world, are all appalling. His portrayal of Israel on the precipice of another holocaust (supported by evangelical Christians) is ludicrous, as Israel is currently in possession of some 200 nuclear bombs, with no supervision by the IAEA or any other international body. Once the little nation that could, Israel tries to pretend that it still is that.
Mr. Netanyahu is emblematic of the dangerous path Israel has been taking since it has abandoned seeking peace and democracy in favor of religious fanaticism. The real problem is that he is supported by a large body of American patrons, not excluding the US government. One wishes that support were accompanied by some demands. Maybe President Obama should take a lesson in rebuffing Mr. Netanyahu from Donald Trump's attitude towards those he does not like (a.k.a. those who dislike him).
Mr. Netanyahu is emblematic of the dangerous path Israel has been taking since it has abandoned seeking peace and democracy in favor of religious fanaticism. The real problem is that he is supported by a large body of American patrons, not excluding the US government. One wishes that support were accompanied by some demands. Maybe President Obama should take a lesson in rebuffing Mr. Netanyahu from Donald Trump's attitude towards those he does not like (a.k.a. those who dislike him).
45
Israel is of little or no importance to most Americans. China, Russia, India, Europe--those are the places where we have vital interests in getting our way. The middle east wars and battle against Islamic idiots is winding down. We see that the USA can be of very little positive influence there. In fact, we have intensified threats to our country by "intervention."
11
Longer term, one wonders what Netanyahu and Israel's interference in American efforts to bring peace to the Middle East will mean for every-day American Jewish politicians.
When Kennedy ran, people worried he would take orders from the Vatican rather than govern us in our own best interests. Already now I hear folks say they won't vote for a Jewish politician at the national level again because it seems their allegiance is to Tel Aviv rather than America. And it's hard to say that they are wrong based on people like Senator Schumer who seem to take up all the airspace.
I am just thankful for the Levin brothers, Sander and Carl, who have represented Michigan in Washington for so many years, always showing the independent spirit we want from our legislators. Would that Sander's thoughtful analysis in this issue could get more coverage.
When Kennedy ran, people worried he would take orders from the Vatican rather than govern us in our own best interests. Already now I hear folks say they won't vote for a Jewish politician at the national level again because it seems their allegiance is to Tel Aviv rather than America. And it's hard to say that they are wrong based on people like Senator Schumer who seem to take up all the airspace.
I am just thankful for the Levin brothers, Sander and Carl, who have represented Michigan in Washington for so many years, always showing the independent spirit we want from our legislators. Would that Sander's thoughtful analysis in this issue could get more coverage.
24
Just watched all of the PBS specials on the fiftieth anniversary of the nuclear age.
I came away from it not concerned about Iran or North Korea.
My concern is the current crop of extreme right wing Republican Presidential candidates who try to outmaneuver one another on their hawkish views.
Not one of them has the good sense or balance displayed by JFK who rejected the unanimous advice of his military brass, all of whom favored an attack on Cuba, an action that many agree would have ended life on the planet as we know it.
I don't want any of them in the driver's seat since none of them seems to believe in the concept of diplomacy.
I came away from it not concerned about Iran or North Korea.
My concern is the current crop of extreme right wing Republican Presidential candidates who try to outmaneuver one another on their hawkish views.
Not one of them has the good sense or balance displayed by JFK who rejected the unanimous advice of his military brass, all of whom favored an attack on Cuba, an action that many agree would have ended life on the planet as we know it.
I don't want any of them in the driver's seat since none of them seems to believe in the concept of diplomacy.
22
A Jewish surname does not add any more credibility to your argument, although the New York Times might think otherwise. Most Americans, including most Americans Jews, oppose this deal for good reasons that have nothing to do with anything other than the safety of Americans in this country and abroad.
8
Wrong!
You have no basis, Richard, for asserting that most Americans oppose the Iran nuclear agreement. And, as the smokescreen from the onslaught of advertising by Republicans and groups like AIPAC clears, more and more Americans are becoming aware that independent experts -- including the former security heads in Israel -- strongly favor the deal.
Most Americans don't oppose the deal.
1
How could you write a column like this and not mention Schumer's opposition?
6
I do not find that Netanyahu or John Bolton pass the 'smell test' on their Middle East pronouncements. They pronounce that American Jews and others should reject a carefully negotiated nuclear agreement between China, Russia, Germany, France, the United Kingdom, and the United States with Iran. This agreement includes the most stringent safeguards ever imposed on a sovereign country. It relies on the IAEA, which was right on Iraq WMDs, while the Bush/Cheney group was deceptively wrong. Mr. Cohen points out that 'American Jewish' interests can differ from the Netanyahu/Bolton 'kill the deal' dictum. I have yet to see an alternative to this nuclear agreement. Broad sanctions against Iran will soon crumble, were the U. S. to renege on this multinational agreement. Iran will be free to expand its nuclear capability. Standing alone, would the United States best serve 'American Jewry' by a disastrous military attack against an unleashed Iran? I think not.
7
I am an American Jew and I am proud to support the Iran deal.
44
The most troubling part of the this piece is that Mr. Cohen would lead readers to believe that Jews have some magical power and ability to control the US Government. Last I checked, Jews did not control the American government. Americans, which include people of Jewish faith, control the American government. It's really an important distinction that seems to get lost in his argument.
5
Agreed on that point. On another point, Iran, if they were a civilized nation, would actually say "A nuclear bomb, why do we need that," and none of this would even be discussed. They, by their nature, are not a trustworthy country. No matter what we order them to do, it just won't happen.
1
If Jews don't control the American government (I agree) it's not for want of trying on schoolyard bully Bibi's part.
"In the real world, this is the best achievable deal for America and the ally, Israel, it would never forsake."
If this is true about the "never forsaking" part (doubtful to me because "never" doesn't exist in the political realm), its in spite of Netanyahu, not because of him. Right now the Likud game plan is to use
American Jews as pawns in the Likud struggle against the Obama Administration, a struggle which began long before the Iran accord and was based on Obama's dislike of the settlements and desire for a two state solution; as opposed to the Likud dream of annexation of the West Bank, now certified by the appointment of Danon as Israel's UN envoy . The effect of Netanyahu's appeals for American Jews to go against their government and cede US Mideast policy to his control will inevitably generate anti-Jewish sentiment in the US. What does he care; it's a sure fire algorithm for generating a new batch of settlers.
If this is true about the "never forsaking" part (doubtful to me because "never" doesn't exist in the political realm), its in spite of Netanyahu, not because of him. Right now the Likud game plan is to use
American Jews as pawns in the Likud struggle against the Obama Administration, a struggle which began long before the Iran accord and was based on Obama's dislike of the settlements and desire for a two state solution; as opposed to the Likud dream of annexation of the West Bank, now certified by the appointment of Danon as Israel's UN envoy . The effect of Netanyahu's appeals for American Jews to go against their government and cede US Mideast policy to his control will inevitably generate anti-Jewish sentiment in the US. What does he care; it's a sure fire algorithm for generating a new batch of settlers.
21
I think the public's problem with The Deal is two-fold...not enough info re when and how the billions will be released and whether there are restrictions on using such monies to promote terrorism and that the U.S. didn't seem to get anything in return--not even the release of the journalist currently being tried as a spy. The other problem is would Iran really use a nuclear bomb if it had one? Would it really destroy Israel knowing there would be instant retaliation from the US? Of course, though, perhaps Obama is the problem...perhaps the feeling among the naysayers re The Deal is that Obama has vacillated so often when strength was required, there's a good chance that Obama would not retaliate--hence Netanyahu's strong opposition to the deal. Obama's weakness in foreign affairs, his habit of negotiating from behind, and his speaking loudly and carrying a small stick is what's wrong with The Deal. But alas Congress has no choice but to approve it since hopefully if Iran didn't follow the US would have a president along the lines of Teddy Roosevelt...socially progressive, fiscally conservative, and most of all, super tough when it comes to protecting America from its enemies.
3
I totally understand were Netanyahu is coming from , though i do not agree with many of his positions or his governments positions. As an "independent" I can see his reasoning and much of it is based on the Shteytl Ghetto mentality. But the good thing is I don't have to agree with his positions because i am not subject to his administration here in the states regardless of his appeal to my "Jewishness" and my Never Again mentality. That said, the pact Obama made is flawed and i don't need Bibi to tell me that nor do i need Republicans to line up against it because a Democrat made the pact( birther mentality). I believe the pact gives carte blanche to the mullahs to surreptitiously continue developing the bomb. I don't think a pact will stop the Iranians as pressure did not stop the Pakistanis nor the North Koreans. Because the development will not stop, there is no need for a pact that rewards Iran with money and time. In addition, it returns too much money that needs to go to victims family's for judgments against Iran for their criminal behavior. I say no to the pact and renegotiate it with good oversight guidelines and rigorous inspections to any facility the UN wants to see but without prior notice and without requiring permission from the Mullahs. My fear is even if we get that, Iran will go to N Korea or Pakistan and get what they want anyway. Remember, as long as it against the Great Satan and his minor Satan buddy in Israel anything goes to destroy us.
15
" I believe the pact gives carte blanche to the mullahs to surreptitiously continue developing the bomb." The problem with statements like this is they assume that the president is either stupid, or is actively seeking the demise of the state of Israel. Does anybody really believe that either of these is true?
What makes you think Iran would agree to a new deal where they have to give up more and we have to give up less?
Who gave carte blanche to the Zionist Jewish Israeli rabbis and their nation state to surreptitiously develop a nuclear weapons arsenal?
France, the United Kingdom and the United States.
Which American state, territory or possession is named Israel?
What do the 6 million Christian and Muslim Arab Palestinians under Israeli dominion by occupation, blockade/siege, exile and 2nd class citizenship think about the nuclear deal between the P5+ 1 and Iran?
France, the United Kingdom and the United States.
Which American state, territory or possession is named Israel?
What do the 6 million Christian and Muslim Arab Palestinians under Israeli dominion by occupation, blockade/siege, exile and 2nd class citizenship think about the nuclear deal between the P5+ 1 and Iran?
6
Thank you Roger Cohen. Yes, I am a Jew and I support this deal. Judaism is about Tikkun --- repairing the world. This deal, OK, not perfect for sure, is an effort in that direction. Favoring this deal is the Jewish thing to do. Yes, there will be risks and much uncertainty over the next 15 years. The deal is not an end but a beginning, and the same perseverance that was shown by our diplomats to reach this deal will have to continue throughout this time to make sure that we reach a different place by 2030.
15
Well, I, as an American Jew, favor the deal--perhaps a bit reluctantly, as I was hoping for a better one--but favor it over the alternatives just the same.
And, I gather a lot of other American Jews feel similarly.
There has been discussion that support for the deal breaks down somewhat along religious/secular lines, with the former being less supportive, and there may be some truth to that, but in my discussions I think there may be more of an age difference. The younger part of the Jewish community has never been as unified in support of Israel's policies and politicians as the older; the latter, of course, have vivid memories of the Holocaust and treat Israel as the last refuge for Jews in a hostile world. The younger tend to think that Israel often betrays the ideals of democracy and tolerance in favor of a fundamentalist view of "the Holy Land" and is wary of stances taken by the traditional Jewish lobbying organizations (AIPAC, AJC, Haddasah). To a goodly number (myself included), these have the hazy taint of oligarchical conservatism, even racism, hanging around them--a tradition of thinking of oneself as part of "the chosen people" necessarily implies others are not chosen, after all--a taint we'd rather not be associated with.
I suspect AIPAC, et. al., would be rather surprised at the number of American Jews who would not support their position on this issue--and on a lot of other issues, as well.
And, I gather a lot of other American Jews feel similarly.
There has been discussion that support for the deal breaks down somewhat along religious/secular lines, with the former being less supportive, and there may be some truth to that, but in my discussions I think there may be more of an age difference. The younger part of the Jewish community has never been as unified in support of Israel's policies and politicians as the older; the latter, of course, have vivid memories of the Holocaust and treat Israel as the last refuge for Jews in a hostile world. The younger tend to think that Israel often betrays the ideals of democracy and tolerance in favor of a fundamentalist view of "the Holy Land" and is wary of stances taken by the traditional Jewish lobbying organizations (AIPAC, AJC, Haddasah). To a goodly number (myself included), these have the hazy taint of oligarchical conservatism, even racism, hanging around them--a tradition of thinking of oneself as part of "the chosen people" necessarily implies others are not chosen, after all--a taint we'd rather not be associated with.
I suspect AIPAC, et. al., would be rather surprised at the number of American Jews who would not support their position on this issue--and on a lot of other issues, as well.
27
Of course, it's not about AIPAC and Jews. It is not specifically a Jewish organization. It is an open, lobbying organization to promote American Israel Public Affairs. There are many card-carrying AIPAC members who are not Jewish. It doesn't matter what Jews think, it matters what their membership thinks.
1
" The younger tend to think that Israel often betrays the ideals of democracy and tolerance in favor of a fundamentalist view of "the Holy Land" "
Palestine belongs to its indigenous people not the 20th century colonists who are primarily Ashkenazi and are descended from European converts to Judaism from the Roman Empire era + the Khazars who converted from paganism c750 CE. Even honest Jewish historians* agree on this and of course now DNA studies show the Ashkenazi have little or no Near East DNA.
* Eg. Ben Gurion & Ben Zvi (2nd Pres.) wrote in their history of Israel that there was no exile after the Romans put down the revolts in the 1st & 2nd centuries CE and that the majority of the Jewish population converte to Islam in the 7th century CE to avoid paying the head tax on all non-Muslims.
Palestine belongs to its indigenous people not the 20th century colonists who are primarily Ashkenazi and are descended from European converts to Judaism from the Roman Empire era + the Khazars who converted from paganism c750 CE. Even honest Jewish historians* agree on this and of course now DNA studies show the Ashkenazi have little or no Near East DNA.
* Eg. Ben Gurion & Ben Zvi (2nd Pres.) wrote in their history of Israel that there was no exile after the Romans put down the revolts in the 1st & 2nd centuries CE and that the majority of the Jewish population converte to Islam in the 7th century CE to avoid paying the head tax on all non-Muslims.
Netanyahu is terrified if America joins the other 6 major powers and approves this deal that then peace will break out all over. Netanyahu is in the same dilemna as Hitler, he has built a militaristic society based upon opposition to "them" and without terrifying the them his whole edifice will come tumbling down. Why should there be universal military conscription if there is peace and no enemy?
19
It's time to pull the plug.
America has lost all credibility in foreign affairs by its blind acceptance of Israeli neocolonialism and collective punishment, both of which have been rejected by the civilized world for more than a generation and now, the prime minister of a foreign nation is openly meddling in the political processes of this country to promote his own political agenda.
End all aid to Israel until Netanyahu is replaced by a rational leader who will adhere to the moral norms of contemporary society and give him a dose of real meddling.
And, please, spare me the horror stories of how nasty the Palestinians are. Compared to the Israeli armed forces, they are a sparrow in a cage full of hawks.
America has lost all credibility in foreign affairs by its blind acceptance of Israeli neocolonialism and collective punishment, both of which have been rejected by the civilized world for more than a generation and now, the prime minister of a foreign nation is openly meddling in the political processes of this country to promote his own political agenda.
End all aid to Israel until Netanyahu is replaced by a rational leader who will adhere to the moral norms of contemporary society and give him a dose of real meddling.
And, please, spare me the horror stories of how nasty the Palestinians are. Compared to the Israeli armed forces, they are a sparrow in a cage full of hawks.
29
Cohen does not even mention the fundamental issue here,are American Jews supporting the best deal for the US or are they acting as a mouthpiece or agent for a foreign country,Israel.Unlike Republicans who oppose the deal because they believe we could have negotiated a better one,Netanyahu's argument is "no deal would be good enough".Worse still,he provides little evidence to back up his assertions about the consequences of the deal currently on the table.It is troubling that so many "mainstream" Jews and Organizations do his bidding.More concerning still is his opportunism in seizing any global situation or issue (for example the recent bombings in France) to call on Jews to move to Israel rather than stay where they are.Such behavior only arms those who question where the loyalty of Jews outside of Israel lie.
13
The AMIA bombing in Argentina was done by the same regime that will promise to uphold the deal.
The Sofia bus bombing by Iranian proxies.
The ship KLOS-C siezed last year, was just full of rose petals to be showered down on Tel Aviv
Oh yes, "Peace in our time"
Maybe "Trust, but verify" works better, and we can't verify.
The last time Jews ignored Government organized mobs that vowed to kill all Jews it didn't work out so well.
The Sofia bus bombing by Iranian proxies.
The ship KLOS-C siezed last year, was just full of rose petals to be showered down on Tel Aviv
Oh yes, "Peace in our time"
Maybe "Trust, but verify" works better, and we can't verify.
The last time Jews ignored Government organized mobs that vowed to kill all Jews it didn't work out so well.
9
A very dangerous game is being played by certain members of the American Jewish community.
If the agreement is turned down, there is a high possibility of a protracted war with Iran. My country will have to invade that country to assure no nuclear production. Troops on the ground will be necessary. That “troops on the ground” fact has been established. Another reality; Iran has a strong military force on land and it will retaliate with religious fervor.
Many thousands of Iranians will die; in Iran many of them innocent women and children. Many thousands of American military will die. Many Israelis will die. Those injured will suffer for the rest of their lives. Additionally, as we discovered with Iraq, there will be long term geo political and religious consequences. Iranian hard liners will hate America even more than they do now. For them and their Mullahs this will be a religious war. Then, another problem; the war will be very costly for America. The fact is we have not paid for the last war. Our country will be weakened geo economically.
It will get worse. Those around the world of the Jewish faith should take note: Jews in Europe will face a hardening of the anti-Semitism already there. Muslim populations will be incensed. The move could backfire for Jews in the US too. As the Iranian war becomes more painful here, their considerable influence on the political process could provoke strong anti-Semitic resentment.
www.InquiryAbraham.com
If the agreement is turned down, there is a high possibility of a protracted war with Iran. My country will have to invade that country to assure no nuclear production. Troops on the ground will be necessary. That “troops on the ground” fact has been established. Another reality; Iran has a strong military force on land and it will retaliate with religious fervor.
Many thousands of Iranians will die; in Iran many of them innocent women and children. Many thousands of American military will die. Many Israelis will die. Those injured will suffer for the rest of their lives. Additionally, as we discovered with Iraq, there will be long term geo political and religious consequences. Iranian hard liners will hate America even more than they do now. For them and their Mullahs this will be a religious war. Then, another problem; the war will be very costly for America. The fact is we have not paid for the last war. Our country will be weakened geo economically.
It will get worse. Those around the world of the Jewish faith should take note: Jews in Europe will face a hardening of the anti-Semitism already there. Muslim populations will be incensed. The move could backfire for Jews in the US too. As the Iranian war becomes more painful here, their considerable influence on the political process could provoke strong anti-Semitic resentment.
www.InquiryAbraham.com
227
Mr. Anderson -- certainly you are not going down a path to justify anti-semitism in the future, are you? If XYZ happens, anti semitsm will be provoked. Hate would never be justified, no matter the outcome. The government will have caused the outcome of this ordeal, not the Jews.
1
For the past 30 years one Israeli political leader after another has
Unfortunately, you are correct @David Anderson, anti-semitism will increase exponentially, nasty people don't need much of an excuse.
The downside of the deal is tangible and immediate: $100 billion to Iran to fund terrorism, and the end of sanctions. The upside of the deal is speculative: possible slowdown of Iran's march to the bomb. Congress should force Obama and Kerry to try for a better deal. Confronted with Western resolve, Iran might flinch. And even if they can't get a good deal, in backing away at this point, at least the US will be doing everything it can to oppose Iran getting nuclear weapons. The so-called "restraints" in the deal are just for show. They're Potemkin constraints.
5
Thanks for this excellent column in support of the Iran deal. Netanyahu's outrageous attempt to control our American congress is deeply offensive to a growing number of ordinary Americans, including Jews.
40
The misassessment of Iran's leadership & its intentions is alarming. The US left has a habit of cozying up to the most heinous regimes in the world (think Stalin and now the Ayatollahs). JStreet like its spiritual forbear, the SDS is a den of nincompoops. And in the media, the Forwards has become an Iran apologist. Oy vey.
5
...and exactly what kind of campaign is Israel waging for public opinion in the other P5+1 countries...Bibi wants the US to serve his interests (further establishing Greater Israel), not our own. That Obama is not playing this game is Bibi's major problem.
165
Exactly correct. Why isn't Bibi speaking in front of the Russian politburo or the British parliament? Only this country hauls out the welcome mat for Israel's war-monger-in-chief.
9
You are right, Copse. The irony is that President Obama is performing a service for Israel as part of the Iran nuclear agreement, while Prime Minister Netanyahu, in his mindless opposition to that agreement, is putting Israel in jeopardy.
TO STU
Obama made an agreement that Israel would reframe from attacking Iran and the USA would stop Iran from getting the bomb.
Obama made an agreement that Israel would reframe from attacking Iran and the USA would stop Iran from getting the bomb.
Just look at their membership and figure out whether these Jewish organizations really represent American Jews. They are all dying because they are not attracting young Jews. Perhaps the knee-jerk acceptance of Netanyahu's policies is the reason why so many American Jews distance themselves from them.
There is also reality -- this is not Israel vs. Obama, the rest of the world endorsed the agreement, so it is the Likud leadership of Israel and a few political allies against the world. As much as they may long for shtetl Israel, unaffected by the rest of the world, it is not going to happen.
There is also reality -- this is not Israel vs. Obama, the rest of the world endorsed the agreement, so it is the Likud leadership of Israel and a few political allies against the world. As much as they may long for shtetl Israel, unaffected by the rest of the world, it is not going to happen.
86
The key issue for many in Congress is not how many Americans or American Jews support the deal, it is how many billionaires oppose it and will give them wads of cash for a "no" vote.
5
Very thoughtful comment, Steve Goldberg. As distasteful and offensive as the behavior of Netanyahu has been, and as disgraceful as has been the fawning over him by the Republicans in Congress, we cannot let this important decision be about them.
The nuclear agreement with Iran must be approved because thinking, honest Americans -- Jews and Gentiles, Democrats and Republicans -- understand that it is in the best interests of America, the Middle East and, clearly, Israel.
The nuclear agreement with Iran must be approved because thinking, honest Americans -- Jews and Gentiles, Democrats and Republicans -- understand that it is in the best interests of America, the Middle East and, clearly, Israel.
5
Bibi uses the same fear driven rhetoric that Bush used after we were attacked. It is much easier to stoke people's fear than to actually engage their brains.
A large majority of Iranian citizens are young and desperately want to engage with the West. Time to stop listening to old men who sell only fear and war and give diplomacy and engagement a chance.
A large majority of Iranian citizens are young and desperately want to engage with the West. Time to stop listening to old men who sell only fear and war and give diplomacy and engagement a chance.
159
It was Wolfowitz & the Office Of Special Plans that he set up & staffed withe Feith , Perle , Edelalman , Wurmser & 18 other AIPACers who created the ies used to rev-up US public support to invade & trash Iraq. FYI Both Feith & Perle were charged by the FBI in a phone tap with passing US secrets to Israel in their prior gov`t jobs.
No more US wars for AIPAC-Israel.
No more US wars for AIPAC-Israel.
7
Why haven't the Israeli people condemned Mr. Netanyahu for his demagogic behavior towards the US and Mr. Obama?
Never in my life have I heard of another statesman from another country involving himself in our politics for his own benefit.
I felt insulted when Mr. Netanyahu did and wished there was a law against it.
Never in my life have I heard of another statesman from another country involving himself in our politics for his own benefit.
I felt insulted when Mr. Netanyahu did and wished there was a law against it.
191
And I also wonder why our Republican congress doesn't get the condemnation they deserve in this country for inviting Netanyahu to speak or for sending a letter to the Iranian mullahs to try embarrass the president and derail the Iran deal. Totally beyond the pale!!
1
As a Jewish American citizen and a member of JStreet, I think that - to paraphrase Mr. Cohen's last sentence - in the real world an Israel under Netanyahu and his arch-right coalition is anything but an ally of the US.
Never in the history of this country has any leader of a supposedly allied nation dared to inject himself into the domestic policies of a country, e.g. the election, nor its foreign policies.
One only has to remember that some years ago, on the day that VP Biden visited Israel, Bibi's government - despite promises to the contrary - permitted some further thousands of apartments to be build in East Jerusalem.
Never in the history of this country has any leader of a supposedly allied nation dared to inject himself into the domestic policies of a country, e.g. the election, nor its foreign policies.
One only has to remember that some years ago, on the day that VP Biden visited Israel, Bibi's government - despite promises to the contrary - permitted some further thousands of apartments to be build in East Jerusalem.
265
Sarah...you're not a Jewish American citizen...you're an American who happens to be Jewish.
There's a difference in priorities!
There's a difference in priorities!
6
Actually Michael, Sarah is a Jewish American, in the same manner as there are Italian Americans, Irish Americans, etc, whether or not she is an observant Jew. Aa a very secular Jewish American, being a Jewish Anerican says nothing about my religious affiliation, which is minimal, but volumes about my cultural and ethnic heritage.
5
Pak...not to belabor the point, but there should be no hyphenated Americans of any kind, particularly with religion.
The separation of church and state should be observed, as in the Constitution, even though it never has been.
Cultural affiliations are also supposed to be cast aside if the concept of immigration is going to work.
Secular or ethnic quasi citizenship doesn't work...it's a matter of how we see ourselves. If we see ourselves as ethnic Jewish or Irish, we split ourselves off into groups and erode the democratic process.
In France, I've never heard anyone identify themselves as anything but French, never quasi ethnic or religion! This keeps people thinking as a team player, all on the same team and not pulled away by biases. Also, there is no prayer in government...religion is a private issue and never in government.
The separation of church and state should be observed, as in the Constitution, even though it never has been.
Cultural affiliations are also supposed to be cast aside if the concept of immigration is going to work.
Secular or ethnic quasi citizenship doesn't work...it's a matter of how we see ourselves. If we see ourselves as ethnic Jewish or Irish, we split ourselves off into groups and erode the democratic process.
In France, I've never heard anyone identify themselves as anything but French, never quasi ethnic or religion! This keeps people thinking as a team player, all on the same team and not pulled away by biases. Also, there is no prayer in government...religion is a private issue and never in government.
3
I support the deal because I am a Jew raised on the teachings of The Talmud. The deal is in the best interests of Israel.
301
but would not regime change, via US ground invasion, be more in Israel's interests? Then there would be no way Iran can get the bomb (plus a friendly regime would be installed).
1
If you were raised on the teachings of the Talmud then you should remember that the dispute is one of the major tools of discourse. Also the detailed deconstruction of any text. That might just as easily lead you to the opposite conclusion.
In any case, I doubt that you will find a Talmudic teaching supporting the deal. Of course one might find: "If someone comes to kill you, kill him first" what might be described as a preemptive strike, but being the Talmud, there is always a different opinion.
In any case, leave the Talmud out of it. It is like statistics; it can be brought to prove anything.
In any case, I doubt that you will find a Talmudic teaching supporting the deal. Of course one might find: "If someone comes to kill you, kill him first" what might be described as a preemptive strike, but being the Talmud, there is always a different opinion.
In any case, leave the Talmud out of it. It is like statistics; it can be brought to prove anything.
3
To Diatribe: You and I must have different editions. The one I own says that it is obligatory to defend Israel.
4
It's easy to go to war; humanity has been doing it for eons. In this case, it's a no-brainer supporting continued peace as opposed to setting up for potential war. It just requires more civility.
38
The Prime Minister of Israel works hard, it seems everyday, to isolate Israel from the World Community. We have entire diplomatic departments from multiple countries working to secure Israel's safety, and, it is never enough. It appears the Prime Minister believes that peace in the Middle East can only be achieved through eternal war in the Middle East.
101
Why should the interests of a foreign country, i.e., Israel, be of such importance to the US anyway? The US gets nothing from its relationship with Israel. Indeed, Israel is a massive strategic liability. The US gets blamed - quite rightly - for enabling Israel's violence and oppression towards Palestinians and its violence towards the Arab world around it. There is no strong moral argument for supporting Israel, particularly as Israeli settlement building exacerbates the conflict with the Palestinians and makes any chance of peace far less. And the fact that the US refuses to acknowledge or give proper weight to the moral claims of the Palestinians puts the lie to the idea of the US as an "honest broker." The US acts more as Israel's lawyer in its dealings with a weak and downtrodden people. When dealing with Iran, it is clear that Netanyahu's fearmongering has a lot more to do with maintaining Israel's massive military advantage in the region than with any rational assessment of Iran's real threat to Israel.
The US should treat Israel as it would any other regional state. Even more, the US must be willing to punish and even sanction Israel- just as it does the Palestinians - when the Israelis take actions that are detrimental to peace. Maintaining this "special relationship" is detrimental to all the parties involved, does nothing to advance peace, and apparently gives Israel's PM a license to blatantly interfere in US politics.
The US should treat Israel as it would any other regional state. Even more, the US must be willing to punish and even sanction Israel- just as it does the Palestinians - when the Israelis take actions that are detrimental to peace. Maintaining this "special relationship" is detrimental to all the parties involved, does nothing to advance peace, and apparently gives Israel's PM a license to blatantly interfere in US politics.
262
I quite agree. We don't obsess about any other country in the world as we do Israel. I think my favorite pro-Israel group is the evangelicals who love the fact that when Jesus comes again Jews will have a chance to believe in him, or be damned. That's real support
10
"Never forsake"? After 67 years of an agonized relationship with Israel, isn't it time to move on?
Isn't it time to spend our foreign aid fortune on countries we have a future with?
Enough is enough! American tax payers need to make their voices heard and demand an end to our dysfunctional relationship with Israel.
Isn't it time to spend our foreign aid fortune on countries we have a future with?
Enough is enough! American tax payers need to make their voices heard and demand an end to our dysfunctional relationship with Israel.
199
You forget that Gentiles have been mistreating Jews for thousands of years. 67 years of aid to Israel is needed to make up for this, at least in small part. Why do you not realize this? Why your hatred of Israel?
3
@Yoda: Even assuming that you're correct, aren't those 67 years about over now?
5
michael kittle, really lets send more money to the PA who's President is in his 11th year of a 5 year term. Or maybe to Turkey to a President who supports the outlawed on the terrorism list of America the Muslim Brotherhood. How about Libya,Syria,Iraq,Yemen? Maybe Pakistan, then they can tell us why they hid Bin Laden. Africa you pick a country we can trust.
3
The words coming out of Iran after the deal was announced is about war against Saudi Arabia, and extermination of Israel. Iran's declared enemies are unanimously against this deal because they see Iranian expansion into Iraq, Syria and Yemen in an effort to encircle and destroy them. Maybe the USA should listen to Iran's enemies and America's friends. Iran needs their embargoed money in order to support its growing military, and surrogate fighters.
Obama is sacrificing Israel and Saudi Arabia to Iran, and anyone who fails to see it is truly blind. Maybe the USA can take a chance on this deal, but not Iran's declared enemies.
Obama is sacrificing Israel and Saudi Arabia to Iran, and anyone who fails to see it is truly blind. Maybe the USA can take a chance on this deal, but not Iran's declared enemies.
14
@ naro
Saudi Arabia and Israel aren't America's "Friends." Where do you get this strange idea? The concept is in reality unknown in international relations where policy is ALWAYS driven by interest. As Truman famously remarked if you want a friend get a dog. Of course Netanyahu thinks the US is a dog whose leash he just has to yank to get it to go in his direction but that's another issue.
Saudi Arabia and Israel aren't America's "Friends." Where do you get this strange idea? The concept is in reality unknown in international relations where policy is ALWAYS driven by interest. As Truman famously remarked if you want a friend get a dog. Of course Netanyahu thinks the US is a dog whose leash he just has to yank to get it to go in his direction but that's another issue.
163
Can we get serious here. Iran spent much of the last 35 years fending off threats to them from Iraq, financed by the Saudis and approved by us. So Iran has good reasons to be worried about what the US and the Saudis are up to. And as far as being a friend, the Saudis are the largest sponsor of terrorism - via the mosques and schools it funds.
14
Are you American first....if not, you should go back to Israel
13
NEVER AGAIN! The battle cry of survivors of the Holocaust and of the State of Israel. Never again will Jews be led submissively to their death! Oddly, Netanyahu moves Israel and the Israelis toward submitting to their deaths because his claims are detached from reality. I take the words of the retired head of the Shin Bet over Bibi's, that the US Iran deal is a good one and better for Israel than no plan or continued hostilities. Bibi needs to understand that he can't blunder his way onto American media with the finesse of Rush Limbaugh, bust the place up like a bull in a china shop and expect Americans as a whole, leave alone American Jews, to submit to his madness that further endangers their security. All human plans involve pros and cons every step of the way and will predictably be fraught with errors that will need to be remedied. The Earth is the planet where imperfection reigns. Given a choice between Barack's and Bibi's imperfect plans, I see Barack's plan as providing Jews, Israel, the US, Iran and the rest of the community of nations, a greater margin of safety. Bibi's plan, in my opinion, is on the level of Nancy Reagan's plan for birth control and the war on drugs: Just Say No! If it didn't work for Nancy, let's face it folks, it's not going to work for Bibi either. Not even if he consults with Nancy's astrologer!
600
This is a brilliant analysis of America's choices re: the Iran deal.
Fortunately Obama understands America's national interest far better than the hard right, politically motivated talking heads and Israeli leaders who continue to take American largess and don't give a darn about American interests.
Fortunately Obama understands America's national interest far better than the hard right, politically motivated talking heads and Israeli leaders who continue to take American largess and don't give a darn about American interests.
12
Never again is an empty slogan. The ultra-Orthodox in Israel won't even do military service.
8
Thanks for injecting a little humor into a major matter in your discussion of a blow-hard like Bibi Netanyahu.
8
:Occasionally, I experience a moment of perversion and I think:
they don't want the deal, ok., let's see if they will like what comes next. Fortunately, it lasts a short time and I pray that rationality will prevail and that we give time a chance to lead us to a more stable course. Nuclear bombs are an abomination and they should be prohibited the way that mustard gas was considered inhuman after WWI.
You just have to read Netanyahu's words to see the immense exaggeration that they contain: Iran will have hundreds of bombs tomorrow, there will a nuclear arms race in the MIddle East, etc. Anytime, someone uses this kind of language, you know he is lying and Netanyahu is a master at this. Remember his drawing the red line at the UN. Iran was about to get the bomb in a few short months…and this was several years ago. One things we know for sure, Iran is not a threat to the US. It may be a threat to our influence in the Middle East, but not a threat to us and politicians who claim so are either unaware of what it would entail or lying. I opt for the latter.
they don't want the deal, ok., let's see if they will like what comes next. Fortunately, it lasts a short time and I pray that rationality will prevail and that we give time a chance to lead us to a more stable course. Nuclear bombs are an abomination and they should be prohibited the way that mustard gas was considered inhuman after WWI.
You just have to read Netanyahu's words to see the immense exaggeration that they contain: Iran will have hundreds of bombs tomorrow, there will a nuclear arms race in the MIddle East, etc. Anytime, someone uses this kind of language, you know he is lying and Netanyahu is a master at this. Remember his drawing the red line at the UN. Iran was about to get the bomb in a few short months…and this was several years ago. One things we know for sure, Iran is not a threat to the US. It may be a threat to our influence in the Middle East, but not a threat to us and politicians who claim so are either unaware of what it would entail or lying. I opt for the latter.
263
Well Frank, you made my case when you wrote "Iran is not a threat to the US" as you sit comfortably sheltered in Durham (I assume NC?). Try living 750 miles from a large country who finances terrorism, publicly shouts "death to you" and has a goal to dominate its neighbors and develop powerful nuclear capabilities. Would you hand control of negotiating with a crazed enemy to a surrogate?
You may not give a hoot about the Middle East or Israel. But if you think giving up the region will insulate you from its chaos and death, there is too much historical precedence to contradict such thinking.
You may not give a hoot about the Middle East or Israel. But if you think giving up the region will insulate you from its chaos and death, there is too much historical precedence to contradict such thinking.
7
Laurence, I simply do not understand why people think that Iran would commit national suicide by dropping a bomb on Israel. So, as the are obliterated by the hundreds of bombs that Israel has, and maybe a few from the US, they can enjoy the great pleasure of being pulverized. The only way that anyone can come to that conclusion is to claim that the Iranians are "crazed enemies". Iranians may be calculating but they are not crazy, and if a chaotic country like Pakistan, with a bomb on the ready, has not created Armageddon why should anyone think that Iran would. I can only try to be logical but I can't cure other people's fears.
8
@ Frank
Last I knew, there are plenty of Muslims who seem to be just fine with committing suicide in the act of destroying those they wish to destroy, be it Western elements such as the WTC or Palestinian suicide bombers in Israel. We in the west tend to not understand this as it doesn't seem rational to us, but that's the mistake we make over and over; expecting others to think like us, or think "rationally".
Last I knew, there are plenty of Muslims who seem to be just fine with committing suicide in the act of destroying those they wish to destroy, be it Western elements such as the WTC or Palestinian suicide bombers in Israel. We in the west tend to not understand this as it doesn't seem rational to us, but that's the mistake we make over and over; expecting others to think like us, or think "rationally".
1
This issue is not about Obama.
29
Agreed. And it shouldn't be about Netanyahu either.
8
Oh, but it is. You don't see BB getting in the face of Xi Jinping, Merkel, Putin, Hollande or Cameron, do you? Where are the $25 million campaigns to sway the legislatures, incite the populace and influence the polls in those countries? They are all equally responsible for the deal.
I'm trying to picture Netty on Russian TV, urging the comrades to abandon their leaders and follow him. Or sitting across the table from the Chinese, who know more about the Iranians than Bibi and his entire shaky coalition ever will. Telling them that Iranians are ignorant savages intent on nuclear holocaust and "bringing the Jews to the door of the ovens."
Nope, this is Bibi inciting division, beating his chest, gleefully barging in like a battering ram, confident of the support of the hate-Obama contingent in the GOP. Likud, Iranian hardliners and right-leaning Congress excepted, the rest of the world is relieved that the six major powers of the world banded together to contain a threat. It's our best chance to draw Iran back into the community of nations -- exactly what Netanyahu REALLY fears.
I'm trying to picture Netty on Russian TV, urging the comrades to abandon their leaders and follow him. Or sitting across the table from the Chinese, who know more about the Iranians than Bibi and his entire shaky coalition ever will. Telling them that Iranians are ignorant savages intent on nuclear holocaust and "bringing the Jews to the door of the ovens."
Nope, this is Bibi inciting division, beating his chest, gleefully barging in like a battering ram, confident of the support of the hate-Obama contingent in the GOP. Likud, Iranian hardliners and right-leaning Congress excepted, the rest of the world is relieved that the six major powers of the world banded together to contain a threat. It's our best chance to draw Iran back into the community of nations -- exactly what Netanyahu REALLY fears.
11
actuall it is. Obama is the one pushing this anti-Israel treaty. If the Republicans were in power they would reject it and instead keep Iran isolated and keep applying both military pressure and the threat of it. The REpublicans, unlike the Democrats, know what needs to be done.
7
"Most young Iranians no more believe in “Death to America” than they believe the Hidden Imam is going to show up tomorrow."
Americans can relate to that. Most Christians don't think that Christ will return tomorrow, nor the world end tomorrow; we know a few people who think those things, and we know what we think about them. Most Jews don't think the Messiah will appear tomorrow either.
This stuff is used to demonize the Other. Why? The same reasons this nuclear deal is being demonized, and by many of the same people.
We know these people too, and we know what we think of them when we recognize them for what they are. The guy with a sign about the "End of the World?" We know what we think. The opposition to the nuclear deal is like that.
Would any Senator come out against the idea of the return of Christ or the Messiah coming? No. Do any of them seriously believe tomorrow is the day? No. Would any of them stand up and say so? Few. That is where we are on the nuclear deal.
Few of the Senators believe what they are taking as their position. They are doing it out of political calculation, and a very narrow calculation. They are too smart, to calculating and successful at calculating, not to see that there is no sensible alternative to this deal. They see that the alternatives are few, and things they'd never support either.
Americans can relate to that. Most Christians don't think that Christ will return tomorrow, nor the world end tomorrow; we know a few people who think those things, and we know what we think about them. Most Jews don't think the Messiah will appear tomorrow either.
This stuff is used to demonize the Other. Why? The same reasons this nuclear deal is being demonized, and by many of the same people.
We know these people too, and we know what we think of them when we recognize them for what they are. The guy with a sign about the "End of the World?" We know what we think. The opposition to the nuclear deal is like that.
Would any Senator come out against the idea of the return of Christ or the Messiah coming? No. Do any of them seriously believe tomorrow is the day? No. Would any of them stand up and say so? Few. That is where we are on the nuclear deal.
Few of the Senators believe what they are taking as their position. They are doing it out of political calculation, and a very narrow calculation. They are too smart, to calculating and successful at calculating, not to see that there is no sensible alternative to this deal. They see that the alternatives are few, and things they'd never support either.
170
US Jews had better face the fact that if Israel and US Zionists get their way and the deal is rejected and the US goes to war with Iran they will suffer greatly for it. As the war drags out and Americans get fed up with it they will blame the Jews and on the whole they will be correct. The heads of major US Jewish organizations are behind Netanyahu and if Jews at large continue to tolerate this situation they are complicit.
US Jews had better recognize that not only our souls but now our necks are on the line. The Jewish State and its supporters have succumbed to collective insanity and they are done for. For us it is not too late to repudiate Zionism and support BDS.
US Jews had better recognize that not only our souls but now our necks are on the line. The Jewish State and its supporters have succumbed to collective insanity and they are done for. For us it is not too late to repudiate Zionism and support BDS.
6
We also need to remember that we too have faced a real threat - the old USSR, an enemy that had a navy that operated in many of the waters ours did. And they were well armed with nukes and conventional weapons, yet in the end, even as they once threatened to bury us, we negotiated.
366
The USSR was profoundly atheistic, Mr. McKenna.They were never going to risk their own extinction through nuclear war.
The Iranian theocrats subscribe to an apocalyptic religious dogma which preaches the return of their messianic 12th Imam (Mahdi) during a time of great tribulation. And after the return of the hidden Imam, judgement day.
Think of the Westboro Baptist Church with nuclear weapons.
The Iranian theocrats subscribe to an apocalyptic religious dogma which preaches the return of their messianic 12th Imam (Mahdi) during a time of great tribulation. And after the return of the hidden Imam, judgement day.
Think of the Westboro Baptist Church with nuclear weapons.
15
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the American Jewish Committee (AJC) and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) representative of the American Jews? When was the election?
413
Reply to Allen, Brooklyn:
Read again. What he wrote was, "But it’s troubling because it’s unclear how representative of American Jews as a whole these organizations are."
Read again. What he wrote was, "But it’s troubling because it’s unclear how representative of American Jews as a whole these organizations are."
31
The above named entities are really supported in high numbers by our oh-so-Christian Evangelicals, albeit for their very own biblical reasons. Go figure.....
9
Many American Jews are "voting with their feet" by marrying out of the faith (as much as 80% among Jews who grew up in Reform households) or simply dropping their religion entirely. The organizations you mentioned represent the interests and opinions of the rich Jews who fund them. Netanyahu has effectively split the American Jewish community. The problems with Iran will eventually sort themselves out, but long term, Israel's problems with its rapidly growing ultra Orthodox population will only get worse.
14
This is awful. Mr. Cohen, the person who is out of step with American Jewry is you. The people whom you picked out as examples are little more than "straw people." Yes, some American Jews, particularly Jews whose ideologies would cause them to agree with the President, will support this deal no matter what. But most Jews who are active in Jewish life oppose this deal because they are well informed and they understand that this deal leads to very frightening outcomes. As for J Street, its funding sources are mirky and its positions oftentimes appear to be more anti-Israel than pro-Israel. As for attacking Netanyahu, that is another straw man of sorts. Almost everyone in Israel is terrified of the deal, including Herzog, who was Obama's darling in the last election. In Israel, where no one agrees on anything, almost everyone agrees that this deal puts Israel, and ultimately the West, in danger. As for interfering in another nation's politics, have you forgotten how the Administration sent advisors and money to Israel to defeat Netanyahu and install Herzog a few months ago? Have you forgotten about Obama's temper tantrum after Netanyahu was re-elected? Do you care one bit that the dangerous policies you continue to advocate in your column put the survival of Israel at risk?
35
According to a recent NBC poll, those identifying as American Jews support the deal 54 to 33%.
102
Mr Cohen is right on. Bibi is using scare tactics for his own agenda which has nothing to do with Israel's existence. His own generals and intelligence service won't back him on this. He is out of control and should focus on peace with the Palestinians, but there is no glory in that, is there?
76
Netanyahu was only re-elected by the narrowest of margins, and that only after he tried to scare the nationalists - the ones dreaming of a 'greater Israel' - by not only openly proclaiming in a West Band settlement that under his reign a two state solution was out of the question, but also that Israeli Arabs were being bussed in high numbers to the polls.
14
It is very difficult to respect the Prime Minister when his response to any movement forward is predicated on an entirely understandable but wholly overworked rendition of "Never Again"
Fundamentalists are cut from the same religious cloth as every other believer; it is only that they, like all the rest of the flock, voice the same fear of life in more strident terms.
What is most appalling is that people of religious faith are the most adamant warriors. The value they voice for life is dimmed to the level of inaudibility by actions which scream of death.
I have little respect and no trust for his words
Fundamentalists are cut from the same religious cloth as every other believer; it is only that they, like all the rest of the flock, voice the same fear of life in more strident terms.
What is most appalling is that people of religious faith are the most adamant warriors. The value they voice for life is dimmed to the level of inaudibility by actions which scream of death.
I have little respect and no trust for his words
454
Never again should me Israel will defend itself. I get lost when Never Again means the U.S. must fight Israeli's battles. Peace with Japan, Germany, and Vietnam...why not Iran? Because of Israel? Let Israel defend itself. Nobody can explain why Israel has any business in a deal between the 5+1 and Iran. Israel can make its own treaties and its own wars.
7
"I have little respect and no trust for his words"! I second the motion.
DOUG you are right but you miss one very important element in this story.
Israel wanted to attack Iran and it was Obama who told them not to.
He told them he would stop Iran.
That to me is a agreement that Israel was forced to accept.
This agreement gave Israel the right to have a say when they have kept their part of the agreement and Obama hasn't.
Israel wanted to attack Iran and it was Obama who told them not to.
He told them he would stop Iran.
That to me is a agreement that Israel was forced to accept.
This agreement gave Israel the right to have a say when they have kept their part of the agreement and Obama hasn't.
1
Thank you Roger, it seems that we have been going out our way the last ten years, beginning with Blankfein, Fuld, Greenspan and their ilk and a host of wealthy Jews from other walks of life eager to tell everyone about their art collections and homes in the Hamptons adnaseum, gotten by having whatever they are peddling made in China rather than America. and we certainly don't need to add to this the constant drumbeat of BibI, Adelson and now Schummer trying to drag America into another war in the middle east which will be fought by young men and women from less affluent backgrounds while our children will be running the banks and silicon valley, no Roger; we should quit giving people a reason to be anti- semmetic: we need another Jonas Salk, Albert Einstein or Albert Schweitzer not these right wing dreck braggarts.
344
"We should quit giving people a reason to be anti-semitic." What kind of tripe is this? That somehow wealthy Jews - curse their art collections and East End homes! - cast a bad light on the rest of us because they fit what is obviously a stereotype you seem to share?
That we need some more Good Jews to remind the rest of the world that we're a good people because, hey, one opened the doors to physics as no one before or since or another found a cure for one disease or another?
Like any other Americans, Jews are individuals and don't need anyone telling us how to feel on an issue or how to make us more palatable. Most of us are smart enough to have weighed all parts of the issue by, you know, reading about it, the opinions of a Sheldon Adelson or Sander Levin notwithstanding.
Some are for the deal, some against. I'm for it: not because I'm Jewish, but because I think it's the right thing.
Oh, and if Albert Schweitzer were the subject in that old SNL skit, "Jew, Not a Jew," he'd come out as the latter. He was Lutheran.
So, if you insist on telling us who are of the Hebrew persuasion how not to make anti-semites out of others, don't do it with anti-semitic tropes straight out of "The Protocols."
That we need some more Good Jews to remind the rest of the world that we're a good people because, hey, one opened the doors to physics as no one before or since or another found a cure for one disease or another?
Like any other Americans, Jews are individuals and don't need anyone telling us how to feel on an issue or how to make us more palatable. Most of us are smart enough to have weighed all parts of the issue by, you know, reading about it, the opinions of a Sheldon Adelson or Sander Levin notwithstanding.
Some are for the deal, some against. I'm for it: not because I'm Jewish, but because I think it's the right thing.
Oh, and if Albert Schweitzer were the subject in that old SNL skit, "Jew, Not a Jew," he'd come out as the latter. He was Lutheran.
So, if you insist on telling us who are of the Hebrew persuasion how not to make anti-semites out of others, don't do it with anti-semitic tropes straight out of "The Protocols."
19
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D - Israel) is certainly not someone to be listened to in regard to what's best for the U.S. Especially not in the light of his vote for war in Iraq.
15
Those who know don't believe it is "YOU FOLKS" which need another Jonas Salk, Einstein because one of them is already enough for a lot of others. No, Sir - We all need another Jonas Salk, Einstein - Shalom and da ainyu!
1
We have Trump. And the Israelis? They have Netanyahu. Enough said.
140
Trump is a million times better and safer than bibi
1
Well Netanyahu became Prime Minister, and was reelected, so Trump........we live in interesting times, and they may become even more interesting.
I don't understand this analogy regarding Trump and Netanyahu. Trump has no power except the power of persuasion, and the deal's fate will be sealed long before Trump has any power to vote on the matter. Netanyahu, in contrast, has great power, both in Israel and the US. His power in the US is exhibited by Schumer's "no" on the deal, and in the entire Republican party.
5
"In the real world, this is the best achievable deal for America and the ally, Israel, it would never forsake."
Love to know where this treaty that obliges us to come to the defense of Israel, is.
Love to know where this treaty that obliges us to come to the defense of Israel, is.
163