Netanyahu wants the US to draw firm red line for iran

chase_gwSeptember 17, 2012

Netanyahu was very explicit this weekend saying that the US MUST draw a 'red line' that will cause specific action to be taken if the Iranians cross it. He said, in no uncertain terms, that America MUST state what that red line is and what the specific consequences would be should Iran cross it.

President Obama has been very clear that America will never tolerate a nuclear armed Iran and that all options are on the table to stop them from doing so. Not good enough for Netanyahu.

Do you think there should be a stated 'red line'? If so what specifically would it be?

If you think there should be stated red line and Iran crosses it what should happen?

Do you think it is appropriate for a foreign country to try and dictate the specific foreign policy of a sovereign nations ?

Here is a link that might be useful: Netanyahu says the US MUST set a red line

Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
hamiltongardener(CAN 6a)

I think Netanyahu would have more credibility if his own country wasn't a nuclear power.

It's OK for them but not for anyone else? Hypocrite.

    Bookmark   September 17, 2012 at 1:10PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
fouquieria(10b)

Well first off, I've never much cared for Netanyahu's aggressive, war-hawk positions...so no, I don't like the line-in-the-sand or thin red line concept. That is the exact antithesis of keeping all the cards on the table. The whole red line idea seems to smack of goading the other side to me.

The US should be LEADING, and using it's power and influence and the full set of cards in the deck. When you have that kind of power and influence, you should never have to go to war. When you go to war, you've pretty much capitulated. That's why we are in the world-wide mess that we are in today. We don't learn from our mistakes.

-Ron-

    Bookmark   September 17, 2012 at 1:14PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
david52_gw

'Red' line. RED line. RED line. IOW, a socialist, communist, atheist, line. Notice it wasn't just "a line in the sand". It had to be a RED line in the sand.

Why? I don't think I'm alone in wondering whats going on here, when a foreign leader tells us what our president should do with the language coached in subliminal adjectives.

    Bookmark   September 17, 2012 at 1:15PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
greatgollymolly

Netanyahu knows Obama does care for Israel and is forcing his hand so Jews around the world will see where Obama stands when it comes to their safety. Good for Natanyahu.

    Bookmark   September 17, 2012 at 1:16PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chase_gw

Does anyone know what Romney's position is? Is he in favour of articulating a specific "red line" and what does he say the consequences will be if it is crossed?

GGM so what do you think Obama should do different from what he is doing?

    Bookmark   September 17, 2012 at 1:22PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
hamiltongardener(CAN 6a)

The whole red line idea seems to smack of goading the other side to me.

It is goading. There has been a lot of that going on against Iran lately. They are trying to back Iran into the corner, the only options are to fight or stand humiliated. I don't think either Israel or the USA expect Iran to stand there and be told what to do and how they can do it. Iran will look weak. Keep it up, and at some point Iran will fight back.

It's not a coincidence that the USA has been building up it's military presence the last couple of months in the Gulf of Oman. It's their way of saying to Iran "Either throw a punch or cower in the corner. Your move."

The fight isn't happening fast enough for Israel. They are like the kid standing at the sidelines of a schoolyard fight, trying to shove the one kid towards the other to get something to happen before the bell rings and they have to go inside.

    Bookmark   September 17, 2012 at 1:24PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
david52_gw

And nobody will even bother listing the likely consequences if we bomb Iran.

Gas price around $15 a gallon, huge economic depression from that alone, massive transfer of wealth into the hands of oil companies, attacks on Americans and American interests all over the globe, war in the gulf, several billion people around the world enraged as we once again interfere, etc. etc.

Not that Iran developing a nuclear weapon isn't going to have its own ramifications, but at least put out a balance sheet so we can see what the likely consequences are going to be.

Let alone the unforeseen, unintended consequences of starting yet another war.

    Bookmark   September 17, 2012 at 1:27PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
jodik_gw

The whole thing smacks of hypocrisy. If we want to be thought of as a shining example of world power and decency, then we have to SET that example. It would seem to me that constantly warring does not get that idea across.

There should be no reason to war with anyone!

Yeah, yeah... war is profitable...

    Bookmark   September 17, 2012 at 1:32PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Roughseas

hamilton , what about the us & canada having nukes?
why single out israel?
after all the us & canada have attacked way more than israel

    Bookmark   September 17, 2012 at 1:35PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

Tell Netanyahu to draw his OWN line. I don't want the US being his pet bully for Iran.

    Bookmark   September 17, 2012 at 1:49PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chase_gw

Roughseas, Canada does not have nuclear weapons although we do have the ability to make one.

I also disagree about Canada attacking way more than Israel. Israel has attacked Palestine and others on many occasions.

    Bookmark   September 17, 2012 at 1:49PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
hamiltongardener(CAN 6a)

hamilton , what about the us & canada having nukes?
why single out israel?
after all the us & canada have attacked way more than israel

First, Canada doesn't possess nuclear weapons.

Second, I have said the same thing about the USA many times here. Pay attention. It is hypocritical for any country that possesses nuclear weapons to demand that the world not allow other countries to also possess them.

    Bookmark   September 17, 2012 at 1:50PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Roughseas

one, I have never seen you said the US should get rid of nukes.
two, canada had nukes for over 20 years, there are canadians who still think there are weapons in canada.
..........

I completely agree that it is hypocritical for any country that possesses nukes to demand others don't.

& if I lived in another country that the us wanted, I'd want my country to get nukes asap.

    Bookmark   September 17, 2012 at 1:55PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
hamiltongardener(CAN 6a)

one, I have never seen you said the US should get rid of nukes.

I said... it is hypocritical for the USA (or in this case, Israel) to demand that other countries not have nukes when they themselves possess them.

two, canada had nukes for over 20 years, there are canadians who still think there are weapons in canada.

Canada didn't have nukes, there were American nukes stationed on Canadian soil. They were removed from Canada, what, 30 years ago?
If you have secret knowledge that Canada has started building nukes, then you must be pretty well connected.

    Bookmark   September 17, 2012 at 2:04PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
blfenton

My Cold War history is fuzzy but wrt to having nuclear weapons, Canada does not possess any of it's own making. The nuclear weapons that were on our soil were U.S. made and loaned to our country but were jointly managed by the U.S. and Canada. As far as I know, they have been sent back.

    Bookmark   September 17, 2012 at 2:15PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
nancy_in_venice_ca Sunset 24 z10

Do you think there should be a stated 'red line'?

I think the question is larger than this.

Israel is incapable of attacking Iran and having desirable results if acting alone. High level officials in both the IDF and Mossad have backed up General Dempsey's assessment that Iran is a rational actor, and does not pose an existential threat to Israel.

Should the U.S. do Netanyahu's bidding when there's not a consensus in his own country on what threat Iran poses?

Iran has the right to develop its own nuclear power, and somehow nuclear weapons development has been conflated with civilian use of nuclear energy. Confrontation is the least effective way to obtain a mutually satisfactory settlement of Iran's nuclear capability, not to mention the risk of solidifying popular opinion for the current government and mullahs in the face of threats of violence from foreign powers. There are other countries that would be considered more honest brokers in achieving a diplomatic resolution, such as BRIC.

We managed to coexist with Soviet nuclear arms, and now with China, Pakistan, and India. Netanyahu can learn to do the same with Iran.

    Bookmark   September 17, 2012 at 3:38PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
labrea_gw

"In appearances on two Sunday talk shows, Netanyahu refused to comment on Mitt Romney's accusation that President Obama has thrown Israel "under the bus," and denied that his own urgency with regard to Iran has anything to do with the upcoming election.

"What's guiding my statements is not the American political calendar, but the Iranian nuclear calendar," Netanyahu said on NBC's "Meet the Press," telling host David Gregory repeatedly that he refuses to be "drawn into the American election."

Netanyahu has recently stepped up his call for the United States and other countries to draw a "red line" with regards to Iran's nuclear program that would invite military action if crossed, a move he called "vital" Sunday on CNN.

Critics have suggested that Netanyahu is pushing the Obama administration to give Iran an ultimatum now out of fear that his leverage will disappear after Election Day. Others have suggested Netanyahu, whose relationship with Romney goes back to the Boston Consulting Group in 1970s, is trying to tip the scales for the Republican nominee. Netanyahu vigorously disputed such charges Sunday. He said he believes Obama and Romney are both committed to preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon and that support for Israel in the U.S. is bipartisan.

"I have no doubt that they're equally committed to preventing that," he said.

Despite Netanyahu's assertions, Romney has made the complicated relationship between the United States and Israel a major issue in his campaign. Netanyahu distanced himself from the Republican nominee's charges that Obama is not sufficiently pro-Israel.

"No, there you go again, David, you're trying to draw me into something that is simply not the case, and it's not my position," Netanyahu said. "So there's no bus. And we're not going to get into that discussion, except to say one thing. We have a strong alliance, and we're going to continue to have a strong alliance. I think the important question is where does the the only bus that is really important is the Iranian nuclear bus. That's the one that we have to derail. And that's my interest, and thats my only interest."

Netanyahu also declined to attack Obama for not arranging to meet with him in upcoming United Nations meetings in New York, reports which Romney seized on earlier this week to criticize Obama. "I think he's met me more than any other leader in the world and I appreciate that," Netanyahu said. "We've had our discussions. Our schedules on this visit didn't work out. I come to New York, he leaves New York. But we continue in close consultation."

Romney called reports that Obama rejected a request to meet with Netanyahu "confusing and troubling" at a New York fundraiser earlier this week. The White House has denied these reports and noted that Obama and Netanyahu spoke for an hour on the phone last Tuesday night."
Red Line Blue states
L'shanah tovah!

    Bookmark   September 17, 2012 at 4:27PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
vgkg(Z-7)

Mitt Romney / Paul Ryan 2012
We Will Bow to Netanyahu

How high did you want US to jump Bebe?

(and while we're at it, we'll apologize for Obama's behavior)

    Bookmark   September 17, 2012 at 4:54PM
Sign Up to comment
More Discussions
Bibi's speech tomorrow
Are you planning on watching? I sure am!
ogrose_tx
April 28ths Coming
April SCOTUS will hear arguments for Marriage equality...
labrea_gw
A Court decision gutting ACA could be a lot worse than you think
A Court decision gutting ACA could be a lot worse than...
momj47
Local (USA) is nothing if we can't compete internationally
I started to comment on the "Dinosaurs are bad"...
steve2416
WTF?? Where is the seed exchange???
Is it gone because it's free?
sammymocha
© 2015 Houzz Inc. Houzz® The new way to design your home™