General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHa'aretz article says Netanyahu met group of US senators/reps & asked them to"pressure Obama"on Iran
Also LAT: "Obama likely to resist pressure to further toughen Iran stance" - article below.
Intensive preparations underway to ensure a successful meeting between the two leaders next week in Washington, despite lack of trust between two sides.
-snip-
Officials in both Jerusalem and Washington acknowledge a serious lack of trust between Israel and the United States with regard to the issue of a possible strike on Iran's nuclear facilities. A senior U.S. official who is involved in preparing Netanyahu's visit to the United States - and who asked to remain anonymous - said intensive preparations are underway to guarantee the success of the meeting between Netanyahu and Obama and to bridge this lack of trust.
-snip-
According to sources, the lack of trust between Israeli and U.S. officials appears to stem from, among other things, a mutual feeling that the other country is interfering in its own internal political affairs. Netanyahu suspects that the U.S. administration is attempting to turn Israeli public opinion against an attack on Iran, say sources.
Meanwhile, they say, the Obama administration suspects Netanyahu is using Congress and the Republican candidates in the presidential race to put pressure on Obama to support such a strike.
-snip-
The Obama administration's suspicions concerning Netanyahu were further fueled after Netanyahu and his advisers briefed a group of senators and senior congressmen during the past two weeks on the Iranian issue, and asked them to pressure Obama on the matter. Last week, Netanyahu met a group of five senior senators over lunch, headed by Sen. John McCain, who ran four years ago against Obama for president. Netanyahu reportedly told the senators he was not interfering in U.S. politics and expected U.S. officials not to interfere in Israeli politics either.
The topic quickly turned to Iran, according to reports. Netanyahu apparently complained bitterly about certain officials in the Obama administration who spoke out against an Israeli strike on Iran. But between the lines, some suggest that Netanyahu was speaking about Obama himself, as well as the other very senior officials in the administration. He reportedly told the senators that this kind of public discourse serves the Iranians.
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/netanyahu-will-urge-obama-to-publicly-back-attack-on-iran-sources-say-1.415428?localLinksEnabled=false
The Israelis, along with GOP presidential hopefuls and senators and some hawkish Democrats, want Obama to keep Iran from potentially building a nuclear weapon.
By Paul Richter and Christi Parsons, Los Angeles Times
February 28, 2012, 6:06 p.m.
Reporting from Washington The White House indicated Tuesday that President Obama would resist pressure for a tougher Iran policy coming from Israel and some U.S. lawmakers who argue that Tehran should not be allowed to acquire even the capability to eventually develop a nuclear weapon.
-snip-
The Israelis, along with Republican presidential hopefuls, GOP senators and some hawkish Democrats, want Obama to move toward that Israeli position. They all believe he is politically vulnerable to charges of being weak on Iran and have stepped up their pressure in recent days as Obama prepares for his meeting with Netanyahu and a speech he is scheduled to give Sunday to the country's largest pro-Israel lobbying group.
-snip-
The Senate sponsors "want to say clearly and resolutely to Iran: You have only two choices peacefully negotiate to end your nuclear program or expect a military strike to end that program," Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), one of them, told a news conference. The Senate has not voted on the proposed resolution.
-snip-
As Obama campaigns for reelection, Republicans sense a potential issue in charges that he is weak on Iran and inattentive to a threat against Israel's existence. The four contenders for the GOP nomination all denounced Obama's Iran policy as dangerous during a debate Wednesday in Arizona.
"This is going to be the key foreign policy question of the election," said a senior Senate aide who asked not to be identified because he was not authorized to comment. "With Iraq wound up and Obama's strong overall record on counter-terrorism, the only area where the Republicans have breathing room is Iran and Israel."
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-us-iran-20120228,0,6892812.story
tabatha
(18,795 posts)The ME will take care of itself.
Dawson Leery
(19,348 posts)You tell Obama to stay out of Israeli "internal affairs". saying that Obama should not have met with Shimon Peres
Netanyahu also believes that Obama's scheduled meeting with President Shimon Peres during the upcoming AIPAC conference constitutes an attempt by the United States to interfere in Israel's internal affairs, say sources. Netanyahu's suspicions were apparently heightened by last week's report in Haaretz that Peres will tell Obama that he objects to an Israeli attack on Iran. Since then, the relations between Netanyahu and Peres have been tense. Peres denied the reports, but Netanyahu and his staff do not seem to completely believe his denials. Peres and Netanyahu met on Friday and again yesterday, just as Peres was set to leave for the United States. The two worked hard to show an atmosphere of "business as usual," according to a source.
Yet, you Benny boy have met with the neo-cons in the US to get them to force Obama into supporting you
unjustified military action.
Pirate Smile
(27,617 posts)I decided to leave that out and just let the articles speak for themselves.
It.Is.Infuriating.
Behind the Aegis
(53,944 posts)Journalism today SUCKS! Too much "speculation" quoted as "fact."
Faryn Balyncd
(5,125 posts)Behind the Aegis
(53,944 posts)Last edited Wed Feb 29, 2012, 03:55 AM - Edit history (1)
parkia00
(572 posts)If they are discussing about ways in which to push the nation that they as congress critters are supposed to serve into another war against another country on behalf of a third country, ignoring the death and destruction and the betrayal of every armed forces personal and their families who serve, for personal benefit; then yes. In fact it would be treason. But then again these are congress critters.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)Publish the FBI surveillance tapes of AIPAC.
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)Pirate Smile
(27,617 posts)Cosmocat
(14,561 posts)that after Iraq, only just now getting out of it, people won't be so easily ginned up about screwing around with Israel.
Could republicans be any bigger arsehats?