Senator: We Can't Let Israel Determine When We Go to War

[Jesus Malverde]

Source: Arutz Sheva

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) triggered controversy with a fiery floor speech in the Senate on Tuesday night, during which she declared that "we cannot let Israel determine when and where the United States goes to war."

Breitbart reports that the speech was made during a debate on a bill that would impose new sanctions on Iran if it fails to comply with the nuclear deal that was reached with it in November.

The bill includes a provision offering support to Israel in the event of an Israeli pre-emptive strike on Iran.

Feinstein chairs the Select Committee on Intelligence and is considered pro-Israel, but her remarks, which echo those of anti-Israel critics, have provoked outrage, noted Breitbart.


http://www.c-spanvideo.org/clip/4481048

Read more: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/176354#.UtgFG3m9XOE

[Mass]

1. I am surprised that DiFi would say something like that.

[sendero]

10. PLEASANTLY...

... surprised.

[lostincalifornia]

13. So did Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Generalizations or assumptions are never a good thing.

[Mass]

23. Uh? DiFi is known for her strong support for Israel.

She has traditionally been more of a hawk and is somebody I would have expected to see in the sponsors of the bill. I am pleasantly surprised she is not.

[lostincalifornia]

25. First of all, this is not about Israel, it is about potential for peace in the region, specifically

Iran. As for her being a strong supporter of Israel, most of Congress is. You do realize she has also been a critic of Israel's expanded settlements.

Yes, she believes that Israel has the right to exist, but she also has not always given them a free pass

Regardless, this is NOT about Israel, it is about Iran, and preventing war. Why Menendez decided to write this bill is outrageous. I am not surprised at the repukes, but those Senate Democrats trying to undercut the president's attempt for peace is extremely disappointing

[bvar22]

16. I am so suprised at this from DiFi that...

...I suspect AIPAC may have been late with her "envelope".

[Gordon Alf Shumway]

2. I am also surprised ...

But pleased. What madness it would be to take decisions of war and peace out of our own hands and given to another country. Especially one led by Netanyahu.

[The Magistrate]

3. She Is Right, Sir

This bill is noxious, and that provision its worst element.

[Wilms]

7. Sir,

If I may address you and the forum...

I had, in my recent travels around DU, seen neither hide nor hair of Your Honor.

I'm sure I speak for others, similarly concerned, in saying how good it is to witness your words reproduced on my screen.

[The Magistrate]

8. Thank You, Sir

My machine crashed, and I have been off the inter-tubes in consequence for some while. I have not yet replaced it, and am posting sporadically when visiting only....

[1StrongBlackMan]

24. For the linguistically challenged ...

"What up, son!"

[Wilms]

27. To sum it up...

I've been missing The Magistrate.

[muriel_volestrangler]

4. The 'outrage' is purely from the Republican Jewish Coalition and Breitbart

so it's entirely right wing politics, nothing to do with what normal people feel, or what responsible politicians think.

[Jesus Malverde]

6. Senator Says New Iran Sanctions Bill Signals The U.S. Wants ‘Regime Change’

Feinstein’s speech comes as an increasing number of Senate Democrats are beginning to voice their opposition to the Kirk-Menendez bill. At the same time, the efforts in both the House and Senate to put more sanctions on Iran while negotiations take place, and to dictate a potential end state to the talks, has increased the partisan divide on an issue that usually has Republican and Democratic consensus.

Ranking Member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee Rep. Eliot Engel’s (D-NY) recent comments on Iran has embodied that split. “Republican leadership in the House ought to be more concerned with implementing the sanctions than concerned with trying to embarrass the administration,” he said on Tuesday, according to Roll Call. “I’m interested in a real coalition. I think sometimes the Republicans are more interested in scoring brownie points against the administration, trying to box the administration into a corner.”

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2014/01/15/3164551/feinstein-iran-sanctions-regime-change/

[Tom Rinaldo]

5. `She earned some respect from me with those comments

When all is said and done, matters of War and Peace often determine what type society we will live in. The lives and treasure spent on war drain our capacity to respond to all social needs.

It took some courage for DiFi to be the one speaking out forcefully on this aspect of the pending legislation. I'll give her credit for showing real leadership on a critical issue.

[albino65]

9. Good for her/About time n/t

[CrispyQ]

11. DiFi said that?

[2banon]

12. Curious statement considering the source..

In fact I'd have to say that comment coming from her rises to the level of suspicion for me as it should for anyone else.

No one should trust her motives with regard to any foreign policy being considered or legislated. There's some sort of cynical deception at play here, you can bet on that.

[GoneFishin]

17. Agreed. Case in point : her proposal to "purportedly" limit NSA surveillance which in actuality

codified the practices in law.

[2banon]

18. Yes, the list is endless - especially wrt to NSA, Patriot Act, Fisa etc

And I think it's no longer a secret that her conflict of interest wrt the Defense Industry, War is highly profitable and important source of her and her family's personal wealth, inherited wealth not withstanding.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

14. IsraelNationalNews is quoting Breitbart. Hmmm. nt

[Jesus Malverde]

19. Here is the transcript from C-Span

00:26:10 I SAID AS CHAIRMAN OF THE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE, I KNOW THE CHALLENGES IRAN POSES TO THE UNITED STATES INTERESTS AROUND THE WORLD.
00:26:19 ITS PATRONAGE OF THE TERRORIST GROUP HEZBOLLAH, ITS SUPPORT FOR SYRIA'S BASHAR ASSAD THROUGH THE REVOLUTIONARY GUARD CORPS ARE TWO OF THE MOST TROUBLING, AND I WOULD HOPE THAT AS A FOLLOW-THROUGH OF DIPLOMACY, WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO QUELL SOME OF THESE ACTIVITIES.
00:26:37 AND LET ME ACKNOWLEDGE ISRAEL'S REAL WELL-FOUNDED CONCERNS, THAT A NUCLEAR-ARMED IRAN WOULD THREATEN ITS VERY EXISTENCE.
00:26:48 I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THAT.
00:26:49 I AGREE WITH IT, BUT WE'RE NOT THERE YET.
00:26:52 WHILE I RECOGNIZE AND SHARE ISRAEL'S CONCERN, WE CANNOT LET ISRAEL DETERMINE WHEN AND WHERE THE UNITED STATES GOES TO WAR.
00:27:03 BY STATING THAT THE UNITED STATES SHOULD PROVIDE MILITARY SUPPORT TO ISRAEL IN A FORMER RESOLUTION SHOULD IT ATTACK IRAN, I FEAR THAT'S HOW THIS BILL IS GOING TO BE INTERPRETED.
00:27:18 LET ME CONCLUDE, THE INTERIM AGREEMENT WITH IRAN IS STRONG, IT IS TOUGH AND IT IS REALISTIC.
00:27:28 IT REPRESENTS THE FIRST SIGNIFICANT OPPORTUNITY TO CHANGE A THREE-DECADE COURSE IN IRAN AND AN OPENING TO IMPROVE ONE OF OUR MOST POISONOUS BILATERAL RELATIONSHIPS.
00:27:43 IT COULD OPEN THE DOOR TO A NEW FUTURE, WHICH NOT ONLY CONSIDERS ISRAEL'S NATIONAL SECURITY BUT PROTECTS OUR OWN.
00:27:51 SO TO PRESERVE DIPLOMACY, I STRONGLY OPPOSE THE NUCLEAR WEAPONS-FREE ACT.
00:27:59 THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR.
00:28:00 PRESIDENT. I YIELD THE FLOOR.
00:28:06 THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE MAJORITY LEADER.
00:28:08 MR. REID: I EXPRESS MY APPRECIATION TO THE COURTESY OF THE SENATOR

[another_liberal]

15. You know what provokes my outrage?

What provokes my outrage is that any bill before the United States Senate would include language like, ". . . a provision offering support to Israel in the event of an Israeli pre-emptive strike on Iran."

Is the "Christian Zionist" crowd really that crazy?

I am completely with Senator Feinstein on this one. No damn way should that bill advance.

[dbackjon]

20. I am pleased she said that.

It should be a no-brainer

[geek tragedy]

21. Only Nixon can go to China . . . nt

[A Simple Game]

22. Surprised that Senator Feinstein would be against this, but

not surprised that The Senate would once again abdicate their responsibility to declare war, just slightly surprised they would give the power to a foreign country. Then again not surprised that if they did give the power away it would be to Israel.

[Orsino]

26. Constitutionally, that power rests with oil companies. n/t

[yurbud]

28. I'm shocked and impressed that my senator said that.

[Jesus Malverde]

29. RJC: Feinstein’s Comments on Israel Are Outrageous and Baseless

Today the Republican Jewish Coalition strongly rejected California Senator Dianne Feinstein’s suggestion that S. 1881, the bipartisan Nuclear Weapons Free Iran Act (Kirk-Menendez), would “let Israel determine when and where the United States goes to war”. The RJC urged Senator Feinstein to retract and apologize for the remarks, made in a speech delivered on the Senate floor yesterday, which have already been amplified by anti-Israel and anti-Semitic commentators.

RJC Executive Director Matt Brooks said:

“Senator Feinstein is within her rights to disagree with a bipartisan majority of her colleagues who support Kirk-Menendez, but her suggestion that those colleagues have ceded control over ‘when and where the United States goes to war’ to Israel is outrageous, inflammatory and completely baseless.

http://www.rjchq.org/2014/01/rjc-feinsteins-comments-on-israel-are-outrageous-and-baseless/