Obama Threatened to Shoot Down IAF Planes

[MachZer0]

"...a Kuwaiti newspaper report Saturday, that US President Barack Obama thwarted an Israeli military attack against Iran's nuclear facilities in 2014 by threatening to shoot down Israeli jets before they could reach their targets in Iran.

Following Obama's threat, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was reportedly forced to abort the planned Iran attack."

Troubling if true. Very troubling indeed. It would explain Obama's objection to Netanyahu's upcoming address to Congress though

 

[South Bound]

"Troubling" doesn't even come close.

This just demonstrates this dirtbag's contempt for Israel and for the United States.

I only wish Israel had called his bluff.

 

[Nithavela]

Would you really like to live in a world where there was a hot war between iran and isreal, on top of the other problems in the middle east?

 

[Btodd]

"Kuwaiti paper claims unnamed Israeli minister with good ties with the US administration 'revealed the attack plan to John Kerry."


Uh-huh. That dirtbag!


Btodd

 

[Audacious]

"Troubling" doesn't even come close.

This just demonstrates this dirtbag's contempt for Israel and for the United States.

I only wish Israel had called his bluff.

How does it compute that the President of the United States has contempt for the United States? If he did, why would he become a politician, or president, or have been a professor of constitutional law?

Trying to stop Israel from starting a bloody international incident is probably a good idea, too, though I'd like a more reliable source than a random Kuwaiti newspaper.

 

[South Bound]

Would you really like to live in a world where there was a hot war between iran and isreal

Yes. Very much so.

How does it compute that the President of the United States has contempt for the United States? If he did, why would he become a politician, or president, or have been a professor of constitutional law?

First, he wasn't a "professor of Constitutional law". That lie was debunked years ago.

Second, why wouldn't he want to be president? In any battle, isn't the objective to take the high ground? What better vantage point to "fundamentally transform" this nation?

Trying to stop Israel from starting a bloody international incident is probably a good idea

Actually, it was Israel that was trying to stop a "bloody international incident" by stopping Iran in the quest to develop nuclear weapons.

By protecting Iran, Obama has contributed to a far more deadly possibility.

 

[wing2000]

Israel does not dictate US policy.

According to the report, “Netanyahu and his commanders agreed after four nights of deliberations to task the Israeli army's chief of staff, Benny Gantz, to prepare a qualitative operation against Iran's nuclear program. In addition, Netanyahu and his ministers decided to do whatever they could do to thwart a possible agreement between Iran and the White House because such an agreement is, allegedly, a threat to Israel's security.”

 

[wing2000]

It would explain Obama's objection to Netanyahu's upcoming address to Congress though

Netanyahu by-passed the branch of government responsible for U.S. foreign policy as clearly laid out in the U.S. Constitution: the Executive Branch. By doing so, he is harming Israel's long term interest and the relationship with the U.S.

Imagine Netanyahu's response if our Presdient addressed the Knesset without consulting him first?

 

[Audacious]

Yes. Very much so.

I, too, am a fan of large-scale land wars.

First, he wasn't a "professor of Constitutional law". That lie was debunked years ago.

At the very least, he was a professor of American law. Why would someone who hates America go into the legal field?

Second, why wouldn't he want to be president? In any battle, isn't the objective to take the high ground? What better vantage point to "fundamentally transform" this nation?

But he hasn't tried to fundamentally transform this nation. The biggest thing he's done so far is mildly change health care. That's not anything close to a fundamental transformation.

Actually, it was Israel that was trying to stop a "bloody international incident" by stopping Iran in the quest to develop nuclear weapons.

By protecting Iran, Obama has contributed to a far more deadly possibility.

Do we have any actual evidence, besides the Kuwaiti paper, that this happened?

And anyway, let's just say it did: that would hardly be the first time we used our military power to pressure another country into doing something. The fact that it's Israel really doesn't change anything.

 

[GarfieldJL]

Netanyahu by-passed the branch of government responsible for U.S. foreign policy as clearly laid out in the U.S. Constitution: the Executive Branch. By doing so, he is harming Israel's long term interest and the relationship with the U.S.

Imagine Netanyahu's response if our Presdient addressed the Knesset without consulting him first?

Didn't Obama have the British Prime-Minister attempt to sway congress in the opposite direction...

Face it, the Obama Administration is being hypocritical, because all Boehner has done is invite someone to prevent the other side of the argument...

 

[wing2000]

Didn't Obama have the British Prime-Minister attempt to sway congress in the opposite direction...

Face it, the Obama Administration is being hypocritical, because all Boehner has done is invite someone to prevent the other side of the argument...

Foreign policy is the domain of the Executive Branch.

 

[Nithavela]

I, too, am a fan of large-scale land wars.

The best ones are those with a few already devastated countries between the two warring parties.

 

[Queller]

"...a Kuwaiti newspaper report Saturday, that US President Barack Obama thwarted an Israeli military attack against Iran's nuclear facilities in 2014 by threatening to shoot down Israeli jets before they could reach their targets in Iran.

Following Obama's threat, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was reportedly forced to abort the planned Iran attack."

Troubling if true. Very troubling indeed. It would explain Obama's objection to Netanyahu's upcoming address to Congress though

You honestly think a link to one paper who is citing an article in a second paper, said article of which is based on "unnamed" sources, is reliable, don't you? Sad.

 

[Supreme]

Thank God he did. Can you imagine if Israel carried out airstrikes on Iran? You think the Middle East is messed up? Try chucking a fight between the region's most technologically advanced military power (Israel), and a nation of 80 million, with a hardcore theocratic government (Iran) into the mix

 

[South Bound]

Thank God he did. Can you imagine if Israel carried out airstrikes on Iran? You think the Middle East is messed up? Try chucking a fight between the region's most technologically advanced military power (Israel), and a nation of 80 million, with a hardcore theocratic government (Iran) into the mix

Why is the goal the absence of conflict? Shouldn't the goal be the absence of threat to peace?

A nuclear Iran does not solve the problems in the Middle East. It means that we now have a chaotic Middle East where one of the chief enemies of Israel and of the West has nuclear weapons. How is that better?

Certainly, you can't believe it's better for Israel, to have nukes in the hands of people who have vowed to drive them into the sea.

Why should Israel not have the right to defend itself?

 

[Nithavela]

It means that we now have a chaotic Middle East where one of the chief enemies of Israel and of the West has nuclear weapons. How is that better?

I was not aware that Iran had developed nuclear weapons.

 

[GarfieldJL]

Thank God he did. Can you imagine if Israel carried out airstrikes on Iran? You think the Middle East is messed up? Try chucking a fight between the region's most technologically advanced military power (Israel), and a nation of 80 million, with a hardcore theocratic government (Iran) into the mix

Imagine if they hadn't decades ago when Saddam was developing them, imagine trying to go up against Saddam when he invaded Kuwait, if he had nuclear weapons...

I'm going to blunt here, you don't let a country that is stating a goal to wipe out Israel obtain the means to actually do so unless you are a complete idiot, or you want a 2nd Holocaust.

 

[MachZer0]

Netanyahu by-passed the branch of government responsible for U.S. foreign policy as clearly laid out in the U.S. Constitution: the Executive Branch. By doing so, he is harming Israel's long term interest and the relationship with the U.S.

Imagine Netanyahu's response if our Presdient addressed the Knesset without consulting him first?

There is nothing in the Constitution that prevents Congress from hearing from foreign dignitaries. By the way, if Obama threatened to shoot my planes I'd bypass him as well

 

[MachZer0]

I, too, am a fan of large-scale land wars.


At the very least, he was a professor of American law. Why would someone who hates America go into the legal field?

Yes, but he really stunk at it

 

[MachZer0]

Foreign policy is the domain of the Executive Branch.

Funding foreign policy is the domain of the Congress