Going it Alone: Israel’s Cold War with Iran

Israeli Fighter Jets - Public Domain

It’s painfully clear by now that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu failed in his mission to prevent a bad deal with Iran.

Even before Democratic Senator Barbara Mikulski became the 34th Senator to endorse the deal last week, thus ensuring a presidential veto of a congressional vote against would stand, there was a sense of inevitability which Team Netanyahu alone did not share. Now, with the White House obtaining the 41 Senators needed to filibuster any vote altogether – with change to spare – that defeat for Netanyahu has turned into a rout. Adding insult to injury, the carefully stage-managed drip-drip of Democratic support for Team Obama demonstrated that there was never really any doubt of a White House victory – they were merely savoring the moment.

And a bad deal it most certainly is, in so many ways – if anyone needed reminding: The farcical 24-day warning period preceding any “surprise” check on nuclear sites; the fact that Iran can still continue enriching uranium, won’t need to shut down its heavy water plants, and can continue research and development into faster, military-purpose centrifuges; the permission to continue its intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) program; that Iran isn’t required to end its support for terrorism or vicious incitement to destroy Israel. All this, and more, while achieving an end to economic sanctions which will pour billions into Tehran’s coffers and fuel its aggressive, imperialist foreign policy.

(Read the rest of the story here…)

2 thoughts on “Going it Alone: Israel’s Cold War with Iran”

  1. Piece in our Time, or was that spelled peace . . .
    One peculiar thing is, how many Jewish Senators voted to uphold the Veto?
    I had heard something that sounded wrong like 15 senators might have been Jewish that voted yes.
    That would be a mind blower if it is true.
    The entire treaty smells bad.
    Chamberlain in 1937 did something similar. England was not quite ready for war.
    Maybe this treaty is like the one Chamberlain made in 1937.
    Maybe it is to stall for time until Israel is really ready for an attack.
    If Iran is attacked by Israel, will this country bring military force against them?
    Or if Iran attacks Israel, which side will we be on?
    Treaties are voided by war. The question is what does this treaty have to say about any of this?

  2. I just looked it up. There are 10 Jewish Senate members.
    The House has more. I think there are 18.
    Most were Democrats. Which doesn’t explain much.
    I only found one Republican Jewish Congress person. This is in the House.
    Are they out of sync with the Democratic Party? Not really.
    Because right now it appears the Democrats are against Israel.
    AT present, the Democrats appear to be a mixed group not really united as Labor is also in there.
    How does labor explain Bill Clinton signing treaties that sent many jobs to Mexico?
    The irony is that Republicans are better friends to Israel than the entire Democrat Party is.
    I think the same can currently be said for Republicans and the Labor Unions.
    The only path that will work to raise wages is professional negotiation. The Labor Unions are the key to that.
    Then all the non-union workers compete with “me too” negotiations. That temporarily raises wages and the economy.
    As near as I can see, most of the depression era legislation designed to raise the common person’s money in wages is gone.
    Even the labor board is mostly a joke.
    What this treaty will do is raise money for the gun selling industry. Mainly expensive toys like tanks, ships, submarines, helicopters, etc.
    So why would Jewish Senators support Obama in this treaty?
    When ever I look for motivation in politics I first go to who gains what. In this case it is obviously the Military/industrial complex that gains.

Comments are closed.