Israel's Netanyahu warns US 'bad deal' would put Iran on nuclear path

To "Tekakaromatagi" you missed one critical piece of information.

The Palestinians do NOT want peace. They want to see Israel destroyed, and all Jews killed.

Tell us, how do you make peace with somebody who wants you dead?

@Baccus:
"negotiations for peace would be in a better footing if PM Netanyahu would show some level of respect for the Palestinian people and stop settling in territories involved in the peace talks."

Absolutely right.

Israel wants peace with the Palestinians. But they want settlements more.
Israel wants to be secure from Iran. But they want settlements more.

It is their political system. Small extremist parties have an undue influence because they can throw their support to a candidate so he has a majority. If Netanyahu decided to make peace with the Palestinians and stop settlements, he would be out.

So to remain as prime minister he has to sell his soul, or rather, the only people who can be prime minister are the ones who are willing to sell their souls.

We are kind of becoming like Israel, but it is not the fault of the founders. They got it right. We've just found out a way to mess up the system.

We do need to have morality or capitalism will collapse because of its excessees. (Hey! I am talking from opposite sides of the political spectrum and at the same time.)

President Obama's words: "If Iran does not have some sense that sanctions will be removed, it will not have an interest in avoiding the path that it's currently on." Does this mean that President Obama trusts a nation whose leader wants to annihilate Israel? This is the nation whose "spiritual" leader has called us the Great Satan. What I'm reading in regard to Obama's words is that Israel has about a 10 year moratorium before they are destroyed with nuclear weapons. By then, Obama will be many years out of the picture, and the president at that time will be to blame. I watched the speech, and I saw a leader of Israel who loves his country, loves democracy, and was pleading with his friends in the U.S. to help him. I don't believe for a minute that his speech was politically motivated.

To "Ernest T. Bass" what planet do you live on?

Clinton fought against the Republicans, and refused to sign the budgets that were proposed that balanced the budget. In order to get Clinton to sign the budget they had to go into deficit spending. So, I wouldn't give Clinton that one.

Reagan averaged $200 billion, Bush I averaged $283 billion, Clinton averaged $200 billion, Bush II averaged $400 billion deficits.

Obama is on track to average $1 Trillion for his yearly deficits.

So, explain how Obama's deficit is closer to zero than Reagan, Bush I, or Bush II.

How do you justify $1 Trillion deficits with nothing to show for it, not even a war?

Badger: Without any doubt, the biggest deficit spenders since 1980 have been republicans. Clinton & Obama have come much closer to a balance budget than Reagan, Bush I & Bush II. It's not even close.
And you cannot begin to justify the cost of those wars.

Badger,
Are you sending your children, grandchildren, nieces and nephews to your proposed "cheaper" war?
Or...just the "other young people"?

Hey BadgerBadger -

"So we haven't gone to war. Why the 7.4 trillion dollar debt for this president, in only 6 years no less. "

What do YOU think? Did you forget about the Multiple Disasters of the preceding administration?

The devastation left by Republicans is EXTREMELY expensive to repair.

I guess you conveniently forgot about that.

Or you are in the depths of DENIAL? . . . A favorite Freudian Defense Mechanism employed by "Conservatives" when they realize their whole reason for being is completely unsupported by reality.

Mr Bass - "If only we had a great president, we could have added another 2 trillion to the deficit by invading Iran a long time ago."

So we haven't gone to war. Why the 7.4 trillion dollar debt for this president, in only 6 years no less.

War would be cheaper than this so called president, and safer than a nuclear Iran too.

If only we had a great president, we could have added another 2 trillion to the deficit by invading Iran a long time ago. And it would have ended so well, just like the last two middle eastern nations the US invaded.
I recall Netanyahu promising how much more stable the Middle East would be once Saddam was gone. He even said Iran may collapse in the void. I really think the US should do everything Israel wants. Plus we should continue to give them billions of fight their wars for them.

Did I get that right, conservatives?

To "Carl Behle" we can't help it that the Democrats (party of NO) are so anti-semetic. We try to vote them out, but they are just so good at deceit that most people don't vote them out. I wouldn't call Pelosi almost crying, or boycotting the speech "rousing", but that is your opinion.

To "FT" and what world are you seeing that is safer? We have replace Al Qaeda, that had a small footprint, and did not claim any land of their own with ISIS that is out there burning people alive, and killing any foreign person they capture. Obama has destabilized the Mideast, and pulled troops out of Iraq despite Iraq wanting them to stay and eliminate ISIS.

Obama has offended the PM of England and Israel and multiple occasions. On top of that, he has also strained relations between the US and much of Europe. Putin laughs at Obama, and has no fear of US intervention in anything he does.

To those that think Iran will abide by any treaty, do you honestly think that Iran will be honest with us? You seem to forget that in 2003 all of the news outlets were reporting that Iran broke the nuclear treaties it had with us then. The same people were running Iran then as are running it now, and you think they will abide by whatever deal Kerry makes with them?

Net's in town shaking down the regressive re-Publican money tree for more entitlements.

Sabre rattling redux.

Works every time with rgeressives.

Yawn.

C'est la vie.

Ignorance breeds disaster.

I don't think the issue with progressives is that confounding. It is not a Jewish issue it is an Israeli issue. The claim by some, and definitely some in the progressive community is that Israel is engaging in human rights violations and oppression. That opinion is decades old.

It is obvious to me that Pro-Israel, anti-Palestinian, Pro-Palestinian, and anti-Israel groups are all taking to social media to spread a lot of propaganda for their side, and some in the news media are loving to pick it up and run with it to further their own agenda. There are other options besides war.

As far as I'm concerned, neither side has remotely shown that they are ready for peace or for anything but to keep arguing about who has done what to whom. The only argument available is which side is being less destructive and immature and I don't think that is an argument worth my time. IMO, until they can act like adults they can go to their rooms and leave the rest of us in peace and not drag everyone else into their drama.

Netanyahu suggests no workable alternative other than war on Iran.

And surely those who are beating the war drum on this thread will immediately volunteer their children to fight in a hopeless, bloody quagmire that will kill tens of thousands of Americans, cost trillions, and impoverish both them and us.

Yes a bad deal does put them on the path to a nuclear bomb and so does no deal. Netanyahu always claims Iran wants to whip Israeli of the map yet I see nothing in his behaviors that suggest he does not want to do the same to not only Iran but also Palestine. Obviously we all want to protect Israel but we need to stop pretending that Netanyahu's behaviors are not a significant barrier to doing so.

I watched the speech and Bibi hit it out of the park. He outlined the myopia of U.S. Foreign policy toward Iran. Happy Harry looked a bit uncomfortable since he's the water boy for Obama. Pelosi looked like she swallowed a very sour candy.

Iran is a terrorist state that supports terrorism all over the world. There is no question about that. The mullahs are not in the least interested in getting along.

The American Left is moving away from Israel. Obama sees Israel as a liability in its foreign policy, whatever that is. He seems to be cozying up to Islam at every turn, throwing Christians and Jews under the bus in the process.

From the Cairo speech to the Prayer Breakfast, Obama is making his feelings known.

Just so he knows, Obama does not speak for me.

Wow, the world view of the conservatives is saaaaaaaary.

Their view has two choices "crushing" sanctions, and war.

They have no clue or choose to forget that when Bush took office the Iranians had fewer than a hundred centrifuges, and offered to reduce them more, but remember Bushy wouldn't talk to the axis of evil so he imposed sanctions instead. After 8 years Obama inherited an Iran with thousands of centrifuges. Good job Georgy you're brilliant.

This is what the President is referring to when he says we know that sanctions alone don't have the desired effect.

That leaves us with war. A war that would be far more a kin to world war II than the Iraq war. That's why Netanyahu has a 20% approval rating in his own country. Good job Boehner, you're brilliant.

@ worf, boycotting the speech is exactly what I want from my elected leaders. It was a partisan political stunt intended to influence voters in Israel and divide the U.S.

Sven, it was Bush who destabilized the Middle East with his false claims of weapons of mass destruction. The loss of thousands of American lives followed that. Our current President got us out of war and has saved thousands of young lives due to his actions. The destabilization was Bush's deal, and his alone.

DN, this speech was a political deal with the Republicans trying to undermine our duly elected President. It was wrong on their part and it shows the desperation of the do nothing GOP. They have no solutions. If their solution is to allow us to be pulled into yet another war that isn't what the majority of American want.

This was a dog and pony show. It brought nothing new to the table. Shame on the GOP for causing yet another rift that could drag us into war, and then we will kill more of our own.

GOP leaders did show some savvy in that they chose this day to slip the approved DHS bill over to the White House for signing. Otherwise their leadership style remains little more than a reactionary stance to whatever the President is for. Sometimes I wonder if without him they'd have any identity at all.

Sad that a leader of another country has to provide leadership to the world about what is morally right and wrong. I find it amazing that so many Americans such as many on this message board will defend poor strategy and decisions because he is "your guy." What an embarrassment our current president is to this great country.

@GaryO,

You're really stuck in the "Republican vs Democrat" mud hole.

If Obama was a Republican, I'd feel the same way.

As long as Obama is a Democrat, you follow like a like puppy. No questions asked.

Hey Worf -

" Skipping is unexceptable, and the commander should either be written up, or fired."

You're going to fire Obama?

Didn't you Republicans try that already in 2012? How did that work out?

And what makes you think America's Commander in Chief should be compelled to do the bidding of a foreign leader?

Obama is NOT a "Conservative" Republican. He's a Democrat and a patriot. He's not going to let Netanyahu boss him around.

Get used to it.

Hey Patriot -

"I really do wish Mr. Netanyahu was our president."

Well . . . Apply for citizenship in Israel. They will probably take you if you're Jewish.

Otherwise you might as well stay here . . . Where we accept the tired, the poor, and the huddled masses yearning to breathe free . . . And of course the wretched refuse from teeming shores, and the homeless, and tempest-tossed.

Well most of us do. But "Conservatives" frown on the idea.

Hardliners like Netanyahu only make matters worse. When will we ever learn that aggression is not the solution to every problem. Diplomacy is hands down the better way—really a no brainer. After all, reconciliation, mediation and resolution of differences are all defining qualities of Christ, to whom we look as the way of truth and light. Extremism and belligerence to me are a rejection of Him. If we are a Christian nation, why don’t we act like it, rather than throwing our lot in with those who lack the concept of a middle way?

But what then, might we ask, of supposed constitutional wavering , Benghazi, the I.R.S. affair, and on and on? Are we to stand idly by? Here I would only point out the obvious, that choosing a culprit on these issues is clearly more partisan than real. Truth is we all believe what we are wont to believe and find what we look for. We might consider our personal, perhaps unconscious motives for assessing blame, and falsely scapegoating the president. Not only is it wrong but unquestionably harmful for ourselves, Utah and the nation.

Our political leaders are employees of the people.

Missing a meeting with Netanyahu was childish. We didn't employ these people to walk out, and skip.

Whether they agreed with him or not, you do your job. Skipping is unexceptable, and the commander should either be written up, or fired.

This foreign leader has been playing the Iran card for 25 years. Literally. It is his scare tactic to gain political power. Seems to work.

How unseemly is it that members of Congress submit to the leader of a foreign nation, one who actually wants war with Iran. Under the Constitution, the President is responsible for foreign affairs, not the Speaker, not Congress, and not Netanyahu. I would love to see Republicans who claim to adhere to the Constitution and criticize the President for deviating from it defend themselves on this one. This is nothing but a political stunt by a foreign politician and by the Republicans. There is not one iota of dignity or statesmanship in this fiasco. Further, we don't even know the terms of a potential agreement with Iran. Here's the deal: Netanyahu wants the U.S. to charge back into war in the Middle East, and the Republicans are anxious to do it. Rep. Chaffetz has been quoted in the SL Tribune that he would bomb Iran, apparently with little thought to the consequences. Utah votes for these people?

what a great speech by a great leader. The best speech given in the House chamber in over 7 years by far. I really do wish Mr. Netanyahu was our president. Someone we could respect.

It makes me sick to see the rousing response our representatives give a foreign leader just to, in my opinion, thumb their noses at the President. The party of "NO" ought to be ashumed of themselves. All Netanyahu is trying to do is bring his own agenda here, and to help his re-election campaign. These people appear to be a bunch of little pouting kids who can't get their way.............

It's odd how liberals were just terrified of a nuclear holocaust back when Ronald Reagan had his hand on the old nuclear trigger. But with Iran's nuclear ambitions they are so ambivalent. "Who cares if they say they want a nuclear weapon so they can destroy Israel and the Great Satan? And who cares if our only reliable ally in the Middle East is annihilated? I have a coexist bumper sticker on my car so I know I'll be ok after the EMP attack"

Can anyone tell me why the democrats and the president are so cold to Israel and Jews everywhere in the world? We are the party that stands up for minorities, and Israel is definitely the minority in their part of the world. Why not stand up for them, both as a country, and as minorities in other countries.

Somebody had to say it.

A pity that some American didn't have the spine to stand up in his/her own Congress and say it.

A few points - First, Mr. Netanyahu was invited here as an insult to the President of the United States by congressional leaders. This was a violation of protocol that has shocked many across the world. Mr. Netanyahu knew it and knows it. This was all about politics.

Second - Barak Obama was elected by the people in this nation as the President. We have the freedom to speak and disagree. If you don't like him, please at least have respect for the President of the United States. Do you remember what many of you called those who disagreed with the politics of President Bush? If you are going to bad mouth the President, please get your facts straight.

Third - I have seen the "sainted" name of President Reagan mentioned in this thread. He would be appalled at the disrespect and hatred shown the current President of the United States.

Exercise your freedom of speech, but please, show some respect and dignity.

Obama's cutting a deal with the devil if he goes through with this. Iran is the largest sponsor of international terrorism and the US should be doing everything possible to confine this horrid regime; not giving it license for another holocaust. There ignorance of some of these post in regards to what will happen if the US does not prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon is appalling Remember folks, after Israel, we are Iran's next most hated nation! This is 1938 all over again, only this time the consequences will be 1000 times more devastating.

Baccus0902,

"....Mr. Netanyahu came and talked to Congress.... The End."
______________________________

That might be how it's remembered. The Prime Minister went for rhetorical effect but he made no case. He called it a bad deal although the outline of a possible deal is yet to be announced.

The speech was a hit with far right Republicans. For Netanyahu, that might be as good as it gets if Israeli voters two weeks from now don’t let him hang onto his job.

@ordinaryfolks. Nice to see your look at both sides. You seem to be saying that on the one hand Netanyahu selectively uses facts (remind us, which facts he is not mentioning?), has conservative friends (just...not cool), and was not polite enough to wait for President Obama's personal invitation to come and speak to a joint-session of Congress.

On the other hand, you also seem to be saying that Netanyahu has a lot of facts that bolster his case against a US-Iran deal, and the facts seem to demand urgency in getting his message to as many influential American leaders as possible.

With your explanation of both sides of the issue, perhaps we can excuse Netanyahu's brazenness given the fact that Iran's current leadership has said they are dedicated to wiping Israel off the face of the earth, and may soon be "a year away" (President Obama's words) from having the means to do so.

@ Mapledon:

You wrote:
"Netanyahu's comments aside, Obama has proven himself no friend. And Democratic legislators' behavior also suggests significant anti-Semitic sentiment within the party Jewish Americans are closely connected to."

Don't you find your comment "contradictory"? Now, if you think criticizing Israel's policies is to be Anti-Semitic. I would suggest for you to re-evaluate your definition. After all Arabs and Iranians can trace their roots back to "Shem" father of the Semites.

Democrats want peace for Palestinian and Israelies. We are not Anti-Semitic we are pro-human beings. Is not that complicated really! The world is Not divided between Good or Bad, Black or White, there are many, shades and variances of many people and ideas among other things.

Being Friend or Foe of Israel "shouldn't" have any bearing in being a good or bad Amwerican.

Personally, I think Israel is a good ally to have in the Middle East. However, negotiations for peace would be in a better footing if PM Netanyahu would show some level of respect for the Palestinian people and stop settling in territories involved in the peace talks. To support Israel shouldn't have to require compromising our principles for global peace.

To all the Netanyahu lovers here I would like to ask. Do you think Israel loves the U.S. with the same committment that "you" love them? Or wouldn't you think that Israel only "uses" the U.S.A. for their security needs?

I am an American, therefore, I put the U.S.A. interest first. The U.S.A. is the only superpower in the world and our vision should always be more global than the vision of a minuscule country as Israel. But I'm sure some here will not understand, nor agree with that.

Mr. Netanyahu came and talked to Congress.... The End.

President Obama continues being the Leader of the free world. Life is good!

Most posters here seem not to realize that Iran is a Shiite nation, a sect which ISIS is determined to obliterate in order to "purify" Islam. When it comes to fighting ISIS, Iran will be on the same side as the US. Going to war with Shiites will play into the narrative of ISIS and serve their ends quite well.

Hey Mountanman -

"President Bush, your country needs you again! The world needs you!"

Do we? So . . . Do you have any particular nation you want to invade and occupy? . . . Or should we invade them all?

We should probably start with Canada. We haven't invaded them since the War of 1812, and it's high time we start showing people who's really the boss in the North America. Besides, the terrorist attacks up there show beyond a doubt that their government is just not up to the task of governing. We need to do some serious nation building, and replace their silly parliamentary system with our superior America-style democracy. We have our work cut out for us.

Hey Sagacious -

"Bibi represents Israel in a much more positive manner than Obama does America. . .. Nor is he afraid to take decisive action when it's necessary,... contrary to how our current leadership seems to be.'

. . . Except all too much of his "decisive action" consists of war crimes.

The Great nation builder GW Bush wasn't afraid to take decisive action either. Did you see how fearlessly he created the Islamic State? . . . As Netanyahu led the cheers on the sidelines.

@atl134

Wrong, pal. You obviously have not looked into the agreement. It provides for 10 times the number of centrifuges that Iran currently has, that would allow them to then create warheads within weeks. Further, the agreement is only for a ten-year time period, after which Iran is free to do as it pleases. But this is all under the premise that Iran can be trusted.

But you go ahead and keep your head safely and securely in the Democratic soothing sand of government handouts.

Why would an "enlightened" society, as we claim to be, allow nuclear proliferation?

Why would an "enlightened" society, as we claim to be, allow any threats of literal genocide against any other people/race/country?

Why would an "enlightened" society, as we claim to be, allow a country who threatens war and literal genocide to develop nuclear weapons?

This is wholly mind-boggling.

RE: Bored to the point of THIS. There was a time when real Americans would have seen this for what it was. However, today, with all the so ”called 'patriotic' Americans”?

Obama’s approval rating tanked to 15 percent this year among active-duty members of the armed services, reflecting a steady decline since he first took office in 2009, according to a new survey from The Military Times., Obama's moves are widely seen as "heavy-handed social engineering that erode deep-seated traditions and potentially undermine good order and discipline," the survey of 2,300 soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen found.

"Morale in the military is swiftly sinking, with the troops losing both their sense of mission and their faith that their superiors, political leaders — and the nation — still have their best interests at heart," the Times said in its exhaustive report entitled, "A force adrift: How the nation is failing its troops and Veterans."

@MapleDon
"The bigger question is why Obama is so set on making sure Iran arms itself with nuclear weapons. No one in the media ask the question"

Because he's trying to work out a deal by which Iran wouldn't have nuclear weapon capacity so why would the media ask that question?

Re: Ordinary Folks

Thank you for your comment.

Too bad you live in Seattle... Utah could use your common sense.

We tend to struggle with seeing the relevance of both side of an issue. We are pretty singular in our thought.

This speech should have never occurred. It is sad that Americans can't see that it was a manipulation by Netanyahu to change the dialogue and incite the conservative base of all three (US, Israel, and Iran) countries.

There was a time when real Americans would have seen this for what it was. However, today, with all the so called 'patriotic' Americans, who focus on the faults of our Nation, rather than It's greatness, the rhetoric is expected.

Re Sven
The Middle east has always been unstable.
Blaming Obama or anyone else for that matter shows a lack of knowledge. The middle eastern question has gone unanswered for nearly 2,000 years.

MY Frozen Fractal Friend.......You almost got it!

If anyone suggests disagreeing with Netanyahu = hating Israel, I would just note now that if that's true that would also mean disagreeing with Obama = LOVING America.

The bigger question is why Obama is so set on making sure Iran arms itself with nuclear weapons. No one in the media ask the question, including the DesNews, for fear of the coming control by this administration of all broadcast media.

The answer is quite simple and it conveys Obama's convictions. Iran is committed to destroying Israel and, once armed, will do so.

Netanyahu's comments aside, Obama has proven himself no friend. And Democratic legislators' behavior also suggests significant anti-Semitic sentiment within the party Jewish Americans are closely connected to.

@Sagacious
"Your analogy and comparison is almost ludicrous in it's context, almost to the point of being comical."

There's nothing wrong with it, it has a very clear point. Disagreeing with Netanyahu does not mean someone hates Israel and disagreeing with Obama doesn't mean that person hates America. It's pretty straightforward. It's only ludicrous to those who want to employ a double standard of either kind while using some sort of baseless reasoning to justify it...

"Bibi represents Israel in a much more positive manner than Obama does America. "

...kinda like that.

So many comments, and so much disinformation from both sides. A pox on both sides for trying to make this a black and white question.

Prime Minister Netanyahu did his country no favors by speaking to Congress outside normal channels. He also is highly selective (ala George Bush) on the "facts" he uses to make his case. This is not his first foray in American politics either. His Ambassador to the US, and political advisor is a GOP operative. And lastly, this is a rather crude political ploy on his part to keep his job.

All that said, the man has points. Iran is an existential threat to Israel, and it does promote Shi'ite terrorist groups in the area. It will serve no good to have Iran as the dominant power of the region, a fact well known to even some Islamic countries such as Turkey and Saudi Arabia. Our geo-political foes aid and abet Iran in its search for the technology and means to make an atomic weapon. No one can blame the Israeli PM for making his case to end negotiations with Iran, and probably start a war.

After leading America and the world the past 6 years one thing is obvious. The world and America are safer and we are more respected. American Jews overwhelming supported BO in both elections and most have little regard to Israel's prime minister and his rhetoric. Stay strong BO. America and the world are grateful for your prudent leadership.

Re: kiddsport

" and how well is America doing with two terms of Obama? Safer, more prosperous, more free?"

Absolutely! YEs and yes!

Can we swap one Obama, one Hillary, and two John Kerry's for ONE Netanyahu?

I'll even provide the birth certificate saying Netanyahu was born in Hawaii!

Uh-oh Looks like the IRS WILL be auditing me. Or, will the ATF (official gunrunners of Obama and the Mexican cartels)call on me?

Enemy #1 as, Iran sees it, is the very existence of Israel. Enemy #2 is the United States.

So, when we let/help Iran build the bomb, and they have used it to wipe Israel off the map, the next order of business will be destroy the second target, the USA.

I wonder how deep the antisemitism must run in those Americans who are willing to help Iran destroy Israel at our own peril? It takes a lot of hate to risk our children's lives to Iran.

@ Frozen Fractals:

Your analogy and comparison is almost ludicrous in it's context, almost to the point of being comical. If that's the best response you can come up with, then perhaps debating is not your forte.

Bibi represents Israel in a much more positive manner than Obama does America. He isn't apologetic about his country the way our current president is. Nor is he afraid to take decisive action when it's necessary,... contrary to how our current leadership seems to be.

@ mcclark:

A closer comparison to Netanyahu would be Ronald Regan, rather than Bush. And the vast consensus among the majority of Americans is that Reagan worked out extremely well for America, and was perhaps pur last great president. We've never been able to achieve that level of leadership since, with foresight and personal integrity not seen since.

@USALover

Given the choice, I would not care to spend a week in either city.

Also, why are you pushing to outlaw Islam? It is just as protected under the first amendment as any Christian or Jewish religion. If we were to outlaw Islam, what protection would your religion have?

President Bush, your country needs you again! The world needs you!

@Sven
"defend Obama's plan to allow the terrorist nation of Iran to develop nuclear weapons."

Nobody is defending that because that's not Obama's plan. Your plan is to antagonize Iran which will only make them think they need nuclear weapons to get Pakistan's favored status.

Our nation's President should have given the same speech, based on the same facts and the same stark threats facing our country, as well as Israel and the entire world.

The speech today by the de facto leader of the free world is something that we should all carefully and soberly review. The threats he outlined are real, the options described are the only ones that exist. The choices are difficult, but a choice must be made.

The refusal of Obama and his inept and foolishly partisan foreign policy advisers to take this situation seriously is appalling. Today marks the date that Democrat cheap partisan political gamesmanship was placed ahead of our long term national interests.

Our national survival is confronted by inevitable nuclear weapons in the hands of a regime bent on destruction of western (including Israeli) civilization. Our inexplicable refusal to recognize the seriousness of this threat may doom us to nuclear attack by Iran or its numerous proxy forces.

Obama could learn a lot from Netanyahu. And so must all Americans.

Netanyahu nailed it! The most important question we should ask the Democrats and their president is which city in America will receive the first nuclear detonation from Iran or its jihadist allies? Its just a matter of time and when it does happen, will the Democrats blame the GOP? Why, yes they will! Don't they always?

It really is interesting watching Liberals defend Obama's plan to allow the terrorist nation of Iran to develop nuclear weapons.

Obama has completely destabilized the middle east. I thought he was supposed to heal all of the animosity the world held for the USA? Wasn't that what his "Apology Tour" was all about? I thought pulling our troops out of Iraq was supposed to bring peace to that region. I thought ousting Mubarak in Egypt was supposed to calm tensions there? Obama's actions have been the catalyst for groups like the Muslim Brotherhood and ISIS.

Dear Leader has been at the helm for 6 years. It is Obama's foreign policy that has helped destabilize the middle east. Obama embraces the world's terrorists, while showing contempt for our greatest allies.

This is the price the world pays for twice electing a narcissistic, petulant child as POTUS.

Who will be the first nation to outlaw Islam?

"The greatest danger facing our world is the marriage of militant Islam with nuclear weapons."

If New York City and/or Israel and/or other cities around the world are destroyed by an Iran made nuclear weapon Mr. Obama's name will be historical mud forever. Iran isn't going to fly a jet over NY City dropping a bomb nor are they going to launch some ICBM but what they will do is sell a nuclear device smaller in size to oil rich ISIS or other Islamic crazies and who will do everything in their power to detonate that device to kill as many "infidels" as possible. I keep thinking back to the statement made by one of the terrorist leaders that Mr Obama released from Gitmo prison. He said "see you in New York".

Iran will get what it wants from Mr. Obama that much is clear. They don't respect him nor do they fear him but they will use him to get the agreement they want. Mr. Obama has neither the foresight nor the courage to do the right thing and Iran knows it. America is in BIG trouble.

@Hutterite

Where would you feel safer? Spending a week in Jerusalem or Tehran? Thought so...

Your hint that Iran can be trusted over Israel is laughable if not so ridiculous.

The developments in this case should show to any Jewish-American who their true friends are- and it certainly isn't Pelosi and the Democrats. I could never understand why they cannot see that.

@AnneFrankenstein- according to the Constitution, foreign policy is the joint responsibility of Congress and the Executive Branch; neither has first-call rights and Speaker Boehner was well within his rights to invite PM Netanyahu to address Congress. That so many Democrats and Obama officials chose to boycott his visit only shows their disregard for their responsibilities in favor of scoring points with their boss. (No, not their true boss, the people who elected them- the boss who commands their fealty from the Oval Office)

@mcclark- and how well is America doing with two terms of Obama? Safer, more prosperous, more free?

The israeli PM doesn't realise how adequate his surname is in an English context. Israel has had the US gold card for way too long, and their unhappiness with a lower credit limit is sure obvious. Like that of a spoiled child.

@ Sven We did have a leader like Netanyahu leading the United States, his name was George Bush. It did not work out so well for us.

Netanyahu just wants America to invade Iran. Let Israel fight its own battles - it has the bomb.

"WASHINGTON — In a speech that stirred political intrigue in two countries, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Congress on Tuesday that negotiations underway between Iran and the United States would 'all but guarantee' that Tehran will get nuclear weapons, a step that the world must avoid at all costs.

'Iran has proven time and again that it cannot be trusted,' no matter what it says about permitting verification of the terms of any accord designed to prevent it from getting such weapons, he said.

'The greatest danger facing our world is the marriage of militant Islam with nuclear weapons,' he said in remarks before a packed House chamber."

====

And yet 61 Democrats and our petulant president couldn't find their way to attend.

PM Netanyahu understands the threat that terrorist nations like Iran pose, while Obama seeks to help this same terrorist nation produce nuclear weapons over the next decade.

If only we had a statesman like Netanyahu leading the United States.

Iran is a sponsor of terrorism and a brutally oppressive regime but we are not going to war with Iran over this. There is no consensus for this in the country and if the Iraq war was folly this would be doubly so.

We have co-existed with worse situations- Soviet Union, North Korea, Pakistan. If Israel wants to take their units out, let them. The foreign policies of Israel and the USA do not coincide here. We can vaporize Iran whenever we want. There is no reason for us to get caught up in Netanayu''s doomsday scenarios.

Obviously it is better Iran not have weapons but igetting a weapon like this changes the calculus for Iran and they know it, so it will be hard to dissuade them.

As to Bibi. For the republicans to invite him here to essentially counter and undermine the administration's negotiations and poke Obama in the eye is not only insulting it is repugnant. And I say that as no big fan of the President. Foreign policy is lead from the White House and for decades there has been a bi-partisan consensus. This breaks with that.

If anyone suggests disagreeing with Netanyahu = hating Israel, I would just note now that if that's true that would also mean disagreeing with Obama = hating America.

Perhaps Israel exhorts to much influence on our international foreign policy.

What is good for Israel is not always in the best interests of the United States.

If Israel attacks Iran's nuclear facilities, Iran will strike back and we will be drawn into it.

We can not afford another war in the middle east.

The Straits of Hormouth will be closed choking off the oil supply to Europe and Asia. We will move a Carrier Group in to open it and possible loose ships and lives.

How come people want us to be the worlds policeman and fight their battles.

Maybe the folks who use middle eastern oil should take care of protecting their supply rather than us.