Page 4 of 14 FirstFirst 12345678910111213 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 201

Thread: Netanyahu Addresses Congress

  1. #46
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    15,003
    Quote Originally Posted by Blademaster View Post
    And we learned from that.
    Really, guess Pelosi, Kerry, Reid et al missed those school days when Bush was in office.

  2. #47
    Dirty Kiwi Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    10 Nov 04
    Location
    Te Whanganui a-Tara, Te Ika a Maui, Aotearoa
    Posts
    19,870
    Quote Originally Posted by Blademaster View Post
    Obama denied making the purported statement that was to undermine Bush's negotiation. Not a good riposte.
    Sure, #2
    BBC NEWS | Middle East | US Democrat Pelosi in Syria talks

    Edit to add : She was picking with Israel at the same time
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...040402306.html
    Last edited by Parihaka; 05 Mar 15, at 06:46.
    In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

    Leibniz

  3. #48
    Military Enthusiast Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    15 Aug 03
    Posts
    5,349
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    Really, guess Pelosi, Kerry, Reid et al missed those school days when Bush was in office.

    When did they ever call a foreign leader into the House and have that leader completely undercut the sitting President at that time?

  4. #49
    Dirty Kiwi Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    10 Nov 04
    Location
    Te Whanganui a-Tara, Te Ika a Maui, Aotearoa
    Posts
    19,870
    When did a president ever before object to a foreign leader addressing a joint session?
    In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

    Leibniz

  5. #50
    Contributor
    Join Date
    14 Sep 08
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    628
    Quote Originally Posted by Parihaka View Post
    When did a president ever before object to a foreign leader addressing a joint session?
    The question is not whether Congress has the right invite a foreign head of state to address a joint session. Ofcourse they obviously do, even if the White House is fiercely opposed.

    However, the current episode is clearly partisan and appears to be a breach of protocol. I cant think of a previous case where a foreign head of state of a US ally used a joint session of Congress to directly confront a key policy of the President of the United States; inserting himself into the political discourse and making common cause with the domestic opponents of a President.

  6. #51
    Global Moderator Defense Professional JAD_333's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Apr 07
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas
    Posts
    11,214
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    JAD,

    whereas Bibi's approach would be to eliminate Iran's capability altogether.


    reading through the transcript, i actually don't see this. as far as i see, he simply states that there should be no deal and that current restrictions should be kept until iran stops being aggressive, gives up terrorism, and stops threatening israel.
    Asty:

    It's not in the transcript but it's a common thread in many of his utterances. If he had his druthers, he'd flatten Iran's nuke facilities.

    He tailored his speech to an American audience, which has no interest in a bombing campaign. Insisting that we maintain sanctions until Iran alters its political behavior goes farther than the original goal, to prevent Iran from building nukes. It amounts to a permanent sanction regime. Is that practical? It depends on whether all the countries involved to agree to open-ended sanctions.
    To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato

  7. #52
    Dirty Kiwi Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    10 Nov 04
    Location
    Te Whanganui a-Tara, Te Ika a Maui, Aotearoa
    Posts
    19,870
    Quote Originally Posted by InExile View Post
    The question is not whether Congress has the right invite a foreign head of state to address a joint session. Ofcourse they obviously do, even if the White House is fiercely opposed.

    However, the current episode is clearly partisan and appears to be a breach of protocol. I cant think of a previous case where a foreign head of state of a US ally used a joint session of Congress to directly confront a key policy of the President of the United States; inserting himself into the political discourse and making common cause with the domestic opponents of a President.
    Bibi's a dickhead, we're agreed, I don't think much of Boehner either.
    Congress knew exactly what they were getting, well before he arrived.
    The White House were notified well in advance that Boehner wished to invite him and raised no objection. Only a month out did they suddenly object, after they knew the invite had gone out.
    As for undermining foreign policy, well Pelosi was happy to do that to both Bush and Olmert in Syria as I pointed out above, and Kennedy with the KGB conspiring against Reagan.
    Teddy, the KGB and the Top Secret File- Tim Sabastian the Sunday Times Feb 2 1992
    Text of KGB Letter on Senator Ted Kennedy

    Nothing new here, except a President publicly opposing an invited head of state speaking to a joint session.
    In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

    Leibniz

  8. #53
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    11,216
    Quote Originally Posted by Duellist View Post
    What Netanyahu has done has, as far as I know, no precedent- I can't remember a foreign leader injecting himself into another nation's domestic debate like this before, let alone that of the United States.
    US has a tendency to make statements before a Taiwanese presidential election.

  9. #54
    Contributor
    Join Date
    14 Sep 08
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    628
    Quote Originally Posted by Parihaka View Post

    Nothing new here, except a President publicly opposing an invited head of state speaking to a joint session.
    I don't agree with how you frame that argument; it seems to reverse cause and effect.

    Nevertheless, I think that this might be worse for US-Israeli relations than just a disgruntled President with 2 years left in his term. If it does come to war with Iran, many Americans will be unhappy. If it turns out be a bigger mess up than Iraq or Afghanistan a lot more Americans will be extremely unhappy; Netanyahu's advocacy for a harder line on Iran will not be remembered kindly in that case.

  10. #55
    Global Moderator Defense Professional JAD_333's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Apr 07
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas
    Posts
    11,214
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    Probably most famously [Congress] rejected WW's vision of the future and refused to ratify the League of Nations charter.
    As was within its Constitutional right.

    Hell look at all the anti-Iraq war comments coming from the Dems before the election of King Obama I.
    Politicians babbling is not the same as Congress meddling in treaty negotiations.

    Lets look at the facts.

    1. Congress has heard from foreign leaders and dignitaries going back to at least Lafeyette.
    2. Congress (House) has its own foreign affairs committee going back to at least 1975
    3. Congress (Senate) has a constitutional foreign policy role (ratifying treaties)
    4. Congress not the president passes law and sanctions or sanctions relief are laws.
    5. Congress has no duty implied or otherwise to support the president even during time of war.
    6. Nothing in the US Constitution even hints at executive control of the legislative.
    All true. None relevant. The issue is whether it was proper and wise to invite Bibi. And to expand on the propriety question, was it in the best interests of the US for Congress to portray the president as superfluous to the conduct of a treaty negotiation? Whether it intended to or not, Congress gave the appearance to many that it was usurping the powers of the president. That's optics, but optics matter.

    Love a good row. And this too shall pass.
    Last edited by JAD_333; 05 Mar 15, at 10:59.
    To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato

  11. #56
    Senior Contributor Mihais's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Apr 08
    Location
    Transylvania
    Posts
    5,171
    Gentlemen,there will be no war with Iran.You can take it and go to the bank with that statement.
    You don't go to war against your allies.Yes,Iran is an ally. Israel can't and won't be.Iranian soldiers are dying fighting against IS,while Israelis never fought along Americans.
    Those who know don't speak
    He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

  12. #57
    Contributor
    Join Date
    14 Sep 08
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    628
    Quote Originally Posted by JAD_333 View Post

    All true. None relevant. The issue is whether it was proper and wise to invite Bibi. And to expand on the propriety question, was it in the best interests of the US for Congress to portray the president as superfluous to the conduct of a treaty negotiation? Whether it intended to or not, Congress gave the appearance to many that it was usurping the powers of the president. That's optics, but optics matter.

    Love a good row. And this too shall pass.
    To be honest, I am not too surprised about the Republicans; this is what I would expect of the opposition party in the political system of the US (I wouldn't be surprised if the Democrats would have acted the same in similar circumstances). What I find a bit amazing is the manner in which Netanyahu, a head of State, has inserted himself into the internal politics of the United States by firmly allying with the Opposition party against the President.

  13. #58
    Regular
    Join Date
    09 Feb 14
    Location
    Essex, UK
    Posts
    93
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    Churchill did it at least thrice. He wasn't the first, Lafayette addressed Congress and this tradition continued through to today. Hell foreign heads of state of have addressed one or both chambers multiple times. The Sausage Factory says 110 foreign leaders and dignitaries have addressed Congress.
    The difference is that the President is being bypassed and deliberately undermined, in the midst of a crucial strategic foreign policy outreach. Irrespective of what you think of Obama and his Iran strategy, it is an unbelievable breach of protocol. I don't think that this sort of thing would have been tolerated in the past, even from an Israeli PM. What does it do to US credibility in the long run, as I said earlier?

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    US has a tendency to make statements before a Taiwanese presidential election.
    A statement from the State Department is very different from the leader of a foreign country inserting himself into the domestic debate of an allied nation in that country's own legislature. Bibi wants to make a certain case with regard to Iran, he can do it directly to the media. He better hope the Republicans can find a way past the Clinton juggernaut in 2016- assuming he wins his own elections which also looks debateable right now.

  14. #59
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    11,216
    Quote Originally Posted by Duellist View Post
    A statement from the State Department is very different from the leader of a foreign country inserting himself into the domestic debate of an allied nation in that country's own legislature. Bibi wants to make a certain case with regard to Iran, he can do it directly to the media. He better hope the Republicans can find a way past the Clinton juggernaut in 2016- assuming he wins his own elections which also looks debateable right now.
    Its worse as Taiwan is very dependent on the US. So it can influence the outcome of the election, interferes in their democracy. Taiwan only became democratic in 2001, they were a dictatorship before.

    Taiwan is a non entity when it comes to world orgs, booted out of the UN in '71, along the same rank as the PLO but even PLO gets more support.

  15. #60
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    15,003
    Quote Originally Posted by Duellist View Post
    The difference is that the President is being bypassed and deliberately undermined, in the midst of a crucial strategic foreign policy outreach. Irrespective of what you think of Obama and his Iran strategy, it is an unbelievable breach of protocol. I don't think that this sort of thing would have been tolerated in the past, even from an Israeli PM. What does it do to US credibility in the long run, as I said earlier?
    The part I bolded is the problem. There is no protocol, which would presume that Congress must support the President. There might be manners, tradition and common courtesy but there is no protocol. Congress was well with in its rights to do as it did.

    JAD,

    Politicians babbling is not the same as Congress meddling in treaty negotiations.
    maybe Obama should not have said he had a pen and a phone he wasn't afraid to use. His attempt to sideline Congress has seen Congress sideline him to an extent.

    All true. None relevant. The issue is whether it was proper and wise to invite Bibi. And to expand on the propriety question, was it in the best interests of the US for Congress to portray the president as superfluous to the conduct of a treaty negotiation? Whether it intended to or not, Congress gave the appearance to many that it was usurping the powers of the president. That's optics, but optics matter.
    Anything that weakens Obama in particular and the whole concept of the imperial presidency in general is good for America. I hope Congress tanks everything Obama tries to do.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. PM Netanyahu at the UN
    By Minskaya in forum International Politics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 28 Sep 12,, 11:33
  2. Netanyahu vs. Livni
    By Ironduke in forum International Politics
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 21 Feb 09,, 02:17
  3. Al-Qaeda Addresses The Jihad-Versus-Resistance Conflict
    By Ray in forum International Politics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 19 Sep 06,, 17:42
  4. e-mail addresses
    By canadian boy in forum World Affairs Board Pub
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 28 Dec 05,, 03:10

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •