Israel and Arab nations in rare agreement »
Posted By israeligirl1 5 months, 3 weeks ago in News"FOR the first time in the history of Zionism," said Israeli PM Netanyahu, "there is an alignment of views between the Arab world and Israel." It was clear he meant Iran which is viewed as a threat by Israel and Arab states such as Egypt and Jordan.
Read Full Story at theaustralian.news.com.au »
1062 Views Share Story 89 Comments Report
Submitted By:
israeligirl1
I've been a marketing consultant to high tech companies for the last 10 years. I am also one of the founders of giyus.org ...
Who Also Submitted:
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 89 (view all)
-
43%
jimdoze5 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Several questions come to mind:
Reply
1. Will the left even acknowledge that there is a prospect of Iranian hegemony over the Middle East?
2. If they do, will they acknowledge that such a situation gives Iran a massive level of geopolitical influence... i.e. does it matter that Iran would sit in control of the chokepoint of the world economy?
3. Does the Obama Administration understand this?
4. Do they care?
5. If they do, will they react to it without first blaming the Bush Adminitration for the situation?
6. Which brings me back to an important question in regard to Iraq. Rather than invade Iraq, rid it of Saddam and his minions, would it have been preferable to re-arm Iraq under Saddam Hussein as a counter-balance to Iran? Does anyone think Saddam and his minions could be trusted to simply fulfill that role? Or, as a re-armed nation, would Saddam have turned to bid for Iraqi hegemony?-
100%
gamahuche5 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Good questions jim but are they actually relevant to the present moment in time?
Reply
A similar question applies to the article - does it REALLY indocaate aany fundamental agreement, one which would stand the test of time and lead to a long-term rapprochement?
Not the way I read it!
Much more like a litmus test for what common interests MIGHT exist, nothing tangible concerning what to do about them if in fact there are any.
It certainly didn't make me jump up and down in gleeful optimism. -
100%
truthiness5 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I consider myself a moderate, but I'll take shot at your questions, Jim
Reply
1. Hegemony seems a strong word.. but an unchallenged Iran could easily grow to be one of the 2 or 3 most powerful arab states (Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Syria being the current)
2. I doubt they would make such an acknowledgement publicly as it would only contribute to such power.. but I am sure they would see it.
3. yes (do you really believe they don't?)
4. what politician doesn't care about shifting balances of power?
5. can't say what public statements they might make, but the poorly handled Iraq war definitely helped Iran.
6. No. It would have been better to embrace the role Iran offered after 9/11 when they helped us attack Al Queda in afghanistan (supply lines and use of air space) -
100%
oldgringo5 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
". Which brings me back to an important question in regard to Iraq. Rather than invade Iraq, rid it of Saddam and his minions, would it have been preferable to re-arm Iraq under Saddam Hussein as a counter-balance to Iran? Does anyone think Saddam and his minions could be trusted to simply fulfill that role? Or, as a re-armed nation, would Saddam have turned to bid for Iraqi hegemony?"
Reply
This is the kind of thinking that led us to this point in history. The idea that we could/would/should arm and support a dictator to counterbalance a perceived territorial enemy is wrong. This is why so many people in the world think that we're hypocrites. We're either a country that believes in freedom, liberty and dignity or we're not. Either we stand against social injustice and human suffering or we support it. I prefer the US to be what I tell my children it is...a great country...not a land of hypocrites. -
-
-
100%
mmrhe5 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It's not that liberals don't appreciate all the implications of Iranian hegemony in the ME jimdoze.
Reply
It's the fact that your buddies in the last administration were warned that ONE of the MANY RISKS they were taking in invading Iraq was just that.
So now that we are on the verge of that reality, don't point fingers at the Left OR the sane ones on the Right for that matter who knew better.
I'll bet we won't see Ol' Ironsides Cheney running his mouth about that will we!-
33%
jimdoze5 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Just as I thought... it's a "Blame the Bush Administration" response.
Reply
It is nonsensical to suggest that an invasion of Iraq is causative of Iranian efforts in pursuit of Middle Eastern hegemony. Implicit in that argument is that the Iranians are making that move to protect themselves. Frankly, the U.S. having boots on the ground in Iraq renders Iran a far safer place, unless Iran had (and has) larger ambitions. -
42%
Endoscopy5 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Silly lib. It was Carter that gave us the Iran we know and hate today. He pulled the rug out from under the Shah because he did not like him and liked the Ayatollah. The Ayatollah was so thankful that they captured the embassy and held the embassy people as prisoners until the day he left office.
Reply
-
-
100%
Justice4All5 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Many in the Middle East consider Iran to be almost as big a threat as Israel.
Reply
Even though Ahamidinejad is not well regarded in Iran he is well liked in the rest of the Middle East. But only because he stands up to the US and Israel.
Obama could accomplish a lot by not letting Israel manipulate him. But that may be a signal to Israel that it's time to start the war that the Iraq invasion was suppose to lead to.
The more the US public knows about Israel the less support Israel will have.-
56%
Endoscopy5 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There is stupidity in action. Israel is not the problem. Do you not know the history of Israel and the wishes of most of the Muslims in the area?
Reply
1. The day that Israel was created the Muslim countries surrounding it attacked it with the avowed aim of driving the Jews into the sea and killing them there.
2. Several wars were fought for the same objective. Muslims lost every time.
3. Muslim terrorists have taken up the cause with the avowed aim of killing all Jews.
Then you have the foolishness to claim that Israel is the problem. You spout the Muslim hate. -
60%
cowboygrandpa5 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
J4A:
Reply
Man, what kind of drugs are you on ???
Ahamidinejad is a terrorist whose own people fear his craziness.
Now as far as Israel. Yes they have some problems. There are some who hate just as there are some who hate in the Arab beliefs.
But I really don't believe Israel wants to destroy all Arabs. Why would they ??? They are their brothers and sisters from Abraham.
Absolutely there needs to be a solution to the problem. But wiping out either nation is not the answer. -
100%
rimbaud5 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"he stands up to the US and Israel":
Reply
When we supported Saddam, as our proxy, in "his" war against Iran, we were allied with the Russians, who also supported Iraq, and the Europeans, whom we encouraged to sell Saddam his chemical weapons. Iran pretty much stood alone and was free of the influence of the great powers and managed to pretty much win that war at the great cost of its "martyred" youth. So why should we expect them to kowtow to us, now? Did you know that the reason they took those hostages was that they were afraid their "revolution" would be undone by another coup, similar to the one that toppled Mossadegh in 1953, that originated in the American embassy. Here's an interesting book: An Islamic Utopian: a political biography of Ali Shariati by Ali Rahnema: what's interesting about it is that the political movement that supported Mossadegh did not just fade away in the decades of the Shah's rule, and he had good reason to be repressive.
-
-
-
100%
dissent5 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
fta
Reply
"Netanyahu's optimistic assessment of his talks with Abdullah were out of sync with the undiplomatic tone of the Jordanian foreign ministry statement which said the King had "demanded" of Netanyahu to declare his acceptance of the idea of a Palestinian state."
netanyahu is pretending something that isn't and abraham rabinovich of the murdoch owned newscorp newspaper "the australian" is playing up the pro-israel anti-iran propaganda. figures
-
-
67%
cowboygrandpa5 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA
Reply
"In his talks with the leaders of the two Arab countries which have peace agreements with Israel and his designation of a common interest, Netanyahu was setting himself up for his visit with President Barack Obama on Monday when the parameters of US-Israel relations will be determined by the two new leaders.
While the potential of a nuclear-armed Iran is clearly Israel's major strategic concern, there are some analysts who suspect Netanyahu may also be using Tehran as a bogey man to divert pressures on him by Washington on the Palestinian front.
Netanyahu's optimistic assessment of his talks with Abdullah were out of sync with the undiplomatic tone of the Jordanian foreign ministry statement which said the King had "demanded" of Netanyahu to declare his acceptance of the idea of a Palestinian state.
While Israel and the moderate Arab leadership share alarm about the hard-edged regime in Iran, their concern comes from different directions. Israel is concerned about Tehran achieving nuclear capability, and its support of Hamas and Hezbollah. Mubarak, who heads the largest and most prestigious Arab country, knows Tehran is unlikely to threaten another Muslim nation with destruction.
He fears Iran's increasingly bold attempts to achieve hegemony in the Middle East.
Although Mubarak might pray for an Israeli air strike on Iran, he would never say so since, for his people, and the Arab masses in general, the main enemy is Israel. The fact Iran is a Shia Muslim state and Egypt is at the heart of the Sunni world is also a factor.
The same concerns are true for Abdullah. Although he publicly calls for a Palestinian state, his nightmare is finding a radical Hamas-controlled state as his neighbour, with Iran at its back.
With Obama's accession, Israel finds itself for the first time dealing with a president whose strong support cannot be taken for granted. Washington is likewise uncertain about Netanyahu - as witnessed by the secret dispatch two weeks ago of CIA director Leon Panetta to Jerusalem to get Netanyahu's pledge that Israel will not stage a surprise attack against Iran's nuclear installations."
I can see the stage being set for the peace accord, that will pacify Israel into a false feeling of security being set up.
Not only Israel but all the countries involved. They are going to be played and put into a harsh situation.
Not real pleased with Obama's handling of this, so far. -
100%
EDWARDIII5 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Iran is a bogyman with a nuclear program. Turky and India can not ignore that fact. Neither can the Chinese. And if China, Japan and S.Korea together can't deter a N.Korean basket case from creating a nuclear arms capacity then Egypt, Israel, Turky and S.Arabia won't have much luck against a power like Iran. If Iran achieves a nuclear weapon Egypt and S.Arabia and everyone else will feel need for same. If enough people have nukes the probability of their use approaches 100%
Reply -
67%
pcknowledge5 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Not real pleased with Obama's handling of this, so far."
Reply
I completly disagree. I believe Ahmedinejad is a nutcase. I also believe Hamas is a Terrorist organization that should have been dismantled long ago. Strapping bombs and killing innocent civilians in Israel is not acceptable. With that said, I know Israel's government has stabbed us in the back on numerous occassions. I also know from my travels to that part of the world, that Israel's government & the IDF don't care about any human life, other then a Jewish life. In the last Israel/Lebanon war, the IDF used cluster bombs which killed innocent hindu & christian civilians who were working in Lebanon. I don't believe the last Israel/Lebanon war was because of 2 kidnapped Israeli soldiers who we never heard about again. I believe Israel started that war to gain control of the Litani river, which technically belongs to Lebanon.
Therefore, I believe President Obama should distance himself from all parties concerned, and try to negotiate a peace plan fair to all. Should President Obama fail, the blame would lie with Israel's government and the Paliestinians (Hamas, Fatah etc) but NOT President Obama. No US President has ever been able to work on a peaceful resolution in that part of the world.-
-
Neutral
Daylight5 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
pcknowledge
Reply
I completly disagree. I believe Ahmedinejad is a nutcase. I also believe Hamas is a Terrorist organization that should have been dismantled long ago.Strapping bombs and killing innocent civilians in Israel is not acceptable.
Now about dismantling the illegal occupier Israel and send them back to where they came from? Whoever the Hamas are they are Palestinian elected by the people of Palestine. They are Democratically elected. Israelis too strap the most dangerous bombs under the belly of their fighter jets and the tanks that they use to kill people in hundreds.
-
-
100%
pcknowledge5 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"But I really don't believe Israel wants to destroy all Arabs. Why would they ??? They are their brothers and sisters from Abraham."
Reply
From what I saw there, all I can say is both sides want to destroy each other. Also, what I observed is neither side cares
about anyone other then themselfes. And I am neither a jew, nor a moslem, nor a christian. The unfortunate part if, as evident in the recent Mumbai attack, both sides are dragging the rest of the world into their conflict.
I hope, pray & trust President Obama will remain neutral in this conflict, and will not be swayed by either side while trying to find a solution.-
25%
Edmar145 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Apparently, you saw only what you wanted to see. A problem that many people have in this world. Name one Muslim country that gives Jews the equality that Israel gives to it's Arab citizens. The second law that Israel passed in 1948 was equality of it's Arab citizens. Jews aren't even allowed in 15 of the 22 Arab countries in the Middle East. They can't own property in 19. The three that tolerate them give them only second class citizen status. You saw what you wanted to see.
Reply
-
-
100%
pcknowledge5 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Ahamidinejad is a terrorist whose own people fear his craziness."
Reply
Nope. Iran is ruled by the religious Mullahs who have some things in comon with the ultra religous Republican's like Palin. The younger generation in Iran fear the religious Mullahs, just like some of us here fear the extreme religious nutwing Republicans (though certainly not to the same extent).
Ahmedinejad is just a mouthpiece, and his days are almost over. Just like the Bush days are over.
It's our government who overthrew the democratically elected leader in Iran many yrs ago, and now we see the consequences of our meddling. Again, I trust and hope President Obama doesn't make the same mistakes as have been made in the past. God bless President Obama, and may God protect him in his mission to find a peaceful solution in a region where there is so much hate on both sides.-
33%
EDWARDIII5 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
In common with Palin? In common with Obama you should say. Obama likes Amadinijad. He admires Islamic holy men. He even supports them financially by refusing to use our own oil so we must buy from the mullahs. He disguises this with his investment in green technologies destined for failure while ignoring our capacity to build enough nuclear plants to make electric cars a reality. He bows instinctively to Islamic religious leaders thanks to his upbringing in madrasas. He pays false homage to Christianity by following psudo-religious leaders who are really disguised hate mongers against the USA.
Reply
In common with Palin-- a few Islamic leaders have something in common with Palin; those who have matured away from the caravan-raider mentality of Mohamed and his apostles. She uses religion to give her personal strength and dependable ethics. Even an atheist like me can respect that. How about you, pc? Are you an atheist? I doubt it. I bet you're a cringing agnostic, deferring all moral decisions yet keeping your options open in case the LIVING GOD come down and smite thee.
-
-
SandmonsterComment removed: Hard Banned
-
33%
pc255 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
with all the attention paid to Pelosi this flew under the radar last week.........
Reply
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/05/14/israel-promi...
Israel promises Obama: We won’t hit Iran without “coordinating” with you
By “coordinating” I assume they mean “without giving you a heads up.” If it means they’ll wait until they have The One’s permission, then, er, they’re going to be waiting a very long time.
During a trip to Jerusalem earlier this week, CIA chief Leon Panetta informed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that U.S. President Barack Obama demanded that Israel not launch a surprise attack on Iran. The message expressed concern that Israel would cause an escalation in the region and undermine Obama’s efforts to improve relations with Tehran.
However, the content was nothing new: The Bush administration also sent tough messages to Jerusalem a year ago, including a demand that it not strike Iran…
The U.S. expects Israel to coordinate its military actions with Washington, a condition to which Jerusalem has agreed due to its dependence on U.S. aid. Senior officials in the Bush administration testified to Congress that Israel had consulted them before deciding on its 2007 air strike on an alleged Syrian nuclear reactor. They said Israel had explained that it considered the Syrian project an existential threat and therefore had to act.
Look at it this way: If they say “we have to act” and The One says no, what do they lose by defying him and attacking anyway? The Democrats aren’t going to risk Jewish votes by cutting off Israel’s foreign aid as punishment,
BIBI is meting with Obama this week, and Obama goes to Turkey in June for the great Muslim apology tour.......How that meeting goes and the tone and content of Obama's speech will determine if and when Israel attacks Iran........... -
50%
Daylight5 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"FOR the first time in the history of Zionism," said Israeli PM Netanyahu, "there is an alignment of views between the Arab world and Israel." It was clear he meant Iran which is viewed as a threat by Israel and Arab states such as Egypt and Jordan.
Reply
Everybody understand the Zionists need another war for them to survive and build more and more of their own nuclear war heads and other banned weapons to destroy the entire world. Why can't Iran or any other country do whatever it takes in order to defend itself? How come Iran could trust Israel for not doing the same thing that Israel doesn't want Iran to do? Israel has used ban weapons in the recent war with Lebanon and also against the Palestinians too. And waged many wars against the neighbors and keep building settlements and killing innocent men, women and children as well. Foolish Arabs should worry more about Israel than Iran because Israel is an occupier and an oppressor. -
100%
TheNewsseeker5 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Should it really be a common enemy, who unites Israel with its neighbors? The Iran fits in very well in this scheme, but Egypt switches easily in setting its preferences. I cannot imagine that this pragmatic coalition will last very long!
Reply
More News
LA Times
A story of shock, chaos and bravery unfolds in Ft. Hood shooting
Historic healthcare overhaul passes House
Afghanistan government says foreign officials are interfering
Unemployment rate rises above 10% ; Obama signs jobless benefit extension
Jason Rodriguez : Shooting at downtown Orlando office building leaves 5 hurt, 1 dead
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.