Boehner’s invite and its meaning
I hadn’t thought of this, but Caroline Glick makes a good point about the significance of Boehner’s invitation to Netanyahu:
With Obama’s diplomatic policy toward Iran enabling rather than preventing Iran from becoming a nuclear power, members of the House and Senate are seeking a credible, unwavering voice that offers an alternative path. For the past 20 years, Netanyahu has been the global leader most outspoken about the need to take all necessary measures to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power, not only for Israel’s benefit, but to protect the entire free world. From the perspective of the congressional leadership, then, inviting Netanyahu to speak was a logical move.
In the Israeli context, however, it was an astounding development. For the past generation, the Israeli Left has insisted Israel’s role on the world stage is that of a follower.
As a small, isolated nation, Israel has no choice, they say, other than to follow the lead of the West, and particularly of the White House, on all issues, even when the US president is wrong. All resistance to White House policies is dangerous and irresponsible, leaders like Herzog and Tzipi Livni continuously warn.
Boehner’s invitation to Netanyahu exposes the Left’s dogma as dangerous nonsense.
Glick makes some other important points, particularly in describing a way in which Obama may have inadvertently damaged his own position by insulting the motives of anyone who opposes him on Iran—including Democrats:
[Obama] has cast proponents of sanctions ”“ and [Democratic Senator Robert] Menendez is the co-sponsor of a pending sanctions bill ”“ as enemies of a diplomatic strategy of dealing with Iran, and by implication, as warmongers.
Indeed, in remarks to the Democratic members of the Senate last week, Obama impugned the motivations of lawmakers who support further sanctions legislation. He indirectly alleged that they were being forced to take their positions due to pressure from their donors and others.
Menendez, who is not only the co-sponsor of the bill but the ranking Democrat on the Senate’s Foreign Affairs Committee, didn’t pull any punches in return, saying that the administration’s talking points sound like they “come straight out of Tehran.”
That’s strong rhetoric for a Democrat vis a vis Obama. The question is, how many additional Democrats feel similarly? If there are enough of them, Obama’s veto could be overriden, which would be a first. It might even be a turning point.
If so, not a moment too soon.
You can say I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one:
Twelve Democrats in the Senate have in the past cosponsored legislation to impose sanctions on Iran. If they all continue to call for the sanctions, it would put the Senate close to the two-thirds majority necessary to override Obama’s veto; supporters would need just one more vote if all 54 Republicans support the bill.
[Hat tip: Nolanimrod.]
[NOTE: Paul Mirengoff of Powerline asks why Obama parrots Iran’s talking points. He believes that “Obama sees Iran as the rising power in the region, and sees a grand bargain with the clerics as the solution to our woes in the Middle East.” Mirengoff speculates that Obama believes this because it “appeals to his intellectual arrogance,” is “consistent with his laziness,” and because he admires “successful anti-American strongmen” (like most leftists do).
That all seems correct, but it probably doesn’t go far enough. I believe that Obama and his main advisor, Valerie Jarrett, are both simpatico with the Iranian regime.]
I cannot shake the conclusion that nothing anyone can do will prevent Obama from ensuring that Iran gets the bomb.
Even if Congress overrides an Obama veto, what’s to prevent him from simply ignoring whatever restrictions and sanctions Congress might apply?
Obama can mimic Jackson; ‘Congress has made their law, now let them enforce it!’ Absent the potential threat of impeachment, what outward constraint is there upon him?
Just a few hours ago, I added a comment to Neo’s post entitled “Mr. Boehner requests the honor of Netanyahu’s presence.” My comment cited the same Caroline Glick column here referenced by Neo, but I chose to emphasize something different, and — for better or worse — I’ll now repeat it.
Glick notes that a recent Israeli TV program showed satellite imagery of an ICBM 27 meters long. Missiles this size are fully capable of reaching the US. This means that Iran is on the verge of posing an existential threat to this country, not just Israel or Europe. This confirms what Netanyahu has been saying for years, and is the context for the invitation to speak before Congress.
I assume that the media will do what it can to suppress this message. Instead, they’ll portray it all as political gamesmanship.
Once again, apologies for the repetition, but this is the major foreign policy issue of the Obama administration. It’s why I thought Romney’s defeat would prove to be so dangerous.
“successful anti-American strongmen”
What sort of success is he talking about? Most of the anti-American strongmen have basket case economies and are great examples of economic failure. Venezuela is a good example.
The Obama administration on Wednesday paid $490 million in cash assets to Iran and will have released a total of $11.9 billion to the Islamic Republic by the time nuclear talks are scheduled to end in June, according to figures provided by the State Department.
Today’s $490 million release, the third such payment of this amount since Dec. 10, was agreed to by the Obama administration under the parameters of another extension in negotiations over Tehran’s contested nuclear program that was inked in November.
These cash payments by the United States have been made with no strings attached, prompting concerns that Iran could use the funds to finance its worldwide terror operations, which include the financial backing of Hamas, Hezbollah, and other rogue entities.
Mark Dubowitz, the executive director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), said the ongoing release of these assets has provided Iran with a critical “financial lifeline.”
“The Obama administration provided Iran with a financial lifeline through both direct sanctions relief and the de-escalation of sanctions pressure that helped the regime stabilize its economy after a severe sanctions-induced economic crisis in 2012 and 2013,” Dubowitz said. “It is not a surprise that this has increased Iranian negotiating leverage and hardened the supreme leader’s nuclear intransigence.”
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhh, that’s the reason.
I simply thought that the Speaker of the House was looking for someone, “he could call a friend”.
The Left hates him.
Progressives have no use for him.
Liberals love to make fun of him and his tearful outbursts.
Many posters on this site and others and hordes of conservatives chide him.
John Kerry has James Taylor as a friend.
John Boehner apparently has to go outside the U.S. to find his.
“This means that Iran is on the verge of posing an existential threat to this country, not just Israel or Europe.” Cornhead
That does imply that capability, once they have nukes. IMO, even when Iran gains that full capability, it will not launch nuclear missiles directly at America from Iran.
Iran is much more likely to use that capability as a deterrent to any interference with its future actions in the M.E. Seizure of the eastern Saudi oil fields (the world’s largest with a majority Shia area pop.) and/or blockading of the Strait of Hormuz (thru which 1/3 of the world’s oil flows) are strategic actions that Iran could take against the West.
Result; the world oil price would skyrocket and mortally threaten western economies.
In such a case, Iranian nuclear missile capability becomes a profound deterrence to Western retaliation.
Once Iran has nukes, an unconventional means for attacking America becomes a potential existential threat; an EMP attack launched off our shores from commercial container ships. Consider the following;
Reportedly both Iran and N Korea have been working on superEMP nuke designs.
Both former CIA Chief James Woolsey and Peter Pry, a senior staffer with the “US Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse Attack” have reported to Congress that, “Iran has been seriously considering an unconventional [EMP] pre-emptive nuclear strike against the U.S.” and that, “the Iranians have been testing mid-air detonations of their Shahab-3 medium-range missile over the Caspian Sea. The missiles were fired from ships.”
“I and my colleagues… think it more likely Iran would make an EMP attack by launching a missile off a freighter, so they could do the deed anonymously, and escape retaliation.
Iran has demonstrated the capability to launch a missile off a freighter. Iran has also purchased Russia’s Club-K missile system. The Club-K is a complete missile launch system, disguised to look like a shipping container, that could convert any freighter into a missile launch platform. The Club-K, if armed with a nuclear warhead, could be used to execute an EMP attack.” Pry explained.
In an EMP attack(s) from a commercial container ship(s), there would be little evidence of the perpetrator, thus we would have little to no idea of whom to retaliate against. In addition, a successful attack would collapse America’s infrastructural electrical, electronics, food, medical and transportation sectors. Estimates are as high as 300 million dead in the first two years.
There is a sleeper cell in the White Hut …
Neo said:
“I believe that Obama and his main advisor, Valerie Jarrett, are both simpatico with the Iranian regime.”
Bingo. Give the lady a gold star.
At Politico — Democratic Iran hawks hesitate on overriding Obama:
Depressing.
We’re in the late 1930’s … Churchill is shaking his head …
Nuclear Iran wants ICBMs as a deterrent to regime change and to make reprisals against its actives in Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and elsewhere difficult. Its actual use of nukes will be small bombs smuggled into the territories of its enemies by 3rd party terrorists such as Hezbollah. This is a part of the bho play book to fundamentally transform America from the relative safety of Hawaii.
British soccer players are fond of saying that sometimes you need to get your retaliation in first.
The only way Iran doesn’t get the bomb is if we use the military option, full stop.
None of this is a surprise. Before he was elected in 2008 BHO famously campaigned that he’d talk to Iran, and he’s keeping that promise.
Geoffrey Britain:
Well, although it’s a longshot, I think defiance of Congress under those particular circumstances is one of the very very few things that could have a chance of leading to impeachment and conviction (impeachment is the easy part, with the GOP controlling the House; it’s conviction by 2/3 of the Senate that’s the hard part).
Here’s the scenario: if Congress passes the sanctions bill and Obama vetoes it and then Congress overrides the veto, it would mean that 2/3 of the Senate (and House) voted to override. Then, if Obama ignores that and doesn’t enforce it, he will be defying 2/3 of Congress, both Senate and House (and risking our national security, which even some Democrats care about). That 2/3 of the Senate is exactly the number needed to convict him.
Ann:
Yes, I would not count on any Profiles in Courage among the Democrats. Especially when Obama threatens them, which of course he will.
And especially if they have any nasty divorce records to unseal, if you know what I mean.
@ Ray, “successful anti American strongmen”
has nothing to do with the particular success or
failure of their country & everything to do with
the fact that the “strongmen” stay in power
year in year out, oppress their people, harass,
imprison & outright kill dissidents. Take away rights
of citizens & never conduct legitimate elections.
(Currently the Left is falling all over with admiration for castro!)
Obama & the Left would like this type of governance
For you & me because some animals are more equal than others.
January 23rd, 2015 at 5:37 pm
Parker, same idea as I had about that.
Although I think they would have better luck using the Mexican-US tunnels for smuggling. It’s not like the FBI are allowed to deal with that. The feds are too busy fighting the drug war by raiding houses, which may or may not contain armed US citizens at the right or wrong address. Then again ATF is arming the drug lords down south, so at least they’ll have a fairer fight.
Language and cultural problems are stopping them, probably. The Mexicans are kind of territorial and they don’t like blacks, Asians, or white gringos around. Muslim carpet heads would kind of stick out in that kind of criminal underworld. Yea, I know, in the West it’s Allah Akbar Diversity is great, all the time, every time in Ft. Hood. But the Mexicans don’t seem that tolerate of much of anything these days.
North Korea is a good example of nuke defense and tactical offense. NK is kidnapping civilians all the time. The reason they can’t be challenged or killed on that is their nuke shield. Boko Haram doesn’t have a nuke shield, they just have an Islamic shield, it’s almost as good against Leftist diversity.
Molly makes a critical point. Evil succeeds by harming people. Other people in the blind zone or sitting on the fence think that means the Regime has failed. No that means evil has succeeded. Different goals there.
There has long been speculation that the Saudis have nuclear capability, and there is no reason to believe that Iran does not already have working devices. As of forty years ago, it was observed that any group who built nuclear weapons succeeded on the first try. The only reason to test would be intimidation. Nice, but you loose the chance to surprise. The rules changed long ago, but we haven’t cought up in our strategic thinking.
Testing is normally a proof that their device works. Which isn’t always the case. And it proves that they can produce multiple products, rather than just one or two. And it perhaps demonstrates the will that one will actually use the weapon on something. That’s often very important in strategic calculations. Since the US has a lot of weapons, but lacks the will to use them depending on who is at the helm.
For those of you concerned about EMP, here’s a solution, and, apparently, evidence that the traitors of both stripes in Washington wish to ensure that Iran and the Mad Muslim world can destroy us with only a nuke or two.
acdemocracy.org/emp-congress-the-shield-act-exclusive/
‘Cuz you know, it’s just not fair that they don’t have a Triad and thousands of nukes, lets level the playing field for the Monsters of our world.
What would our response be if Israel took out Iran’s nuclear capability? I fear that Obama’s anger would be much more than that of the surrounding states.
R-OP:
No doubt.
What are the possible outcomes of all this? If I were Obama I would just ignore it, if the sanctions pass Congress over his veto he will just figure out a way to quietly negate their effect. He has done this before with various court rulings. He has consistently broken the law by Executive Actions and memoranda. This should be no different. His press choir will gladly oblige any attempt to get it off the front page.
A veto override, if played right by the White House, would provide no more than three days of embarrassment for Obama, unless it is followed by an impeachment and conviction. Remember Obama wants to be impeached because the media will use it to drum up sympathy for a victim of the evil Republicans and unnameables (Jews and Zionists) who want the US to go to war for a foreign entity.
Either Israel initiates a first strike or (fill in the blank, all I can come with is a nuclear holocaust).
Iran’s “actual use of nukes will be small bombs smuggled into the territories of its enemies by 3rd party terrorists such as Hezbollah.” parker
The flaw in that strategy is the certainty of retaliation. My understanding is that (unlike an EMP) a normal nuclear blast is easily identifiable as to the origin of the device used.
neo,
With all due respect, I don’t think that would trigger even an attempt at impeachment. Impeach the FIRST BLACK PRESIDENT? Not for anything less than the gravest possible of crimes. And the evidence would have to be ironclad. Even then, some would refuse to find him guilty. Obama’s race makes impeachment, simply ‘a bridge too far’.
Geoffrey Britain:
I don’t actually think it would trigger an impeachment attempt, either.
But it’s one the very few ways I can imagine that it would be possible for it to happen.
The Saudis have had Chinese ballistic missiles for decades. Do we really think that the Pakistanis have refused to sell them nuclear warheads?
Barak is a muslim and Valerie was born in Iran.
G. Britain
I follow the oil markets closely. We are in the 40s for WTI and gas is $1.83 in Omaha.
It is both a supply and demand issue. The drilling rig count is headed down along with capex spending. This is especially important for the new fracking wells as they have a shorter productive life than conventional wells.
The proximate cause of this is that the Saudis have kept supply the same and refused to cut. They have the lowest production costs and huge deep pockets.
So the price of oil could turn on a dime given the right events. And it will go up much faster than it went down.
And, of course, Obama will do nothing.
Just the other day at Davos our great Secretary of State Jean Francois Kerry–who testified before Congress during the Vietnam War that he was aware from what he had heard and the kinds of things he had done that our soldiers
“… had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country.” (see more quotes from his testimony at
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2013/01/genghis_khan_secretary_of_state.html#ixzz3PkhZuV5R)
–denied that Islam had anything to do with what he described as the “criminal anarchy” and “nihilism” taking place all around the world today.
As a corrective, I recommend this striking compilation–taken from Islamic sources–illustrating the worldview and nature of Islam that Dr. Andrew G. Bostom recently posted on pjmedia (see http://pjmedia.com/blog/bill-oreilly-killing-the-truth-about-muhammad-and-global-jihad/ ).
My understanding is that (unlike an EMP) a normal nuclear blast is easily identifiable as to the origin of the device used.
The Left will cover for the Islamic Jihad’s deficiencies, as I told you before. Besides, the Left would use the emergency as a way to persecute and terminate their political enemies in the US.
There are plenty of Islamic attacks in the world, but the Left goes out of their way to divert attention. The same will apply in a nuclear case.
If you run some fallout down to Abby’s lab, she can tell you where the fissile material came from. She can’t tell you who bought/stole/made the bomb, nor can she tell you who snuck it into the cafeteria.
Consequently, retaliation is likely to be chancy. In addition, the usual suspects will be howling about killing women and children just on account of something already done and why ruin more lives….
We have the Three Conjectures ahead of us.
A recently retired Israeli diplomat said they told the Indian government all about the Mumbai terrs. “Do something.” You don’t get it, said India. Pakistan has nukes. So Beslan happens under the protection of Iranian nukes.
Obama likes Marxist states. He has demonstrated his affinity with support and prosecution of regime change of nationalist Muslim regimes. Israel’s republic sets a bad example for his dreams of change.
Cornhead Says:
January 24th, 2015 at 10:17 am
“This is especially important for the new fracking wells as they have a shorter productive life than conventional wells.”
This is entirely incorrect. It’s a view propagandized by Putin & Co all over the Internet. At the time Putin thought that his BIG worry was fracking. Only now the dunce has realized that his true worry is KSA surge capacity.
1) It’s WRONG that KSA has stayed steady at the wheel.
They’ve opened up the flood gates with ADDITIONAL processed exports — ON TOP OF — their maximal pumping tempo. This amounts to another 400,000 bpd of mostly middle distallates. (Yanbo complex, Red Sea)
2) Fracxed wells, by definition in TIGHT SANDS, will be weeping light, sweet crude for another CENTURY — once drilled.
This is pretty much exactly what as transpired in Kerrn county — and that stuff is thick and sour. ( The original sweet, light stuff petered out decades ago.)
3) What happens with fracked crude is a SURGE of early production that actually pays off for the whole drilling effort — within the first 13 months or so.
After that, whatever flows is an oil man’s annuity.
4) Totally unlike most oil drilling, fracking is hitting EXTREMELY large wide areas. It’s a CAN’T miss drilling effort.
In which case the economics of oil drilling are turned on their head: NO DRY WELLS, the bane of oil men everywhere.
This latter factor is NEVER advertized by the Putin propaganda crew.
5) To top it all off, fracked wells — mostly — never need jack-pumps — and their associated expenses. The very nature of tight sands applies TREMENDOUS pressure.
So they flow like ‘artesian’ wells — with virtually no additional inputs.
Again, this is upside down from all other oil wells.
6) It would appear that the industry is shutting off new drilling. That’s their cash bleed.
They can carry on with their ‘annuity’ stream till prices turn.
“Boehner’s invite and its meaning”
I take it to mean that Boehner is showing the President that he has a phone and a pen as well.
Now that the Repubs control both houses of Congress, they can do some things independent of the White House. What’s good for the goose is sauce for the gander. 🙂