Will Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech to Congress have a major impact on US Mideast policy?

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 02 Mar 2015 14:41:41 -0500

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is set to address a joint session of Congress tomorrow. Will his address have an impact on US Mideast policy and the Administration's efforts to reach a nuclear arms agreement with Iran?

Response by CPT Zachary Brooks made Mar 2 at 2015 2:42 PM

CPT Zachary Brooks — Mon, 02 Mar 2015 14:42:37 -0500

Doubtful with the current administration. I welcome his input however.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 2 at 2015 2:43 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 02 Mar 2015 14:43:13 -0500

I see this may be retaliation for members of the President's campaign team going over to Israel & meddling in the elections over there. It is intriguing to see what he will say.

Response by SFC Michael Jackson, MBA made Mar 2 at 2015 2:57 PM

SFC Michael Jackson, MBA — Mon, 02 Mar 2015 14:57:45 -0500

I don't think the Obama Administration cares what Prime Minister Netanyahu says. It obviously wasn't important for the President or he would have met with him.

Response by COL Jason Smallfield, PMP, CFM, CM made Mar 2 at 2015 3:05 PM

COL Jason Smallfield, PMP, CFM, CM — Mon, 02 Mar 2015 15:05:52 -0500

- Will PM Netanyahu's speech to Congress have a major impacton US Mideast policy? Unfortunately no for the following reasons:
1. The Obama administration has shown over the past 6 years that it does not work well with others (either US internal or external with US allies) and does not work in a collaborative manner. Unilateral action is the trend both internally and externally.
2. The administration has shown that it will not let facts get in the way of what it wants do. Several examples of this to include but not limited to Obamacare (if you like your doctor you can keep him, if you like your plan you can keep it) and Radical Islam (ISIS is a JV team, we are winning against terrorism).
3. The administration has shown that it punishes those who do not sing from their sheet music (pick any SECDEF over the past 6 years) while rewarding those who do even if they are ineffective (VA, AG). Punishment has various levels of severity ranging from public attacks to termination to merely cutting out of the loop. Want to guess where PM Netanyahu falls within range?
4. Will be interesting to see the administration position on a possible nuclear arms agreement with Iran. Is this a treaty requiring Senate approval or an "agreement" that the administration can pursue unilaterally? I am guessing it will be the latter and not the former.

Response by SSG Leonard Johnson made Mar 2 at 2015 3:07 PM

SSG Leonard Johnson — Mon, 02 Mar 2015 15:07:42 -0500

Look, I'm sorry but I have to say something. And I'm sorry if I'm labeling Democrats and liberals, but this is the only way that I see it.
Why do Democrats and liberals hate Jews and Christians? Yet, they will invite our enemies people like the Hajji brotherhood?
In the last six years I have seen nothing but a tenfold attempt to persecute Christians and Jews. No, our government is not cutting heads off, but it seems like they attempt to make it our fault with the propaganda, of the things happening in the Middle East.
All this mess is because of three people slick Hillary, Kerry, and the executive branch of the administration.
They are trying to tell us Iran will not have the bomb but yet in 10 years in their paperwork that's exactly what they'll do. I get so tired of we have to talk to them, talk died on 9/11

Response by CSM Michael J. Uhlig made Mar 2 at 2015 4:11 PM

CSM Michael J. Uhlig — Mon, 02 Mar 2015 16:11:45 -0500

Unfortunately, seems as though party politics will play out......I understand one side (dems) plan on not being there - walking out before he gets there.

Hope the voters take note and send them sorry butts home.....we need more veterans as our elected officials anyway.

Response by Cpl Jeff N. made Mar 2 at 2015 4:33 PM

Cpl Jeff N. — Mon, 02 Mar 2015 16:33:35 -0500

It will not make a difference to Obama. He is hell bent on getting a bad deal with Iran. He is the king of bad deals. For those of you concerned about foreign leaders and dignitaries speaking to a joint session on Congress it has happened 114 times in our history. This is nothing new.

Below is a list of all of them. We had one as recently as September 18th of 2014 (President of Ukraine, you know the guy getting whacked by the Russians that we refuse to provide any arms to defend themselves). This one was done without much fanfare.

Because this is Bebe who will make Obama look like the clueless clown that he is on the international stage, this one has become a big deal. Obama doesn't want you to see what a real world leader that understands the threats in the world looks like. He will pale in comparison.

http://history.house.gov/Institution/Foreign-Leaders/Joint-Sessions/

Joint Meeting & Joint Session Addresses Before Congress by Foreign Leaders & Dignitaries...

The purpose of a Joint Meeting has usually been for Congress to hear an address from an important figure—generally a visiting foreign leader. This practice became a standard part of foreign leaders’ state visits to the United States after 1945. In the early Congresses, a Joint Session or a House Reception was often used for the address.There are two known instances of unofficial addresses by foreign leaders to the House and Senate in the House...

Response by CPO Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 2 at 2015 5:18 PM

CPO Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 02 Mar 2015 17:18:16 -0500

I am so sick of the fighting. The manipulation and even use of the very inner emotions of people to put one against another. The comments I read here are so negative and hurtful. The labeling and pointing fingers at this admin, this religion or that religion or this faith and that faith and then people that call themselves brothers and sisters in arms attack one another instead of talk with and learn to understand one another.

Seems it is easier to answer most times on here with personal attacks instead of information and then listening to one another to understand how that information may or may not be able to be used or improved.

So many this past decade or more, since 9/11 have been so quick to point fingers and then attack. The labeling of liberals, republicans, democrats and haters, zealots, anti-American is even the words used to described the people we take an oath to lay down our lives to protect. This is the uniform, this is the oath, this is the promise.

One thing I was always proud of in the military was this hate had not been so widespread on anything for many years. We had long since learned to allow others the opportunity to learn, grow, advance and flourish as people anybody that was willing to stand, take the oath and even profess to have a very deep loyalty to our country and our countries values. Then turn on one another like Judas at the flash of a silver coin or whatever trinket takes higher value over we as a people. We as a people remembering what this country was built, hard work, honesty, trust, cooperation and compassion. There were down sides of it all, those were and are the qualities we all still have to offer.

We first must look in my opinion inward before we continue down the road of hate and polarization in our military. We all took an oath, if you no longer wish to wear the uniform and uphold that oath, then leave, that is the first and most important issue in all this, what is this doing to our military?

You, me, we, all deserve better than this and none of us should stand for any of the dividing concepts. I am also very sick of the people that use the excuse of "Well they did this, or they did that and all the other comparisons that try and make our own shortcomings the result of someone else control. That is very sad.

Especially in the NCO and Officers represented on this site. If it is any consolation, I would still to this day lay down my life, not for yours, for the values and principles we all espouse. Who the other person is does not matter, protecting the concept of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness seems to be quite a handful right now.

No this is not a lecture, simply an observation of the questions I have been seeing and so many of the replies. The emotional sidetrack that destroys any possibility of constructive discussion is just such a dangerous animal.

My best, as always, I wish the best for all as we travel this journey.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 2 at 2015 5:23 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 02 Mar 2015 17:23:18 -0500

Netanyahu is making a rather large gamble for very little gain.

Response by GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad made Mar 3 at 2015 4:08 PM

GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad — Tue, 03 Mar 2015 16:08:41 -0500

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/netanyahu-says-us-is-on-verge-of-bad-deal-with-iran-over-nuclear-program/2015/03/03/8dbb2774-c1c8-11e4-ad5c-3b8ce89f1b89_story.html?hpid=z1

Netanyahu says U.S. is on verge of ‘bad deal’ with Iran over nuclear program

The Israeli prime minister forcefully argued that a deal to keep Iran’s nuclear ambitions in check would have the opposite effect.

Response by SGT Francis Wright made Mar 3 at 2015 4:37 PM

SGT Francis Wright — Tue, 03 Mar 2015 16:37:25 -0500

I don't think so, but those 56 Democrats will have some explaining to do to their Jewish constituents. Seventyfive percent of Jewish registered voters are Democrat. They will not appreciate the snub.

Response by GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad made Mar 3 at 2015 7:55 PM

GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad — Tue, 03 Mar 2015 19:55:53 -0500

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/decrying-insult-some-democrats-seethe-after-netanyahus-address/ar-BBibUvr

Decrying 'insult,' some Democrats seethe after Netanyahu's address

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was met with rounds of applause and repeated standing ovations Tuesday while addressing a joint meeting of Congress but make no mistake: Democrats were by no means joining in the acclaim.