Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Purveyor

(29,876 posts)
Fri Sep 14, 2012, 06:09 PM Sep 2012

Israeli Fallout

By ERIC L. LEWIS

It should go without saying, but apparently does not, that the tragic crisis unfolding in the Middle East calls for sober statesmanship rather than political posturing. The jihadist murder of the American ambassador to a newly liberated Libya; the carnage unleashed by the Assad regime on the Syrian people; the emergence of a Muslim Brotherhood regime in Egypt; the conundrum of Iranian nuclear ambitions — the region presents decades worth of complex challenges telescoped into real time.

Responding to these challenges, Mitt Romney mixes crude political theater with neocon bromides. Attacking President Obama for supposedly apologizing to Islamic radicals, he appears unable or unwilling to understand the responsibilities of a president trying to deal with a volatile situation while Americans are in harm’s way.

Romney shows no respect for diplomacy in general. He declares that “God did not create this country to be a nation of followers” and maintains that “in an American century, America leads the free world.” His surrogates repeatedly mock President Obama’s “apology tour” and his unfortunate “leading from behind” formulation on Libya. His principal advisers, John Bolton and Dan Senor, are part of a neocon hard core that opposes any policy that would diminish American sovereignty or freedom of action. Yet faced with the vexing issue of whether the Middle East should be further roiled by an Israeli attack on Iran in an attempt to stop its nuclear program, Romney is willing to outsource that decision to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Speaking earlier this week, Netanyahu said that if the Obama administration was unwilling to set fixed red lines that Iran could not cross, it “has no ‘moral right’ to restrain Israel from taking military action of its own.” The fundamental moral and political issue here, however, is whether it is the sovereign prerogative of the United States to make the decision of whether to start a regional war, a war that will certainly require American resources and may well require American troops to finish.

MORE...

http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/13/israeli-fallout/

5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Israeli Fallout (Original Post) Purveyor Sep 2012 OP
my position... a geek named Bob Sep 2012 #1
PRE-cisely! M_M Sep 2012 #4
Thank you... a geek named Bob Sep 2012 #5
Romney obviously knows nothing about the world. applegrove Sep 2012 #2
That's right “God did not create this country to be a nation of followers” rsweets Sep 2012 #3
 

a geek named Bob

(2,715 posts)
1. my position...
Fri Sep 14, 2012, 06:12 PM
Sep 2012

Israel is a free country, able to do what it wants...

Th united States is a free country, not obligated to back Israel's military actions.

rsweets

(307 posts)
3. That's right “God did not create this country to be a nation of followers”
Fri Sep 14, 2012, 07:37 PM
Sep 2012

God created this country for the native Americans ...

just so happens the Europeans showed up and screwed the pooch

..ass wipe

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»Israeli Fallout