How myopic and irrational is this.....

[TXduckdog]

"The Iranians have a point," said one senior administration official. "The U.S. can't forever be the enforcer of a double standard where Israel gets a nuclear free ride but Iran has to abide by every letter in the NPT. President Obama has put the issue of nuclear disarmament at the center of his foreign policy agenda. His credibility is at stake and so is U.S. credibility in the Muslim world. How can we tell Tehran that they're better off without nukes if we won't make the same point to our Israeli friends?"


With this rationale.....why is there any problem with Korea launching missles? If this guy doesn't know the strategic difference between Iran and Israel...then this admin really is clueless when it comes to foreign policy.

This statement on the heels of the US voting "here", actually abstaining from a UN Security Council vote on the resolution calling for a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East. It also demands that Israel sign the 1970 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and submit its nuclear facilities to international inspection. Two similar, albeit nonbinding, resolutions were approved last September by the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna.

The result.....relations between the Obama administration and the government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, never warm to begin with, have cooled dramatically.

Mr. Netanyahu also provoked the administration's ire after he was inadvertently caught on an open microphone calling Mr. Obama "worse than Chamberlain." The comment followed the president's historic Dec. 21 summit meeting with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Geneva, the first time leaders of the two countries have met since the Carter administration.

Also factoring into the administration's thinking are reports that the Israelis are in the final stages of planning an attack on Iran's nuclear installations. Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who met with his Israeli counterpart Ehud Barak in Paris last week, has been outspoken in his opposition to such a strike. The Jerusalem Post has reported that Mr. Gates warned Mr. Barak that the U.S. would "actively stand in the way" of any Israeli strike.

So here we are....The U.S. abstention is sending shock waves through the international community, which has long been accustomed to the U.S. acting as Israel's de facto protector on the Council. It also appears to reverse a decades-old understanding between Washington and Tel Aviv that the U.S. would acquiesce in Israel's nuclear arsenal as long as that arsenal remained undeclared. The Jewish state is believed to possess as many as 200 weapons.

[road kill]

"The Iranians have a point," said one senior administration official. "The U.S. can't forever be the enforcer of a double standard where Israel gets a nuclear free ride but Iran has to abide by every letter in the NPT. President Obama has put the issue of nuclear disarmament at the center of his foreign policy agenda. His credibility is at stake and so is U.S. credibility in the Muslim world. How can we tell Tehran that they're better off without nukes if we won't make the same point to our Israeli friends?"


With this rationale.....why is there any problem with Korea launching missles? If this guy doesn't know the strategic difference between Iran and Israel...then this admin really is clueless when it comes to foreign policy.

This statement on the heels of the US voting "here", actually abstaining from a UN Security Council vote on the resolution calling for a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East. It also demands that Israel sign the 1970 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and submit its nuclear facilities to international inspection. Two similar, albeit nonbinding, resolutions were approved last September by the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna.

The result.....relations between the Obama administration and the government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, never warm to begin with, have cooled dramatically.

Mr. Netanyahu also provoked the administration's ire after he was inadvertently caught on an open microphone calling Mr. Obama "worse than Chamberlain." The comment followed the president's historic Dec. 21 summit meeting with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Geneva, the first time leaders of the two countries have met since the Carter administration.

Also factoring into the administration's thinking are reports that the Israelis are in the final stages of planning an attack on Iran's nuclear installations. Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who met with his Israeli counterpart Ehud Barak in Paris last week, has been outspoken in his opposition to such a strike. The Jerusalem Post has reported that Mr. Gates warned Mr. Barak that the U.S. would "actively stand in the way" of any Israeli strike.

So here we are....The U.S. abstention is sending shock waves through the international community, which has long been accustomed to the U.S. acting as Israel's de facto protector on the Council. It also appears to reverse a decades-old understanding between Washington and Tel Aviv that the U.S. would acquiesce in Israel's nuclear arsenal as long as that arsenal remained undeclared. The Jewish state is believed to possess as many as 200 weapons.

Here is an idea that would fit the current scheme, take all the NUKES away from those that have them and redistribute them to tose that need them!!

Just sayin'......




Now....if that doesn't make at least 1 of you laugh, I give!!

[Julie R.]

Here is an idea that would fit the current scheme, take all the NUKES away from those that have them and redistribute them to tose that need them!!

Just sayin'......




Now....if that doesn't make at least 1 of you laugh, I give!!

Genius!!

[JDogger]

You were right. You got one laugh.

RK's plan for nuclear weapons;



Great idea!

[Franco]

Here is an idea that would fit the current scheme, take all the NUKES away from those that have them and redistribute them to tose that need them!!

Just sayin'......

Hard to laugh when this is exactly what Obama is doing, with his naive approach to disarmament.

As I've said before, the Isralis know they can no longer count on us for support. Rev Wright is fiercly anti-Israil and pro-Islam. The same Islam that wants to see all Americans dead. Much of the black community is anti Jew and pro Muslim.

Why would Obama be any different?

[ducknwork]

Much of the black community is anti Jew and pro Muslim.

Why would Obama be any different?

Because he's half white?

I know, I know...it's a shot in the dark, but it's all we have...
________
Iolite portable vaporizer

[Bob Gutermuth]

If six million of my people had been slaughtered in death camps, I would want nukes too. Never again. Ahmanutjob's country hasn't the history of such a slaughter.

[Richard Halstead]

Because he's half white?

I know, I know...it's a shot in the dark, but it's all we have...

In Maui they would say hapa half and half.

[JDogger]

If six million of my people had been slaughtered in death camps, I would want nukes too. Never again. Ahmanutjob's country hasn't the history of such a slaughter.

Well, not since Alexander, even if it was not 6 mil. Of course the CIA and the Shah mighta left a bad taste too.

JD

[BonMallari]

Here is an idea that would fit the current scheme, take all the NUKES away from those that have them and redistribute them to tose that need them!!

Just sayin'......




Now....if that doesn't make at least 1 of you laugh, I give!!

I love it ....now they can redistribute them over Iran, maybe one in the Mts of Pakistan,or one in Hugo Chavez lap...we will even arm it free of charge..lets send one to Putin while we are at it.....J/K folks dont get your shorts into a wad, nuclear proliferation could mean the end of the world..the next one wherever it lands could be the beginning of Armegeddon and that is not a joke