TToI:‘"Sparks fly"’ over US policy on Iran at meeting between Netanyahu and US envoy

[Gibbsisgod2006]

They want nukes for lots of reasons. The biggest reason is that so no one can tell them what or what not to do - not even the superpower USA. That is not a good thing.

My only point is that they are not going to give nukes away to proxies. That is a scare tactic argument.

I agree

[nonniey]

Get out of the way? Aside from flying the planes themselves, America is currently getting impeding the Israeli mission how? Unless the CIA is secretly manning Iranian air defenses.

Clear a corridor? Israel would need to fly over Jordan, Saudi Arabia and or Iraq. It's the USA that is denying Israel permission to do this?

Buy the missiles somewhere else or build them yourself Israel. You've stolen enough technology over the years to do this.

Well there was one report that the US leaked that Israel had an agreement with Azairbaijan to let them refuel and rearm. Just a press report but that would be one plausible way to get in the way.

[visionary]

Interesting timing. I wonder what's up.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/stor...n-embassy.html

Canada closes embassy in Iran, expels Iranian diplomats

Canada has suspended diplomatic relations with Iran and is expelling Iranian diplomats from Canada, Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird announced in a statement today.

Speaking to reporters in Russia, where he's attending the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-Operation summit, Baird said the government is formally listing Iran today as a state sponsor of terrorism under the Justice for Victims of Terrorist Act.

"Iran is among the world's worst violators of human rights. It shelters and materially supports terrorist groups," Baird said.

In the statement, Baird said Canada has closed its embassy in Iran, effective immediately, and declared personae non gratae all remaining Iranian diplomats in Canada. Those diplomats must leave within five days. All Canadian diplomats have already left Iran.

"Canada’s position on the regime in Iran is well known. Canada views the government of Iran as the most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today," he said in the statement.

The statement cited Iran's support for the Assad regime in Syria and failure to comply with UN resolutions on its nuclear program, and its threats against Israel.

The statement also makes reference to Iran's "blatant disregard" of the Vienna Convention that guarantees the protection of diplomatic personnel.

[twa]

The last line is probably the main factor visionary...along with possible fireworks on tap

always good to watch if the diplomats start leaving in numbers or going to skeleton crews

[visionary]

The last line is probably the main factor visionary...along with possible fireworks on tap

always good to watch if the diplomats start leaving in numbers or going to skeleton crews

If you mean the protection of diplomats thing, I don't think that's anything new, those concerns were from many months ago.

[twa]

Those concerns remain and accelerate as tensions mount....history repeats if you allow it

[JMS]

Interesting timing. I wonder what's up.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/stor...n-embassy.html

I don't know if you remember or not.. But when the Irainians took over the American Embassy in Tehran in 1979 many of the Embassy people were not in the Embassy.
Those Americans went to the Canadian Embassy, which issued them Canadian Passports, and assisted them in getting out of the country.

I think this is very likely a precursor to an Israeli strike. We have no embassy in Iran, the Canadians are a likely target for retaliation given their support of us in the passed. It also makes sence the US would inform Canada that we think a strike is imminent... Canada is one of the four countries in the world which we recipricate with 100% of our intelligence assets... ( Canada, Britian, Austrailia, New Zealand ).

This coupled with us having 3 carriers off the coast of Iran is ominious.

[visionary]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...8891C920120911

U.S., Israel still at odds over Iran "red line"

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel and the United States were in talks on setting a "clear red line" for Iran's nuclear program, but the two allies remained at odds on Monday over whether to spell out a clear threshold for military action against Tehran.

The Israeli leader, who has been pressing President Barack Obama for a tougher line against Iran, again signaled that a sharper U.S. ultimatum for Tehran could deter it from developing nuclear weapons and mitigate the need for a military response.

[Thiebear]

Ronald Reagan, (1) Pro Life, (2) Anti-communist, (3)stronger on defense, (4)smaller less attrusive government, (5)deregulation, (6)pro life.
George Bush Sr, (1) Strong Foreign policy (2) Increased federal spending for childcare/ education, (3) Immigration reform (4) Against N. Korea getting the bomb.
Bill Clinton, (1) Pro choice, (2) Support for Head Start (3) fiscal restraint, (4) Era of big government done, (5) Pay as we go government.
George Bush Jr. (1) Pro Life (2) Cut taxes (3) Increase Military Spending (4) No Child Left Behind

Edit: Thiebear:
Barack Obama (1)HealthCare (2) Stimulus-Infrastructure (3)Don't Ask/Don't Tell gone (4) Drones-everywhere (5) No work requirement (6) Green companies
Romney (1) Supposed to be after they are elected?

[visionary]

https://twitter.com/pdanahar

Former IDF Major Gen told me "The American 'No' [to bombing Iran] is now presented in a way that [the Israeli PM] cannot really ignore it"
2:01 AM

Former Major Gen in israel's IDF told me some current not just former members of Israeli security establishment are reluctant to bomb Iran
2:13 AM

Former IDF Major Gen said PM believes in bombing #iran but doesn't have full support of IDF or Israelis so lacks 'the political capacity'
2:27 AM

[twa]

http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-e...emium-1.464278
Netanyahu: Those that refuse to set red lines for Iran can't give Israel red light
Netanyahu launches unprecedented attack on U.S. government; U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta says if Iran decides to make a nuclear weapon, the U.S. would have a little more than a year to stop it.

[JMS]

https://twitter.com/pdanahar

There is no consensus on bombing Iran even among Israeli national security officers.
The United States is telling BiBi it's counter productive, hurts his overall security, don't do it. Maybe even there will be repercussions if you do it. (hollow threat from a President in a tough re-election fight).

None of that matters. If BiBi thinks it's in Israel's interest, Israel will do it.

[twa]

None of that matters. If BiBi thinks it's in Israel's interest, Israel will do it.

yep
what is the downside to a redline? ....w/o a clear limit the imagination gets overactive

[JMS]

yep
what is the downside to a redline? ....w/o a clear limit the imagination gets overactive

Flexibility, credibility, control over your foreign policy... are all things which could be a concern in setting an arbitrary red line in the sand.

Oh here is a new developemnt..

White House declines Netanyahu request to meet with ObamaThe

White House's response marks a new low in relations between Netanyahu and Obama, underscored by the fact that this is the first time Netanyahu will visit the U.S. as prime minister without meeting Obama.
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomac...emium-1.464328

This is the kind of thing which really sends shock waves through Israel's political system. When their prime minster is not welcomed at the white house it really makes people follow what's going on . I think Netanyahoo has been treated like this by several presidents including Bush Sr, and Clinton. Maybe Reagan too.

[twa]

Flexibility, credibility, control over your foreign policy... are all things which could be a concern in setting an arbitrary red line in the sand.

I think the flexibility part is what is bothering Bibi, that they will flex into a nuclear power.

You don't think there can be a credible red line?

He has already committed to preventing Iran from going nuclear....unless he flexes or evolves