ED:
Thanks anyway.

Correction: the link for that is this:

http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2009/03/netanyahu_threatens_attack_on_iran_in_months.php

Also this:

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200903u/netanyahu

Want to know why the US can’t get out of Iraq any time soon?

Because we have to stay there to cover Israel’s ass while it bombs Iran (or bomb Iran ourselves, of course, with US-occupied Iraq as a staging ground, full of US soldiers who will be sacrificed in order to shield dear little Israel, by bearing the brunt of any Iranian retaliation). The latest Israeli threat came in the course of an interview with incoming Israeli PM Netanyahu:

In an interview conducted shortly before he was sworn in today as prime minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu laid down a challenge for Barack Obama. The American president, he said, must stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons—and quickly—or an imperiled Israel may be forced to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities itself. […]

Neither Netanyahu nor his principal military advisers would suggest a deadline for American progress on the Iran nuclear program, though one aide said pointedly that Israeli time lines are now drawn in months, “not years.”

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article2827787.ece

re: By rfidler, April 11 at 11:19 pm:

Yet again you have shifted yourself to another argument and are pretending that this has been your argument all along. I have officially stopped caring what you claim to think.

Ed:
You say, “It is enough that Israel and its lobby have been threatening this war.”

All I’m asking you to do is prove that that simple statement is true. For instance, can you cite a quote from an AIPAC lobbyist to that effect? All I’m saying is that simply making the statement does not make it true, any more than George Bush simply making the statement that Iraq had WMDs made that true.

Please, assume I’m dense and take it one step at a time.

Re:By rfidler, April 11 at 9:09 pm #

Rfidler writes:

“And, you can’t say, “It is not up to me to show why the Israelis may think this is necessary,” then accuse me of not arguing in good faith. It IS necessary for you to support your agrument so we can go on from there.”

Now I doubt that you are up to this, frankly. It is enough that Israel and its lobby have been threatening this war. It doesn’t matter why (officially or unofficially) they want it, or whether they are correctly conceiving their own interests in pushing for it.  My argument is only dependent on the fact that they ARE threatening war against Iran and propagandizing for it. My argument does not depend in any way on why they think this is a good idea. If you can’t see that, then you are simply too dense.

Ed:

Wait. I really want to understand you. But your last post was akin to the “Who’s on first?” routine. Way too many double negatives for me to follow.

And, you can’t say, “It is not up to me to show why the Israelis may think this is necessary,” then accuse me of not arguing in good faith. It IS necessary for you to support your agrument so we can go on from there.

re: By rfidler, April 11 at 4:21 pm:

•Rfidler writes:

“So, then, merely making the charge that Israel pulls so many strings is all that is necessary to make it true.”

Rfidler, your previous replies did not question the strength of Israel’s political clout in the US. You tried to deny only that Israel would want or need the US to stay in Iraq for the reasons I stated.

Since I have shown your denial of this much to be without merit, you now switch to denying that Israel has sufficient political influence.

Furthermore, you now pretend that this was what you were denying in the first place, and you fault me for having made arguments which failed to refute what you weren’t saying.

You do not argue in good faith. Good day.

Ed:

So, then, merely making the charge that Israel pulls so many strings is all that is necessary to make it true.

Thanks for clearing this up.

re: By rfidler, April 11 at 2:02 pm #

Rfidler writes:

• “Explain why Israel feels it necessary to bomb Iran.”

It is not up to me to show why the Israelis may think this is necessary. But it is indisputable that Israel is threatening to do this. Whether they really want or intend to do it, or only want to be able to threaten credibly to do it, they need the US in Iraq in either case. Of course, the Israelis would like even better for the US to do it for Israel - an option that is also made easier and more credible while the US is occupying Iraq.

Rfidler writes:

• “It’s also a geographical fact that Israel would have to cross Syria, Jordan, and/or Saudi Arabia to get to Iran. Why aren’t we occupying those countries as well?”

Jordan, which is a US/Israeli dependent client state, would not interfere, and that would be sufficient in addition to US-occupied Iraq for safe overflight, especially given that the US still has some military units based in Saudi Arabia.

Rfidler writes: 

• “Israel had no trouble bombing the Natanz nuke facility in Iraq before we got there. Their biggest problem would be Iranian anti-aircraft defenses.”

That has little bearing on this case. The bombing of many sites in Iran via overflight of Iraq is a far greater undertaking. Even if it be possible for Israel to do this by overflying a hostile Iraq on the way there and back, it is obviously far easier for Israel to do this, or at least to continue credibly threatening to do this, while the US is in Iraq.

Rfidler writes: 

• “And I take it you don’t believe Obama and Maliki when they say that ALL US forces will be out of Iraq by the end of 2011.”

It does seem doubtful, unless Obama begins to show more backbone in resisting Israel’s dictates.

Ed:

Explain why Israel feels it necessary to bomb Iran.

It’s also a geographical fact that Israel would have to cross Syria, Jordan, and/or Saudi Arabia to get to Iran. Why aren’t we occupying those countries as well?

Israel had no trouble bombing the Natanz nuke facility in Iraq before we got there. Their biggest problem would be Iranian anti-aircraft defenses.

And I take it you don’t believe Obama and Maliki when they say that ALL US forces will be out of Iraq by the end of 2011.

No tin hat indeed.

By rfidler, April 11 at 11:49 am:

Rfidler, no tin foil hat is required, only an ability to put together a few salient facts.

It is a matter of public record that Israel continues to threaten to bomb Iran, and that these threats are intensifying now that Netanyahu is in power.

It is a matter of geographical fact that Israel would need to overfly Iraq in order to carry out the bombing.

It is a fact that Israel could not do this were the US military not occupying Iraq.

And it is a matter of fact that Israel’s devotees in the US have the political clout to make sure that the US occupation of Iraq continues as long as the Israeli government deems this necessary for Israel’s “security” interests, as Israel grandly defines them.

Ed Harges:
Where can I get one of your tin foil hats?

Israel needs to overfly Iraq if and when it undertakes its bombing of Iran. American troops have to be in Iraq to make sure Israeli planes can safely fly over on their way to incinerate tens of thousands of innocent Persians.

Also, American troops have to be in Iraq (and the Persian Gulf) to protect Israel from Iranian retaliation, and to fight the full-blown regional or world war that would quickly develop. These are two very big reasons that the most powerful lobby in Washington, indeed the most powerful force in American politics, will not let us leave Iraq.

If Obama really, all of a sudden, really REALLY made it clear that we’re going to get completely out of Iraq, and fast, how long do you think the Mossad would allow him to continue to live?

It would be so easy to make it look like some lone, crazy, racist Goy from Idaho did it, now wouldn’t it?

Jason!!: You go guy!

Paracelsus: Workers who actually produce sweat on their brows don’t earn enough to pay income taxes, so not to worry. We need to get rid of the collossally regressive payroll tax. Now THAT would be helpful. And wrong- everybody knows the IRS is incorporated in Cuba! “Look it up.”

NYCartist:
The Emperor of Japan looked out his window and saw a beautiful mushroom cloud and exclaimed, “Now THAT’S art! I want peace NOW!” Wish away Dorothy, Kansas is out there somewhere. You want peace, carry a big stick.

BlueEagle: Spot on!

How about:
“An American taxpayer closing his eyes and wishing that the government would stop funding GM and the United Nations.”

From AP - Major war-funding legislation while Barack Obama was in the Senate, and how he voted:

_May 2005: Congress approved an $82 billion bill to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and international anti-terrorism efforts. Obama voted yes.

_June 2006: Congress cleared a $94.5 billion bill to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as provide aid to hurricane victims. Obama voted yes.

_September 2006: Congress cleared a $448 billion Pentagon funding bill that included $70 billion for U.S. military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama voted yes.

_April 2007: Congress cleared a $124 billion spending bill that provided $90 billion for war costs but mandated the withdrawal of U.S. troops within six months. Obama voted yes, but President George W. Bush vetoed the legislation.

_May 2007: Congress approved a roughly $100 billion spending measure to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and domestic projects, including hurricane relief. Obama voted no.

_December 2007: Congress cleared a $555 billion catchall spending bill that included $70 billion for U.S. military action in Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama did not vote.

_June 2008: Congress approved a measure to spend $162 billion for war costs as well as provide a 13-week extension of unemployment benefits and emergency relief for the flood-ravaged Midwest. Obama voted yes.

Obama = One Big Ass Mistake America!

I’d say quit paying income tax anyway. Americans aren’t being represented, and I don’t see why working people should pay income taxes off their money wages earned by the sweat of the brow.

It’s a total scam. Why pay a corporation that is incorporated in Puerto Rico? That’s right the IRS is incorporated in PR. Also why pay income taxes if your income doesn’t derive from foreign sources or the US government? Look it up. You are only supposed to pay income taxes if you are a foreign agent, work for a foreign corporation or derive your income from foreign sources. I tried to find the IRS law for US citizens but I could not find it.

A wishingwell would work well,too.  I wish some were wishing, and some were actually fishing for peace by doing the things that it will take to get peace, such as demonstrations, civil disobedience (by the brave), art, and ?  What suggestions would others make?

Americans do not pay taxes to fund wars. Most Americans pay taxes to avoid jail. Paying personal income tax is just like a pay-off to the mafia. You pay them off and they leave you alone until the next year.

Besides personal income tax just pays interest in the debt. Other countries like China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, etc. funded the recent wars.

Major Foreign Holders of Treasury Securities
http://www.treas.gov/tic/mfh.txt