I/P: post-semitism in the desert of the deal

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > I/P: post-semitism in the desert of the deal

Buffer: May 6, 2007; I sometimes turn down sex and blowjobs from my girlfriend because I'm too busy posting in D&D. PS: She used my credit card to pay for this.

Why would anyone assume Clinton would walk it back? The Clintons aren't exactly fans of Bibi or Likud(I mean hell, Camp David and the '96 elections), and if the distinction has been drawn between supporting the Israeli government and supporting Israel I see no reason why Hillary wouldn't continue an Obama policy of putting the screws to him.

# ? Mar 22, 2015 14:30

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 5, 2024 14:11

Darth Walrus: Feb 13, 2012

Buffer posted:

Why would anyone assume Clinton would walk it back? The Clintons aren't exactly fans of Bibi or Likud(I mean hell, Camp David and the '96 elections), and if the distinction has been drawn between supporting the Israeli government and supporting Israel I see no reason why Hillary wouldn't continue an Obama policy of putting the screws to him.

As I recall, Hillary is a lot more sympathetic to Israel and Netanyahu than Bill (though in the second case, that's because Boll loving loathed Bibi).

# ? Mar 22, 2015 14:35

Forums Terrorist: Dec 8, 2011

Don't worry, I'm sure Bibi is insufferable enough that in six months Hillary will hate his guts too. :v:

# ? Mar 22, 2015 15:25

Mc Do Well: Aug 2, 2008; by FactsAreUseless

The Insect Court posted:

lol

Would have been interesting to see the usual suspects spin a Herzog victory and a ruling coalition that included the Joint List. They would have scrambled to figure out how to say 'Uncle Tom' in Arabic.

or, y'know, we would be excited about the Israeli people rejecting Bibi and the siege mentality. But that isn't what happened.

# ? Mar 22, 2015 15:34

Peel: Dec 3, 2007

Would have been interesting to see the usual suspects spin a Herzog victory and a ruling coalition that included the Joint List. They would have scrambled to figure out how to rage about the corruption of the government by the mud people without getting banned. This would definitely have happened, and is certainly not silly conjecture.

# ? Mar 22, 2015 15:42

Main Paineframe: Oct 27, 2010

Buffer posted:

Why would anyone assume Clinton would walk it back? The Clintons aren't exactly fans of Bibi or Likud(I mean hell, Camp David and the '96 elections), and if the distinction has been drawn between supporting the Israeli government and supporting Israel I see no reason why Hillary wouldn't continue an Obama policy of putting the screws to him.

Because she doesn't want to be a one-term president? Aside from the fact that seven out of ten Americans support Israel, there are a number of very wealthy donors in the Democratic camp who happen to wholeheartedly support Israel, and although Hillary has carefully stayed out of the current squabbles, its known that she's been courting those donors with precisely-calibrated pro-Israel statements. Let's not forget how much Obama's policies changed as soon as he had absolutely nothing left to lose politically.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6278360

quote:

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton presented herself as both a staunch defender of Israel’s security and a supporter of continued negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program in a wide-ranging conversation about foreign policy Friday.

“The relationship between the United States and Israel is solid, and will remain solid, and will be part of our foreign policy and our domestic concerns, our values, ideals, forever,” Clinton said in response to a question about the sometimes fractiousrelationship between President Barack Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. She called the relationship between the two countries "mature" and said differences between the two leaders were "honest."

Clinton spoke at an intimate dinner at the eleventh annual Saban Forum, with billionaire Israeli-American media and entertainment mogul Haim Saban. His forum, in partnership with the Brookings Institution, brings together government officials, policymakers and business leaders each year. Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, have made regular appearances at the Saban Forum, which isn’t surprising given that the billionaire has donated millions to the Clintons' philanthropic foundation and was a key player in her first presidential campaign.

As Clinton inches closer to a possible bid for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination, her sit-down with Saban allowed her to stress her support for Israel in front of a crowd filled with members of Netanyahu’snow-dissolving coalition government, as well as leaders of the opposition parties.

Saban has said that he is willing to give “as much as needed” to get Clinton elected and that he would “pitch in with full might” because her presidency is a “big dream” of his. Yet Clinton's conversation with Saban avoided directly addressing the 2016 question, as the two coyly danced around the subject by talking about her new grandchild.

The billionaire, who was born in Israel and calls himself a “one-issue guy” when it comes to his politics, has said that he considers a nuclear Iran “an existential danger” to Israel. He is, however, less conservative than one of his billionaire political donor counterparts, casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, and has voiced his support for a Palestinian state.

Clinton, who received flack at 2012’s Saban forum for saying that Israel had displayed a “lack of generosity” and a “lack of empathy” toward Palestinians, reiterated her support for a two-state solution to the conflict, but avoided chastising Israel for West Bank settlement construction, as she has in the past.

“There is a necessary imperative to continue to try to achieve a resolution between Israel and the Palestinians,” she said. “The two state solution … remains an important and, I would argue, essential concept to bring people together around.”

Israel’s government will go to elections next year in an especially fraught period for the stalled peace process. Clinton acknowledged those tensions for those in the room, and beyond, who maintain that Israel cannot relinquish its occupation of the West Bank for security reasons.

“Now I’m well aware of everything going on and the increasing tensions in the region, in Israel, in the West Bank to say nothing of the continuing aggressive behavior from Hamas coming out of Gaza,” she said. “But the absence of negotiations leaves a vacuum that gets filled by problems, bad actors, threats, other kinds of behavior that are not good for Israel and not good for the Palestinians.”

In November, Saban said President Barack Obama had “shown too many carrots and a very small stick” in his administration’s dealings with Iran, and voiced support for legislation that would require Obama to gain congressional approval for any nuclear deal.

Over the last year, Clinton has begun to strike a more cautious tone in her discussions of nuclear negotiations. Though she asked the Senate not to impose new sanctions on Iran in February, she said in May that she was “personally skeptical that the Iranians would follow through and deliver” on a nuclear deal and that “every other option does remain on the table” if negotiations fall apart. Now that the negotiations have been extended for another seven months, Clinton said they should be allowed to continue.

“I think its a very important effort to continue to pursue and to see if we can reach an agreement that’s in line with our requirements,” she said, after she explained, as she has in the past, that the United States must be “clear in any deal of what the consequences would be of any violation, and that would include, as we say, keeping all options on the table.”

Clinton said the nuclear program isn’t “the only problem we have with Iran.”

“Iran’s sponsorship of terrorism, Iran’s support for [Syrian President Bashar] Assad and the havoc that that has wreaked, support for Hezbollah, the continuing pressure on providing arms to Hamas and so much else that it engages in in the region that causes great concern to Israel, our Arab partners in the gulf, that’s all part of the ongoing challenge that Iran poses,” she said.

Despite the tensions, Clinton invoked the words of the former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill to make her case that it was worth staying the diplomatic course.

“Better to jaw-jaw than to war-war,” she said, paraphrasing Churchill.

# ? Mar 22, 2015 15:47

Kim Jong Il: Aug 16, 2003

Peel posted:

Would have been interesting to see the usual suspects spin a Herzog victory and a ruling coalition that included the Joint List. They would have scrambled to figure out how to rage about the corruption of the government by the mud people without getting banned. This would definitely have happened, and is certainly not silly conjecture.

True, but don't discount the anger against Arab "collaborationists" which is already in this very thread, and on Electronic Intifada calling Odeh a Marxist Jew-loving traitor.

# ? Mar 22, 2015 16:00

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

DaveWoo posted:

Obama speaks about Israel/Netanyahu:

Gotta admit, that's quite a bit harsher than I expected him to say publicly.

Holy poo poo that's basically everything I hoped he would say. Not letting Netanyahu flop back to the two-state line, not ruling out letting the UN recognize the state of Palestine, and specifically calling out Bibi's "Arabs are voting in droves" line. (Yeah, I can see why that would make Obama super pissed, change "Arab" to "Black" and you get something that's very familiar to Obama in US politics.)

Elotana posted:

Bennett to Bibi: "Hey rear end in a top hat we all speak English"

http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Po...an-state-394595

Oh this is hilarious. :allears:

Bibi's definitely stuck between a rock and a hard place now. I honestly think he might just go back to saying the two-state solution is dead since it's obvious Obama isn't letting him walk that one back. It's basically the truth and it's probably what Bibi actually believes anyway.

# ? Mar 22, 2015 17:18

Zeroisanumber: Oct 23, 2010; Nap Ghost

Buffer posted:

Why would anyone assume Clinton would walk it back? The Clintons aren't exactly fans of Bibi or Likud(I mean hell, Camp David and the '96 elections), and if the distinction has been drawn between supporting the Israeli government and supporting Israel I see no reason why Hillary wouldn't continue an Obama policy of putting the screws to him.

Don't forget that even the relatively mild anti-Israel/pro-Palestinian stance that people on this thread take represents a fairly small minority of US opinion. Most people who aren't at all fluent in the issues will take a reflexively pro-Israel stance simply because their government and culture seem more like ours, because they're fighting "terrorists" and because they have an extremely astute, successful, and deep-pocketed PR team working 24/7 to maintain that good opinion. That means that absent any other factor, a good 60% of the voters are going to have nebulously good feelings towards Israel.

Think of it this way: All that Obama's done so far is to specifically rebuke Netanyahu after he shat on Obama's front porch and then said some flat-out racist poo poo and said there'd be no two state solution under his watch. And yet we all treated it like a watershed moment because an open criticism of Israel by an American executive is stunningly rare.

# ? Mar 22, 2015 17:29

Fuck You And Diebold: Sep 15, 2004; by Athanatos

fade5 posted:

specifically calling out Bibi's "Arabs are voting in droves" line. (Yeah, I can see why that would make Obama super pissed, change "Arab" to "Black" and you get something that's very familiar to Obama in US politics.)

You don't need to change anything to recreate Obama's experience with the Republicans.

# ? Mar 22, 2015 18:25

SNAKES N CAKES: Sep 6, 2005; DAVID GAIDER
Lead Writer

Party statements on the first day of consultations:

quote:

ZU: MK Eitan Cabel told Rivlin that party leader Isaac Herzog is the right man to lead at this time, but that he will do so from the opposition. "We will lead the opposition headed by Herzog," he said. "There is no doubt the Zionist Union scored an impressive achievement, but unfortunately the prime minister's achievement was greater."

Likud: "Likud, as the largest party with 30 Knesset seats, must hold onto not just key positions in the diplomatic and defense arenas, but also key social portfolios so as to best be able to address all of the issues we promised to during the campaign," said Levin. He added that a stable coalition that can govern for four years must be formed without delay.

Erdan addressed the controversy over Netanyahu's remarks about the number of Arabs headed to the polls, saying, "We spoke to the president about our obligation to minorities, and we regret the incorrect interpretation of Netanyahu's comments. Israel is a democratic state, everyone knows that. We are proud of that and of the fact that the Central Elections Committee chairman is an Arab judge."
Levin, meanwhile, said he "regretted that the Arab population in Israel largely chose to support a list that conceded in advance its part in decision-making. Despite this, we are committed to creating a government that will care for all of Israel's citizens."

Arabs: Joint List chairman Ayman Odeh told Rivlin he does not recommend Netanyahu form the next government. When pressed, he and MK Jamal Zahalka said they would consider supporting Zionist Union chairman Isaac Herzog if Rivlin asks him to forge a coalition.

Habayit Hayehudi: "It is important for us to determine, first of all, that the government's guidelines match the ideology of Habayit Hayehudi and will include the 'NGO transparency law,' regulation of construction in Judea and Samaria [the West Bank] and development in the Golan."

Shas: "Throughout this campaign we have said we would recommend Netanyahu and we are recommending Netanyahu. Prime Minister Netanyahu also knows that our condition for joining the government is agreeing to our socioeconomic plan."

UTJ: United Torah Judaism chairman Yaakov Litzman and MKs Moshe Gafni and Meir Porush rejected [the president's proposal to join a coalition with Yesh Atid]. Gafni said that there are parties they would refuse to join in the coalition. Litzman conditioned the party's joining a unity government on advance knowledge of its members. "Lapid humiliated us and hit us," he said. "There is no reason for us to be friends. You wouldn't want friends like that and neither would I."

Litzman earlier told Rivlin that his party would recommend Netanyahu for prime minister. "It's no secret we endured two very difficult years with the previous government," he said. "In addition to the damage to religious issues, there was also harm done to the weak and to the child stipends. We hope the next government is more socially minded."

Litzman added that he hopes to be able to "help the weak and the outer regions of the country, and that the government lasts for a full term. That doesn�t go without saying."

Looking pretty good for Bibi so far.

# ? Mar 22, 2015 18:35

Absurd Alhazred: Mar 27, 2010; by Athanatos

Duckbag posted:

I thought the multiple football comparisons were especially telling.

The sort of people who would consider voting for their elected representatives to be analogous to cheering for their team are not what I'd call informed or conscientious citizens.

I will say that my feelings about these elections resembled nothing more than cheering for a sports team. There is something beyond reason about it, the completely irrational hope that Netanyahu will be humiliated, the disappointment after the results were tallied... still, I do have enough detachment to understand the difference between my emotional state and what is politically at stake (and between what would have increased, however slightly, the chances of a non-Netanyahu coalition, vs. what I thought was the better vote to make), but a lot of people just don't work at that level.

Doflamingo posted:

Back to the Israeli elections for a sec: did we talk about Herzog offering Kachlon everything but the kitchen sink, up to and including rotation as PM? Because holy poo poo.

What!? Where?

# ? Mar 22, 2015 18:36

emanresu tnuocca: Sep 2, 2011; by Athanatos

Do any of you syrian civil war nerds have links to some comprehensive resources concerning Al Nusra Front and their cooperation with the IDF in the golan? Preferably some that contain more conclusive evidence than only the iran press tv photos (which validity I do not doubt particularly given the ~~secret~~ arrest of the Druze correspondent who took those photos but nonetheless are less useful to me given their Iranian source), that the IDF is aiding Syrian rebels is not a secret by any means but I'd be interested in anything that demonstrates that demonstrates that those 'freedom fighters' we're aiding are in fact Al Qaeda affiliates.

# ? Mar 22, 2015 19:16

Volkerball: Oct 15, 2009; by FactsAreUseless

emanresu tnuocca posted:

Do any of you syrian civil war nerds have links to some comprehensive resources concerning Al Nusra Front and their cooperation with the IDF in the golan? Preferably some that contain more conclusive evidence than only the iran press tv photos (which validity I do not doubt particularly given the ~~secret~~ arrest of the Druze correspondent who took those photos but nonetheless are less useful to me given their Iranian source), that the IDF is aiding Syrian rebels is not a secret by any means but I'd be interested in anything that demonstrates that demonstrates that those 'freedom fighters' we're aiding are in fact Al Qaeda affiliates.

Here's a story from al-Monitor that relies pretty heavily on testimony from activists on the ground. To me it's come off as one of those conspiracy theories that often turn out true in the Middle East in a way they can't anywhere else.

http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2015/01/syria-opposition-daraa-israel-communication-nusra.html

Also a reminder, if we held Obama to his campaign rhetoric, the US supports a unified Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. This is just dumb politics poo poo.

# ? Mar 22, 2015 20:26

Xander77: Apr 6, 2009; Fuck it then. For another pit sandwich and some 'tater salad, I'll post a few more.

Duckbag posted:

I thought the multiple football comparisons were especially telling.

The sort of people who would consider voting for their elected representatives to be analogous to cheering for their team are not what I'd call informed or conscientious citizens.

Well, like a lot of non-American sports, there's an interweaving between being athletics and political activity. There are still a lot of "the laborers of area X" teams around... and alternately, "Betar" generally identifies with Mizrahis, the right-wing and anti-Arab sentiments.

If you don't feel like digging into that sort of convoluted history, you may go with the obvious "sports, hah" nerd gambit and compare to the Byzantine White/Blue/Greens.

Volkerball posted:

Here's a story from al-Monitor that relies pretty heavily on testimony from activists on the ground. To me it's come off as one of those conspiracy theories that often turn out true in the Middle East in a way they can't anywhere else.

http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2015/01/syria-opposition-daraa-israel-communication-nusra.html

Eh. "My enemies are working with the Zionist entity" is the drunk gay black baby slur-de-jour of the Middle East. Sure, it's probably true at some point, if only due to sheer statistical probability, but still.

# ? Mar 22, 2015 20:27

Volkerball: Oct 15, 2009; by FactsAreUseless

Xander77 posted:

Well, like a lot of non-American sports, there's an interweaving between being athletics and political activity. There are still a lot of "the laborers of area X" teams around... and alternately, "Betar" generally identifies with Mizrahis, the right-wing and anti-Arab sentiments.

If you don't feel like digging into that sort of convoluted history, you may go with the obvious "sports, hah" nerd gambit and compare to the Byzantine White/Blue/Greens.
Eh. "My enemies are working with the Zionist entity" is the drunk gay black baby slur-de-jour of the Middle East. Sure, it's probably true at some point, if only due to sheer statistical probability, but still.

Don't get me wrong, Assad and his supporters have been been making baseless accusations about the protesters and opposition being backed by Israel since forever. But ever since JaN made gains along the Golan Heights, there's been some suspicious activity.

# ? Mar 22, 2015 20:36

Darth Walrus: Feb 13, 2012

SNAKES N CAKES posted:

Party statements on the first day of consultations:

Looking pretty good for Bibi so far.

Sauce?

# ? Mar 22, 2015 20:37

SNAKES N CAKES: Sep 6, 2005; DAVID GAIDER
Lead Writer

Darth Walrus posted:

Sauce?

http://www.haaretz.com/news/israel-election-2015/1.648205

# ? Mar 22, 2015 20:40

emanresu tnuocca: Sep 2, 2011; by Athanatos

It seems, given the recorded activities of both the IDF and JaN on both sides of the golan that this little conspiracy theory is fast approaching the point where it's pretty difficult to claim it is a mere conspiracy theory. Unless there's some other rebel force which is completly anonymous to all western observers that seems to be occupying the exact same positions JaN are and fighting regime forces at the exact same time. I mean, who the gently caress are we helping in syria if not the guys who are sitting directly on the border crossing. There's also that story about the captured UN peace keepers who seem to have been released after the Sauds iirc ransomed, unmolested and unharmed, you'd think most scary al Qaeda affiliates would be a little more ruthless unless they had a good reason to try to be civil? (that last part is some conspiracy theory thinking, won't deny that).

I also recall a recent article about JaN disassociating themselves from AQ which seems to support this little conspiracy theory.

Good article Volkerball, thanks.

# ? Mar 22, 2015 20:40

New Division: Jun 23, 2004; I beg to present to you as a Christmas gift, Mr. Lombardi, the city of Detroit.

Nusra did not end up disassociating from Al-Qadea, though the rumor was that Qatar really would like them to so they can more openly fund them.

Nusra might eventually sever official ties at some point though, I think. I don't think their ideology would change at all, but they seem to be more pragmatic than your average jihadi group.

# ? Mar 22, 2015 20:46

Absurd Alhazred: Mar 27, 2010; by Athanatos

I don't think it's been mentioned in this thread, but two Israeli artists associated with the left have been in the news recently: Yehonatan Gefen was actually assaulted in his home while Ahinoam Nini was merely threatened, with the offenders citing Geffen's treatment as an example.

It may be a coincidence, but I had the dubious pleasure of watching a right-wing "satire" show called "Everything Is Under Judicial Review" (הכל שפיט, a term associated with former chief of Israel's High Court, Aharon Barak, who is hated by the right for allegedly overstating the authority of that court): there a stand-in for BDS activist artists, Amy Boycott, cited Ahinoam Nini as the only actual name of a Jewish friend she could come up with.

# ? Mar 22, 2015 20:49

Volkerball: Oct 15, 2009; by FactsAreUseless

emanresu tnuocca posted:

Unless there's some other rebel force which is completly anonymous to all western observers that seems to be occupying the exact same positions JaN are and fighting regime forces at the exact same time. I mean, who the gently caress are we helping in syria if not the guys who are sitting directly on the border crossing.

Quneitra was originally taken in a joint operation, and the south is enough of a jigsaw to provide deniability. Ahrar al-Sham, the FSA, and the SRF are all active around there, not to mention the hundreds of little groups with shifting alliances.

# ? Mar 22, 2015 20:56

President Kucinich: Feb 21, 2003; Bitterly Clinging to my AK47 and Das Kapital

Absurd Alhazred posted:

I don't think it's been mentioned in this thread, but two Israeli artists associated with the left have been in the news recently: Yehonatan Gefen was actually assaulted in his home while Ahinoam Nini was merely threatened, with the offenders citing Geffen's treatment as an example.

It may be a coincidence, but I had the dubious pleasure of watching a right-wing "satire" show called "Everything Is Under Judicial Review" (הכל שפיט, a term associated with former chief of Israel's High Court, Aharon Barak, who is hated by the right for allegedly overstating the authority of that court): there a stand-in for BDS activist artists, Amy Boycott, cited Ahinoam Nini as the only actual name of a Jewish friend she could come up with.

�If he had been attacked while giving a performance or a public appearance, that would be one thing, but to come to a person�s door and attack them at their house, this is something else, something that absolutely cannot be accepted,� National Police Commissioner Yochanan Danino said Sunday.

Uhh....

# ? Mar 22, 2015 21:02

Bear Retrieval Unit: Nov 5, 2009; Mudslide Experiment

Absurd Alhazred posted:

I don't think it's been mentioned in this thread, but two Israeli artists associated with the left have been in the news recently: Yehonatan Gefen was actually assaulted in his home while Ahinoam Nini was merely threatened, with the offenders citing Geffen's treatment as an example.

It may be a coincidence, but I had the dubious pleasure of watching a right-wing "satire" show called "Everything Is Under Judicial Review" (הכל שפיט, a term associated with former chief of Israel's High Court, Aharon Barak, who is hated by the right for allegedly overstating the authority of that court): there a stand-in for BDS activist artists, Amy Boycott, cited Ahinoam Nini as the only actual name of a Jewish friend she could come up with.

Don't forget the Rapper turned nazi "The Shadow" openly threatening Asaf Avidan while suffering no backlash what so ever.

# ? Mar 22, 2015 21:29

Absurd Alhazred: Mar 27, 2010; by Athanatos

Bear Retrieval Unit posted:

Don't forget the Rapper turned nazi "The Shadow" openly threatening Asaf Avidan while suffering no backlash what so ever.

Is this recent? I only remember him and his goon squad attacking leftists during protests last summer.

# ? Mar 22, 2015 21:33

Bear Retrieval Unit: Nov 5, 2009; Mudslide Experiment

Absurd Alhazred posted:

Is this recent? I only remember him and his goon squad attacking leftists during protests last summer.

A week ago: http://www.haaretz.co.il/gallery/music/1.2590290
I couldn't find any english source, the jist of it is Avidan saying he wants to be seen as an artist, not an Israely artist, and The Shadows's response is a bunch of nationalist bullshit ending with this gem: "I suggest you hire a body guard next time you're in Israel because it's getting scary over here, even more scary after this article. loser."

Bear Retrieval Unit fucked around with this message at 21:50 on Mar 22, 2015

# ? Mar 22, 2015 21:45

Absurd Alhazred: Mar 27, 2010; by Athanatos

Bear Retrieval Unit posted:

A week ago: http://www.haaretz.co.il/gallery/music/1.2590290
I couldn't find any english source, the jist of it is Avidan saying he wants to be seen as an artist, not an Israely artist, and The Shadows's response is a bunch of nationalist bullshit ending with this gem: "I suggest you hire a body guard next time you're in Israel because it's getting scary over here, even more scary after this article. loser."

Ironically, Achinoam Nini is quoted at the end saying that it's unfortunate Avidan and other Israeli artists are trying to distance themselves from Israel, that she has to deal with certain things as an Israeli abroad, but she'd never left the country (I imagine in the sense that she's never forgotten where she came from, she has gone on several international tours).

# ? Mar 22, 2015 22:00

A big flaming stink: Apr 26, 2010

I think some people itt are getting hung up over the polling percentage of american support for israel. its pretty obvious that if you put the question to someone they'll say israel good arabs bad the vast majority of the time, but I'm kind of doubtful anyone but a significant minority actually care enough to have it change their vote, especially since the potential reprisal is just doing nothing.

# ? Mar 23, 2015 02:10

emanresu tnuocca: Sep 2, 2011; by Athanatos

Everyone who's had any sort of hope Netanyahu would fail to assemble a coalition may lower their expectations, Rivlin has announced earlier today that his role in the electoral process is now officially over as over 61 elected MKs (as represented by their parties) have recommended Netanyahu for prime minister, this does not include Lapid's Yesh Atid who've said that they recommend neither candidate and would serve as opposition for the next Knesset term.

Presumably this would be the exact coalition which we've all predicted right after the elections, being: Likud, Kulanu, Jewish Home, Shas, United Torah and Yisrael Beitenu.

It's all on you now Obama, don't let us down.

# ? Mar 23, 2015 13:37

Aurubin: Mar 17, 2011

What does Kulanu gain by being subservient to Likud? Isn't that sorta what happened to Lapid's party? Deal with the devil and they slowly tear you down by not allowing any of your agenda through the Knesset?

# ? Mar 23, 2015 13:51

emanresu tnuocca: Sep 2, 2011; by Athanatos

The only way to get anything substantial done is by being a part of the coalition, I'd assume Kahlon is well aware of Netanyahu's tactics and economic ideology so there are a bunch of likely possibilities:
He got certain guarantees from Netanyahu that appeased him.
He believes he can outplay Netanyahu and get what he wants.
Without Lapid's backing he felt his hand was spent and he that he had to join the coalition under whichever terms were offered by Netanyahu.
Any possible combination of the above.

He's less of a political rookie than Lapid is/was, so we'll see how it plays, not that anyone here should care too much as he obviously doesn't consider any security/palestine issues to be on his agenda.

# ? Mar 23, 2015 13:58

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

Yeah, I never really bought the whole Kulanu-YA package deal, they're natural rivals for the center bloc.

# ? Mar 23, 2015 14:02

evilweasel: Aug 24, 2002

Doesn't recommending Netenyahu merely mean he's saying that Netenyahu should get the chance to form the coalition I(and, implicitly, that he thinks he'll be able to reach a deal) but that he still needs to work out a deal he's happy with? In other words he has recommended Netenyahu but the actual deal-making is yet to come and none have actually been reached yet.

# ? Mar 23, 2015 16:17

archaeo: Nov 5, 2009; may the power of Hecate compel you

With Kulanu, Netanyahu has enough votes to ignore one of the other parties of the right; ie. Bennet could stay out and be positioned as the true voice of the settlers.

# ? Mar 23, 2015 16:22

Absurd Alhazred: Mar 27, 2010; by Athanatos

evilweasel posted:

Doesn't recommending Netenyahu merely mean he's saying that Netenyahu should get the chance to form the coalition I(and, implicitly, that he thinks he'll be able to reach a deal) but that he still needs to work out a deal he's happy with? In other words he has recommended Netenyahu but the actual deal-making is yet to come and none have actually been reached yet.

Yep, most of the horse-trading is still to come. Hence the deadline is ultimately in May.

# ? Mar 23, 2015 16:23

Darth Walrus: Feb 13, 2012

archaeo posted:

With Kulanu, Netanyahu has enough votes to ignore one of the other parties of the right; ie. Bennet could stay out and be positioned as the true voice of the settlers.

Jewish Home has eight MKs. That brings the coalition below 60 seats. He can play hardball with Yisrael Beitenu, who have six seats, but Bennett is trickier.

# ? Mar 23, 2015 16:24

SNAKES N CAKES: Sep 6, 2005; DAVID GAIDER
Lead Writer

Yeah:

quote:

30 Likud
10 Kulanu
8 Jewish Home
7 Shas
6 Yisrael Beiteinu
6 UTJ

67 total with 61 minimum

He can spare 6 votes to retain a one vote majority, but that's it. Shas, Kulanu, or Jewish Home could bring down the government at any time.

# ? Mar 23, 2015 16:33

Absurd Alhazred: Mar 27, 2010; by Athanatos

SNAKES N CAKES posted:

Yeah:

He can spare 6 votes to retain a one vote majority, but that's it. Shas, Kulanu, or Jewish Home could bring down the government at any time.

Once the government is formed he could maintain a minority government if he gets outside help, though. For example, if a peace deal is looming and that kicks Jewish Home (and maybe Shas) out, ZC and/or Meretz could protect the government from non-confidence votes.

# ? Mar 23, 2015 16:55

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

Now that Yesh Atid has explicitly said they will be in opposition to Bibi, the more interesting quandary will be how he threads Bennett and the US, since both are annoyed with his outright flip-flopping and want him to take opposing stands.

# ? Mar 23, 2015 16:57

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 5, 2024 14:11

Absurd Alhazred: Mar 27, 2010; by Athanatos

Elotana posted:

Now that Yesh Atid has explicitly said they will be in opposition to Bibi, the more interesting quandary will be how he threads Bennett and the US, since both are annoyed with his outright flip-flopping and want him to take opposing stands.

That's simple, actually. The US has basically said it's working under the assumption that he's abandoned the two-state solution, so he loses nothing by acceding to Bennett's demand.

# ? Mar 23, 2015 17:01

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > I/P: post-semitism in the desert of the deal

«‹›260 »