Israeli Police Enter Netanyahu's Home For Questioning Over Corruption Allegations

Zero Hedge ^ | 1/2/16 | Tyler Durden

[Moonman62]

I’ve read that Israel as a whole is quite corrupt and socialist. It’s only compared to their neighbors that we think well of them.

[gr8eman]

Of course you would if you hate Jews!

[Robert DeLong]

I don't see it as "apples and oranges" at all. The example I cited is the type of scenario where the relations between the countries is directly put at risk because it involves the leader of one country meddling directly in the internal political dealings of the other.

We meddle around the globe in other countries affairs. In fact we often dictate to them employing all kinds of veiled and/or open threats. We have overthrown governments in the past, as well as, in very recent history. Iraq, Egypt, Libya, with Syria being the latest. One by Bush with much of the nation's blessing, and three by Obama without consultation or consensus of any kind.

All countries lobby us. Some go the extra mile with bribes in the form of charitable and/or political contributions.

However, you seem to confuse giving opinion with lobbying. Bibi was offering his opinion. His guarantee did not pan out, but then I contend that big mistakes were made, and resistance here at home emboldened opposition forces in Iraq. He was wrong to use the word guarantee, but he wasn't wrong in the fact that many Iraqi's were overjoyed that Saddam was removed and that they had held free elections. As the old adage goes that, the road to hell is paved with good intentions, indeed proved to be the case here too. Also it is disingenuous to cherry pick one small segment that may belie the overall statement someone makes. A favorite tactic employed by journalists.

No matter how noble the cause may appear, there are just too many variables in the Middle east to accurately predict the final outcome. But we certainly created the framework for disaster when we telegraphed our every move including our timetable for withdrawal.

I guess at this point we should just agree to disagree. I have no doubt there are those who support your opinion, just as there are those who support my opinion. But each of us arguing about our opinions is pointless and serves no real purpose, as Trump will make that decision. I for one with stand with his decision, even if it differs from mine. though in my heart I will feel he made the wrong decision.

[Paul R.]

It means Netanyahu had his own reasons for wanting Saddam knocked off, but those were not arguments he particularly promoted in public. Nor did Bush promote his real reasons (though I think his strategy could have worked had it not succumbed to the "public" sale of the war effort, unfocused execution, and Obama's obliteration of what was left.)

Both leaders instead pushed "lines" (or fairy tales?) they thought would play well, at the time. Then at least for Bush some of those things became real (but unrealistic) goals themselves, playing along with the subtexts. Ditto for Obama and the "Arab Spring".

"G'Kar" in Babylon 5 almost had it right: "Let me pass on to you the one thing I've learned about this place: No one here is exactly what he appears.

Just take out the word "exactly".

[Paul R.]

Poland (when not being ruled by someone else)? Granted we don’t have a large base there — Putin would REALLY get upset!

[Tours]

Soros - maybe. Barky, not likely. The rest, highly unlikely. They're War hawks like Netanyahu.

[Tours]

Politics is a dirty business wherever one goes. Israel is no exception. Netanyahu is no saint, nor are his political opponents.

I just hope the U.S. stays out of Israel’s internal affairs. Let the Israelis sort out their own affairs.

[StAnDeliver]

"No telling what's behind this.... I'm so confused... My tin foil hat has melted."

"What's behind this?" Iran. "Who's behind this?" Take one long look at who ran the losing campaigns to Bibi.

"Obama developed a real feud with Bibi" - John Podesta, #wikileaks 18625

[Alberta's Child]

I don't disagree with anything you've posted there. France has always kept their distance from the U.S. even in NATO -- and for good reason in many cases. First and foremost, they didn't want their own nuclear arsenal to be included in any arms reduction treaties that were being negotiated between the U.S. and Soviet Union during the Cold War.

Keep in mind, though, that even at the level of cooperation Israel and the U.S. have, this isn't any different than our relationships with the governments of Muslim countries in the Middle East -- even in radical Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia.

[Alberta's Child]

I’ve heard the same thing. Even so-called “conservatives” in Israeli politics would be considered borderline Marxists here in the U.S.

[Alberta's Child]

Right -- good post.

I would remind everyone on here who disagrees on subjects of this nature that Donald Trump was elected with a mandate last year -- and in all my interactions with his campaign his focus was on America's interests, not anyone else's. For one thing, I would hope that this idiocy of allowing U.S. policy to be dictates by foreign interests -- even to the point of taking sides in foreign domestic affairs to the point of toppling governments -- will come to an end. THAT is his mandate, as evidenced by the fact that many Americans were so sick and tired of what our professional politicians have done over the last 25 years, that we elected a character with no political experience at all.

[Alberta's Child]

Right. Netanyahu can have his own reasons for advocating a policy that results in our government p!ssing away thousands of U.S. lives and hundreds of billions of dollars of our taxpayers' money. My point is that he shouldn't be invited here to make his case for that idiocy, and we shouldn't listen to him now that he's been thoroughly discredited.

That statement applies to ANY foreign leader, by the way.

[Robert DeLong]

Good response, and thanks.

That being said I do have one minor objection. That being your choice to describe President elect Donald J. Trump as a character. Only because it could be seen as a descriptor that could be interpreted as one of expressing a connotation of endearment or one of devalue.

Had you chosen to simply refer to him as a person or, an individual, I would have stopped with my first sentence.

[Alberta's Child]

Trump is definitely a "character" -- by any measure and by either connotation (as a term of endearment or of devalue). That's what made him the perfect candidate. Anyone else would have been dismissed out of hand as an unserious knucklehead, but this guy brought the perfect combination of competence, sharp political instincts, and zany antics to the national scene.

Of course he's a "character" ... he played one on his own TV show for years!

As I've said many times since he first launched his presidential campaign ...

The best thing about Donald Trump is that he approaches politics as if it's a professional wrestling match.

The worst thing about Donald Trump is that he approaches politics as if it's a professional wrestling match.

Cheers! LOL.

[meyer]

soros...teamobama.

Soros never had a problem entering the home of the Jewish people.