Friday, March 7, 2014

U.S. House of Representatives Bill On Israel Tells Obama To Shove His Policies Up His Ass

Once again, "The Peoples' House" smacked President Barack Hussein Obama silly with new legislation that strengthens America's commitment to the nation of Israel - believe me, the signal of this bill to Obama could not have been more direct and more blatant.

At a time when the Israelis might feel more threatened by America than ever before due to the Islamic terror tactics of the American President, the House of Representatives has ALWAYS been solidly behind the protection of Israel and thankfully, has now stood up and told Hussein Obama to shut the fuck up.

The story comes from The Jerusalem Post.

US bill 'dramatically strengthens' Israel alliance

The US House of Representatives passed a bill on Wednesday that declares Israel a "major strategic partner" of the United States, reinforcing the broad relationship between the two nations and laying the groundwork for more expansive strategic cooperation.

The bill would expand the delivery of forward-deployed US weapons to Israel, as well as other military technologies, and would commit Congress to further funding of the Iron Dome short-range missile defense system.

Controversially, the bill would also invite Israel into a visa waiver agreement with the US, which has been opposed by members of the intelligence community and the Democratic caucus for multiple years.

The bill passed 410-1 in the House. The Senate has taken up a similar measure, which is still in the committee process.

Just a day after its annual policy conference in Washington, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee declared the bill's passage a victory, and characterized the measure as "dramatically strengthening the US-Israel relationship."

"This designation lays the foundation for expanded US-Israel cooperation in a wide variety of spheres, including defense, intelligence, homeland security, energy, agriculture and trade," AIPAC said in a statement, applauding the bill as "critical" and calling on the Senate to act with similar haste.

The second half of the bill, which focuses on US-Israel energy relationships, was authored by House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) and Ranking Member Henry A. Waxman (D-CA) and aims to strengthen collaboration between the two countries on energy projects.

The United States-Israel Energy Cooperation Enhancement Bill first passed through the House of Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee on December 11, and a Senate companion bill passed through the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee on December 20. Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), chairwoman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, was responsible for the Senate companion bill, alongside Se.s Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska).

This portion of the bill officially determines that "United States-Israel energy cooperation, and the development of natural resources by Israel, are strategic interests of the United States," recognizing Israel specifically as a partner in water technology, safety and security arenas. Encouraging the US National Science Foundation to collaborate with the Israel Science Foundation, the text also encourages more robust academic cooperation in a variety of energy-related fields.

Advocating "open dialogue and continued mechanisms for regular engagement," the bill calls for continued energy partnerships among government and academic institutions as well as the private sector from both sides. Some particular topics of interest include identifying priorities for developing Israeli natural resources, discussing best practices to secure cyber energy infrastructure, leveraging natural gas to positively impact regional stability and improving energy efficiency, the bill says.

The bill also acknowledges the important role of the US-Israel Binational research and Development Foundation (BIRD) and the US-Israel Binational Science Foundation, and commits continued multiyear funding "to ensure the continuity of the programs of the foundations."

“I am pleased this important measure was included in the legislative package and encouraged to see it received such overwhelming support," Upton said, following the bill's passage. "With a simple amendment to the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, this legislation will help bolster the partnership between Israel and the US on energy production and help enhance energy security."

With American assistance, Israel will be able to continue making advancements in developing its natural resources, Upton stressed. He also committed to working on future "commonsense energy solutions" with colleagues from both sides of the aisle, as occurred while drafting this legislation.

"Today the House passed an important bill that will expand the partnership between the U.S. and Israel," Waxman agreed. "Israel is a close ally, and it is in our national interest to help the Israelis development their natural resources in a responsible way that protects the environment."


Maria Montolivo said...

Politics has always been about hedging one's bets.

It would surprise you to know that The USSR was one of the First Nations to recognize the State of Israel. Yet later on they threw their support behind the Arab countries battling Israel. The successor state of Russia continues to do so until this day.

Now what does that say? For 66 years America has supported Israel and vice versa. Not out of love, that doesn't exist in the Real Politik world of International Relations. But out of mutual interest. When that interest dries up, so does the support.

There might come a day soon enough when we will see another superpower be the main supporter of Israel. Roles could directly be exchanged. Alliances don't last forever, especially in the fast paced and frenetic world of contemporary international politics.

Israel could be allied with Russia tomorrow. And the military led governments of Egypt and Jordan with America. Or the status quo can keep on going.

In order for mutual support to continue, there needs to be mutual interests. If one party, which ever one, thinks the relationship has turned a little one sided the desire for such a relationship to continue starts to wane.

Alliances never remain monolithic for too long.

That thought process leads to taking the patronage of a bigger ally for granted. Leaving one unprepared for drastic change.

The Duhnmharu said...

The more things change the more things stay the same

Maria Montolivo said...

Well yes and no. One segment of American society is very pro Israel. Another one is lukewarm for such support.

Now the issue is, which segment will come to dominate national elections? Because Israel is not the 51st state, any relationship with it would have to fall under the sphere of foreign relations.

And national elections determine foreign policy.

So it all depends on whom the political future belongs to. To Those that have a very pro Israel mindset, or to those that seek a different kind of relationship with the region as a whole.

Continued engagement vs disengagement.

Only time will tell

The Duhnmharu said...

If 33% say yes to ISrael and 33% say maybe on ISrael thats 66% of teh vote for ISrael. I would be workijng on teh other 33% to turn some of them make them pro. But Under teh current president, he has power that he seems to like to use that is dangerous to ISrael. He has thrown her under teh bus entirely with Iran, and has lied so often we lose count. At this point its a nice gesture to say we are with Israel, but until teh liar in chief is either impeached, or hits a golf ball so hard his head spins off, everything is just window dressing not backed up with actions. Nothing but window dressing because Israel is fed up with Obama, and frankly last time they were betrayed by America, The Liberty got shot up we do not want to see a replay of that .

Maria Montolivo said...

Yes but the point is, was that 66% the same 15-20 years ago? Or was it 76%? Or higher? And will it be 56% in another 15-20 years?

Of course it is mostly speculation but an electorate will support a foreign policy(within reason) if it is relayed to them enough times.

So far the foreign policy has been that of unwavering or near unwavering support for the State of Israel, because that has been in the strategic insterests of American foreign policy.

Now should that interest change as all international alliances between nations do, what will the trajectory be? Well one of gradual disengagement.

But that will only depend on which political force wins the next 3-4 national elections.

And if the party of gradual disengagement does win the next few elections, you could see a shift in the American-Israeli alliance. From one of unwavering support, to one of mere diplomatic ties.

Of course should the pro Israel parties win, then the status quo will continue with minor variations.

So in essence the future of the State of Israel will not be decided on the battle field, but rather in the voting booths in November, every four years.

The Duhnmharu said...

Unwavering support was strong during the first four years of Oliars term. But that did not prevent him from throwing Israel under teh buss regardless of their foreign policy. It is a personal decision by teh Prevaricator in Chief. Israel under Obama rule has been shafted, thrown under teh bus, lied to had promises broken, betrayed with intelligence leaks, all courtesy of that piece of shit we have for POTUS what a disgrace.

I would like to think it would be decided on teh battle field, because at this moment in time, Israel can not trust Israel , or its politicians for any help or support. Regardless of decisions today, America just can not be trusted. That is a sad state of affairs. Blame lays right at the foot of teh anointed one who is POTUS. Wonder when we will ever see a real proper birth certificate for Obama. Sad but true.

Maria Montolivo said...

Laying the blame for a changing shift in strategic alliances on the feet of one man is not going to get anywhere as a valid and rational idea.

The shift has been ongoing for at least 20 years.

Battlefield outcomes are usually decided long before the battle commences.

For Israel that decision comes with whichever party dominates elections within America.

I suppose the next 2 major elections are the ones to watch for a glimpse at future strategic relations with the entire region that Israel is located in.

Should they go in favor of those seeking gradual disengagement then Israel needs a contingency plan to seek out another major benefactor.

The latter will be difficult since the two main other powers, China and Russia are more friendly with Israel's foes.

2016 may just yet be the most pivotal year in the history of the modern Jewish state.

As for a state of distrust? That's been there between people since the Dawn of time. It's not a modern nation state phenomenon.

I'm sure Israel feels the distrust today, the same way America felt it after the Liberty incident. It's always there, incidents just enhance it.