I am a Texas resident who is very much in favor of doing what we can to ensure security for Israel. Their country is in a very vulnerable position and this is already an incredibly difficult task as things stand today. The recent attack on the border of Lebanon is a prime example. The road is treacherous enough without hawks in our congress creating conditions which accelerate movement toward hostilities with Iran over possession of nuclear fuel simply for producing her own electricity. What becomes of fuel when it is removed is a matter to be determined, but should not be impossible to resolve. I know Israel has reason not to trust Iran, but at the same time however, the US has been pulled into war in Iraq while Republicans did their best to paint a picture of a nuclear threat that was yet to be. And as was the case before, the rhetoric is about war as a “last option” while the actions at every step of the way are designed to create a more inflexible position against a regime that will only become more defiant. This seems to be the plan of US hawks – and part of the purpose in inviting Mr Netanyahu to speak.
I am also against congress working to involve the US in attempting to “shift” the status of E Jerusalem by construction of a new embassy (particularly in the East or the strip between East and West; see S.117 ). I may be wrong, but such relocation appears to me as part of an attempt to “inhibit” progress toward a Palestinian state. This should not be the business of the US congress to decide unilaterally, and additionally, the move would go against the intent of UN Security Council resolutions on Jerusalem. Some of the people who would interfere may think there would be no negative consequences as long as we send a strong enough message. But it will cause problems with US-Arab relations – possibly even with traditionally cooperative countries like Jordan. And if that message can be interpreted to mean that the US and Israel dictate terms and that concessions will bring nothing in return for Iran or Palestinians, then no talks take place and we all know what will happen. Such antagonistic moves would cause increased animosity against Israel as well as invite an attack by extremists against the facility, possibly resulting in an escalation on multiple fronts. I believe that the sponsors of these actions know that. But they are willing to take the risk because the resulting conflict would be profitable – and it won’t take place on our continent.
So aside from what is proper protocol, my view is that the intentions of too many in our congress are not well aligned with the long term interest of the US or Israel. While Mr Netanyahu can always voice his concerns as he has in the past, it is not in the interest of either country for him to address congress directly. So I am hoping this event gets cancelled. Republican Hawks would see me and my views as anti-Israel, as they see our President. I believe they are wrong on both counts.