don't we just love o? so statesmanlike, calculating, thoughtful, wise? how did
we ever get along before he arrived on the polical front?
So much for the great unifier and nobel peace prize winner. This is just a few
hundred steps backwards for the whole process. This is the problem with
"progressive" left wing ideology. It looks great on paper, but, in the
real world it just doesn't work.
Another serious error in judgment on the part of Obama. This is what happens
when you hire a guy with no experience and far-left political positions.
I am beginning to wonder if Obama has chosen Joe Biden as his lead speech
Is this president off his rocker? It appears as though the great peacemaker is
actually more adept at creating divisiveness and fomenting war. The
U.S. really needs to think seriously about getting out of the global policeman
business and reposition itself as the world's number one major manufacturer.
'This is what happens when you hire a guy with no experience and far-left
political positions.' - Cats | 8:04 a.m. I wouldn't know. Obama has been managing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that Bush left him
for the better part of x2 years now. Or does time as President of
the United States not count as 'expeirence' now? I know I haven't
done that. Osama Bin Laden, dead. Zero troops in Lybia.
I think Obama is doing a fine job. Or has he called Isreal the 'axis
of evil' yet?
This is what happens when you elect somebody who tries to be everything to
everyone. It doesn't work! ANY elected official will tell you that you can't
please everyone, and Obama's trying to play both sides of the fence. If he
thinks that siding with the Palestinians is going to get him clout with the rest
of the Middle East, that just proves what a poor diplomat he is.
I think this may be the very first time I've ever agreed with Harry Reid on a
I'm sure that President Obama is shaking his boots over Harry Reid's criticism
yeah like Ms Molli said Im sure Pre3sident Obama is going to loose sleep over
what Reid says I dont think so. !
The problem is that with a two-state solution, things will not get better. I
understand where the president is coming from however I do not think it was a
wise move at this time. I also wish someone would bother to interview and talk
to those Arabs and Muslims that actually serve in the Israeli military (yes they
do) and those that work loyally in Israel. The numbers would shock you at how
many like Israel just the way it is.Again, if people want to harp
about that the UN took the land away from the Palestinians, etc etc.. Well then
what about the Kingdoms of Israel and Judea?
Harry Reid will always support Israel. His wife is a former member of the jewish
faith, and he is a nationalized Israeli. Harry Reid is not as bad as every right
wing conservative says.
I guess Pres. Obama is a great unifier. He has Harry Reid and Rob Bishop
unified against him.
I think it is time for House of Representatives to introduce Articles of
Impeachmet against the President.
Let's see here. obama would like to take the one nation in that part of the
world that allows all citizens to have freedom. The one nation where different
religions, ethnic groups, cultures live in harmony with each and defend each
other; and toss them to people that call them "little satan"
"infidels" "zionists" and allow millions of lives to be
slaughtered, enslaved, and their possessions stolen from them?The
problem is the ideology mr. president. The war of '67 was the muslim neighbors
wanting to drive these people into the ocean and wiping them off of the map. A
country defended themselves and were successful. They won some land in the
process, while defending their land. They weren't the aggressors. The aggressive
nations should lose land if all of their combined powers couldn't push a small
population off. By the way Israel returned the oil fields to Egypt after the
war. I guess they could have hold onto the oil and made a fortune. They just
want a country of their own. Muslims already have huge nations. Let the Jewish
people have a sliver of land.
'I think it is time for House of Representatives to introduce Articles of
Impeachmet against the President.' - noneck62 | 9:38 a.m. So they
can fail at impeachment... again? Let's look at how that
worked out before... *'Gingrich Admits to Affair During (attempted)
Clinton Impeachment' - By JAKE TAPPER - ABC News - 03/09/07 'Setting
the stage for his entry into the presidential race, former House Speaker Newt
Gingrich, R-Ga., gave a radio interview to be broadcast today with Focus on the
Family's James Dobson, in which Gingrich for the first time publicly
acknowledged cheating on his first and second wives. "There were
times when I was praying and when I felt I was doing things that were wrong. But
I was still doing them," Gingrich said during the interview.'
Bill Clinton was later aquitted. You know who resigned before they
were about to be impeached? Richard Nixon. You know
what party Nixon belonged too? The Republican party.
The war of 67 was part one million of an ever ending battle between the sides
for control. Don't pretend it was an isolated unrelated continuation of other
events. That shows some real lack of knowledge of the history of that area.I frankly am glad to see disagreement. I applaud that members of the
same party can have diverging opinions on different aspects. I shows they are
thinking for them selves rather than from directives from a centralized party.
Good for them. There should be times that democrats cross this isle on issues,
and likewise the same going the other direction. John2000 - Reid
and Bishop are unified on an issue - not against the person. That is the big
difference. Voting on issues, not because you like or dislike someone. This
isn't the most popular contest in the high school year book.It is
time for American politics to grow up and for representative to vote their
hearts, not what pin they have stuck in their lapel.
I must agree that The President was out in left field.Sounds to me like he is
for the Arabs and want Israel to take steps and make more cocession than the
Arabs. I guess he will be one that says that the Holcast never happen next.
We all make mistakes. Mr. Obama's mistake was acting like an authority on a
subject that he knows little about. If he's half the man that he should be, he
will listen to his critics, he will learn more about the subject, he will put
aside his personal agenda, and he will promote the only true democracy in the
Middle East.I'm betting that his personal pride will keep him from
learning. I'm betting that he has people right now trying to spin things to
make it look like he said things that he didn't say. I'm betting that right now
he has people all over the world twisting arms and making deals contingent on
supporting his views of Israel.Mr. Reid burned political capital,
but he did the right thing. So did Mr. Bishop. It's too bad that
Mr. Netanyahu was not born in Hawaii. We could use a leader who's not afraid to
doing the right thing, who's not afraid of holding his ground when responding to
a very inexperienced world leader.
Harry Ried - even a broken clock is correct twice a day.
"The place where negotiating will happen must be at the negotiating table
and nowhere else. No one should set premature parameters about borders, about
building, or about anything else."It isn't premature to tell
Israel to stop building settlements on land stolen from the Palestinians in the
West Bank. Friends don't let friend oppress the politically powerless.Israel: if you want to oppress the Palestinians, steal their land, pump your
sewage into their villages, call the women prostitutes, bully them, keep them
from moving freely over their own land, blow up their houses, drill for water in
places that make their wells go dry, etc. go right ahead.But I don't
think that the US should be a party to this wickedness. They have perverted the
Old Testament for a land grab to please politically powerful settlers.Tekakaromatagi
78 percent of Jews in the USA voted for Mr. Obama and many in Israel are
re: Tekakaromatagi | 11:34 a.m. May 25, 2011 You have the right to
speak freely in the American Press, but you have the obligation to be honest
with your "facts". The land was not stolen from the
Palestinians. On May 14, 1948, Israel declared independence. The
next day, the surrounding Arab states attacked Israel. Do you understand that?
Israel was attacked by the Arabs. In 1967 Egypt, Jordan and Syria
vowed to destroy Israel. Do you get that? It was Egypt, Jordan and Syria who
surrounded Israel and threatened its destruction.Revisionist history
will not change the facts. Having Mr. Obama tell Israel to give its land to the
Palestinians will not change the facts. Having the whole world stand against
Israel will not change the facts. Hatred for Israel will not change
" I guess he will be one that says that the Holcast never happen
next."What?Or perhaps he is just citing precedent
of what this country did after WWII. WWII was largely propagated by resentment
of Germany for the carving up of their country after WW1. The
"conservatives" can decided to follow the example of the extremist,
terrorist and dictators, and the man who holds the office of President can do
what other Presidents before him from Iraq back to WWII, and honor borders which
have been established and acknowledged by the world community.Those
lands are "occupied" lands - lets be clear. They were never granted
to Israel, never granted in the UN resolution establishing an Israeli state, and
Palestinian state. We saw how doing so finally established lasting peace in
Europe, an area who had a history of war many times longer than the current
middle east conflict. Why not apply those lessons learned to this scenario.Clearly politics is clouding sound judgement. The same politics that
would have that after nearly 50 years of Cuba embargo with no results sticks to
that practice as well. With free trade, the soviet union fell. Cuba would fall
To "Pagan | 10:04 a.m" I hate to tell you this, but Clinton was
impeached. The only other US President to be impeached was Andrew Johnson, a
Democrat. Both Clinton and Johnson were impeached, but were not convicted and
removed from office. Let me say it again, Clinton and Johnson, both Democrats
UtahBlueDevil: Wrong. God gave them that land over 3000 years ago. Obama only
opens his mouth to chand feet.
Mike said: On May 14, 1948, Israel declared independence. The next day, the
surrounding Arab states attacked Israel. Do you understand that? Israel was
attacked by the Arabs, Which they said they would do, yet Israel
called them on, because The US was standing behind them (arms folded)Executive Committee of the Jewish "Yishuv" (community) in Palestine
met to decide whether or not to declare a state, as has been envisioned under UN
Resolution 181. The Arab states had declared that if such a state was declared,
they would invade it. Nonetheless, the committee decided to declare a state.The declaration stated that Israel "will uphold the full social
and political equality of all its citizens, without distinction of race, creed
or sex; will guarantee full freedom of conscience, worship, education and
culture; will safeguard the sanctity and inviolability of the shrines and Holy
Places of all religions; and will dedicate itself to the principles of the
Charter of the United Nations. " Which they have NOT done.
Redshirt... am I reading you clear that you are saying that the fact that
letters of impeachment were brought against two Democrats hundreds of years
apart, and later cleared of those charges, is somehow a greater crime against
this country than a president who resigns his office as to avoid having to be
forced from office?I am missing your point. What Clinton was
cleared of was worse than what Nixon resigned for? To be clear, I
don't think any of these incidents are exactly shinning moments in US history at
many levels. But this is hardly an argument that can be definitively proven by
either side. If you think it is, the you all have a real selective memory. Angry crowds wanting to impeach the president they didn't vote for has a
long history in this country, dating all the way back to Adams and the riots
wanting to get him out of office. There is a rich and long history of poor
losers on both sides. This is just more same old stuff.
Pagan:No matter what BHO does will be "a fine job", won't
it.I have to say - I was absolutely astounded when those words came
out of his mouth re: reinstating the 1967 borders. I mean - my bottom jaw
literally dropped open.What cave has this man been living in?? Even
Harry Reid was looking for a hole to crawl into - what does that tell you?
Until all Palestinians, neighboring countries and all of Islam recognize Israels
right to exist and swear off the call to annihilate the State of Israel, there
is no place to start negotiations. As long as there is a regional attitude
sworn to annihilate Israel, they must keep the lands to defend themselves. I
suggest that Mr. Obama start at that point and then work toward an ideal state.
Apparently Bishop and Reid would prefer that the Palestinians remain stateless
as second class non-citizens of the great Israeli democracy. All it takes is one
look at the map of settlements and it is apparent that Israel has no interest
whatsoever in peace with the Palestinians. Instead, Israel steals water and
other natural resources from the territories and continues to commit the most
traditional act of war against any people by taking land and bulldozing houses
to make room for the conquering population. Israel refuses to recognize a
Palestinian state yet demands recognition of its own government as a
precondition to peace talks. President Obama was right; Bishop and Reid are flat
'No matter what BHO does will be "a fine job", won't it.' - Tom in CA
| 1:38 p.m. Wrong. I want DADT repealed, today. I want
Gitmo closed, and I wanted us to avoid Libya altogether. Is the
world perfect? No. Now, we both know some people will
never be SATISFIED with what Obama does, will they? *'Obama
dithering in Libya' - By Charles Krauthammer - Published by DSnews - 03/27/11 An article claiming Obama wasn't doing ENOUGH in Libya.
Then: *'Rand Paul: Obama 'Hypocritical' For Decision To Intervene In
Libya' - Huffington Post - 04/02/11 Republican Sen. Rand Paul
condeming Obama for DOING anything in Libya. Which is it Tom?
Oh, and FYI: Zero troops in Libya. In fact:
*'Gadhafi asks Obama to stop' - By Matthew Lee - AP - Published by DSNews -
04/06/2011 I don't 'think' Obama's doing a fine job Tom.
He IS doing a fine job.
To "Pagan | 2:33 p.m" what is Obama doing a fine job at?! So far
everything he touches blows up in his face.In the middle east every
group he backs ends up being backed by terrorists."Hamas, PA
Expressing Support for Jasmine Revolution in Tunisia" in CrethiPlethi
(jewish newspaper)"Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have
al-Qaeda links" UK Telegraph"Egypt protests: America's secret
backing for rebel leaders behind uprising" UK Telegraph. We then find out
that the Muslim Brotherhood are the leaders of the uprising. The Muslim
Brotherhood works closely with Hamas and al Qaeda.His spending is
out of control. See "National Debt Up $3 Trillion on Obama's Watch"
October 2010 CBS News. Obama increased the debt by $3 Trillion in less than 2
years.Lets not forget "President Obama refuses to meet with
Governor Gibbons about tourism comments" from KTNV in Las Vegas, where we
find out the damage that Obama caused by his remarks about businesses having
confrences there.From Bloomberg we read "Obama Seen as
Anti-Business by 77% of U.S. Investors"From CNN "Stocks
end volatile session lower" where Obama's speech caused panic on Wall
To Pagan,Obama is NOT doing a fine job. President Obama
is the worst President in the history of this country.See how that
works? You have your opinion and I have mine.
I'm not saying I agree with Obama or not, but when was seeking peace ever
something worth dogging someone over. The blood shed over there is crazy, and
as much as I know many in the US wish to protect Israel, the fact is, they push
that relationship with us many times and act like bullies far more often then
they should.It's like this, I think this whole issue comes down to
one magic word: pride. Pride, as in what folks on both sides seem to have
un-healthy amounts of and what will keep any serious peace from happening. I
believe Obama's heart was in the right place, and he truly wants to see peace.
We can debate if his methods are sound or not, but please don't question his
Re: Tekakaromatagi | 11:34 a.m. May 25, 2011 Jordan would still be
in East Jerusalem today if they'd heeded Israel's advice and stayed out the the
Six-Day War. The only way to describe Israel's victory in that war is
miraculous. They won total victories on every side. Their enemies started a
war they couldn't finish.We'll save the 1982 Lebanon War where
Israel shot down 86 Syrian aircraft in aerial combat without a single loss for
The best way to get off square one is to leave square one.
the Obama mystique is starting to unravel...Good Riddance Barry Soetero...its
another Obummer Summer!
Regarding the 1967 war: In six days Israel won the war, and on the seventh day
the Lord rested.
I think President Obama has more courage than all the GOP/TEA party members!
This President has been absolutely thoughtful and capable of executing his
duties and responsibilities. President Obama has done more to fix the US economy
and international relations as well as taking out OBL a couple of week-ends ago.
His leadership is truly needed and warranted no matter what the Republican/TEA
party say. We need to back him and get out the vote for Democrats! Granted
President Obama has not done anything about immigration, but bear in mind he has
been held in check by the Republican leadership during the last Congress and now
also by the TEA party. This show down over the debt ceiling will bring to a head
the rift in the Republican/TEA party. Their true colors will shine through and
highlight who's on who's side. The Congress should revamp the Federal taxes on
everyone in America to increase the funding of programs for all Americans. The
president has saved numerous American jobs. That's what this current Congress
should be doing. Legislating jobs, jobs, jobs. They have failed! They have
It's been a rough week for Obama. First he insults Israel, then his limo
bottoms out in front of a crown in Ireland, then he puts the wrong date on the
guest list at Westminster Abbey (by three years), then he proposes a toast to
the queen and nobody raises their glasses with him. But he kept blabbering on
and on through the British National Anthem. What an embarrassment. If any
Republican did any of this stuff that B.O. has done in the last week people
would be all over it. Not this guy though. He's still got his band of
In 1967 Israel was attacked by three huge countries which surrounded her,
namely: Egypt, Syria and Jordan. All this was done to completely annihilate
Israel. Israels supplies were cut off by sea and by land. America told them
not to fight until President Johnson decides they should. Israel was on her
own. But through brilliant strategic planning, Israel won the war and gained
these lands. Israel fought heroically and won through sheer guts and miracles.
Obama knows Palestine will always fight Israel. Hammas wants Israel
to exist no more. Peace will never be achieved until every Israeli man, woman
and child be wiped off the face of the earth or in captivity. Obama
knows all this, yet he wants Israel to go back to her pre-1967 borders. Israel
is the only nation in the Middle East who allows freedom for people. It is not
under Muslim laws, in fact it is the only non-Muslim country in the Middle East.
When the Israeli President gave his talk to congress, he received
31 standing ovations. Good for them. Good for Harry Reid and good for our
'Obama is NOT doing a fine job. President Obama is the worst President in
the history of this country. See how that works?' - JNA | 4:25 p.m. Yeah. All your opinion. I at least presented
facts. TOO | 8:27 p.m., Ok, let's review.
Bush calls three countries the 'axis of evil', starts two wars without
provocation he left for someone else to fix, is the 'decider', claims 'Mission
Accomplished' but dosen't kill Osama Bin Laden, Doubles the national debt,
doubles the unemployment rate, 40,000 dead Ameircans in Iraq... and
you want us to vote Republican again? I'll take the British National
Anthem over two bloody and pointless wars that cost American lives, any day. Your post is petty, and focus' more on Obama's toast than policy. You probably complained when Obama made NBA picks and STILL managed the
wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. That Bush left.
"Right to exist as a state" Guess what, so does Palestine. So why not
start before Israel started land aquisition and territorial expansion? Or shall
we start before WWII when Israel had no status?
After Israel fairly gained political control over the West Bank in 1967 they
began taking ownership of land that belongs to Palestinians to build
settlements. Ariel Sharons intention was to have facts on the ground, to occupy
the hills and to make life difficult for the Palestinians so they would leave.
Some Israeli settlements pipe their sewage onto Palestinian lands. Israeli
settlers who build illegal settlements are ignored. Palestinians who make
additions to their houses have the additions demolished.Terrorists
massacred some Palestinian villages in 1948 to frighten the inhabitants to flee.
People have keys to houses their grandparents locked when they were fleeing.
That is the right to return that Palestinians want. Jewish people who fled
Europe after WWII are receiving reparations for property left behind. Perhaps
the Palestinians can negotiate reparations rather than having a right to
return?Israels basis for existence in the OT. The OT also says to
have the same justice for strangers as for the Israelis. The Palestinians in
the West Bank need to have a vote just like settlers.After all they
are their brothers.
I have no objection to Israel having political owenership over the lands
captured in 1967. What I mean when I say that they are taking Palestinians'
lands is that they building settlements in the West Bank for Israeli
settlers.In 1948 Israeli groups attacked Palestinian villages to
terrorize the people into leaving. Some familes still have the keys to the
homes that their grandparents locked when they were fleeing. They expect to
have the right of return.Jews who fled Europe during and after WWII
are seeking reparations for the property they left behind. The Palestinians
should get the same thing.Saudi Arabia offered Israel recognition
several years ago if Israel withdrew to their 1967 borders. Israel has not
accepted. There is no point in requring Hamas to recognize Israel as a
condition for negotiating with them. That is what is supposed to be resolved in
the negotiation.Israel's basis for existence is the OT. The OT
states that the laws that apply to Israelites and to strangers should be the
same law. Israel needs to give the Palestinians in the West Bank the right to
vote.They are, after all, their brothers.Tekakaromatagi
AIPAC meets, and Congress kneels.
Re: Baja Joe | 9:57 p.m. May 25, 2011 The Palestinians weren't
content with the land they had prior to the '67 war and so they'd be content to
get it back today? If Jordan hadn't entered that war after being warned by
Israel they'd still be in possession of East Jerusalem and the West Bank today.
When Russia gives back the land they took from Finland in WWII and
the United States gives back the land we took from the Native Americans then
perhaps we'd be in a better position to ask Israel to give back land they took
during their miraculous victory over the Arab World in '67.
After reviewing the comments, I am amazed at how irrational people get when it
comes to the Middle East, and how ill-informed they are.