What idiot?

[Guest]

I just saw the Palestinian negotiator on television. One of the main criterion for the Palestinians to restart negotiations is that they start from the point of pre-1967 borders.

What idiot ever put that in their heads?

[Guest]

I just saw the Palestinian negotiator on television. One of the main criterion for the Palestinians to restart negotiations is that they start from the point of pre-1967 borders.

What idiot ever put that in their heads?

Is that the idiot that were stuck with until we remove him from office in 2012?

[Guest]

The Palestinian leader Abbas who is DEMANDING statehood for the Palestinians also is adamant that they WILL NOT RECOGNIZE ISRAEL AS A STATE!! Also he says he will never give up the so-called RIGHT OF RETURN and that the Palestinian state will be CLEAN (or empty, depending on the translation) of an Israeli presence (military or civilian).

This issue should now be dead in the water. Palestinian statehood has to be a non-starter with these proclamations; resulting with Abbas being shown to the U.N. door by security personnel.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4126571,00.html

http://www.frumforum.com/abbas-palestine-no-jews-allowed

[Guest]

Richie,

Thanks for bringing some factual information to another sophomoric, (but unfortunately hateful), attempt to blame the President for everything in the world some folks don't like. This is the garbage which demeans the political thread, and is only 'acceptable' because it is protected by the first amendment.

btw - like a lot of us, your biases are pretty evident, but more and more you are resorting to facts to defend them.

[Guest]

Why, prey tell, is it always garbage when the opposition does/says things the exact same way y'all do?

btk

[Guest]

ijustlusit, hate to break your bubble, but Obama did say that in a speech. No way that Israel could ever exist if that happened. Everyone knows that and the current administration has several times tossed Israel under the bus.

Before calling someone sophomoric, you should really check your facts of what is being discussed. Don't get into the name calling as several on this forum seem to like to do. Might have to send them to bed without supper if they keep it up. Gets really boring and add nothing of substance to the discussions.

Also never say anything on this forum that you would not say to someone face to face.

[Guest]

New gaffe: Obama hails America's historic building of 'the Intercontinental Railroad'

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/09/obama-gaffe-jobs-act-speech-brent-spence-bridge-ohio.html

Yea, we can build one from New York to France.

[Guest]

The Palestinians and the Jews have been trying to live peacefully together for a couple thousand years. Sometimes there have been third parties who try to encourage them to get along, like we're doing now. Actually, the vast majority of Palestinians and Jews actually do get along, living and working together very peacefully, sometimes even on a friendly basis. It's primarily the political and religious leaders on both sides who continually agitate and cause problems.

So given the current situation, I have a question. I'm not trying to bait anyone and I recognize that the suggestion made by my question is a very short-term response to what has been a centuries-old problem, but here goes...

The majority of Muslims in the Middle East hate the U.S. There are some that choose to get along with us (like the Saudis) because we buy a lot of their oil, send them boatloads of money and provide them with a lot of weapons. But for the most part the Muslims don't like us, even the peaceful Palestinians who are finding a way to co-exist with the Jews on a day-to-day basis. They probably never will. I know I can't imagine a scenario where our relationship with the Islamic countries will be warm and fuzzy. Our politicians will call some of them "allies" (like we call Pakistan), but any clear-thinking person knows better.

So if that's the case, why don't we just forget about trying to encourage peace and trying to figure out who's right and who's wrong between the Palestinians and the Jews. Why not just throw our lot in with Israel, give them a lot of money and weapons--even the atomic kind--and let the parties sort their problems out themselves. We kind of know who'd win and that would be OK with us, wouldn't it?

What d'ya think?

[Guest]

The Palestinians and the Jews have been trying to live peacefully together for a couple thousand years. Sometimes there have been third parties who try to encourage them to get along, like we're doing now. Actually, the vast majority of Palestinians and Jews actually do get along, living and working together very peacefully, sometimes even on a friendly basis. It's primarily the political and religious leaders on both sides who continually agitate and cause problems.

So given the current situation, I have a question. I'm not trying to bait anyone and I recognize that the suggestion made by my question is a very short-term response to what has been a centuries-old problem, but here goes...

The majority of Muslims in the Middle East hate the U.S. There are some that choose to get along with us (like the Saudis) because we buy a lot of their oil, send them boatloads of money and provide them with a lot of weapons. But for the most part the Muslims don't like us, even the peaceful Palestinians who are finding a way to co-exist with the Jews on a day-to-day basis. They probably never will. I know I can't imagine a scenario where our relationship with the Islamic countries will be warm and fuzzy. Our politicians will call some of them "allies" (like we call Pakistan), but any clear-thinking person knows better.

So if that's the case, why don't we just forget about trying to encourage peace and trying to figure out who's right and who's wrong between the Palestinians and the Jews. Why not just throw our lot in with Israel, give them a lot of money and weapons--even the atomic kind--and let the parties sort their problems out themselves. We kind of know who'd win and that would be OK with us, wouldn't it?

What d'ya think?

I think we're already arming Israel and have been doing it for years and Israel is indeed nuclear with a submarine shield similar to what we use. But just like our commitment to NATO, it must be understood that an attack on Israel is an attack on us.

Like you said, we can never appease the Muslims, so we must stand firm against their ambitions.

[Guest]

I think we're already arming Israel and have been doing it for years and Israel is indeed nuclear with a submarine shield similar to what we use. But just like our commitment to NATO, it must be understood that an attack on Israel is an attack on us.

Like you said, we can never appease the Muslims, so we must stand firm against their ambitions.

Yea, but isn't our commander in chief sympathetic towards the muslims. I think Israel will breath easier when Obama is voted out in 2012.

[Guest]

New gaffe: Obama hails America's historic building of 'the Intercontinental Railroad'

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/09/obama-gaffe-jobs-act-speech-brent-spence-bridge-ohio.html

Yea, we can build one from New York to France.

Oh my!!!! Sounds like an impeachable offense to me. :cus:

[Guest]

Oh my!!!! Sounds like an impeachable offense to me. :cus:

Maybe not, if they won't impeach him for not being a natural born citizen, I guess he's off scot free again.:undecided:

[Guest]

vg...that comment explains the lunacy..Now I get it...I hope everyone else does too.

[Guest]

hrp01, once again you must get a copy of the United States Constitution and read it, especially the portion pertaining to NATURE BORN CITIZEN. In our President's own book he states that his FATHER was a Britsh Subject, then according to the Constitutional scholars, he IS NOT eligible to be the President.

So there you have it. Seems as if the current crop of criminals, both libs and conservs are in this con game together and are against us common folk. Hope that you belong to the common folk and not the criminals in Foggy Bottom.

[Guest]

hrp01, once again you must get a copy of the United States Constitution and read it, especially the portion pertaining to NATURE BORN CITIZEN. In our President's own book he states that his FATHER was a Britsh Subject, then according to the Constitutional scholars, he IS NOT eligible to be the President.

So there you have it. Seems as if the current crop of criminals, both libs and conservs are in this con game together and are against us common folk. Hope that you belong to the common folk and not the criminals in Foggy Bottom.

In their play book the end justifies the means. I think that they might really believe that they are the only ones able to help those at the "bottom"...Then when they get the "power" it rules them and selfish desires, greed, and arrogance takes over their lives. Just a thought.:sad:

[Guest]

Maybe not, if they won't impeach him for not being a natural born citizen, I guess he's off scot free again.:undecided:

Surely you gest.....and don't call me Shirley. :cus:

[Guest]

ijustlusit, hate to break your bubble, but Obama did say that in a speech. No way that Israel could ever exist if that happened. Everyone knows that and the current administration has several times tossed Israel under the bus.

Before calling someone sophomoric, you should really check your facts of what is being discussed. Don't get into the name calling as several on this forum seem to like to do. Might have to send them to bed without supper if they keep it up. Gets really boring and add nothing of substance to the discussions.

Also never say anything on this forum that you would not say to someone face to face.

Had you been reading recent threads, you might recall the one I started about how the President, face-to-face with the Israeli PM, mentioned starting discussions from the pre-67 position, and was strongly chastised by Netanyahu. But to the surprise of most of the world, Netanyahu later admitted this unthinkable idea might have some merit.
The originator of this thread missed all of this. Now a month or two later, he/she brings it up again, apparently not knowing all that transpired, showing that the post was simply designed as an excuse to call the President an idiot. THAT'S the garbage.

[Guest]

Why can't we have a discussion on something of importance? Whether or not people continue to argue that Barack Obama is or isn't a citizen is a worthless consumption of our brainpower. He is the POTUS. He was elected the POTUS. No legal effort to overturn that has been successful. He will be the POTUS until January 19, 2013 at least. Why in the world do we waste time continuing discussions like this?

[Guest]

It was started when I mentioned Obama's quote about the intercontinental railroad that the USA built. Apparently the lefties liked to yuck it up when Bush misspoke and bragged that Obama was an impeccable speaker. I guess they don't think misspoken words are funny anymore now that the president of his 57 states is in the White House.;)

[Guest]

It was started when I mentioned Obama's quote about the intercontinental railroad that the USA built. Apparently the lefties liked to yuck it up when Bush misspoke and bragged that Obama was an impeccable speaker. I guess they don't think misspoken words are funny anymore now that the president of his 57 states is in the White House.;)

The Organization of the Islamic Conference has 57 states. Coincidence? Yeah, okay, let's go with that.

It tells me a lot about this man who is our President. The classic Freudian slip.

[Guest]

The Organization of the Islamic Conference has 57 states. Coincidence? Yeah, okay, let's go with that.

It tells me a lot about this man who is our President. The classic Freudian slip.

I didn't know that. And you posted without attacking another poster or being malicious. Maybe we are starting to have civil discourse?

[Guest]

I didn't know that. And you posted without attacking another poster or being malicious. Maybe we are starting to have civil discourse?

:laugh::laugh::laugh:

[Guest]

Nice to see the lovefest with Richie and villagegolfer continues. Will be fun to see them comisserate in '12. :cus:

[Guest]

The Palestinians and the Jews have been trying to live peacefully together for a couple thousand years. Sometimes there have been third parties who try to encourage them to get along, like we're doing now. Actually, the vast majority of Palestinians and Jews actually do get along, living and working together very peacefully, sometimes even on a friendly basis. It's primarily the political and religious leaders on both sides who continually agitate and cause problems.

So given the current situation, I have a question. I'm not trying to bait anyone and I recognize that the suggestion made by my question is a very short-term response to what has been a centuries-old problem, but here goes...

The majority of Muslims in the Middle East hate the U.S. There are some that choose to get along with us (like the Saudis) because we buy a lot of their oil, send them boatloads of money and provide them with a lot of weapons. But for the most part the Muslims don't like us, even the peaceful Palestinians who are finding a way to co-exist with the Jews on a day-to-day basis. They probably never will. I know I can't imagine a scenario where our relationship with the Islamic countries will be warm and fuzzy. Our politicians will call some of them "allies" (like we call Pakistan), but any clear-thinking person knows better.

So if that's the case, why don't we just forget about trying to encourage peace and trying to figure out who's right and who's wrong between the Palestinians and the Jews. Why not just throw our lot in with Israel, give them a lot of money and weapons--even the atomic kind--and let the parties sort their problems out themselves. We kind of know who'd win and that would be OK with us, wouldn't it?

What d'ya think?

Your assessment is succinctly brilliant. You've got my vote for Secretary of State. In the long term, I would also like to see our relationship with India improved significantly as a part of the new diplomacy.

[Guest]

Your assessment is succinctly brilliant. You've got my vote for Secretary of State. In the long term, I would also like to see our relationship with India improved significantly as a part of the new diplomacy.

:agree::BigApplause:

[Guest]

The Palestinians and the Jews have been trying to live peacefully together for a couple thousand years. Sometimes there have been third parties who try to encourage them to get along, like we're doing now. Actually, the vast majority of Palestinians and Jews actually do get along, living and working together very peacefully, sometimes even on a friendly basis. It's primarily the political and religious leaders on both sides who continually agitate and cause problems.

So given the current situation, I have a question. I'm not trying to bait anyone and I recognize that the suggestion made by my question is a very short-term response to what has been a centuries-old problem, but here goes...

The majority of Muslims in the Middle East hate the U.S. There are some that choose to get along with us (like the Saudis) because we buy a lot of their oil, send them boatloads of money and provide them with a lot of weapons. But for the most part the Muslims don't like us, even the peaceful Palestinians who are finding a way to co-exist with the Jews on a day-to-day basis. They probably never will. I know I can't imagine a scenario where our relationship with the Islamic countries will be warm and fuzzy. Our politicians will call some of them "allies" (like we call Pakistan), but any clear-thinking person knows better.

So if that's the case, why don't we just forget about trying to encourage peace and trying to figure out who's right and who's wrong between the Palestinians and the Jews. Why not just throw our lot in with Israel, give them a lot of money and weapons--even the atomic kind--and let the parties sort their problems out themselves. We kind of know who'd win and that would be OK with us, wouldn't it?

What d'ya think?

I cannot see anything potentially productive in your position. And it is nothing but dangerous to give nuclear weapons to anyone, regardless of how committed we are to them.

Surely you jest that "we kind of know who'd win..." is a likely result of arming Israel to the teeth then withdrawing to see how things play out. Very likely it would eventually be "we kind of have a bigger mess than ever".

Let's resist simple solutions. Containment, communication and mediation isn't a bad idea, especially for a conflict measured in milleniums. As long as we've had our hand in it's one of the world situations we haven't screwed up. And hey, there've been a bunch of other miracles over in that area. Why not another one?

[Guest]

I cannot see anything potentially productive in your position. And it is nothing but dangerous to give nuclear weapons to anyone, regardless of how committed we are to them.

Surely you jest that "we kind of know who'd win..." is a likely result of arming Israel to the teeth then withdrawing to see how things play out. Very likely it would eventually be "we kind of have a bigger mess than ever".

Let's resist simple solutions. Containment, communication and mediation isn't a bad idea, especially for a conflict measured in milleniums. As long as we've had our hand in it's one of the world situations we haven't screwed up. And hey, there've been a bunch of other miracles over in that area. Why not another one?

Yea, and in the meantime the clock is ticking in Iran. Tick, tick, tick, tick.:boom:

[Guest]

Yea, and in the meantime the clock is ticking in Iran. Tick, tick, tick, tick.:boom:

So I gather you are suggesting that the answer to dealing with Iran's potential nuclear weapons capability is to give nuclear weapons to Israel.
I can't help but think that would almost insure the possibility of nuclear war. But if you keep nuclear weapons out of the hands of the Israelis in the near future, it is almost certain the Israelis will find a way to 'disarm' Iran by their own devices. They have a real knack for neutralizing the advantages of their potential enemies.

[Guest]

So I gather you are suggesting that the answer to dealing with Iran's potential nuclear weapons capability is to give nuclear weapons to Israel.
I can't help but think that would almost insure the possibility of nuclear war. But if you keep nuclear weapons out of the hands of the Israelis in the near future, it is almost certain the Israelis will find a way to 'disarm' Iran by their own devices. They have a real knack for neutralizing the advantages of their potential enemies.

Israel is already nuclear and has been for years, in one of the world's worst kept secrets. It's the only reason it's still in existence.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/10/20/why-israel-should-declare-itself-a-nuclear-power.html

http://www.jewishpost.com/archives/news/israels-nuclear-power.html