deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on May 19, 2011 15:40:54 GMT -5
Dezi like I said very limited understanding of whats going on, I was mostly kidding about the bombing part I am not the type to advocate or agree with such things. Glad to hear that , the bombing, and whole i am very familier with what's going on there, I will be the first to say a easy solution, especially when you are talking such a small piece of land where every mile, hector what ever the measurement is so vital to the parties, they all have a stake in it, is not going to be the way. A solution will cost a lot of tears, sweat, loud voices and table banging I am sure, and I hate to say it, but the real possibility of seriouse actions being taken against those who do the negotiations by those who won't agree with what is negotiated by them.
|
|
henryclay
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 5, 2011 19:03:37 GMT -5
Posts: 3,685
|
Post by henryclay on May 19, 2011 15:51:10 GMT -5
LadyLove, thank you for your explanation, but your question of "Why not the mainland?" caught my eye. Wikipedia puts it this way: Mainland Japan is defined to consist of several major islands (Hokkaidô, Honshû, Kyûshû, Shikoku) and many minor ones. The first city "bombed" was Hiroshima, which is on Honshu, along with Tokyo. The second city, Nagasaki is on Kyushu. In particular, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were were among several cities that had been relatively spared througout the war specifically for that purpose. Although Hiroshima was the primary target for the first "bomb", Nagasaki was not a primary target. The weather intervened and the primary target, Kokura, was spared. Kokura is also on the island of Kyushu. You are correct that the hope was for Japan to agree to end the war. But there would not be any more bombs if they did not. There weren't any more bombs. Thank you again.
|
|
reasonfreedom
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 8:50:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,722
|
Post by reasonfreedom on May 19, 2011 16:14:51 GMT -5
Alright, there is two things I see wrong with his message.
1) The U.S. is having great economic issues and he is delving to much into foreign countries' issues.
2) Wants to give Egypt 2 Billion for economic support/debt relief. Somebody pinch me, I want to make sure we have a 13 trillion dollar national debt. This fact right here should show why you should not trust any spending cut bill produced from the administration.
We have Afghanistan and Iraq wars and now he wants to jump in between Israel and the Palestine. I appreciate his idealism and imagination, but when he is at the edge of the cliff and jumps off thinking that his arms can reach the moon to grab onto I would think the shock of reality on his face would be some expression.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 2, 2024 14:43:24 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2011 16:41:18 GMT -5
Because Obama is not an American president as much as (he thinks) a global community organizer. Won't work if no one listens. Throwing our money at Egypt right now-- may as well cut a check to the Muslim Brotherhood.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on May 19, 2011 17:03:30 GMT -5
none of their thought mean a f in the wind..just yadda, yadda..Obama bashing or haven't a clue as to the issues.And posting reams of crap about the Middle East and Muslims makes you so well informed? If I wanted to read all that garbage I'd go to the news sites you pull it from, not here. Mr Burns what seems to be your problem with my threads, my posts? You usually show your disinterest by your posting of the ZZZZZ's, now your calling it c***, and are complaining that if you wanted to read the what is happening in this part of the world , it's garbage in your mind, you could go to news sites, which is true if you wanted to spend the time, and as far as being so well informed, the articles posted are not my thoughts and rather then just post them with no comments, I express my views of what the story is about. I find articles of interest, usually of current events, usually , but not always, foreign affairs of a important area of the globe, post the article of interest with my own thoughts on the topic, a link and a bit of the article for interest and then stand back. Most seem to get some response so there is interest. granted some fall quickly away, no interest, [sigh]. Naturally , to question my ideas is the right of the readers, and many do, sometimes agreeing, other time questioning my ideas which I welcome. You see, that's what we do here, it's a Political/Market board where what is really wanted is original ideas and thoughts that can be discussed, not agree with, but discussed. Most of the zone is fluff, and I like fluff, fluff is good. However, there is some important things happening in Politics and events in the country, in the world, that affects us personally in the pocket book as well as emotionally, and that has many of us concerned. Why your so negative on these types of threads I have no idea, hard to comprehend. I know it's not reading skills so I am assuming you have a personal thing here and my suggestion is, why not get over it, get involved, find something of interest, try posting your own thread. I promise I will visit and if interested will be glad to respond, and if no interest, promise not to post zzzz's , just mosey away. Possible you might do the same with threads you have no interest in, which is your right, just mosey away.
|
|
henryclay
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 5, 2011 19:03:37 GMT -5
Posts: 3,685
|
Post by henryclay on May 19, 2011 17:11:53 GMT -5
Whatever happens between Israel and the Palestinians, and however the wars go in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Lybia, and Egypt, and wherever else the arabs are rattling swords, I would think any talk of "nuking 'em back to the stone age", or "turning that place into a glass parking lot" may not project a realistic solution to anything. We already have enough "enemies" and it's probably a good time to remember that some of the countries that don't like us too much not only also have nuclear capabilities, but they may have powerful friends who will be happy to see some of them sent our way.
The myth that the Cold War was fought mostly by detente was not a myth at all. It was the real liklihood of Mutually Administered Destruction, (MAD), that kept the nukes inside the silos.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on May 19, 2011 17:19:00 GMT -5
Whatever happens between Israel and the Palestinians, and however the wars go in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Lybia, and Egypt, and wherever else the arabs are rattling swords, I would think any talk of "nuking 'em back to the stone age", or "turning that place into a glass parking lot" may not project a realistic solution to anything. We already have enough "enemies" and it's probably a good time to remember that some of the countries that don't like us too much not only also have nuclear capabilities, but they may have powerful friends who will be happy to see some of them sent our way. The myth that the Cold War was fought mostly by detente was not a myth at all. It was the real liklihood of Mutually Administered Destruction, (MAD), that kept the nukes inside the silos.
|
|
workpublic
Junior Associate
Catch and release please
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 14:01:48 GMT -5
Posts: 5,551
Favorite Drink: Heineken
|
Post by workpublic on May 19, 2011 17:25:47 GMT -5
When one signs a peace agreement, or a settlement such as this, then there has to be trust , as well as guarantees
no shit. are you saying isreal always breaks the agreements
|
|
humok
Established Member
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 9:33:39 GMT -5
Posts: 265
|
Post by humok on May 19, 2011 17:50:24 GMT -5
Many still cannot face that he is a muslim and his actions show it more all the time....How long do you think it is going to be before we have trouble in Yemen and Venezuela? I predict they are next on the hit list.
|
|
|
Post by lakhota on May 19, 2011 17:58:05 GMT -5
What did Obama say that was "anti-Semitic"? He simply said Palestinians can keep "some" of their land if they recognize the "thief's" right to exist. Is that about it? As a Native American, it's easy for me to see how many Palestinians may perceive it that way. Obama Call For 1967 Borders For Israel To Make For Awkward Meeting With Netanyahu WASHINGTON -- The headlines made it clear. From New York to Tel Aviv, President Obama's call for a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians with borders based on the lines following the Six Day War of 1967 was a first for a sitting American president. "The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states," the president said toward the end of a broader speech on the Middle East. "The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves and reach their potential in a sovereign and contiguous state." More: www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/19/obama-call-for-1967-borde_n_864440.htmlIsrael Borders Of 1967 Would Be 'Indefensible': Netanyahu JERUSALEM — Israel's prime minister on Thursday gave a cool reception to President Barack Obama's Mideast policy speech, warning a withdrawal from the West Bank wold leave Israel vulnerable to attack and setting up what could be a tense meeting at the White House. www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/19/israel-borders-obama-middle-east-speech_n_864306.html
|
|
|
Post by lakhota on May 19, 2011 18:50:15 GMT -5
Right-Wing Media's Deranged Attack: Obama "Sided With Terrorists" In Middle East SpeechRight-Wing media unleashed a crazed onslaught after President Obama's speech on the Middle East, outrageously asserting that Obama "sided with terrorists" by saying that the 1967 borders should guide negotiations over the formation of a Palestinian state. But this position is nothing new, and American Jewish groups praised today's speech.More: mediamatters.org/research/201105190045
|
|
|
Post by lakhota on May 19, 2011 18:54:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by lakhota on May 19, 2011 18:58:01 GMT -5
Obama's Big Mideast Speech: Hits the Right Notes, Not a Whole Lot of SubstanceObama offered plenty of airy rhetoric about advancing our "values," but actions speak louder than words and the world continues to await some tangible results. A super-power is like a super-tanker: it doesn't turn quickly. In his second major address about America's relationship with the “Muslim world,” Barack Obama continued a course correction that's been woefully slow for his base at home and much of his overseas audience, yet has been frighteningly fast for some. More: www.alternet.org/world/151012/obama%27s_big_mideast_speech%3A_hits_the_right_notes%2C_not_a_whole_lot_of_substance/?page=entire
|
|
ameiko
Familiar Member
Joined: Jan 16, 2011 10:48:22 GMT -5
Posts: 812
|
Post by ameiko on May 19, 2011 19:10:44 GMT -5
The man is either completely insane or a closet Muslim who is doing his best to help create a Muslim celiphate.
1. He does nothing to support the Iranian revolutionaries who seek to overthrow a hostile Muslim theocracy.
2. He DOES support the Muslim Brotherhood and the beasts who almost killed a journalist when they gang raped her over a US ally of several decades.
3. He lends the US military to help remove Quadafi from power in Lybia and told the world the man must go. Now I HATE that SOB but he has been playing by our rules since the US invaded Afghanistan and Iraq: no known ties to terrorists, keep the oil flowing, and no Muslim theocracy.
4. NOW, Obama has tossed Isreal under the bus by demanding that it give up territory to the Palestinians without even the courtsedy of conferring with Israel first. Remember, the Palestinians are the same who have broken EVERY single treaty with Israel, toss rockets into Israeli settlements EVERY day, voted in a terrorist group that seeks to not only level Israel but commit genocide upon the Jews and conduct Jihad (it's in their charter), and cheers when settlers are murdered, even children.
Maybe these are ends times and the guys who think this Saturday is Rapture day might not be as crazy as we think. Heck, they can't be any crazier than the people who want to re-elect this utter failure of a President.
|
|
ameiko
Familiar Member
Joined: Jan 16, 2011 10:48:22 GMT -5
Posts: 812
|
Post by ameiko on May 19, 2011 19:17:45 GMT -5
To those who think this move will lead to peace, you are insane. You can not make peace with a people who want to kill you, just as the jews, gypsies, homosexuals, and others could never make peace with the Nazis because the Nazis wanted to KILL THEM! The only peace in this case is the peace of death when the ovens are ignited one last time and the butchers have finished their work.
The Palestinians have broken every peace treaty, elected terrorists (who have vowed to wipe out Israel, kill the Jews, and conduct Jihad) to lead them. They teach their children to think of Jews as pigs and rats and praise sons who blow themselves up so they can murder innocents on buses and pizza parlors.
They had made their terms clear: to the death. The US and Israel must accept that and bring war as needed or allow Israel to be slaughtered.
The only "middle ground" would be a complete disengagement: bring every single Israeli to the US to settle here but that will not stifle the rage in the Muslim heart; they have warred on the west before the US existed and will continue to do so until the words of the rapist, warlord, and slaver Muhammed reign over all of humanity.
Freedom or Slavery, War or Peaceful March to a Death Camp: it's just that clear.
|
|
handyman2
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 23:56:33 GMT -5
Posts: 3,087
|
Post by handyman2 on May 19, 2011 19:21:48 GMT -5
Obama should have finished his statement. He should have said if Israel pulls back to the borders established in the 1967 accord and any country then attacks them, we will in 48 hours bombed them further back into the stone age without any warning. That would close the issue once and for all.
|
|
humok
Established Member
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 9:33:39 GMT -5
Posts: 265
|
Post by humok on May 19, 2011 19:37:10 GMT -5
Finish his statement? He did......He simply cannot go against his teachings as a child and young man and defend Israel.
|
|
|
Post by lakhota on May 19, 2011 20:02:00 GMT -5
Sen. Graham: 'I Am Willing To Take The Bruises And Stand By Obama'WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama had two Republican audiences for his Thursday speech on U.S.-Middle East policy. One was made up of GOP lawmakers on Capitol Hill, some of whom gave a surprising show of support for Obama. The other was comprised of Republican presidential hopefuls who were seemingly competing with each other to come up with the most vitriolic responses. Shortly after Obama's speech, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) told reporters that he is prepared to go out on a limb for the president to support his plan for investing billions of dollars to spur democracy in the Middle East and North Africa. “I am willing to take the bruises and stand by Obama to engage countries like Egypt and Tunisia and stay involved in Libya and finish the job in Iraq,” Graham said. “I am willing to take American dollars at a time when we’re flat broke, go back home and suffer the consequences of sending aid to Egypt at a time when South Carolina has 10 percent unemployment because I believe the Egyptian revolution is about a new way of doing business that’s better for us.” Graham, who has traveled extensively in the Middle East, said he thought Obama made two mistakes in his speech, however. The first was talking about Israeli settlements, and the second was focusing on border issues without addressing the overall complexity of Israel-Palestine negotiations. “Our friends in Israel are very upset that he only focused on borders,” said the South Carolina Republican. “There are many other aspects of this deal that are being overshadowed.” But overall, he added, Obama "did a really good job."More: www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/19/obama-middle-east-speech-republican-reactions_n_864455.html
|
|
|
Post by lakhota on May 19, 2011 20:05:47 GMT -5
|
|
cme1201
Junior Associate
Tennis Elbow, Jock Itch, and Athletes Foot, every man has a sports life!
Joined: Apr 6, 2011 13:55:07 GMT -5
Posts: 5,503
|
Post by cme1201 on May 19, 2011 20:09:00 GMT -5
Graham said. “I am willing to take American dollars at a time when we’re flat broke, go back home and suffer the consequences of sending aid to Egypt at a time when South Carolina has 10 percent unemployment because I believe the Egyptian revolution is about a new way of doing business that’s better for us.”
And this kind of thinking is what is destroying our economy, were broke but, were going to give you money, kind of like saying you take checks great I thought you wanted money.
|
|
|
Post by lakhota on May 19, 2011 20:15:39 GMT -5
Graham said. “I am willing to take American dollars at a time when we’re flat broke, go back home and suffer the consequences of sending aid to Egypt at a time when South Carolina has 10 percent unemployment because I believe the Egyptian revolution is about a new way of doing business that’s better for us.”And this kind of thinking is what is destroying our economy, were broke but, were going to give you money, kind of like saying you take checks great I thought you wanted money. Well answer this: Why does Israel need over $3 billion yearly in U.S. aid?
|
|
SweetVirginia
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 17:56:15 GMT -5
Posts: 1,360
|
Post by SweetVirginia on May 19, 2011 20:28:50 GMT -5
Whatever happens between Israel and the Palestinians, and however the wars go in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Lybia, and Egypt, and wherever else the arabs are rattling swords, I would think any talk of "nuking 'em back to the stone age", or "turning that place into a glass parking lot" may not project a realistic solution to anything. We already have enough "enemies" and it's probably a good time to remember that some of the countries that don't like us too much not only also have nuclear capabilities, but they may have powerful friends who will be happy to see some of them sent our way. The myth that the Cold War was fought mostly by detente was not a myth at all. It was the real liklihood of Mutually Administered Destruction, (MAD), that kept the nukes inside the silos. Henry, I know you are a conservative and I dont agree with many of your views, still, you present your views in a very reasonable and sound way, and I just wanted you to know, I appreciate that. So, karma coming your way.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on May 19, 2011 20:33:25 GMT -5
|
|
cme1201
Junior Associate
Tennis Elbow, Jock Itch, and Athletes Foot, every man has a sports life!
Joined: Apr 6, 2011 13:55:07 GMT -5
Posts: 5,503
|
Post by cme1201 on May 19, 2011 21:08:06 GMT -5
Graham said. “I am willing to take American dollars at a time when we’re flat broke, go back home and suffer the consequences of sending aid to Egypt at a time when South Carolina has 10 percent unemployment because I believe the Egyptian revolution is about a new way of doing business that’s better for us.”And this kind of thinking is what is destroying our economy, were broke but, were going to give you money, kind of like saying you take checks great I thought you wanted money. Well answer this: Why does Israel need over $3 billion yearly in U.S. aid? And as I have said in other posts lakhota if you would bother to read more than your own, We shouldn't.
|
|
|
Post by lakhota on May 19, 2011 21:18:41 GMT -5
Excellent. Sorry I missed your previous statements on the matter.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on May 19, 2011 21:34:05 GMT -5
Is this President going out of his way, to make sure he is not re-elected?
Looks like a go for Republican Congress and Republican White House. Now, how many Supreme Court seats might come up after 2012?
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on May 19, 2011 22:22:08 GMT -5
How so, didn't say no adjustments wouldn't be made, they have carefully put settlements on high ground, strategically where they could, and they have many settlements, real towns put where they want them and most would stay with them. Your looking for what, no state or a state with Israeli settlements between all areas as you go from A to B that one would have to pass through Israeli lines to go visit mom every time they wanted to go from a to B . Also how does a State function in commerce, moving product from A to B if broken up as it seems you might want. Or is it no State at all, status quo. Israel population and strategic production would be too close to the border they would go from 45 miles down to 8 with no room for there military . Do not forget they will be bordering people who have repeatedly called for there extinction. Still doesn't answer my question. Obama said a Palestinian state that is viable, and that means continuous areas of land under their control, not broken up into little settlements that to get to A from B one has to do miles around or go through areas of suspicions, being stopped , identified , let through , held up, when your just trying to travel in your own State. Also traveling through populations who all watch you with contempt from the adults to the children, wishing you were not present. There would be security walls still in place I am sure, not coming down so fast, security areas and remember, your talking about a independent state that has now and will have more , security and police forces to keep order. In fact on the West Bank, PA security has been praised by the Israelis for their cooperation and professionalism and they are not even a State right now.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on May 19, 2011 23:16:41 GMT -5
What did Obama say that was "anti-Semitic"? He simply said Palestinians can keep "some" of their land if they recognize the "thief's" right to exist. Is that about it? As a Native American, it's easy for me to see how many Palestinians may perceive it that way. Obama Call For 1967 Borders For Israel To Make For Awkward Meeting With Netanyahu WASHINGTON -- The headlines made it clear. From New York to Tel Aviv, President Obama's call for a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians with borders based on the lines following the Six Day War of 1967 was a first for a sitting American president. "The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states," the president said toward the end of a broader speech on the Middle East. "The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves and reach their potential in a sovereign and contiguous state." More: www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/19/obama-call-for-1967-borde_n_864440.htmlIsrael Borders Of 1967 Would Be 'Indefensible': Netanyahu JERUSALEM — Israel's prime minister on Thursday gave a cool reception to President Barack Obama's Mideast policy speech, warning a withdrawal from the West Bank wold leave Israel vulnerable to attack and setting up what could be a tense meeting at the White House. www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/19/israel-borders-obama-middle-east-speech_n_864306.htmlThanks , glad you are keeping your feelings front and center, keeps everything in context. "What did Obama say that was "anti-Semitic"? He simply said Palestinians can keep "some" of their land if they recognize the "thief's" right to exist. Is that about it? As a Native American, it's easy for me to see how many Palestinians may perceive it that way." "if they recognize the "thief's" right to exist.".. another known cliche of those who have a low opinion of, keep it up, just reinforcing your feelings. No thieves , in the early 19th century when they, Jews from the European East " first started to come in #'s to Palestine, [Israel not yet born} they didn't steal land, they purchased land, over priced. Much of it Malaria ridden swamp land from absent ownership, from wealthy owners who lived in Cairo, Istanbul , other Arab capitals. People who had never set foot on these lands. Money collected by pennies in a can in retail stores throughout the world as Jews went about their daily lives. Swamp land drained and made fertile , planted by hand, few tractors, dredgers, many dying of the diseases as they worked. "As a Native American, it's easy for me to see how many Palestinians may perceive it that way." While I can understand the feelings of the Native American " that the last thing that was good for them and theirs was the discovery of the land by the Europeans and then the settlement of, to expect to hold their land against a more advanced society, no matter what the nobility of it in fables and stories, in the reality of life it would never happen. To expect that these changes will take place peacefully and fairly, that to is a fallacy. Possible better leadership by those who could understand what was happening and coming might have made a softer landing possible, but that at that time was not possible. The thing I wonder now though, what is the excuse today, the way so many live, where they live the problems so many have, known fact, admitted to by so many of their own people. For all of the above, here I agree with the President and feel the reaction of many is just ignorance and emotional and a excuse to diss the Potus who seem to enjoy that endeavor, it seems part of their daily life.. Netanyahu is not my leader, he is the leader of another State and if he wants what he wants from our/my country, and it seems he does, then in my opinion, to diss my President publicly, to embarrass him and his ideas , publickly, to publicly get involved in our electoral process, he is, using a possible lack of political support by a group as a hammer against the POTUS, a idiot I am not and neither are the rest of you here who are reading this, to me, I don't appreciate that interference in our ways and business. It is obvious, this foreign leader is playing local politics in a arena he does not have a right to , he has no chips in this game. My answer to him , good thing I am not th POTUS, is stay home, F off..and if Obama goes down in his re election bid, rather then kiss this ones arse..better to kick it , and see where the chips fall. I have great respect for the State of Israel, want it safe , am willing to help pay for their protection, and even defend it if needed, though so far, they have never asked for our people to defend them. However, as we have to, supposed to, understand where they are coming from and their concerns, that works both ways . They have to understand we , our leaders have a hell of a lot more on their plate then just their tiny piece of the globe and to dismiss all our concerns and obligations and actually diss our leaders, because they don't cow tow to their wants, F em. The problem is, they know about our other concerns, they just don't care. What the POTUS suggested in todays speech , was a answer to what is happening in this important part of the Globe. he had to be strong but also Presedential, and he was.. He should/could have mentioned the Saudis, however, understanding the fact, they , Saudis are the 800 LB guerrilla in the room, and to get into it with them, who lets face it, are everything the president does not see as a viable way to govern and be, if Gas hit $250 a barrel due to more anger then there is now, just a shutting off the taps a bit, how would you all feel. For the Israeli leader to open his trap, before meeting the President, showing his stupidity, arrogance, it was not good, or possible even declaring war on the POTUS, haven't a clue his desires or agenda before he even met with him, one lousy day, either he is in trouble politically at hiome, has lost it, is scared, or is just incompetent, possible a mix of all of the above. The thing is, the PM does not want to change, does not want a change, nada, status quo is the way to go, no matter what is going down around him, and that is not good thing.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on May 19, 2011 23:17:02 GMT -5
What did Obama say that was "anti-Semitic"? He simply said Palestinians can keep "some" of their land if they recognize the "thief's" right to exist. Is that about it? As a Native American, it's easy for me to see how many Palestinians may perceive it that way. Obama Call For 1967 Borders For Israel To Make For Awkward Meeting With Netanyahu WASHINGTON -- The headlines made it clear. From New York to Tel Aviv, President Obama's call for a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians with borders based on the lines following the Six Day War of 1967 was a first for a sitting American president. "The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states," the president said toward the end of a broader speech on the Middle East. "The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves and reach their potential in a sovereign and contiguous state." More: www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/19/obama-call-for-1967-borde_n_864440.htmlIsrael Borders Of 1967 Would Be 'Indefensible': Netanyahu JERUSALEM — Israel's prime minister on Thursday gave a cool reception to President Barack Obama's Mideast policy speech, warning a withdrawal from the West Bank wold leave Israel vulnerable to attack and setting up what could be a tense meeting at the White House. www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/19/israel-borders-obama-middle-east-speech_n_864306.htmlThanks , glad you are keeping your feelings front and center, keeps everything in context. "What did Obama say that was "anti-Semitic"? He simply said Palestinians can keep "some" of their land if they recognize the "thief's" right to exist. Is that about it? As a Native American, it's easy for me to see how many Palestinians may perceive it that way." "if they recognize the "thief's" right to exist.".. another known cliche of those who have a low opinion of, keep it up, just reinforcing your feelings. No thieves , in the early 19th century when they, Jews from the European East " first started to come in #'s to Palestine, [Israel not yet born} they didn't steal land, they purchased land, over priced. Much of it Malaria ridden swamp land from absent ownership, from wealthy owners who lived in Cairo, Istanbul , other Arab capitals. People who had never set foot on these lands. Money collected by pennies in a can in retail stores throughout the world as Jews went about their daily lives. Swamp land drained and made fertile , planted by hand, few tractors, dredgers, many dying of the diseases as they worked. "As a Native American, it's easy for me to see how many Palestinians may perceive it that way." While I can understand the feelings of the Native American " that the last thing that was good for them and theirs was the discovery of the land by the Europeans and then the settlement of, to expect to hold their land against a more advanced society, no matter what the nobility of it in fables and stories, in the reality of life it would never happen. To expect that these changes will take place peacefully and fairly, that to is a fallacy. Possible better leadership by those who could understand what was happening and coming might have made a softer landing possible, but that at that time was not possible. The thing I wonder now though, what is the excuse today, the way so many live, where they live the problems so many have, known fact, admitted to by so many of their own people. For all of the above, here I agree with the President and feel the reaction of many is just ignorance and emotional and a excuse to diss the Potus who seem to enjoy that endeavor, it seems part of their daily life.. Netanyahu is not my leader, he is the leader of another State and if he wants what he wants from our/my country, and it seems he does, then in my opinion, to diss my President publicly, to embarrass him and his ideas , publickly, to publicly get involved in our electoral process, he is, using a possible lack of political support by a group as a hammer against the POTUS, a idiot I am not and neither are the rest of you here who are reading this, to me, I don't appreciate that interference in our ways and business. It is obvious, this foreign leader is playing local politics in a arena he does not have a right to , he has no chips in this game. My answer to him , good thing I am not th POTUS, is stay home, F off..and if Obama goes down in his re election bid, rather then kiss this ones arse..better to kick it , and see where the chips fall. I have great respect for the State of Israel, want it safe , am willing to help pay for their protection, and even defend it if needed, though so far, they have never asked for our people to defend them. However, as we have to, supposed to, understand where they are coming from and their concerns, that works both ways . They have to understand we , our leaders have a hell of a lot more on their plate then just their tiny piece of the globe and to dismiss all our concerns and obligations and actually diss our leaders, because they don't cow tow to their wants, F em. The problem is, they know about our other concerns, they just don't care. What the POTUS suggested in todays speech , was a answer to what is happening in this important part of the Globe. he had to be strong but also Presedential, and he was.. He should/could have mentioned the Saudis, however, understanding the fact, they , Saudis are the 800 LB guerrilla in the room, and to get into it with them, who lets face it, are everything the president does not see as a viable way to govern and be, if Gas hit $250 a barrel due to more anger then there is now, just a shutting off the taps a bit, how would you all feel. For the Israeli leader to open his trap, before meeting the President, showing his stupidity, arrogance, it was not good, or possible even declaring war on the POTUS, haven't a clue his desires or agenda before he even met with him, one lousy day, either he is in trouble politically at hiome, has lost it, is scared, or is just incompetent, possible a mix of all of the above. The thing is, the PM does not want to change, does not want a change, nada, status quo is the way to go, no matter what is going down around him, and that is not good thing.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on May 19, 2011 23:17:22 GMT -5
What did Obama say that was "anti-Semitic"? He simply said Palestinians can keep "some" of their land if they recognize the "thief's" right to exist. Is that about it? As a Native American, it's easy for me to see how many Palestinians may perceive it that way. Obama Call For 1967 Borders For Israel To Make For Awkward Meeting With Netanyahu WASHINGTON -- The headlines made it clear. From New York to Tel Aviv, President Obama's call for a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians with borders based on the lines following the Six Day War of 1967 was a first for a sitting American president. "The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states," the president said toward the end of a broader speech on the Middle East. "The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves and reach their potential in a sovereign and contiguous state." More: www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/19/obama-call-for-1967-borde_n_864440.htmlIsrael Borders Of 1967 Would Be 'Indefensible': Netanyahu JERUSALEM — Israel's prime minister on Thursday gave a cool reception to President Barack Obama's Mideast policy speech, warning a withdrawal from the West Bank wold leave Israel vulnerable to attack and setting up what could be a tense meeting at the White House. www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/19/israel-borders-obama-middle-east-speech_n_864306.htmlThanks , glad you are keeping your feelings front and center, keeps everything in context. "What did Obama say that was "anti-Semitic"? He simply said Palestinians can keep "some" of their land if they recognize the "thief's" right to exist. Is that about it? As a Native American, it's easy for me to see how many Palestinians may perceive it that way." "if they recognize the "thief's" right to exist.".. another known cliche of those who have a low opinion of, keep it up, just reinforcing your feelings. No thieves , in the early 19th century when they, Jews from the European East " first started to come in #'s to Palestine, [Israel not yet born} they didn't steal land, they purchased land, over priced. Much of it Malaria ridden swamp land from absent ownership, from wealthy owners who lived in Cairo, Istanbul , other Arab capitals. People who had never set foot on these lands. Money collected by pennies in a can in retail stores throughout the world as Jews went about their daily lives. Swamp land drained and made fertile , planted by hand, few tractors, dredgers, many dying of the diseases as they worked. "As a Native American, it's easy for me to see how many Palestinians may perceive it that way." While I can understand the feelings of the Native American " that the last thing that was good for them and theirs was the discovery of the land by the Europeans and then the settlement of, to expect to hold their land against a more advanced society, no matter what the nobility of it in fables and stories, in the reality of life it would never happen. To expect that these changes will take place peacefully and fairly, that to is a fallacy. Possible better leadership by those who could understand what was happening and coming might have made a softer landing possible, but that at that time was not possible. The thing I wonder now though, what is the excuse today, the way so many live, where they live the problems so many have, known fact, admitted to by so many of their own people. For all of the above, here I agree with the President and feel the reaction of many is just ignorance and emotional and a excuse to diss the Potus who seem to enjoy that endeavor, it seems part of their daily life.. Netanyahu is not my leader, he is the leader of another State and if he wants what he wants from our/my country, and it seems he does, then in my opinion, to diss my President publicly, to embarrass him and his ideas , publickly, to publicly get involved in our electoral process, he is, using a possible lack of political support by a group as a hammer against the POTUS, a idiot I am not and neither are the rest of you here who are reading this, to me, I don't appreciate that interference in our ways and business. It is obvious, this foreign leader is playing local politics in a arena he does not have a right to , he has no chips in this game. My answer to him , good thing I am not th POTUS, is stay home, F off..and if Obama goes down in his re election bid, rather then kiss this ones arse..better to kick it , and see where the chips fall. I have great respect for the State of Israel, want it safe , am willing to help pay for their protection, and even defend it if needed, though so far, they have never asked for our people to defend them. However, as we have to, supposed to, understand where they are coming from and their concerns, that works both ways . They have to understand we , our leaders have a hell of a lot more on their plate then just their tiny piece of the globe and to dismiss all our concerns and obligations and actually diss our leaders, because they don't cow tow to their wants, F em. The problem is, they know about our other concerns, they just don't care. What the POTUS suggested in todays speech , was a answer to what is happening in this important part of the Globe. he had to be strong but also Presedential, and he was.. He should/could have mentioned the Saudis, however, understanding the fact, they , Saudis are the 800 LB guerrilla in the room, and to get into it with them, who lets face it, are everything the president does not see as a viable way to govern and be, if Gas hit $250 a barrel due to more anger then there is now, just a shutting off the taps a bit, how would you all feel. For the Israeli leader to open his trap, before meeting the President, showing his stupidity, arrogance, it was not good, or possible even declaring war on the POTUS, haven't a clue his desires or agenda before he even met with him, one lousy day, either he is in trouble politically at hiome, has lost it, is scared, or is just incompetent, possible a mix of all of the above. The thing is, the PM does not want to change, does not want a change, nada, status quo is the way to go, no matter what is going down around him, and that is not good thing.
|
|