Posted on 05/31/2010 2:54:20 PM PDT by Islaminaction
Ask Barney Frank.
That will never happen, but it almost might be worth it to have every Jew in this country vote straight Republican in November.
Larger numbers of planes does you no good if they’re destroyed before they even see the enemy.
I disagree. The US would join with Turkey under this administration.
Israel simply needs to be ambushed in the right way, so the president can claim profound horror at what Israel has had to do.
I suspect a small yield neuton nuke engaging an Iranian nuclear weaponry facility would have collateral damage. The president would then have his cause for breaking ranks with Israel. Also, the numbers of Jews in this country is extremely low in terms of percentage of population. If the democrats can gain Hispanics in huge border-crossing numbers as voters, they will throw the Jewish democrats under the bus faster than you can say Mordecai and Haman.
I’m of the opinion that Obama’s ordering the fleet into the Persian Gulf and across land in the Mediterranean Sea is not designed to defend Israel but instead to deter Israel.
You miss the point. Turkey has a very modern air force including AWACs and tankers and a modern air defense system. They will not be easy to defeat. They are not Syria or Egypt.
Small (but important) correction: Turkey was never "the sick man of Europe" (for the simple reason that it never was or will be a part of Europe - culturally or geographically).
Turkey was (is) "the sick man on the Bosperus."
NATO is a DEFENSIVE alliance. It does not oblige NATO to go to war on behalf of a member (e.g. Turkey) that chooses to be the aggressor.
“What they have to leave, they can destroy. Or give it to the Arabs “
Same thing, noting what happened to the greenhouses they gave the Palestinians.
I believe that Turkey intends to force Israel into aggression by escorting ships through the blockade. Israel pretty much has to respond.
"Neither Nicholas nor Seymour completed the phrase with the clause "of Europe," which appears to have been added later and may very well have been journalistic misquotation. Take, for example, the first appearance of the phrase "sick man of Europe" in the New York Times (12 May 1860): "The condition of Austria at the present moment is not less threatening in itself, though less alarming for the peace of the world, than was the condition of Turkey when the Czar Nicholas invited England to draw up with him the last will and testament of the 'sick man of Europe.'
Figures it was the New York Times that screwed things up originally. Thank you for the correction.
You're right - the land called "Israel" would go from being a jewel to being an outhouse. Who will the Arabs blame for their failures if the Jews move out of the region? Maybe Arabs can look at themselves for the first time in their history. And realize that their choices have consequences.
Also, the Jews would be happy in South Florida - they can make "New Israel" into one of the most beautiful countries in the world. And all the stress and horror they've had to live with would be over. Everyone wins...
Ah, perhaps it was indeed so. I never heard it that way, but it looks like I was mistaken. Thanks for the info. (I’ll never use it that way, though! ;-))
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.