Skip to comments.Bush welcomes UN MidEast resolution
Posted on 08/12/2006 9:45:47 AM PDT by ImpBillEdited on 08/12/2006 9:50:28 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
President Bush welcomed a U.N. resolution on Saturday aimed at stopping the fighting between Israel and Hizbollah, saying the guerrilla group and its sponsors Iran and Syria had brought an "unwanted" war to the region.
The fighting continued on Saturday, with the Israeli army saying it had started broadening its ground offensive in southern Lebanon.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Unless Hezbollah is humbled and begs and pleads for an unconditional surrender to Israel, any UN or other brokered cease-fire is worthless and will not hold. It will only embolden these terrorists claim that they "won" and commit more acts of terror.
Now that's an interesting comment. That could mean weeks from now...
Do note who he is blaming for this war
This is a bad move and we are weaker because of it. Our p()ssy government should have helped Isreal defeat these scum bags. What happened to "either you are with us or against us"?
I'm feeling about the same way now as I did regarding the 1993 World Series, when the Phillies brought in the "Wild Thing" in the ninth inning. "Surely," I thought, "Jim Fregosi knows what he's doing. Surely this is a cunning plan to hold on and win Game 6, forcing a seventh game in the series which the Phillies are sure to win. Surely I know nothing about managing a major league baseball team. Surely ...."
In my humble and dejavu opinion the western world, at the hand of "the worlds only Super Power" lost and put off the inevitable action that must eventually be taken if we will ever have any semblance of peace with these barbarians who yearn for 7th Century life again.
I can't begin to express the dearth of my current thoughts in words that would give meaning to those thoughts.
Although, I am not surprised.
As I have feared from the beginning the "we", in the main, have no concept of what we are facing. And most people either won't nor can't visualize what is going to be required to defeat this insidious movement (Islam).
What would a cowboy hat do to enhance the picture?
This does not suprise me. He's always been pro-UN for the most part. I'm sick of this globalism bullshit. It doesn't work. Well, Israel..we'll see you in this same situation 6 years from now--AGAIN.
For the clueless here, I'm not talking about Bush.
I think there are a lot of things that are in play here (aside from the fact that the "resolution" had been delayed by Bolton for weeks and that it is pretty toothless anyway).
One is that this was all a preliminary, testing skirmish. Ohlmert revealed himself to be too weak and vacillating for us to support fully, because, quite frankly, I think he would have let us down and made us look a lot worse if we had overtly committed and then he wimped out. I would suspect that Bush is a little disappointed in Ohlmert's performance, after Israel had been given the time and strategic materials to carry it off more thoroughly than it has.
Secondly, I think Hezbollah proved to be a lot better armed and more widely dispersed than anybody expected initially. I am sure we were watching their means for receiving their resupply shipments, who was sending them, etc.
Third, I think it indicates that the nutcase in Iran isn't quite ready to go yet; while he blustered, he really didn't do anything overtly, but limited himself to covertly supplying advisers and materiel to the Hezzies. It also revealed that other countries which may hate us, such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt, are more afraid of Iran than they are of us, and are even willing to support us rather than be taken over by Iran.
There are a lot of things going on here, and this is probably just one of the opening skirmishes in a war that we have to win - so therefore, we have to conduct it correctly and knowledgeably from the start.
I would really appreciate it if you would put back the entire article and put my source in, if possible. I don't think JR has a problem with Yahoo. Awaiting your action or response.
...maybe this be some secret strategery by Pres Bush in order to actually win this war?...because if it is not..I only have to conclude that our President really don't have a clue as to the nature of our enemy....and his actions will get possibly millions of us killed right here in downtown America.
We can only wonder if he would accept a "peace plan" when the car bombs start going off at your local mall.
Nothing but political speak, in my humble but hick, opinion.
But thanks for your insight!
That is indeed the prevailing school of thought, but perhaps it is the West that needs time to regroup, renegotiate alliances, and continue to unmask the islamicfascists such that no western civilized nation is in doubt of the enemy's intentions.
At this point in time of the conflict we still have way too many people who are in denial of what is at stake in the WOT. The enemy's tactics of simply wearing out our resolve seems to be working. Let us take a breath as well for now and refocus our efforts. Bush told us this fight would be going on long after he left office, so in the long struggle against an enemy so insidious such that they can confound a republic with their theocracy let us regather our will, our focus, and our future.
Bush doesn't do borders.
Thanks for putting a bit of sarcastic whit into an otherwise dreary topic. It reminds me that who am I to be so critical, and yet ..... /;-(
Yea and that's why he put John Bolton in there ... get real
Olmert: Good morning Mr. President.
Olmert: Mr. President, we would like to continue our battle against the Islamofacists and destroy the Hezzies, and if that means taking the action to a protracted regional war with the gardens of terrorism all across the Middle East, want to know if America will stand with us, shoulder to shoulder?
Bush: (long pause)
Bush: (longer pause)
Bush: Well ........ (even longer pause)
Bush: Ya see, Ehud, it's like this ...... (much longer pause).
Bush: It's an election year, over here, ya know .....
Olmert: I understand Mr. President. We will take "the deal", even if we know it solves nothing.
Bush: Maybe next time Ehud. Gotta run now, cows need milking, thanks for the chat buddy.
Bush to Condi: Well that went better than I expected, ya think?
Tune in after this watch is over and some American city is glowing in the dark.
You ever hear of L.O.S.T.? If not, Bolton, Bush and Condi are perfectly comfortable giving the UN control of 70% of the Earth's surface.
Oh to be sure, I am talking about "our" President, but in no way restricting my words and thoughts to him only.
You are full of it
Speaking of which, before I became a Phillies fan, I'd get my wife to tie me up and flog me with a knotted rope. Now I just watch the Phillies.
hahahaha What a come back. Prove my statement wrong. We'll see who's full of it then. I dare you to prove me wrong.
BTW, maybe you should change your tag line. :-)
We more than likely have more in common than not, but I have an entirely different take on this. But perhaps I am, due to age and past experiences, a bit jaded.
I, personally don't give a hoot about how "we look" and deeply believe that "we" have been squandering in many ways the chance to take this conflict of civilizations directly to our enemies directly by following the Military ancient and in recent histories ignorance of the "principle of mass".
If you are at all interested in the "principle of mass" as taught at the Army War College for many decades now you may read about them at the following link.
As in a "war" I participated in 30 plus years ago, we seem to apply them for a while and then back down.
What a waste of time and resources putting off the inevitable is and always has been.
LOL. Thanks. Repeat this from time to time, as I continue to respond to comments on this thread. It really helps in keeping all things in perspective.
The ceasefire scorecard: Condi: on board; Bolton: on board; Bush: On Board; Chirac: On Board; Annan: On Board; UN Security Council: On Board; Hezbollah's Nazrallah: On Board;
Lebanese Prime Minister Saniora: On board; and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert: On board.
maybe you need to buy a clue
Follow the link here http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060812/pl_nm/mideast_un_bush_dc_1and you will see it is not even the same article.
Is your job to protect Jim Robinson and Free Republic or to keep the thread as pro Bush/GOP as you can. Keeping folks from reading the news as found and posted?
It more than likely doesn't matter now as the thread is dead more than likely because you made the changes you did, to infer that it came from the Washington Post.
Sad day all around to include the free and open discussion here on Free Republic, even when done so in accordance to the rules Jim, so wisely, made after his problems with the Times and Post.
The long lasting peace that Condi wanted.
So what's your point? Get back to us in a few months.
Then you should have posted that link instead of leaving it blank
There is something about great power that I clearly do not understand...and just what it is that would keep a powerful man from doing what he know is the right thing to do.
I just pray that when the car bombs start going off here, it is not at our table....but if it is....we'll never know, will we?
What's with the "our"?
You're definitely one of the clueless I was talking about. This place is full of them, unfortunately.
Thanks for the interesting cross-reference!
I agree that it would have been better to go in and really sock them (them being the Hezzies and their supporters). I think the problem was precisely that Olmert did lose the initiative, because he is weak and vacillating and wouldn't commit to large force - and then there really wasn't much we could do. To some extent Israel may be operating as our proxy in this, but it's also a separate country with its own objectives, and I never got the feeling that Olmert and Bush were quite on the same page.
And unfortunately, you're right. This war is inevitable. I'm not sure what's going to trigger the major outbreak of declared war, probably something trivial. But it's just a matter of time, and I hope we're putting the time to good use.
You cared enough to post that ridiculous graphic.
Why do you suppose I used quotation marks? Perhaps to make say it in a perogative sense? I don't know anyway, you are correct. I guess I am clueless. Can you clue us lessor folks in? I guess I haven't been able to get a clue how you really feel about the topic of the Thread?
"So what's your point? Get back to us in a few months."
My point would be lost on you, so don't worry your little head about it.
The problem is, you don't have a point if you knew anything about middle east geo politics and the history of the UN. Jusdt because a few countries say indicate they are "on board", that means nothing until they prove it. Which few countries do these days. Just look at our own Congress backing the war. Fewer and fewer do these days, and they were "on board." You are the uninformed, ignorant fool who believes that every day is a sunny day. Maybe you might wwnt to take a social studies or civics class when you get to the sixth grade.
The problem is, you don't have a point if you knew anything about middle east geo politics and the history of the UN. Jusdt because a few countries say indicate they are "on board", that means nothing until they prove it. Which few countries do these days. Just look at our own Congress backing the war. Fewer and fewer do these days, and they were "on board." You are the uninformed, ignorant fool who believes that every day is a sunny day. Maybe you might wwnt to take a social studies or civics class when you get to the sixth grade."
If I were you, I'd take that crystal ball you bought at K-Mart back for a refund.
The rest of us will just have to wait and see what happens.
See if your mommy will give you some milk and cookies in the meantime.
Well, just look at past performance of the UN and the ME in general. Those nations you mentioned who are "on board" will never support this cease fire. The same crap will erupt be the end of the year. Stay tuned.
Get real? We're still in the UN and we're not doing anything to stop this conflict. You can believe what you want, he's PRO UN to the point he'll never remove us from that bullsheet, and you know it.
'Bush welcomes UN MidEast resolution'
Ok he's not pro-UN because Bolton's in there. What was I thinking... oh wait...oh look ...the title of the thread tells different. I am real.
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.