Posted on 12/27/2007 1:37:55 PM PST by SJackson
High volume. Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking on the Topic or Keyword Israel, WOT
..................
In brief, Republican candidates won't support GWB because he's handled the issue like a Democrat, and understandably Democrats won't give him credit for handling it the way they would.
The Mr. Palestine thread.
You might be interested in the accolades and applause given Pres. Bush in this discussion.
It runs about an hour and 1/2, but it’s excellent and well worth the time.
American Foreign Policy in the Middle East - Dangerous Times in a Dangerous Neighborhood
Moderator: Michael Medved
Panelists: John Podhoretz, Dennis Prager and Mona Charen
http://www.jewishpolicycenter.org/article/83
Come on over here and explain why Ron Paul, who will allow Israel to fight for a free Israeli nation is a nutcase and Bush who wants a divided Israel/Palestinian state is your hero.
ping
All the people in the discussion you post are Bush sycophants and in the case of Israel v. Palestine, Bush is wrong.
Islamists shouldn't be expected to act like the (comparatively rational) Soviets.
How can Bush have such good foreign policy against the terrorists, yet switch to appeasement just for Palestine?
Most of the candidates are of the same old Arabist/western European guard, too. ...ethnicities and oil instead of right.
“his vow to quickly move the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem”
Still waiting on his fulfilling that promise. It slip his mind when he was sending millions of taxpayer dollars to the Fatah nutjobs?
How about answering why Bush is still the hero when wants a divided Israel/Palestinian state and not a free Israeli nation.
I think what you are saying is, “Ron Paul is a nut for being completely unconcerned with nuclear proliferation in the Middle Eastern Islamic world, and for thinking that the Israeli’s should have to fight there own wars.”
Good point. At least the Soviets weren’t entirely alien, nor entirely insane.
To whom? Not to me. I disagree with his naive view that rewarding the "Palestinians" with a state in Israel's backyard despite the former's unwillingness to abide by even the most elementary conditions of his so-called "roadmap to peace" will yield peace in the region.
But as I mentioned in the above post I heartily disagree with Ron Paul's prescription for the region as well. Allowing nuke proliferation in the Islamic world isn't just a concern to Israel, it's a huge national security concern for us as well. RP's "hands off" approach to those maniacs would spell big trouble. ...and even surpasses Bush in the naive dept.
Stopping Iran from getting nukes isn't "fighting Israel's war," it's fighting our own war.
I don’t quite know what to make of the last sentence in the posted article re “... all should be praying [Bush] succeeds.” That’s because a Pali state and Israeli-Palestinian “peace” are incompatible with each other, barring the appearance of a Ghandi-type Palestinian leader, the likes of which we’ve never seen before. Anyone representing Fatah or Hamas is certainly not a reasonable nor reliable “peace partner.”
Do you really think Iran is going to attack the US? That would be instant suicide and they know it. They aren’t equipped like Russia or China, you know.
Anyone thinking there will be a Israeli-Palestinian “peace” as long as there is an Israel is a total nutjob.
What's with this gratuitous slap at Ann Coulter by lumping her with Pat Buchanan?
I think it's fair to say that Coulter is a Christian Zionist and Buchanan most definitely is not.
But do I think Iran is likely to attack us directly? Probably not. However, you're neglecting to consider another possibility -- Iran using the various terrorist orgs it sponsors to do its dirty work. They could smuggle a nuke into one of our harbors. ...or across out porous borders (no thanks to Bush).
Nukes floating around the Islamic world is a completely unacceptable state of affairs to all rational people. It's dangerous enough that Pakistan has a nuke arsenal. ...and that alone could come back to haunt us. Toss Iran and the rest of the big Islamic players in to the nuclear mix and the situation becomes exponentially more hairy.
Yep, I caught that too. Then again liberals (like Bloomfield) lumping all variety of conservatives together is nothing new. The author probably agrees with Buchanan (regarding Israel) a lot more than he’d be comfortable with.
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.