Posted on 02/25/2008 7:14:25 PM PST by Cinnamon Girl
Oh that “Likudnik” rationalization is alive an well. It is synonymous with “Neocon” which is shorthand for “JOO” or “ZOG”. I can’t believe he said this.
Although many have known this - the left is a worldwide movement. When Clinton was in power he helped get Blair into office and then sent his campaign managers to get Netanyahu out of the Israeli PM’s office.
Fair points. The US obviously has to have a foreign policy where we form alliances and pick sides in the world. It is commenting on political systems inside other countries which I don’t like. Obviously, there is a need to debate the effects countries have on the world at large.
Additionally, while we have sympathies for nations/peoples, etc. those must be subordinate to US national interest.
In the case of Israel, I sometimes wonder if Israelis’ affection for the US is in conflict with their national interests. The US does give them lots of cash for not fighting another war against Egypt, loan guarantees, etc., and lots of toys to fight wars with other Arab nations, should the need arise. But on the other hand, the US has also forced Israel to make major territorial concessions that were directly against their interests, during Lebanon we forced them to stop at the threshold of victory, and during Gulf II forced them to ground their planes despite missile attacks by Iraq.
Kennedy and Reagan where Americans—not Irishman who were American Presidents. Any sympathies they might have had for their ancestral soil had to be subordinate to the greater need for an alliance with Great Britain.
And sympathies by non-Jewish presidents for Israel is certainly subordinated to the need for cheap oil, which we don’t get anyway. But perhaps our (totally unsatisfied) need for cheap oil should be subordinated by the need for an ally in the middle-East who is democratic, humane despite constant provocation, and not in bed with terrorism, despotism, and young boys.
Roosevelt did not lead the US to war when the lowlands where invaded by Germany.
And we went to war for Israel when? Reagan put Marines in harm’s way to stop Israel from finishing its war against the PLO and friends. He pulled them out when it became clear that Congress would not give the Marines the lattitude they needed to defend themselves, even after a suicide truck bomb.
Eisenhower could not refuse to lead a war against his country of origin...
And there’s a Jewish general somewhere who is currently refusing to lead a war against Israel despite a declaration of war?
and I guess most of the other Presidents where Anglos so I have run out of examples.
But that’s really your best example. Anglo aristocrat Thomas Jefferson went to war against England in 1812, and anglo yob Andrew Jackson led our boys to victory in 1814.
I’m rabbling too much—so I’ll just say I didn’t mean to come across as a ‘Knownothing get the heck out stereotype’ I’m just having a really inelegant day.
Noted. No noknownothingism is imputed. But quit rabbling and take a break.
Sounds just like Jimmy Carter; and we know how much of a friend Mr. Peanut has been to Israel.
“Although many have known this - the left is a worldwide movement. When Clinton was in power he helped get Blair into office and then sent his campaign managers to get Netanyahu out of the Israeli PM’s office.”
Ol’ snakehead. Yessssss........
He also got campaign cash from Chicoms, American expatriate fugitives, and Colombian drug dealers.
Indeed. He’ll get the islamic vote too. Laughable.
What if Likud is voted in by a majority? Is Obama still going to be anti-Likud?
The Jews in America better wake up, smell the coffee and face reality; the democrat party and it’s leading presidential candidate do not support the Jews, Israel or the war on ISLAMIC/Muslim terrorists. The truth is; their goals, policies and presidential candidates actively support Islam, Muslims and their stated goals: hatred of the Jews and the ultimate destruction of both the Jews and the nation of Israel.
point. New York Senator Clinton.
Of course.
“The Jews in America better wake up, smell the coffee and face reality; the democrat party and it’s leading presidential candidate do not support the Jews, Israel or the war on ISLAMIC/Muslim terrorists. The truth is; their goals, policies and presidential candidates actively support Islam, Muslims and their stated goals: hatred of the Jews and the ultimate destruction of both the Jews and the nation of Israel.
point. New York Senator Clinton.”
They know. They know. That’s why they vote Democratic. See thread about liberalism being a mental disorder. Somehow, I have been spared this hereditary curse, but my parents are way way way way leftists, so I can attest to it. They like the Democratic party precisely BECAUSE all that you said above is true.
"I think there is a strain within the pro-Israel community that says unless you adopt an unwavering pro-Likud ap-proach to Israel, then you're anti-Israel, and that can't be the measure of our friendship with Israel," leading Democratic presidential contender Illinois Senator Barack Obama said Sunday.
"If we cannot have an honest dialogue about how do we achieve these goals, then we're not going to make progress," he said.
He also criticized the notion that anyone who asks tough questions about advancing the peace process or tries to secure Israel by anyway other than "just crushing the opposition" is being "soft or anti-Israel."
Obama made the comments in a closed-door meeting with several members of Cleveland's Jewish community, who will be participating in the crucial Ohio primary to be held next Tuesday.
Thanks rmlew.
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.