Skip to comments.Obama is our only hope for peace in Middle East (Obama man of peace, like Lincoln, says reader)
Posted on 04/05/2008 7:38:08 AM PDT by Timmy
Obama is our only hope for peace in Middle East
Published Saturday, April 5, 2008
Editor, the Tribune: Ever wonder why so many independent-minded conservatives are choosing Barack Obama over John McCain and Hillary Clinton? Peace.
Obama has opposed the war in Iraq since its start. Clinton supported the war at first but changed her mind for political reasons. McCain has been behind the war all along.
Listening to Obamas speeches and debates, and researching his positions, reveals a man who will not only bring our troops home but will not start new wars.
McCain jokes about starting new wars when Americans are still dying in Iraq and Afghanistan, billions dollars are being spent on foreign wars at the expense of a "recessed" or "depressed" economy and an overextended military that needs to come home once and for all.
Clinton cannot be trusted. Her husband, Bill, almost started wars in Haiti and Korea until independent peace negotiators averted them. He ordered bombing of Iraq, Afghanistan and the Sudan to get his sex scandals off of the front page.
Obama comes to us as a man of a peace at a critical time in our countrys history - just as another Illinois senator with little national experience came to us 148 years ago. Yes, I am comparing Obama to Abraham Lincoln. He has been compared to a lot of people over the Internet and in campaign rhetoric, but it is Lincoln he most closely resembles. It is our patriotic duty to vote for Obama in November to end Americas involvement in Iraq and other senseless foreign situations.
The email for Letters to the Editor is firstname.lastname@example.org (250 word limit).
No projectile vomit alert?
Well, he is correct in his assessment of the Clintons but woefully, foolishly and embarrassingly naive about Obama.
Yep! A man of peace, like all good Muslims are.
I take it that Mr Shipp is referring to McCains "bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran" quip.
Here is a clue Shippweed... Iran started a war with us in 1979 and they are still at it now.
Babies For Obama
Obama is our only hope for peace in Middle East (Obama man of peace, like Lincoln, says reader)
a man of peace....a man from the religion of peace.....which is the truth????
Yes we need the vomit alert. Lincoln was good but only because he won the war and was on the right side as to slavery. He could have stopped the war that cost millions of american lives. Man of peace, hardly.
Hilarious. “They’re just repeating syllables. Like children do.”
Methinks this mindless repetition of syllables is not limited to children.
Obama wants to expand troop presence in Afghanistan. Am I reading the article correctly that the author doesn’t understand these are two separate fronts?
I have to find the link that states unequivocally that Obama will go into Pakistan - a nuclear country - with or without their permission should they not cooperate on Bin Laden.
There was no war in Lincoln's time!
He was a man of peace, especially after he was assassinated.
Independent-minded conservatives know these things.
And my patriotic duty is to support America and all she stands for - including Michelle Obama’s many blessings - which would mean not supporting her husband.
A true man of peace would have to be the strongest, toughest man in the region. A bowling score of 37 doesn’t contribute to a perception of the candidate as one of those.
Obama’s Campain Coordinator on Iraq, Colin Kahl,Stay on Success: A Policy of Conditional Engagement,.the U.S. should aim to transition to a sustainable over-watch posture (of perhaps 60,00080,000 forces) by the end of 2010 (although the specific timelines should be the byproduct of negotiations and conditions on the ground).
Obama may have claimed he was against the war from the start but was he always against leaving troops?
Obama July ‘04 to the CSM,
“the United States has an “absolute obligation” to remain in Iraq long enough to make it a success.”
“The failure of the Iraqi state would be a disaster,”.”It would dishonor the 900-plus men and women who have already died. . . . It would be a betrayal of the promise that we made to the Iraqi people, and it would be hugely destabilizing from a national security perspective.”
I agree with your assessment that Obama is no friend of Israel.
But there is the oft made point that if the Jewish people did not exist in the Middle East, the Arabs would have to invent them, because they are incapable of living in peace.
But then again R2D2's speakers kind of suck. No mid-range.
Yeah, “peace” by appeasment to our enemies who want us dead. That’s what Obama will do.
He’ll be more like the next Neville Chamberlain than Lincoln.
On a more serious note, this letter makes you wonder how many under-age kids will attempt to vote in the general election. Obama's campaign did say the other day that they were going into the high schools to register voters.
Help us, Obama-Wan Baloney, you’re our only hope...
“Barry O, Superstar,
“Do you think you’re what they say you are?”
[completing tag line]
That picture is just so darling! Give your baby a kiss for me! :)
That minor scuffle during Lincoln’s peaceful time in office only resulted in almost 600,000 military deaths. I don’t think we need another one of those — although Barak’s election might lead to one.
Barack Obama - building a religion
He shall cause the lion to lay down with the lamb.
Obama ME peace = forsake Israel and let the Pali’s run wild...
God help America! Where else can we turn?
Why is it that the Dems have to continually hijack a republican president’s legacy for their own use? Lincolin was not a man of peace and they would’ve screamed over his suspension of habeas corpus!
Bringing the troops home before the mission is done will cause mayhem beyond our imaginations.
Does that idiot (and the minions who follow his garbage) think that bringing the troops home now will just automatically achieve peace? ow, I wonder? Is it OK if Iran and its findamental, militant Islamic rule just spreads that into Iraq? Will it be an accomplishment to let al Qaeda rebuild and run rampant?
Some people watch too much cable TV.
My typing STILL sucks.
Yeah, the remark about Lincoln being a man of peace almost floored me. Also, if Obama is elected he’s going to be tested immediately in the worst way. Chances are we’re more likely to get into a war if he’s elected than McCain.
Now let’s be fair. He scored 37 in 5 or 6 frames. He was headed toward a 60, at least. This indicates true strength to me.
OBAMA: Well, I think that this administration has not been very good at what’s been called the exercise of “soft power.” ...
KEYES: See, I think the great problem is that you cannot give a soft response to a hard threat. It would be kind of like trying to meet a bayonet with a spaghetti noodle. And it’s not going to help the people of this country to survive.
After 9-11, we were faced with a hard threat. We had lost thousands of people, and we had to move aggressively. The belief that Afghanistan was enough is a belief based on a failure to understand the global infrastructure of terror—so that you deal with the threat that has hit you instead of with the threats that will hit you later if you neglect to preemptively move against their bases of support.
It is precisely in order to create a situation in which maybe people who would be otherwise supportive of this bloodthirsty threat will respond a little better to your overtures that you move with decision against regimes like the Iraqi regime that had shown itself disposed to support terror, to fund terror, to be part gleefully of the global infrastructure of terror—and to act against them before they have the opportunity to act against you.
As the Civil War started, in the very beginning of Lincoln's presidential term, a group of "Peace Democrats" proposed a peaceful resolution to the developing Civil War by offering a truce with the South, and forming a constitutional convention to amend the U.S. Constitution to protect States' rights. The proposal was ignored by the Unionists of the North and not taken seriously by the South. However, the Peace Democrats, also called copperheads by their enemies, publicly criticized Lincoln's belief that violating the U.S. Constitution was required to save it as a whole.
With Congress not in session until July, Lincoln assumed all powers not delegated in the Constitution, including the power to suspend habeas corpus. In 1861, Lincoln had already suspended civil law in territories where resistance to the North's military power would be dangerous. In 1862, when copperhead democrats began criticizing Lincoln's violation of the Constitution, Lincoln suspended habeas corpus throughout the nation and had many copperhead democrats arrested under military authority because he felt that the State Courts in the north west would not convict war protesters such as the copperheads. He proclaimed that all persons who discouraged enlistments or engaged in disloyal practices would come under Martial Law.
Among the 13,000 people arrested under martial law was a Maryland Secessionist, John Merryman. Immediately, Hon. Roger B. Taney, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States issued a writ of habeas corpus commanding the military to bring Merryman before him. The military refused to follow the writ. Justice Taney, in Ex-parte Merryman, then ruled the suspension of habeas corpus unconstitutional because the writ could not be suspended without an Act of Congress. President Lincoln and the military ignored Justice Taney's ruling.
Finally, in 1866, after the war, the Supreme Court officially restored habeas corpus in Ex-parte Milligan, ruling that military trials in areas where the civil courts were capable of functioning were illegal.
That sounds great, but it doesn't fly in a turbulent world. It sounds really great to the Muslim leaders who know that if Obama is elected, no US troops will be sent to interfere as the caliphate is plundered. No more senseless and illegal wars, Mr Imam. You just go ahead there and we will stay right here.
Obama is the one they have been waiting for. Now they can.
WHERE and WHEN does the moron who wrote this article propose to defend ourselves against our publicly sworn enemy?
AFTER they take HIS head?
Fools who think that surrender to tyrants is the path to peace, deserve neither peace nor a voice in the matter.
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.