Bush Middle East Speech Discussion Thread

[RCW2001]

Bush Middle East Speech Discussion Thread

[ClancyJ]

the conditions will be ignored as they adjust the landscape

With this attitude - nothing at all could have been promoted. Any proposal presented would meet with the same "conditions will be ignored" statement.

There is no action from Israel until the Palestinians have done their part. The only hesitation I see is that once again the Israelis will have to go through a test period with the Palestinians after the initial conditions met - yet, this comes after they have done much to change.

I just don't know what you would have expected us to do. Israel can at any time throw caution to the wind and attack no matter what we say about it. Yet - that will be more of the same. I must say - I too wish they would just get Arafat out of there. Yet - we can't really do that - the people themselves must move away from him.

[Miss Marple]

OK. Someone has hijacked holdonnow's screen name:

To: Thinkin' Gal

A voice of reason. Right on.

670 posted on 6/24/02 4:40 PM Pacific by holdonnow

[holdonnow]

Because Reagan was a communist??? The Brady Bill was a bad bill. I strongly disagreed with Reagan on this. But that has nothing to do with the point that was raised -- that Bush was the first president to recognize the 2nd amendment standing for the right of individuals to own guns. I can't wait to see what Bush does is he ever receives some kind of gun control bill, though. If past if prologue, he'll sign it, just as he has signed every other bill that has crossed his desk. I also seem to recall that his father made quite a public spectacle when he resigned from the NRA.

[illstillbe]

Before I found FR ... I would seek you out, sir ... for I thought your brain amazing ... and your words rang true to me ... you said the things I had needed to hear ... and backed them with reason ...

But this pretty, Summer evening?!

I think you've gone too long without a walk .. or maybe a bit of quiet time by a pond ....

Perhaps your brain has simply decided to play tricks with you ... for you are that bright ... but frightfully ... disingenuous and bordering on ... I am sorry to say ... yes ... petty, and kinda High Schoolish this night.

There ... I said it ... even as I tell you that you helped me through some of the very darkest political days of my life ...

This day, though ... well ... let's hang it up and call foul ball ... and start again on the morrow ....

[kristinn]

I bet I can disagree with someone without calling them a "little puke."

663 posted on 6/24/02 7:35 PM Eastern by Miss Marple

Perhaps, but apparently you can't disagree with someone without insinuating they are drunk.

Apparently appearances on television and talk radio leave one with the idea that he is the sole arbiter of truth. Apparently, it also leaves those folks with the impression that they have a license to be rude.

Either that, or cocktail hour started early.

564 posted on 6/24/02 6:45 PM Eastern by Miss Marple

I get really sick of those who get the vapors when a few insults are made and then claim that they are above such behavior.

[holdonnow]

Yeh, I write for all conservatives. They all speak for me. You caught me!

[wcdukenfield]

I listened to what Bush said, I just didn't delude myself into thinking his words meant more than they actually did.

What I did not hear was unqualified support for Israel. What I heard was moral equivalency between Israel and the PA. What I heard was a US committment to a Palestinian state before the Palestinians have shown that they are capable of acting responsibly and in a civilized manner. I also heard a three year timeline offered by the President.

And what I'm seeing here are vicious attacks on Levin, for no reason other than that he is honest enough to recognize when a Republican President comes up short, as he has on this issue. I just hope our liberal friends aren't watching this thread. Miss Marple, et. al., this is not your finest hour.

[Fracas]

Perhaps it is time for a new opinion. I think the President's first instinct was correct: let Israel and the Palestinians deal with the problem. Where that instinct went awry was in staying Israel's hand against using military force.

Israel is perfectly capable of dealing with the issue IF the U.S. does not interfere. We will defend Israel if they are attacked by other Arab countries (Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, etc.). Israel can deal with the verbal slings and arrows of the feeble French, the bloated Brits, and the grumpy Germans. What they cannot deal with is a hostile U.S. policy that argues against their national interest.

Many have paid lip service to the 'Israel (of course!) has the right to defend herself, but...' without a shred of sincerity. We should allow Israel to defend herself WITHOUT INTEFERENCE from us. It does not seem to me that Sharon has been here begging for support; it seems that he has been here presenting the case for a free hand.

Conservatives were appalled when Clinton boldly influenced an Israeli election. I have been equally appalled at the inability of the media and some Libs to avoid the specious 'moral equivalence' argument.

The religious issues are not going to be settled by giving the Palestinians a state; they want Israel destroyed. Only a fool would believe there will be a 'democratically' elected Palestinian government.

Israel should do what is best for Israel and defend their country as we need to defend ours. When they need help they will ask and we will provide support. Enough of the Chris Matthews philosophy of 'we don't want to be at war with all the Arab states' nonsense. We ARE at war with the Arab states, including those that are our nominal friends.

War has many faces, and one of them is economic. Our stock market plunges upon news of every homicide bomber. We have postponed finding a real solution for far too long.

[holdonnow]

Calm down ... you can handle it ...

[archy]

since the "Who is like Bush who can make war with him" sentiments are coming from them. While from my brief scan of this thread I surmise that I disagree with much of your position, I have to applaud you for a witty turn of the phrase. Very clever, made me chuckle.

I do think that Rush is correct on this issue, in that it smells to high heaven of appeasement(creating the new state of Polandstine?) Nonetheless, it may be a tradeoff that has to be made to enable greater gains in the region.

Ah. I understand. It's for *Peace in our time....*

[Howlin]

Ridiculous. Everybody agrees it was FOR Israel. Unless, of course, you NEED an issue.

[Miss Marple]

Hey, kristinn, I never said I was perfect. Others who purport to be are, I guess. And it takes a lot before I lose my cool.

I freely admit I lost it, and probably shouldn't have said that. I apologize to holdonnow for that comment.

[ClancyJ]

I thought we were supposed to be respectful here - no personal attacks and such. Or, is that only for the mere peons?

Yes

Apparently holdonnow has special posting privileges that us peons don't have. Hopefully he is speaking "tongue-in-cheek" or charm is not his strong suit.

[holdonnow]

I'm sorry if calling another hit-and-run poster a "little puke" offends. I'll keep that in mind. But you go right ahead with your cheap shots.

[Howlin]

Nor yours if you didn't hear Bush say exactly what you said you wanted him to say.

[OldFriend]

I'm convinced........you, Rush, and Sean are timesharing a single brain!

[holdonnow]

Yes, we must agree with Howlin. He demands it.

[Nix 2]

The bottom line is that if the Palestinians don't do all that Bush said, and they won't, the administration will simply continue to pressure Israel to concede to its demands

Not hardly. It really surprises me sometimes when people only hear what they want and don't notice anything else moving in the air.
President Bush is quietly taking the perceived power of the UN right out from under their noses in so many ways they will soon not be able to function as an *authority* on anything, including Israel, and most of all, he is precluding them from whatever authority they thought they had over the US.
He wanted much larger tax cuts. He didn't get them. So where is the money going? It's going to farmers. Vouchers are wending their way thru the courts and it looks like the Ohio plan is a winner.
He has cut the EU out of his *inner circle* and they have to deal with the fact that Russia is, or will become, the best ally we ever had.
McCain/Feingold is words and nothing but. It is a meaningless bill that just forces you to change the color of the blocks on the checkerboard.
The water flows from suckerfish to farmers.
He is reversing Clinton in so many, many ways; rescinding Clinton's signature on setting up World Court, Kyoto, Foreign Aid, Monetary Fund....Let me count the ways.
AND HE DID IT WITH DASSHOLE AS THE BIGGEST OBSTRUCTIONIST IN THE HISTORY OF THE US.
We should be doing everything in our power to elect conservatives to the Senate and Congress instead of regaling Bush with a wishlist he can't possibly fulfil alone...not that he isn't trying.

[Howlin]

So I saw.