Comments on: Can Obama Clear His Mideast "Ambiguity"?
In Israel, Democrat Will Face Leaders On Both Sides Of Conflict Dubious Of His Capabilities
Add a Comment See all 289 Comments
- Bush sent a high level member of his administration to hold talks on Nuclear Weapons with Iran''''s leaders! So it appears Obama is right on this issue, and Bush is nothing but a hypocrite!
Posted by nolalou
it''s not like people haven''t tried talking to Iran before. Bush''s position is that it is futile to do so. As it stands now, it''s kinda looking like Bush was right. - Reply to this comment
- Interesting to hear comments from Israel that they are troubled by Obama''s willingness to talk to Iran.
When President Bush was in Israel a few months ago, he made a speech where he said "Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along," Comparing Iran''s leaders to Hitler. This was taken as an attack on Obama''s positions.
So what do we find out last week? Bush sent a high level member of his administration to hold talks on Nuclear Weapons with Iran''s leaders! So it appears Obama is right on this issue, and Bush is nothing but a hypocrite! - Reply to this comment
- Again, relax and enjoy the Obama ride.
Posted by IndyVet66
what do you like about obama''s middle east plan? - Reply to this comment
- Also, I can%u2019t help but notice a lot of angst among you neoconservatives. It looks like the Iraq war will wind down, even though you may want us to stay there for 100 years or so.
Senator Obama will take the fight to Al Queda in Afghanistan and beat them down like the dogs that they are.
Senator Obama will develop a real energy and environmental policy and reinvigorate the American economy, instead of dumping $1 Trillion into an unnecessary war in Iraq.
I think you should relax and enjoy the ride. Obama will become President in January and we will have a unified Democratic government for the first time in 14 years. The Republicans had such a government for 6 years and completely screwed it up by their own admission.
Let the Democrats have a chance. A lot of us have high expectations for Barack Obama and the Democrat majority in both the house and the senate. They certainly can%u2019t do worse than Bush and the Republicans.
If they screw it up, then let%u2019s make another change. But it just doesn%u2019t make any sense to reward Bush%u2019s Republican incompetence with more of the same (or worse) incompetence from Republican John McCain.
Again, relax and enjoy the Obama ride. - Reply to this comment
- I really dislike this kind of yellow journalism.
There is no ambiguity in Obama''s Middle East Policy. The media is just stirring up the pot to try to keep this election close and their ratings up. It aint gonna work. - Reply to this comment
- Google Obama and International Solidarity Movement
Both Wright and Obama have been involved with this organization. They claim to be a peace group. Decide for yourselfs.
Posted by Obama8years at 11:26 AM : Jul 22, 2008
----------
for ourselfs?! - Reply to this comment
- Google Obama and International Solidarity Movement
Both Wright and Obama have been involved with this organization. They claim to be a peace group. Decide for yourselfs. - Reply to this comment
- "Can Obama Clear His Mideast "Ambiguity"?"
I don''t necessarily see the ambiguity, it seems that Mr. Obama is positing that any country should have the right to have it''s capitol city remain wholly within a sovereign state, but if a city must undergo genocide to become such, then civilized people cannot condone it.
If Jerusalem cannot become a peaceful capitol without committing genocide and otherwise practicing apartheid against inhabitants who are of a different religion, then it has no right to be called a capitol city, and definitely cannot be called a "holy city" without committing blasphemy, as there is too much blood on the ground.
Perhaps it would be best to have the Israeli capitol at Tel Aviv. If people wish to posit religious reasons as to why it must be Jerusalem, then they must explain how they can abrogate the laws of Moses, which they accept as the commandments of the god of Abraham, to make it so. - Reply to this comment
Liberalism is a descriptive term, and libs love to wear it proud.....not the same as a derogatory term
Posted by Minuteman-1
If "liberal" has not been turned into a derogatory term by the right then why are so many now calling themselves "progressive" and why has the right wing blogs taken notice of this phenomena? For what it is worth I see both terms as descriptive of a political philosophy and hardly comparable to a racial slur.- Reply to this comment
- Posted by omega39
Interesting, because over the last 8 years I have listened to Coulter, Rush and Hannity refer to anyone that disagreed with this administration as "liberals" in the most derogatory sense.
------------------------------------
You probably shouldn''t be listening to Coulter, Rush and Hannity. They are bad for the soul.
Doesn''t Hannity have a liberal on his TV show? That couldn''t be too derogatory. In fact, it seems fair and balanced.
Liberal, Moderate and Conservative are all valid terms which can be used in discussing political topics. - Reply to this comment
- omega39 at 11:07 AM
Liberalism is a descriptive term, and libs love to wear it proud.....not the same as a derogatory term - Reply to this comment
- If you were a sensitve person you would not use the N word. It is clear that you only wish to stir up hate. Your attitude is an example of the new hate and division Obama is bringing to America.
Posted by dowell100
Interesting, because over the last 8 years I have listened to Coulter, Rush and Hannity refer to anyone that disagreed with this administration as "liberals" in the most derogatory sense. - Reply to this comment
- ...Laine Katz, who emigrated from Philadelphia to Israel in the 1970s, counts herself as one of Obama''s earliest supporters. She maintains Israel would be better off with an American president who would take the Israeli government to task for thumbing its nose at U.S. policy.
Indeed, because there is nothing special about the Israelis, and they should be held to the same foreign policy standards as any other country, as far as the United States is concerned. Because when it gets down to the blood and guts of it all, the Israelis mean as much to us as the Yugoslavians did, or as the Haitians do now. - Reply to this comment
- Posted by jh6379
Open your heart and stop being so insensitive.
------------
If you were a sensitve person you would not use the N word. It is clear that you only wish to stir up hate. Your attitude is an example of the new hate and division Obama is bringing to America. - Reply to this comment
- In this case, please, please, please describe what failure would be???????
And what does a suit have to do with anything?? The ones Bush always wears are all "empty" anyway!!
Remember---"clothes don''''t make the man".
Posted by liberalme
Failure would be to leave the Middle East, particularly Iraq, vulernable to a takeover by Radical Islam. That is who, and what, we are fighting. This is a religious war that is a continuation of the crusades and barbary wars.
As far as the clothes: Consider this a job interveiw for the biggest, most powerful position in the world. What would you wear? - Reply to this comment
- If you want them to come home, why are you supporting Obama''''s attempt to send an already tired forces, over to Afghanistan to have another 4,000 more killed.
What happened to "bring the troops home" ? oh, since its the server of Barry-Berry Koolaid, and Hater-aid, now it''''s ok to be all war-mongerish, since its Obama....I see
Posted by Minuteman-1 at 10:47 AM : Jul 22, 2008
Ok, just who put our troops in these 2 countries? We never should have gone to Iraq---never and now that Bin Laden is no longer in Afganistan--we need to get out of there too----however, our illustrious "leader" has created devastation in both of these countries and we need to help rebuild---after all we helped destroy both Afganistan and Iraq--however Iraq has suffered the most.
Personally I would just give bothe countries money to rebuild and get the heII out---our troops can''t tell who the "enemy" is---I guess they don''t wear nametags there. - Reply to this comment
- liberalme at 10:48 AM
He wants to play make believe Secretary of State, and meet officials with no authority of the United States, at least wear a suit and tie, I mean come on - Reply to this comment
- jh6379 at 10:42 AM
No, it is you who keeps making disparaging remarks, calling people the N word, neocon, same as Ni - Reply to this comment
- Barack Obama admitted tonight that he would rather see failure in Iraq than concede that he was wrong about the surge. A candidate who places his political ambition ahead of our national interest does not pass the threshold to be commander in chief.
And, what is with not wearing a suit when he''''''''s meeting with other officials? A real loser.
Posted by Ariel133 at 10:42 AM
In this case, please, please, please describe what failure would be???????
And what does a suit have to do with anything?? The ones Bush always wears are all "empty" anyway!!
Remember---"clothes don''t make the man". - Reply to this comment
- liberalme at 10:45 AM
If you want them to come home, why are you supporting Obama''s attempt to send an already tired forces, over to Afghanistan to have another 4,000 more killed.
What happened to "bring the troops home" ? oh, since its the server of Barry-Berry Koolaid, and Hater-aid, now it''s ok to be all war-mongerish, since its Obama....I see - Reply to this comment
