the day that the USA leadership can effectively criticize...

[RainierBeachPoet]

We shouldn't even take sides. It's not our business so we just need to stay out of it.

the problem is if we didnt take sides, israel would be obliterated. we have to protect israel but we cannot condone anything and everything they do

[Hawker]

the problem is if we didnt take sides, israel would be obliterated. we have to protect israel but we cannot condone anything and everything they do

Israel being obliterated is a problem for the US how?

[RainierBeachPoet]

Obama will do what every American President does: Nothing. How can America criticize Israel for bombing Hamas when we overthrew the Iraqi government in retaliation to a bunch of Saudis launching 9/11? At least Israel is going after the actual culprits. Personally, I always found it strange that the US was somehow supposed to be responsible for peace in the Middle East. There's a very simple reason why even when we try and negotiate a settlement it doesn't work: People want land to live on. Israelis and Palestinians both want the sme area and that's the oldest and most common reason to have war. There really is no "right" or "wrong" side to this, these people have been killing each other since before most of us were born, heck, you could even say it dates back to Biblical times. But somehow Obama's going to fix this? You know why he's silent right now? Because he probably knows, although he may never admit it, that he can't broker lasting piece over there. The people--not just the leadership, but the people--of both countries (well, whatever Palestine is) want each others land and hate each other for the constant acts of bombing/terrorism. Obama's going to go over there, give a nice speech, and fix everything? As much hope as he talks in his speeches Obama's a realist. If that situation is ever "resolved" it will probably be over a massive Palestinian grave. And that would be tragic, but when two peoples want the same land, that tends to be the "solution." Look right here at what happened to the Indians.

i agree with this post

obama is primarily a pragmatist even more than being a realist (although ithe two do go hand in hand) and pro-israel. but being pro-israel doesnt mean you cant have influence behind the scenes. consistent with the "change" theme of his campaign and a different style of politics, israel is key in many of our foreign relations.

in order to regain our standing in the world, protecting the human rights of the palestinians would help regain the crediblity lost by the bush administration

but i am not holdnig my breath that obama can take the necessary steps in this direction-- or if there is even a political will to do so

[RainierBeachPoet]

Israel being obliterated is a problem for the US how?

it would be a problem for israel and would have repercussions around the world

to allow the obliteration of any country would be a universal tragedy

[embersyc]

As long as Isreal keeps firing missiles that say USA on the side of them, only criticizing them will not help. We have to stop funding their military as well.

[Jumpshot Virus]

We have no business in the middle-east, period. I don't care what we risk or lose monetarily or world peace wise. We shouldn't be there. the EU shouldn't be there. We want to act as if we're playing big brother keeping little brothers apart from ripping each other's heads off, but that's certainly not the case, and anyone with a worldly IQ greater than 60 knows that.

With or without the assets of the middle-east and their lands, the US could sustain itself easily by keeping our nose out of their business and taking care of our people at home first and foremost. Greedy elites see things differently, and could care less about what's in the actual best interest of our nation and other Western nations.

$ talks, and $ controls anything and everything, including you me and our own gawddamn government and it's ambitions to not only be "# 1" but we have to be phucking # 1 + 1 ... it's very phucking sad when you think about it.

[Thorpesaurous]

And this leads to why I still think the war in Iraq has some value. There are two solutions to the middle east conflict. One of them involves propping up a "democracy", that pushes the western ideals, philosophies, and culture to the point that the young Muslim street rises up. There are a huge chunk of Saudi youth that are obsessed with western culture. The other solution is to go to the Suadis and Egyptians and tell them to do as they please with Isreal and we won't step in, then watch how quickly the Muslim attitude toward us changes. Anyone who knows anything about our policy with Isreal over the past 60 years, and our financing methods can see why reason number two isn't going to happen anytime soon. I'm not naive enough to think that our current leadership played this out with that kind of forsight, but I do think it's a valid enough long term reason to not jump on everyone who is in support of the war. The far evangelical christian right also believs that the Jews have to occupy Isreal in order for the second coming to happen (not that I'm an expert on evangelical christianity), which may explain the neo-con's support more than anything with as much global forsight as I may be giving them credit for.

[Sharas]

it's war, there is no such thing as a "disproportionate and excessive response" the object of any war from theboxing ring to the gaza strip is to crush your enemy, this is not a tit for tat engagement... if somebody launches rockets into civilian territories not even trying to hit military installations but aiming to kill innocents there is no such thing as an excessive response.

now if hamas only hit military posts then that's one thing but they don't hit those, they don't even try... they aim soley to kill israeli citizens, as a country israel has every right to do what ever it takes to protect it's people

OK, that's just not true. there's a point where defense stops being defense and becomes just a revenge against the innocent. this is not the first time israel has crossed that line. how much collateral damage is too much? you can't simply disregard the lives of the innocents and stay on the right side, and that's exactly what israel does these days.

if anyone else in the world did the exact same thing israel did yesterday, the whole world would gang up on them and call them the war criminals, including the US.

[Jumpshot Virus]

And this leads to why I still think the war in Iraq has some value. There are two solutions to the middle east conflict. One of them involves propping up a "democracy", that pushes the western ideals, philosophies, and culture to the point that the young Muslim street rises up. There are a huge chunk of Saudi youth that are obsessed with western culture. The other solution is to go to the Suadis and Egyptians and tell them to do as they please with Isreal and we won't step in, then watch how quickly the Muslim attitude toward us changes. Anyone who knows anything about our policy with Isreal over the past 60 years, and our financing methods can see why reason number two isn't going to happen anytime soon. I'm not naive enough to think that our current leadership played this out with that kind of forsight, but I do think it's a valid enough long term reason to not jump on everyone who is in support of the war. The far evangelical christian right also believs that the Jews have to occupy Isreal in order for the second coming to happen (not that I'm an expert on evangelical christianity), which may explain the neo-con's support more than anything with as much global forsight as I may be giving them credit for.

Good post.

All the political powers of the world need to simply go back to the drawing board and start over from ground zero. I know this is easier said than done, but the world as a whole, and most notably Western and Middle-Eastern nations need to change their worldly philosphies and outlooks on their futures if we all wish to coexist down the road. Otherwise, WWIII will happen, and unfortunately it will probably be the last world war.

"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."

[RainierBeachPoet]

As long as Isreal keeps firing missiles that say USA on the side of them, only criticizing them will not help. We have to stop funding their military as well.

that would be a good next step if we ever have to balls to even criticize them publicly

unfortunately, the selling of military hardware is a large part of our usa economy...

[RainierBeachPoet]

And this leads to why I still think the war in Iraq has some value. There are two solutions to the middle east conflict. One of them involves propping up a "democracy", that pushes the western ideals, philosophies, and culture to the point that the young Muslim street rises up. There are a huge chunk of Saudi youth that are obsessed with western culture. The other solution is to go to the Suadis and Egyptians and tell them to do as they please with Isreal and we won't step in, then watch how quickly the Muslim attitude toward us changes. Anyone who knows anything about our policy with Isreal over the past 60 years, and our financing methods can see why reason number two isn't going to happen anytime soon. I'm not naive enough to think that our current leadership played this out with that kind of forsight, but I do think it's a valid enough long term reason to not jump on everyone who is in support of the war. The far evangelical christian right also believs that the Jews have to occupy Isreal in order for the second coming to happen (not that I'm an expert on evangelical christianity), which may explain the neo-con's support more than anything with as much global forsight as I may be giving them credit for.

i am not exactly sure what you mean by-- letting the saudis and egypt do what they want with israel

we didnt even confront the saudi's when we knew that the majority of the 9-11 terrorists were saudi. we are too beholden to their oil. there is no motivating force that would make them cooperate with israel. over the years, egypt has been good with their peace accord and they might be able to do something

but either way, it is hard to imagine that they would befriend israel in meaningful ways when it might damage their own standnig in the muslim world

regarding the FAR far right and fringe churches that believe in the support of israel for these questionable theological reasons of the second coming (plus the neo-cons support)-- this is an argument for diminishing our support for israel!

[YAWN]

Like i said in another thread im not too keen on the situation, but from what i have read..

If Hamas, who is a known terror organization, has come out and said we want to kill any and everyone that is associated with israel. They then proceed to blindly fires rockets into the southern part of israel; purposely from public areas that are known to have many civilians around. Israel is not allowed to go after the organization that has been doing this for years?

If some terror organization in tijuana mexico decided to fire a single rocket into san diego, would we not go after the person who did it?

[Showtime]

it would be a problem for israel and would have repercussions around the world

to allow the obliteration of any country would be a universal tragedy

You do know genocide and other civil wars have been virtually ignored by the major powers over the past decades, right? Oh, but nobody cares about them because it's not near Jerusalem.

[wTFaMonkey]

one word:

Isreals lobby group ---> AIPAC

[wTFaMonkey]

the problem is if we didnt take sides, israel would be obliterated. we have to protect israel but we cannot condone anything and everything they do

I don't understand how Isreal would be "obliterated".

they have thousands of nukes. Does Iran have even 1? No one would touch Isreal.