Appeasing Nazis

cjhsa, you gonna need more than namecalling for arguments. As for Israelis they are not all one thing by far and dont all agree with Bushie by far.

0 Replies

cjhsa wrote:

Would someone like to explain to me why Isreal looks at W like their greatest friend and protector in 60 years - even more than Reagan?

bf you should just rename yourself bs.

I believe, one has to be either in Israel (and understand the language), or have friends/family there that communicate often. Plus, Israelis come in all political persuasions, so speaking to one or two people means nothing, I think.

Let's offer the thought that the Israelis might already sense that history is going to consider him a great President. So, a "great historical figure" visiting is an honor for Israel. It won't be the first time that Jews are a bellwether.

0 Replies

Obama: Bush policies strengthened Iran, Hamas

Harsh attack: Presidential hopeful Obama claims rival McCain wants to 'double down' on Bush's failed policies, says current administration must explain 'why Hamas now controls Gaza' after US insisted on Palestinian elections

Reuters Published: 05.16.08, 21:02 / Israel News

Obama slams Bush: Democratic presidential front-runner Barack Obama said on Friday President George W. Bush's "failed policies" had strengthened US enemies like Iran and Hamas.

Responding to Bush's comment on Thursday that those who want to talk to Iran were like Nazi appeasers before the Second World War, Obama accused Bush of "exactly the kind of appalling attack that's divided the country and that alienates us from the world."

Obama also challenged Bush and Republican presidential rival John McCain to a debate on foreign policy issues, a day after Bush caused outrage among Democrats with his remarks on appeasement before the Israeli parliament.

McCain, who has clinched his party's presidential nomination, did not repeat the word "appeasement" On Thursday. But he did criticize Obama's pledge to speak directly to US foes, particularly Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. He said Obama needs to explain why he would talk to him.

"If George Bush and John McCain want to have a debate about protecting the United States of America, that is a debate that I'm happy to have any time, any place, and that is a debate that I will win because George Bush and John McCain have a lot to answer for," Obama said in a campaign speech in South Dakota.

"They've got to answer for the fact that Iran is the greatest strategic beneficiary of our invasion of Iraq. It made Iran stronger, George Bush's policies," He said.

"They're going to have to explain why Hamas now controls Gaza, Hamas that was strengthened because the United States insisted that we should have democratic elections in the Palestinian Authority."

"That's the Bush-McCain record on protecting this country," Obama added. "Those are the failed policies that John McCain wants to double down on."

0 Replies

What does "double down" mean? Is he talking to hipsters that understand that kind of slang? I guess he won't miss my vote then.

Does "double down" refer to some sort of scoring method in "double dutch"?

0 Replies

Double down is a gambling term. Not relevent to Bushie's policies that have strengthened Iran and Hamas. As have Israel's policies.

0 Replies

blueflame1 wrote:

Double down is a gambling term. Not relevent to Bushie's policies that have strengthened Iran and Hamas. As have Israel's policies.

So why would he use a term that doesn't have universal understanding? I'd wonder if he talks to a limited audience? Perhaps, my presence in his constituency would not be appreciated, or preferred?

0 Replies

It has universal understanding. Somehow not for you. McCain sure understands. You're right he aint agonna miss your vote at all.

0 Replies

Those Jewish appeasers

Barack Obama is not the only one who should be taking offense at President Bush's insistence that anyone having truck with terrorists is no better than Neville Chamberlain and, furthermore, ignores the lessons of the Holocaust.

According to an opinion poll last February, 64% of Israelis -- many of them Holocaust survivors or their relatives and descendants -- wanted their government to talk directly to Hamas.

Many Israeli analysts and senior military officers have long felt the same way. For example:

Hamas is not going to disappear," says Shlomo Brom, a former Israeli military chief of strategic planning. "They're not Al Qaeda; they're a national political movement." Brom, who favors indirect negotiations with Hamas, says he believes a dialogue could help moderate the Islamists. (Newsweek, March 7, 2008)

Appeasers all, in President Bush's world view (and John McCain's, apparently -- although it differs with what McCain said about Hamas a couple of years ago)

As for Iran, also the focus of Bush's and McCain's appeasement wrath, here is Bush's own Defense Secretary:

In a speech given to a group of former American diplomats, Robert Gates, the US Secretary of Defense, stated that his country needs to seek dialogue with Iran. He advocated engaging Tehran diplomatically, rather than simply attempting to intimidate it. (The National, Abu Dhabi, May 16, 2008)
link

0 Replies

View host brings up Prescott Bush's Nazi ties: Developing...

0 Replies

So Obama is running against Bush? Who knew?

0 Replies

Since Bushie's speech in Israel Obama has been running against appeasement charges. Now at least it's in the mainstream that the Bush/Walkers were not only appesers of Hitler but partners and enablers of Hitler.

0 Replies

What MSM are you referring to?

The MSM is the biggest pack of liberal liars on the planet these days.

Enemy combatants.

0 Replies

Neville Chamberlain's policy towards Hitler, which later was deemed appeasement is often trumpeted as the archetypical act of folly and cowardice. But this is with the benefit of hindsight. At the time, Chamberlain wanted to avoid another European war. Most people did. He thought Germany had been unfairly treated after WW1, a lot of people did. Britain's economy was not geared up for war, but if it was inevitable as the break down of the Munich treaty brutally showed, the 18 months time it bought to re arm proved vital. Finally Chamberlain, with all his efforts to avoid war shattered, with a deep and abiding memory of the horrors of WW1, declared war on Germany, a war he expected to be even more terrible. Remember it was Britain and France that declared war on Germany, not the other way around, and it stunned Hitler. Chamberlain was no coward.

0 Replies

blueflame1 wrote:

Those Jewish appeasers

Barack Obama is not the only one who should be taking offense at President Bush's insistence that anyone having truck with terrorists is no better than Neville Chamberlain and, furthermore, ignores the lessons of the Holocaust.

According to an opinion poll last February, 64% of Israelis -- many of them Holocaust survivors or their relatives and descendants -- wanted their government to talk directly to Hamas.

Many Israeli analysts and senior military officers have long felt the same way. For example:

Hamas is not going to disappear," says Shlomo Brom, a former Israeli military chief of strategic planning. "They're not Al Qaeda; they're a national political movement." Brom, who favors indirect negotiations with Hamas, says he believes a dialogue could help moderate the Islamists. (Newsweek, March 7, 2008)

Appeasers all, in President Bush's world view (and John McCain's, apparently -- although it differs with what McCain said about Hamas a couple of years ago)

As for Iran, also the focus of Bush's and McCain's appeasement wrath, here is Bush's own Defense Secretary:

In a speech given to a group of former American diplomats, Robert Gates, the US Secretary of Defense, stated that his country needs to seek dialogue with Iran. He advocated engaging Tehran diplomatically, rather than simply attempting to intimidate it. (The National, Abu Dhabi, May 16, 2008)
link

When did Israelis become a criterion for U.S. policy?

0 Replies

blueflame1 wrote:

View host brings up Prescott Bush's Nazi ties: Developing...

Whoppie?

0 Replies

Foofie wrote:

blueflame1 wrote:
Those Jewish appeasers

Barack Obama is not the only one who should be taking offense at President Bush's insistence that anyone having truck with terrorists is no better than Neville Chamberlain and, furthermore, ignores the lessons of the Holocaust.

According to an opinion poll last February, 64% of Israelis -- many of them Holocaust survivors or their relatives and descendants -- wanted their government to talk directly to Hamas.

Many Israeli analysts and senior military officers have long felt the same way. For example:

Hamas is not going to disappear," says Shlomo Brom, a former Israeli military chief of strategic planning. "They're not Al Qaeda; they're a national political movement." Brom, who favors indirect negotiations with Hamas, says he believes a dialogue could help moderate the Islamists. (Newsweek, March 7, 2008)

Appeasers all, in President Bush's world view (and John McCain's, apparently -- although it differs with what McCain said about Hamas a couple of years ago)

As for Iran, also the focus of Bush's and McCain's appeasement wrath, here is Bush's own Defense Secretary:

In a speech given to a group of former American diplomats, Robert Gates, the US Secretary of Defense, stated that his country needs to seek dialogue with Iran. He advocated engaging Tehran diplomatically, rather than simply attempting to intimidate it. (The National, Abu Dhabi, May 16, 2008)
link

When did Israelis become a criterion for U.S. policy?

When our top leadership became filled with aggressive Zionists.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

blueflame1 wrote:

Since Bushie's speech in Israel Obama has been running against appeasement charges. Now at least it's in the mainstream that the Bush/Walkers were not only appesers of Hitler but partners and enablers of Hitler.

Did Bush have anything to do with the Fall of the Roman Empire also?

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Foofie wrote:
blueflame1 wrote:
Those Jewish appeasers

Barack Obama is not the only one who should be taking offense at President Bush's insistence that anyone having truck with terrorists is no better than Neville Chamberlain and, furthermore, ignores the lessons of the Holocaust.

According to an opinion poll last February, 64% of Israelis -- many of them Holocaust survivors or their relatives and descendants -- wanted their government to talk directly to Hamas.

Many Israeli analysts and senior military officers have long felt the same way. For example:

Hamas is not going to disappear," says Shlomo Brom, a former Israeli military chief of strategic planning. "They're not Al Qaeda; they're a national political movement." Brom, who favors indirect negotiations with Hamas, says he believes a dialogue could help moderate the Islamists. (Newsweek, March 7, 2008)

Appeasers all, in President Bush's world view (and John McCain's, apparently -- although it differs with what McCain said about Hamas a couple of years ago)

As for Iran, also the focus of Bush's and McCain's appeasement wrath, here is Bush's own Defense Secretary:

In a speech given to a group of former American diplomats, Robert Gates, the US Secretary of Defense, stated that his country needs to seek dialogue with Iran. He advocated engaging Tehran diplomatically, rather than simply attempting to intimidate it. (The National, Abu Dhabi, May 16, 2008)
link

When did Israelis become a criterion for U.S. policy?

When our top leadership became filled with aggressive Zionists.

Cycloptichorn

Sorry, if you are alienated from U.S. policy and those that value it.

0 Replies

Foofie wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Foofie wrote:
blueflame1 wrote:
Those Jewish appeasers

Barack Obama is not the only one who should be taking offense at President Bush's insistence that anyone having truck with terrorists is no better than Neville Chamberlain and, furthermore, ignores the lessons of the Holocaust.

According to an opinion poll last February, 64% of Israelis -- many of them Holocaust survivors or their relatives and descendants -- wanted their government to talk directly to Hamas.

Many Israeli analysts and senior military officers have long felt the same way. For example:

Hamas is not going to disappear," says Shlomo Brom, a former Israeli military chief of strategic planning. "They're not Al Qaeda; they're a national political movement." Brom, who favors indirect negotiations with Hamas, says he believes a dialogue could help moderate the Islamists. (Newsweek, March 7, 2008)

Appeasers all, in President Bush's world view (and John McCain's, apparently -- although it differs with what McCain said about Hamas a couple of years ago)

As for Iran, also the focus of Bush's and McCain's appeasement wrath, here is Bush's own Defense Secretary:

In a speech given to a group of former American diplomats, Robert Gates, the US Secretary of Defense, stated that his country needs to seek dialogue with Iran. He advocated engaging Tehran diplomatically, rather than simply attempting to intimidate it. (The National, Abu Dhabi, May 16, 2008)
link

When did Israelis become a criterion for U.S. policy?

When our top leadership became filled with aggressive Zionists.

Cycloptichorn

Sorry, if you are alienated from U.S. policy and those that value it.

What does this even mean?

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Foofie wrote:
blueflame1 wrote:
Those Jewish appeasers

Barack Obama is not the only one who should be taking offense at President Bush's insistence that anyone having truck with terrorists is no better than Neville Chamberlain and, furthermore, ignores the lessons of the Holocaust.

According to an opinion poll last February, 64% of Israelis -- many of them Holocaust survivors or their relatives and descendants -- wanted their government to talk directly to Hamas.

Many Israeli analysts and senior military officers have long felt the same way. For example:

Hamas is not going to disappear," says Shlomo Brom, a former Israeli military chief of strategic planning. "They're not Al Qaeda; they're a national political movement." Brom, who favors indirect negotiations with Hamas, says he believes a dialogue could help moderate the Islamists. (Newsweek, March 7, 2008)

Appeasers all, in President Bush's world view (and John McCain's, apparently -- although it differs with what McCain said about Hamas a couple of years ago)

As for Iran, also the focus of Bush's and McCain's appeasement wrath, here is Bush's own Defense Secretary:

In a speech given to a group of former American diplomats, Robert Gates, the US Secretary of Defense, stated that his country needs to seek dialogue with Iran. He advocated engaging Tehran diplomatically, rather than simply attempting to intimidate it. (The National, Abu Dhabi, May 16, 2008)
link

When did Israelis become a criterion for U.S. policy?

When our top leadership became filled with aggressive Zionists.

Cycloptichorn

Well, thank Harry Truman, Democrat.

0 Replies

Appeasing Nazis

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know