15
   

ISRAEL - IRAN - SYRIA - HAMAS - HEZBOLLAH - WWWIII?

 
 
genoves
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 16 May, 2009 12:46 am

I am convinced that the left wing is reflexively Anti-Israel because the left wing is dedicated to the downfall of the USA with its present Capitalistic System. The Anti-American haters of the sixties and seventies--the bombers--the Weathermen--the qausi Communists--are still with us.

I am heartened that BO is going to visit Israel. He will find that he will not be able to bullshit Nathanyahu.

I am always amused by the fanatic Islamists in Iran and Pakistan who, despite their huge numerical advantage in people and territory, demand the destruction of Israel.

Not while Bibi is there. He has promised--"Never Again
0 Replies
 
genoves
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 16 May, 2009 12:53 am
ADVOCATE WROTE:

Advocate wrote:

What the hell are you talking about? Our military spending is taking us to the poor house, and it is hugely wasteful. The last time I looked, we were spending more than the next 26 countries in spending combined. How many more countries must we invade? Are we trying to be another Roman Empire?


*************************************************************

We may be trying to be another Roman Empire with Obama as Caesar.

Friday May 15th--Chicago Tribune

quote:

"The House delivered a big victory to President Barack Obama, approving a bill to provide $97 billion for major national security initiatives including US military Operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan."
0 Replies
 
genoves
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 16 May, 2009 12:54 am
@Advocate,
I didn't know that Brandon was up to his old tricks.
0 Replies
 
genoves
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 16 May, 2009 12:56 am
@MontereyJack,
Monterey Jack says that the Bullshit flows not from Obama but from Nethanyahu. Really? Well, we will see just how Obama who never spent a day in the military makes out against the battlefield hero. Nethanyahu.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 May, 2009 02:19 pm
Here is an excellent piece on the complexities surrounding Hamas, Iran, and the Obama administration. Israelis have concluded that O is not a friend of Israel, and they may have good reasons for this.

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/20090517_Washington_has_abandoned_its_obligations.html
genoves
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 17 May, 2009 05:20 pm
@Advocate,
Yes, everyone should read this piece. The last three paragraphs read:

A poll taken earlier this month by Bar Ilan University showed that only 38 percent of Israelis view Obama as friendly toward Israel. Moreover, 66 percent of Israelis support a military strike on Iran's nuclear installations, and only 15 percent say they believe Israel should cancel an attack on Iran if the United States opposes the operation.

These data are important for understanding how Israelis are responding to the Obama administration's apparent hostility toward Israel and its perceived preference for a nuclear-armed Iran over any concerted action by the United States or Israel to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power. What the administration is signaling Israelis - and their government - is that Washington is no longer Israel's trusted ally. Indeed, it is becoming clear to the Israeli public that, for the administration, it doesn't matter what Israel does or what its enemies do. As far as Obama and his advisers are concerned, Israel's refusal to make further concessions to the Palestinians will be the cause for whatever transpires.

In this state of affairs, on the eve of the Obama-Netanyahu meeting, more and more Israelis have come to the conclusion that there is little point in taking Washington's views into consideration. If Washington is going to blame Israel anyway, we are better off being blamed for preemptively removing the threat of a new Holocaust than for allowing that threat to become a fact of life.

*******************************************************************

Netanyahu, unlike BO, served his country in the military. Unless BO agrees to put strong and unrelenting pressure on Iran with regard to the construction of nuclear devices, Nathanyahu ignore BO and save his country from the prospect of nuclear annihilation.

Some forget that the Israelis took out the Iraqi site which was preparing to st up a nuclear device.
Foofie
 
  2  
Reply Sun 17 May, 2009 06:23 pm
@genoves,
genoves wrote:

A poll taken earlier this month by Bar Ilan University showed that only 38 percent of Israelis view Obama as friendly toward Israel.


I guess that can also prove that all Jews may not be highly intelligent.
genoves
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 18 May, 2009 12:35 am
@Foofie,
You may be right, Foofie, but that means that 62% of Jews view Obama as inimical to Israel. After Netanyahu gets through with Obama( BO does not know that Netanyahu is not a wimp like Arlen Specter) the number of Jews who view Obama as friendly to Israel will decrease.

But, since Obama is such a skilled double talker, he may be able to convice Bibi that he is on Israel's side. I doubt that Bibi will fall for that since Bibi has heard a great many flim-flam men like Obama in his time.

BO meets the hero of Israel tomorrow. Stay tuned!
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Reply Mon 18 May, 2009 05:32 am
"Surfing for Peace": The Gaza Surf Club
Quote:

Dorian Paskowitz brought surfing to Israel in 1956 -- and in 2007 he did the same for the Gaza Strip, bringing a batch of surfboards into the war torn region. Since then, the sport has grown in the shadow of violence.
[...]
Paskowitz was in a position to know. He happened to be Israel's surf pioneer, a Californian who had learned to surf during the Depression before introducing the sport to Tel Aviv in 1956. His real ambition in those days was to fight for the Israeli military. When the Suez War started, he said, "I volunteered in quite a Hollywood kind of manner, so much so that the recruiter in Tel Aviv laughed and said, 'You must have seen too many John Wayne movies.'" Paskowitz didn't realize that an American Jew would need Israeli citizenship to fight for Israel. "He shook me up so bad I said, '**** him, I'm gonna get my board and go surfing.'" So he paddled out the same day at Frishman Beach, in front of a number of Tel Aviv lifeguards -- who went on to become the fathers of Israeli surfing.

So in 2007, at the age of 86, Paskowitz decided to try and repeat his success. A story appeared in the L.A. Times about two Palestinians named Mohammed Abu Jayyab and Ahmed Abu Hasiera, and the picture showed them posing on Gaza Beach with a single shared board bearing a cartoon image of a shark. "They just looked so forlorn," Paskowitz told me. "So my son David and I said, 'Well, let's go take 'em some boards.'"

Gaza had "nine or 10" Palestinian surfers at the time, according to Matt Olsen. Now -- just two years later -- there are 50 or 60.

... ... ...
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 May, 2009 06:08 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Quote:
"Surfing for Peace"


Smile Nice story, Walter. Thanks.
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 May, 2009 09:22 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Well, if Israeli Jews and Palestineans ever surf on the same beach, they will appear more similar than ever, since both Jews and Muslims are forbidden to have tatoos.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 May, 2009 12:32 pm
Well they aren't talking surfing but Hamas is again talking in a more concilatory manner now. And why? Are they sincere or do they think Barack Obama is more gullible that George Bush or Bill Clinton? Do they really mean they don't intend Israel's destruction this time or is this yet another lip service to buy time to regroup, resupply, and rearm? How seriously should we take them when they say they won't recognize Israel because it is the 'only negotiating point they have'?

Quote:
. . . .In a recent interview, Hamas lawmaker Yehiye Moussa said the group is "not demanding to destroy Israel." West Bank legislator Mahmoud Ramahi added that Hamas is ready to talk to the West"stressing the group has nothing in common with the virulently anti-Western al-Qaida.

The new tone seems mostly aimed at President Barack Obama, who was meeting Monday with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Washington. As he puts together a new Mideast strategy, Obama must decide whether the U.S. will keep shunning Hamas, which seized Gaza by force in 2007 after winning parliamentary elections.

So far, the U.S. and international community insist they will deal with Hamas only if the group recognizes Israel first.

But some foreign policy experts in the U.S. and Israel are advocating a new approach to Hamas, noting that neither the boycott nor Israel's recent war in Gaza have toppled the militants.

Those advocating change include a former Israeli military commander of Gaza, an ex-chief of Israel's Mossad spy agency and a group led by Obama's now chief economic adviser, Paul Volcker.

Volcker's group told Obama that any future Palestinian government that includes Hamas should be judged by whether it's ready to observe a truce with Israel, and allow moderate Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to negotiate with Israel"not by whether Hamas is ready to revoke its ideology.

Hamas has said in the past it's open to such ideas, and would leave it to Palestinians to decide whether to accept any peace deal that emerges.

But others insist any change in policy toward Hamas would be dangerous.

They warn that Hamas hasn't abandoned its goal of destroying Israel, citing as evidence the continued weapons smuggling into Gaza and Hamas' ties with Iran. Engaging Hamas would legitimize violence, weaken Abbas and undermine moderate Arab countries trying to contain Iran, these critics say.

Hamas is notoriously difficult to pin down to clarify its positions, with hard-liners and more pragmatic politicians often issuing contradictory statements. Even as some have reached out in recent weeks, other Hamas figures continue to highlight what the group calls its right to wage armed struggle against Israeli occupation.

Still, a change in Hamas tone has been noticeable, particularly in comments by Mashaal.

In a televised speech last month aimed at British lawmakers, Mashaal urged Europe to prod the Obama administration to take a new Mideast approach.

"You will find not just Hamas, but also the Palestinian people and all the Arabs keen on making real peace, one based on restoring rights and free of occupation," he said.

He also praised as a "golden opportunity" the Arab peace initiative, which offers Israel recognition in exchange for a withdrawal from all territory it captured in 1967. Such feelers appear part of Hamas' attempt to win acceptance of its Gaza rule, plus an end to the stifling two-year border closure there.

Yet the feelers fall short of meeting the West's conditions.

On that point, Hamas politicians insist there's no way the group will recognize Israel now"because they say, it is one of their few negotiating strengths and they can't give it up until they know what they will get in return.

Israel is not impressed by the Hamas outreach.

Its governments have been deeply suspicious of the group, which has fired thousands of rockets at Israeli towns in recent years. Israeli officials note that Hamas' founding charter remains pledged to Israel's destruction.

Netanyahu has said he wants to see Hamas deposed. And Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor argues that Western engagement with Hamas would be a severe blow to both the moderate Abbas and to ally Egypt"undermining their efforts at "stability, security and political compromise."

Obama is expected to unveil his Mideast strategy sometime in June. He has it is in U.S. interests to have a Palestinian state alongside Israel.

But officials in the Obama administration also have signaled that Hamas won't be permitted to cut corners and fall short of recognizing Israel. The officials indicate that the new U.S. Mideast strategy won't include direct U.S. contacts with an unreformed Hamas.

The stalemate over Hamas is just one of the factors stalling Palestinian-Israeli peace talks"but it is considered significant. . . .

Whole article here:
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D988P5IO0&show_article=1
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 May, 2009 01:43 pm
In the last 24 hours. . .

Quote:
WASHINGTON (AP) - Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Monday he is ready to resume peace talks with the Palestinians immediately, but any agreement is contingent on their acceptance of Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state.

Netanyahu and President Barack Obama met for more than two hours at the White House and focused on Mideast peace talks, Iran's nuclear program and the U.S.-Israeli relationship.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D988QMIG2&show_article=1
genoves
 
  0  
Reply Mon 18 May, 2009 03:30 pm
Walter Hinteler

2 Reply report Mon 18 May, 2009 05:32 am "Surfing for Peace": The Gaza Surf ClubQuote:

Dorian Paskowitz brought surfing to Israel in 1956 -- and in 2007 he did the same for the Gaza Strip, bringing a batch of surfboards into the war torn region. Since then, the sport has grown in the shadow of violence.
[...]
Paskowitz was in a position to know. He happened to be Israel's surf pioneer, a Californian who had learned to surf during the Depression before introducing the sport to Tel Aviv in 1956. His real ambition in those days was to fight for the Israeli military. When the Suez War started, he said, "I volunteered in quite a Hollywood kind of manner, so much so that the recruiter in Tel Aviv laughed and said, 'You must have seen too many John Wayne movies.'" Paskowitz didn't realize that an American Jew would need Israeli citizenship to fight for Israel. "He shook me up so bad I said, '**** him, I'm gonna get my board and go surfing.'" So he paddled out the same day at Frishman Beach, in front of a number of Tel Aviv lifeguards -- who went on to become the fathers of Israeli surfing.

So in 2007, at the age of 86, Paskowitz decided to try and repeat his success. A story appeared in the L.A. Times about two Palestinians named Mohammed Abu Jayyab and Ahmed Abu Hasiera, and the picture showed them posing on Gaza Beach with a single shared board bearing a cartoon image of a shark. "They just looked so forlorn," Paskowitz told me. "So my son David and I said, 'Well, let's go take 'em some boards.'"

Gaza had "nine or 10" Palestinian surfers at the time, according to Matt Olsen. Now -- just two years later -- there are 50 or 60.
*****************************************************************

Paskowitz must have been careful not to go too near Jayyab's and Hasiera's friends who carried those extra large surf boards. I understand those extra large surf boards can conceal bombs.

BUT PASKOWITZ, WHO CONSORTS WITH THE SWORD ENEMIES OF ISRAEL MUST BE A KOOK. JUDGE FOR YOURSEVES.

Note--
quote from Wikipedia
None of the Paskowitz children were formally educated during their time on the road. Doc's philosophy about the difference between knowledge and wisdom led him to believe that the formal education systems in all the countries of the world were not useful. Doc believes that achieving wisdom comes from real experiences in the world, from meeting and learning from everyday people, and that formal education is dangerous to young minds. Doc himself, however, is a Stanford graduate. Many of his children now feel that their opportunities in life have been damaged by their lack of formal education.
end of quote
Anyone who would do that to his children is a kook!



0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 May, 2009 03:48 pm
@Foxfyre,
Martin Indyk, a former US ambassador to Israel, said: "Netanyahu is caught between a rock and a hard place, the rock being the president's determination to achieve a two-state solution and the hard place being his political base which opposes it. He's inching toward the Obama position but trying to avoid saying the words, 'two-state solution.'"

Mr Netanyahu's political survival may depend on him sticking to his position. Avigdor Lieberman, the Israeli foreign minister whose right-wing party is essential to the survival of the Likud-led coalition, is forthrightly opposed to the creation of a Palestinian state.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/5335620/Obama-to-warn-Israels-PM-Benjamin-Netanyahu-No-more-blank-cheques.html
genoves
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 May, 2009 03:51 pm






Netanyahu: Ready to Resume Peace Talks with Palestinians Immediately


WASHINGTON (AP) - Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Monday he is ready to resume peace talks with the Palestinians immediately, but any agreement is contingent on their acceptance of Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state.
end of quote
The rabid fanatics in AlQueda, strongly entrenched in Palestine, will never recognize Israel. They have sworn to obliterate Israel. So did Iran!

The questions that must be answered were highlighted in a Wall Street Journal Opinion Piece which suggested that Statehood for Israel and Palestine is not the only important issue on the table.

Quote:

"Can the US and its European allies peacefully prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons? And, if not, would Israel try to do so militarily even if doing so greatly angered President Barack Obama( BO would probably stamp his little foot and call Netanyahu--"a Yid Honky")

"Therese Delperch, a leading nonproliferation expert at France's Atomic energy Commission wrote...:"We have negotiated with Iran for five years and we came to the conclusion that they are not interested at all in negotiating but only in buying time for heir military program"(What do you expect from fringe religious fanatics?)
0 Replies
 
genoves
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 May, 2009 04:00 pm
@dyslexia,
Dyslexia is apparently unaware that Avigdor Lieberman may be opposed to the creation of a Palestinian State but he is not averse to striking at Iran before the religious fanatics in that country build a nuclear device.

Dyslexia may have forgotten but the fact is that the Israelis have already destroyed two attemps by the fanatic Anti-Western fringe Islamists to set up a nuclear device with which to threaten Israel--

l. Israeli pilots( the best in Europe or Asis, most highly trained and fiercely patriotic) knocked out the nuclear plant being built by Saddam Hussein.

2. Israeli pilots obliterated the nuclear plant( built-courtesy of the North Koreans) in Syria.


If they have to, they will smash the Iranian site.

Netanyahu has promised--"Never Again"!
0 Replies
 
genoves
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 May, 2009 04:05 pm
62% of Jews view Obama as inimical to Israel. After Netanyahu gets through with Obama( BO does not know that Netanyahu is not a wimp like Arlen Specter) the number of Jews who view Obama as friendly to Israel will decrease.

But, since Obama is such a skilled double talker, he may be able to convice Bibi that he is on Israel's side. I doubt that Bibi will fall for that since Bibi has heard a great many flim-flam men like Obama in his time.

BO meets the hero of Israel. The former military hero of Israel will eviscerate
BO. BO has no experience that matches Natanyahu since BO never fought a battle for his country in his life.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 May, 2009 04:19 pm
@dyslexia,
I think the writer of that Telegraph piece might be overreaching a bit though. The component that he isn't recognizing is the importance of the "Jewish vote" in the USA and those 'Gentiles" who also are emotionally and philosophically tied to Israel. Obama has already backed down on a number of things to retain popularity with various segments.

So if any compromise was perceived to put Israel at an obvious disadvantage, I think most Americans would probably object and President Obama might soften his tough rhetoric:

Quote:
Voters Still Say Palestinians to Blame, But 50% Say Israel Should Accept Truce
Monday, January 12, 2009

Two weeks of military action in the Gaza Strip has done nothing to move public opinion in America.

Today, 56% of voters nationwide say that the Palestinians are to blame for the current situation in Gaza while 13% say the Israelis are at fault. Two weeks ago, a nationwide survey of adults found that 55% placed the blame on the Palestinians and 13% pointed the finger at Israel.

Forty-five percent (45%) say Israel should have taken military action against the Palestinians, little changed from 44% two weeks ago. Thirty-eight percent (38%) say that the Jewish nation should have tried harder to find a diplomatic solution, down slightly from 41% in the earlier survey.

As in the earlier survey, Republicans strongly agree with Israel while Democrats wish there had been more efforts at diplomacy. Forty-seven percent (47%) of unaffiliated voters support Israel’s military action while 36% would like to have seen more diplomatic efforts.

Looking ahead, 50% say Israel should agree to a truce now while 26% disagree.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics2/voters_still_say_palestinians_to_blame_but_50_say_israel_should_accept_truce


Quote:
40% Say Israelis, Palestinians Can Peacefully Coexist
Friday, May 08, 2009

With Israel and Iran turning up the bellicose language, U.S. voters are less confident than they were at the beginning of the year that Israelis and Palestinians can live side by side in peace.

Now just 40% of voters think it is possible for the two to peacefully coexist, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. That’s down 12 points from early January. Two years ago, just 27% thought it possible for the two sides to live together in peace.

While 40% now think such co-existence is possible, 36% disagree and say it is not.

Just 34% of voters now think it is at least somewhat likely that the Israelis and Palestinians will reach a peace agreement by the end of President Obama’s first term in office. Only 8% believe such an agreement is Very Likely.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics2/40_say_israelis_palestinians_can_peacefully_coexist


Note, in a study of polling groups from the last two elections, Rasmussen was consistently near or at the top in predicting the final results. Zogby, at least for the 2008 election, was near the bottom.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 May, 2009 04:21 pm
More than half of all Israelis believe Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's performance is worse, or at least no better, than that of his predecessor, Ehud Olmert, who was one of Israel's least popular leaders, a new Haaretz poll has found.

The poll, which Haaretz commissioned from Dialog, found that 28 percent of the 492 respondents said Netanyahu's performance was worse than that of Olmert, who at some stages of his career had only a single-digit approval rating. Another 27 percent of respondents said Netanyahu's performance was the same as Olmert's.

However, 31 percent said Netanyahu was a better premier, while 14 percent said they were undecided.
Advertisement
Asked about the peace process, 57 percent of respondents, or 280 people, said that Netanyahu should tell U.S. President Barack Obama that he supports a two-state solution when he visits Washington next week. Only 35 percent said Netanyahu should not give his consent, while 8 percent were undecided.

About 40 percent of respondents who identified themselves as Likud voter said Netanyahu should agree to a two-state solution.http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1085714.html
 

Related Topics

Israel's Reality - Discussion by Miller
THE WAR IN GAZA - Discussion by Advocate
Israel's Shame - Discussion by BigEgo
Eye On Israel/Palestine - Discussion by IronLionZion
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 04/26/2024 at 04:12:57