Carter blames Israel for Mideast conflict

Advocate wrote:

Carter has lost what little credibility and respect that he had.

Further fallout from Carter's new book

by the web

My impression is that his book is selling rather well. I'm no fan of his politics, but my strong impression is that he does indeed command a great deal of respect among many elements of society, both here and in other countries. I believe it is Israel, not Carter, that has been losing respect and credibility throughout the world.

The letter you pasted was more a statement of personal antipathy for Carter than an argument against the case he made in the book.

Repeated attacks on the author and attempts to change the subject or cloud the issues here,do not constitute an impressive or effective response to the facts and interpretations of them put forward in Carter's book. The dispassionate observer might be led to conclude that you have no counter arguments.

0 Replies

There have been more then 60 rocket attacks against Israel from Gaza since the last cease fire.

Israel has done nothing until now, but they are going to start striking against the rocket teams.

Israel is to be blamed for breaking the ceasefire I am sure.

0 Replies

According to this morning's newspaper, Israel is again builiding settlements on the West Bank (breaking a promise made) after ceasing to do so for nine years.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

There have been more then 60 rocket attacks against Israel from Gaza since the last cease fire.

Israel has done nothing until now, but they are going to start striking against the rocket teams.

Israel is to be blamed for breaking the ceasefire I am sure.

I think it could still hold. The rockets are being fired by Islamic Jihad, who is not part of the cease fire agreement. If Israel limits their response to these militants, and as long as Hamas doesn't use the retaliation as a pretext to perpetuate the violence, there is still a chance to revive the peace the talks. That's just my opinion.

0 Replies

Since President Bush confirms "all options are on the table" we can all send ideas on how to extricate ourselves from that mess, while protecting the major U.S. interests in the region - my idea unfortunately is already taken:

Quote:

.................
"But I thought that famous military theorist you guys all like to quote -- what's his name? Oh yea, Vauban -- said building and holding fortresses was the way to win a war," replied the First Citizen.

Poor Vauban, I thought, so often quoted and so little read. He wrote more about taking fortresses than building and defending them. "First Citizen, this is not quite Vauban's kind of war," I responded. "Mesopotamia is not the Spanish Netherlands, and Vauban didn't face elephants. But getting our troops out of their fortresses and into Babylon is only half my proposal."

"OK, what's the rest of it?," asked First Citizen Bush.

"You have to make an alliance with Persia," I said.

"An alliance with Persia? Are you nuts? Those guys are Zoro-fascists! Just last week three good Americans were killed in Detroit when some Zoros jumped from their burning ziggurat and landed on them. Besides, don't you know they are trying to build flying chariots? Ally with them? Never!" The First Citizen was known for being firm in his likes and dislikes.

"I admit, First Citizen, that this new Zoroastrian practice of setting their ziggurats on fire and then jumping from them is a problem," I replied. "And the Persians may well get chariots to fly regardless of what we do. But the fact of the matter is, we cannot hope to control Mesopotamia without their help. To obtain that help, we must in turn offer them what they want. An alliance with the United States would help solve many of their problems. I think they might go for it."

The First Citizen pondered my advice. "Supposing I wanted to do that. How could I approach them?"

"You might send the Shah a small present," I suggested. "I'm thinking of the people who pushed you into this disastrous war. You know, the neo-claques."

"Why should I send the Shah the neo-claques?", the First Citizen asked.

"Not all of them," I replied. "Just their heads."
.......................................

http://www.d-n-i.net/lind/lind_12_19_06.htm

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

There have been more then 60 rocket attacks against Israel from Gaza since the last cease fire.

Israel has done nothing until now, but they are going to start striking against the rocket teams.

Israel is to be blamed for breaking the ceasefire I am sure.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/806084.html

Quote:

Islamic Jihad: We are firing rockets in bid to sabotage Gaza truce

By Aluf Benn, Amos Harel, Mijal Grinberg and Yoav Stern, Haaretz Correspondents, Haaretz Service and Agencies

The Iranian-backed militant group Islamic Jihad is firing Qassam rockets at Israel with the intention of sabotaging the month-long Gaza truce and provoking Israeli retaliation, members of the group said Wednesday.

"That's one of the main reason for resuming [rocket] attacks," said Abu Ahmad, a spokesman for the group.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

According to this morning's newspaper, Israel is again builiding settlements on the West Bank (breaking a promise made) after ceasing to do so for nine years.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/806464.html

Quote:

Israel's plan to settle 30 families on a former Israel Defense Forces base in the West Bank would violate terms of a U.S.-backed Israeli-Palestinian peace plan, the United States said on Wednesday.

"The establishment of a new settlement or the expansion of an existing settlement would violate Israel's obligations under the road map," Gonzo Gallegos, a State Department spokesman, told reporters in Washington.

"The U.S. calls on Israel to meet its road map obligations and avoid taking steps that could be viewed as predetermining the outcome of final-status negotiations," he said. Washington was seeking an explanation from Israel, Gallegos added.

It appears that the U.S. is acting as the tempering intervener in this plan, as opposed to being unconditionally pro-Israel. It is a inflammatory move to build new settlements at this point.

0 Replies

MC, I doubt very much Israel will listen to any US "suggestions" not to build.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

MC, I doubt very much Israel will listen to any US "suggestions" not to build.

Probably not, but if Israel gets too aggressive, we hold the purse strings and I hope that the U.S. will set some limits with Israel. The whole world is watching and the charge that the U.S. is too lenient with Israel isn't exactly a secret.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

McGentrix wrote:
There have been more then 60 rocket attacks against Israel from Gaza since the last cease fire.

Israel has done nothing until now, but they are going to start striking against the rocket teams.

Israel is to be blamed for breaking the ceasefire I am sure.

I think it could still hold. The rockets are being fired by Islamic Jihad, who is not part of the cease fire agreement. If Israel limits their response to these militants, and as long as Hamas doesn't use the retaliation as a pretext to perpetuate the violence, there is still a chance to revive the peace the talks. That's just my opinion.

With Iran stirring the pot again, it further cements my opinion that someone, preferably Israel rather than us, bomb the hell out of Iran. If HighSeas is reading, if I said I thought it best to nuke Iran, I was exaggerating, but Iran needs to have someone remove their nuclear processing facilities with conventional weapons.

0 Replies

We always come out verbally against new Israeli settlements, but we never do anything about it. MC is right, we do hold the purse strings, and a lot of our money goes to the building of settlements. The last time we witheld money because of settlement activity was when Bush Sr. was in office, and to my knowledge that was the last time we made any stand against the settlements other than paying lipservice.

As to striking Iran, I can't see how that would solve anything. But maybe I'm just dense.

0 Replies

This stylistic tactic Iran invoked in Iraq, with fueling the war between dueling factions is just now being replicated in Israel. Iran knows that a shithead regime in Israel that is entirely trigger happy is going to go to work against the Palestinians in Gaza as long as they think Hamas is launching the attacks.

In my opinion, this is all foreplay to bring as much of the mideast to crisis in separate insurgency campaigns staged in Iraq, Lebanon and Israel. Knowing the U.S. involvement in Iraq and the U.S. close ties with Israel, Iran's game plan is to create a colossal diversion and complete its nuclear program. Once Iran goes nuclear, they will try to unite the Arab nations against the U.S., control the Homuz strait and declare war against Israel.

FD, six other Arab nations have indicated in a joint letter that if Iran gets the bomb, they are similarly going to develop similar nuclear capabilities.

0 Replies

Well, I wouldn't blame them for wanting the bomb if Iran (or any other neighbor) has it. That's the nature of these things, I guess.

0 Replies

Monte Cargo wrote:

[................]
With Iran stirring the pot again, it further cements my opinion that someone, preferably Israel rather than us, bomb the hell out of Iran. If HighSeas is reading, if I said I thought it best to nuke Iran, I was exaggerating, but Iran needs to have someone remove their nuclear processing facilities with conventional weapons.

Thanks, Monte Cargo, but my own opinion on what we should do with Iran appears in the excerpt of Lind's article posted 4 posts above your own. I share Lind's view.

0 Replies

"Zoro-fascists", etc. That's a lovely piece, HS.

I expect we've all noted that the "State official" criticizing Israel's settlement announcement is actually the nephew of the head janitor? It is uncertain, we understand, whether Condi Rice even knows of this announcement, not to mention whether she might agree even with its punctuation.

0 Replies

It seems Gerald Ford also disagreed with Bush on Iraq.

0 Replies

Here is Bill Clinton in Israel. I may be wrong, but I think that each of you would enjoy this.

www.liel.net/Liel-ClintonVideo2.wmv

0 Replies

0 Replies

I wonder where that theater is located, because we visited a huge one at the kibbutz we visited at Ein Gedi near the Dead Sea. I know there's another famous theater in Tel Aviv.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

It's not a glowing tribute to Kennedy. We were on the verge of a nuke war if Kruschev didn't blink first. Our military was on red alert, and ready to strike if Kruschev didn't back down and remove those bases in Cuba.

What Kennedy did do was wait it out rather than strike first; the best decision he could have made.

Agreed once we got to the point of the Cuban missle crisis, Kennedy got us out of it with a feat of diplomatic engineering. The fact that Kansas doesn't glow in the dark is enough to make Kennedy look good because he averted war with the Soviets.

My comment was more to address what happened to bring us to that point. Kennedy planned an uprising in the Bay of Pigs, and then backed out of providing air cover, leading to the massacre of thousands of Cubans by Fidel's communist army. That signaled U.S. weakness to Nikita Kruschev, and to show the U.S.A. that the U.S.S.R. meant business, they sent nukes for Castro to shoot at the United States if we attemped another invasion.

0 Replies

Carter blames Israel for Mideast conflict

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know