^^^dont forget Ron Paul, he is against any foreign intervention

Is it me or did Obama look kind of pissed during the press conference with Netanyahu today?

I am sorry I missed it, but have seen clips. Btw, why is it that Netanyahu speaks such good English compared to other foreign leaders?

It's why it's hard for me to have any sympathy for the Palestinians, since they voted Hamas into power.

After Arafat died in 2005(leaving his family in Switzerland richer by the >$1 billion he embezzled from his own people), Mahmoud Abbas took over the Palestinian Authority. Israel thought he was interested in peace, so they returned Gaza to the PA--in the process uprooting 9,000 Jewish settlers, some of them forcibly, so the Gazans wouldn't be troubled with any Jews in their midst. Gazans ousted the PA and installed Hamas, an Islamic terrorist organization that quotes the Protocols of the Elders of Zion in its charter and vows to destroy Israel. Result: >7k rockets rained on Israel, causing scores of deaths and injuries.

If an Islamic terrorist organization like Al Queida, which wants to destroy America because we're a Christian-majority nation, were to win an election in southern Canada or northern Mexico, and start raining down rockets on Michigan or Arizona, how long would it take any of us to demand that our government stop them?

Me, too.

After Arafat died in 2005(leaving his family in Switzerland richer by the >$1 billion he embezzled from his own people), Mahmoud Abbas took over the Palestinian Authority. Israel thought he was interested in peace, so they returned Gaza to the PA--in the process uprooting 9,000 Jewish settlers, some of them forcibly, so the Gazans wouldn't be troubled with any Jews in their midst. Gazans ousted the PA and installed Hamas, an Islamic terrorist organization that quotes the Protocols of the Elders of Zion in its charter and vows to destroy Israel. Result: >7k rockets rained on Israel, causing scores of deaths and injuries.

If an Islamic terrorist organization like Al Queida, which wants to destroy America because we're a Christian-majority nation, were to win an election in southern Canada or northern Mexico, and start raining down rockets on Michigan or Arizona, how long would it take any of us to demand that our government stop them?

"If some of these folks think that it’s time to launch a war, they should say so. And they should explain to the American people exactly why they would do that and what the consequences would be,"

"“I see some of these folks who have a lot of bluster, and a lot of big talk, but when you actually ask them specifically what they would do, it turns out they repeat the things that we’ve been doing over the last three years — it indicates to me that that’s more about politics than actually trying to solve a difficult problem.”"

just some background info

In early February 2006, Hamas offered Israel a 10-year truce "in return for a complete Israeli withdrawal from the occupied Palestinian territories: the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem," and recognition of Palestinian rights including the "right of return."

After the election, the Quartet on the Middle East (the United States, Russia, the European Union (EU), and the United Nations) stated that assistance to the Palestinian Authority would only continue if Hamas renounced violence, recognized Israel, and accepted previous Israeli-Palestinian agreements, which Hamas refused to do.The Quartet then imposed a freeze on all international aid to the Palestinian territories.

In 2006 after the Gaza election, Hamas leader sent a letter addressed to George Bush where he among other things declared that Hamas would accept a state on the 1967 borders including a truce. However, the Bush administration didnt reply.


In an interview on May 2010, Mashaal said that if a Palestinian state with real sovereignty was established under the conditions he set out, on the borders of 1967 with its capital Jerusalem and with the right of return, that will be the end of the Palestinian resistance, and then the nature of any subsequent ties with Israel would be decided democratically by the Palestinians.

In July 2009, Khaled Meshal, Hamas's political bureau chief, stated Hamas's willingness to cooperate with a resolution to the Arab-Israeli conflict which included a Palestinian state based on 1967 borders, provided that Palestinian refugees be given the right to return to Israel and that East Jerusalem be recognized as the new state's capital.

technically, al-qaeda wants to destroy america for a number of reasons chiefly our undying support both militarily and economically for israel, the "occupation of arab lands" eg Saudi Arabia, etc by US troops, and outrage toward the U.S. for being a secular, domineering presence in the Arab world

again in not saying i hate israel or anything like that (i dont, i have lots of close jewish friends) i am just sharing some comments as I see things

The Palestinians have been wanting a return to the 1967 borders ever since, well, their 1967 attack on Israel failed. They attack Israel, Israel kicks their butts and takes more land, and afterward the Palestinians are like, "Oh, never mind. Let's just pretend like none of this ever happened." And so Israel is supposed to give away land they've had for over 40 years in return for what? A meaningless 10 year promise of peace? Then what? Seriously, Dapper, open your eyes. I realize you're an Obama fan but you've bought into the liberal bullshit that paints Israel as the tyrant and the Palestinians as the victim.



What's ironic is, ol' Bin Laden and his mujahideen buddies were fine with U.S. assistance in their war against the Soviet Union. But afterward? Get out! The Muslim world does have a lot of ground to talk as far as the immoral, corrupt, secular influence of the west. But, then again, many of these Muslim countries in the middle east have been dysfunctional dictatorships who run things by fear, torture, murder, etc. Israel, and the U.S. support of it, has been the least of their problems. But for years they allowed their tyrant leaders to keep their focus on what they claimed was the source of all their problems - Israel.

A few things

Facts are facts, First of all, the Palestinians did NOT attack Israel first in 1967. The contrary is correct.

The Six-Day War fought between June 5 and 10, 1967, by Israel and the neighboring states of Egypt , Jordan, and Syria. After a period of high tension between Israel and its neighbors, the war began on June 5 with Israel launching surprise air strikes against Arab forces. The outcome was a swift and decisive Israeli victory. Israel took effective control of the Gaza Strip and the Sinai Peninsula from Egypt, the West Bank and East Jerusalem from Jordan, and the Golan Heights from Syria.

At the commencement of hostilities, both Egypt and Israel announced that they had been attacked by the other country. Once it was established that Israel had struck first, the Israeli government claimed that it was a pre-emptive strike in the face of a planned invasion by the Arab countries.On the other hand, the Arab view was that it was an unjustified attack.In the leadup to the war, the United States advised Israel that America's military intelligence saw no signs of Egypt preparing to invade Israel.

I havent bought into any bullshit from anybody. Personally, i look at the facts on the ground as I see them and then I support the policies that I think should be in place. this is why I support Obama, Obama has been one of the few leaders (well until recently) to call Israel out on its aggressive behaviors, its treatment of the Palestinians, and its reluctance to accept the 1967 borders in exchange for a lasting peace agreement. A spade is a spade as I see it.

Yes, I am Liberal but I DONT vote according to party lines. In fact, I have voted a few times for conservative candidates in the past. I vote on the ISSUES and the adequate solutions that I think are needed and presented by all candidates involved.

The fact of the matter is, I am not blaming one side over the other. BOTH sides are guilty in certain respects for the lack of a peace agreement in the region.

Facts are facts, First of all, the Palestinians did NOT attack Israel first in 1967. The contrary is correct.

The Six-Day War fought between June 5 and 10, 1967, by Israel and the neighboring states of Egypt , Jordan, and Syria. After a period of high tension between Israel and its neighbors, [b]the war began on June 5 with Israel launching surprise air strikes against Arab forces.

Let's look at the period of "high tension":

May 15: President Nasser of Egypt ordered two armored divisions into the Sinai Peninsula.

May 17: Nasser ordered UNEF, the UN force in the Sinai, to depart from Egyptian territory. Three Egyptian divisions and 600 tanks then deployed in the Sinai.

May 22: Nasser announced the closure of the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping, cutting off all shipping to Israel’s port of Eilat. which was responsible for 30% of israel's exports.
Nasser's move was also illegal. As part of the post-1956 war settlement, the Gulf of Aqaba had been declared by maritime nations in 1957 as an international waterway.

May 25: Nasser, in a speech to the Egyptian National Assembly, said: "The problem presently before the Arab countries is not whether the port of Eilat should be blockaded or how to blockade it - but how to totally exterminate the State of Israel for all time."

May 30: Mutual defense pact signed between Egypt, Jordan and Syria.

But, you're right: Israel did strike first. What a bunch of warmongers! Why would a peace-loving state ever take seriously an extermination threat from a neighboring state and its Soviet-armed allies?

First, you must have missed the part in the history books where Egypt, Jordan, and Syria were mounting their forces on the Israeli border in preparation for attack. Israel simply beat them to the punch.

Second, so Israel should give up land it's had for over 40 years in return for a promise of a "lasting peace agreement" that the Palestinians will never adhere to? Every time the Israelis have given up land, it's been used to launch rockets further into Israel. And even if some Palestinians were willing to abide by the agreement, others wouldn't. So, in the end, Israel is being asked to give up a lot in return for.....wait for it.....NOTHING.

Third, yes, neither side is perfect or pure as the driven snow. But the fault for failing to find lasting peace certainly isn't 50/50 or even close to it.

Sen. John Kerry -- chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee -- in a Washington Post op-ed criticized Mitt Romney's foreign policy approach to Iran. "I join this debate because the nuclear issue with Iran is deadly serious business," Kerry writes. "It should invite sobriety and thoughtfulness, not sloganeering and sound bites. The stakes are far too high for it to become just another applause line on the stump. Idle talk of war only helps Iran by spooking the tight oil market and increasing the price of the Iranian crude that pays for its nuclear program."

thus, Iraq and points west could be swept with radioactivity.

There is a basic core difference between the American and Israeli governments on this issue.

Washington doesn't want Tehran to have a bomb, Tel Aviv doesn't want Tehran to have the capability to make a bomb.

Good point, Ronnie. And therein lies the problem.

And that's because the Israelis will be the likely first target even before America. So they don't have the same luxury of waiting indefinitely for "diplomacy" to work as the U.S. and other nations.

You're obviously pretty damn certain that if Tehran becomes nuclear armed, that they'll immediately press the button without haste.

Taking everything into consideration, as well as dispensing with wishful thinking, it would be reckless not to assume they would use it sooner or later.

And not just a direct attack on Israel or whoever but also use it as leverage to further influence/destabilize the region.

But, hey, maybe the Iranians really are just sick of using all that oil under the ground and really do want to convert to nuclear energy.

The former head of Israel's intelligence service believes the Iranian regime is a rational one and even its president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad - who has called for Israel to be annihilated - acts in a somewhat rational way when it comes to Iran's nuclear ambitions.
The regime in Iran is a very rational one," says the former top Israeli spymaster. And President Ahmadinejad? "The answer is yes," he replies, but "Not exactly our rational, but I think he is rational," Dagan tells Stahl.

It's a different kind of rational says Dagan, not rational in the Western-thinking sense. "But no doubt, they are considering all the implications of their actions...They will have to pay dearly...and I think the Iranians at this point in time are...very careful on the project," says Dagan. "They are not running..."

So he doesn't advocate a pre-emptive Israeli military strike against Iran's nuclear industry anytime soon, an attack that he said would have to be against "a large number of targets."