Ya'all want to condemn Israel for trespassing...

I want to condemn Palestinians for terrorism and brutally murdering tens of thousands of innocent Israelis...

That is not entirely accurate...

The investment of 100 Billion was established back in October...

50 Billion of that was decided to go to the US to create jobs AFTER Trump won the election...

Do you really want to condemn Israel to an endless war with HALF its own population???

How is that any different than it is right now??

Will innocent Israelis be any less dead???

Why can't you condemn the Palestinians for their terrorism without adding a condemnation of Israel??

The FIRST problem that MUST be addressed is the terrorism committed by Palestinians..

Until that is addressed, Israel has the moral, ethical and legal high ground for ANYTHING Israel does up to, but not including, terrorism itself....

It's THAT simple...

"If Israel annexes the West Bank, that will add 2.8 Million Palestinians to the population of Israel of 8 million...

Now, it's been a while since I was in a math class, but I don't think that 2.8 million is a majority of 10.8 million... :D"

What is your problem with math Michale??? Did you really fail that badly at it in school???

We have already said that the Israeli population of 8 million consists of 6 million Jews and 2 million Arabs, NOT 8 million Jews. Did you miss that part??? Even if you only add 2.8 million Arabs to the already 2 million Arabs living INSIDE Israel right now, that still gives you a population of 4.8 million out of 10.8 million which is nearly HALF the population!

The USA had enough trouble with a hostile minority whose land we took over, namely the long Indian wars with our own Native Americans, and they were only a tiny fraction of our population.

Do you really want to condemn Israel to an endless war with HALF its own population???

"Like I said.. The problem isn't the settlements. The problem is the terrorism.."

First of all Michale, FACTS are NOT "spin." Secondly I was not talking about settlements. What I have been talking about all along is Israel annexing territory over the hostile objections of the Arabs who are living there, and who then would become part of Israeli society against their will.

Michale wrote:

"The settlements won't stop until the terrorism does..."

However, since you insist on talking about them instead of the actual subject at hand, since you constantly change the subject to them, fine.

My take on it is this: The terrorism won't stop until the settlement activity does.

It REALLY is that SIMPLE.

"Trump says Sprint will bring 5,000 jobs back to the US; OneWeb will create 3,000 jobs

Holy crap!!!

Trump is da bomb!!!! :D"

You do KNOW that Trump is NOTHING of the kind, right??? ALL those those Sprint and OneWeb jobs Trump says he created were part of a $50 billion investment plan Japan’s SoftBank Group Corp. developed in October, ahead of his election. The plan was announced earlier in December following a meeting between SoftBank’s billionaire owner, Masayoshi Son, and the president-elect. Trump took credit for that investment plan too, even though (again) it predated his election.

Nope... No one can....

I rest my case...

543

Kerry is saying the EXACT same thing that I am saying..

The problem is that Kerry doesn't really believe this, even though it is 1000% factual...

542

Kerry presented himself as a devoted friend of Israel, but what came through far more powerfully was his complete failure to understand how progress could be made. He and Obama tried from the start to reach an impossible comprehensive deal (just as Bill Clinton and George W. Bush had done) rather than focus on the incremental progress that really might have been achieved. To call for such incremental progress, three weeks before he leaves office, is folly; he wasted four years and Obama wasted eight viewing such steps as "small ball" unworthy of great men such as they. Kerry's speech called for "realistic steps on the ground" now to establish the path forward. If only he had said that in 2013 when he took office, or Obama had said it in 2009, progress might actually have been possible.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/john-kerrys-final-harmful-insult-to-israel/article/2006074

Word....

541

Does Lurch *REALLY* think that, if there is a two state solution, that Israel will be able to live in peace??

Do you??

The government of the Palestinians STATED Number 1 goal is the destruction of Israel...

How can you even THINK that a two-state solution will fix the problem when one of those "states" is totally committed to the destruction of the other state???

Hamas and the Palestinians that support terrorism are the ONLY impediments to peace of any import..

ANYTHING but the terrorism is a far distant second, as far as impediments go..

539

Gaza...

And look at what the Palestinians did with it...

It's a hellhole of government mismanagement..

The Palestinians simply cannot HAVE a viable state...

And Obama wants to FORCE a state on them??

Utterly ridiculous and totally devoid of ANY association with reality....

537

COME ON Michale, you KNOW Kerry is RIGHT. IF Israel keeps ALL of the West Bank territory, and DOES NOT EXPEL all of the Palestinians living there, OR DENIES them FULL equal Israeli citizenship while they are living on what becomes Israel's territory, then Palestinians become a MAJORITY OF ISRAEL'S population.

This is simply not factual...

If Israel annexes the West Bank, that will add 2.8 Million Palestinians to the population of Israel of 8 million...

Now, it's been a while since I was in a math class, but I don't think that 2.8 million is a majority of 10.8 million... :D

536

THEN we can talk about the Israeli settlements...

*THAT* is the only logical and rational way forward.

Until such time as the Palestinians stop the terrorism, Israel will have the moral, ethical *AND LEGAL* high ground and will be able to do what they want with their land...

The settlements won't stop until the terrorism does...

It's that simple...

And I honestly can't understand how anyone would have a problem with this...

535

Would YOU want to allow millions and millions of terrorists and terrorist supporters a vote in YOUR government??

Of course not.. Only a fool and a moron would allow that...

Look what happened the last time Palestinians were given the vote.. They voted in a terrorist organization as it's government...

And YOU want to say:

"OK Israel, you have a choice.. You can either have ONE STATE and allow millions of terrorists and terrorist sympathizers to have a say in your government.

Or you can have TWO STATES with one of those "states" being run by a terrorist organization whose SOLE purpose is the destruction of Israel. Everything else is secondary.."

And you call that a reasonable, rational choice!!????

Tell ya what.. You get the Palestinians to disavow and disband Hamas...

THEN we can talk about the Israeli settlements...

534

Friedman is with the New York Times and the Times Anti-Israel stance is well documented...

I could find a great commentary by Alan Derschowitz on Fox News that "proves" how wrong Friedman is.. And ya'all would no more accept that than I accept Friedman's...

"That's the way the cookie crumbles.."
-Jim Carrey, BRUCE ALMIGHTY

Nuance = spin

I recognize the spin...

But it is NOTHING but spin...

Like I said.. The problem isn't the settlements. The problem is the terrorism..

Ya'all want to condemn Israel solely, but ya'all rarely mention the terrorism unless prompted..

That shows me that you are on the wrong side of the Israel/Palestinian issue..

Ya'all are on the side of terrorism..

And that is a bad side to be on..

The terrorism against Israel MUST stop...

THEN... and ONLY then... can the other matters be discussed...

How many innocent Palestinians die when Israel builds on land that is rightfully Israel's??

Answer: NONE

How many innocent Israels die when Palestinians commit atrocious and heinous terrorist attacks against innocent Israelis???

Answer: Tens of thousands

So, it seems to me that the REAL problem is not the settlements, but rather the terrorism...

When has the UN ever addressed that in any forceful way???

When has the UN ever condemned the terrorism of the Palestinians except as an afterthought in a resolution that attacks Israel??

Answer: Never..

"Find the Kerry quote, Michale, and produce it here. It's not much longer than what you have already posted, just a couple of words short, but oh such a critical omission on your part."

Michale wrote:

"Kerry said that Israel CAN'T be a jewish state AND a democratic state...

Kerry said that Israel has to be one or the other but they can't be both.."

NO Michale. that is NOT what Kerry said. You took it ENTIRELY OUT OF CONTEXT. How about I post it for you???

What Kerry said was:

"Today, there are a number — there are a similar number of Jews and Palestinians living between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. They have a choice. They can choose to live together in one state or they can separate into two states. But here is a fundamental reality, if the choice is one state, Israel can either be Jewish or Democratic, it cannot be both. And it won’t ever really be at peace."

What Kerry was talking about was Israel losing both its democratic nature and its Jewish character if it insists on trying to control an Arab population that is larger than its own Jewish population while at the same time denying that Arab population full participation on an equal basis in a democratically elected government of a single united state consisting of Israel and the occupied territories of the West Bank.

What is so hard about the nuances of that statement that is so hard for you to grasp and understand???

And, far from quoting Kerry exactly, you misquoted him so atrociously that the entire meaning of what he said was completely lost, mostly on you.

Find the Kerry quote, Michale, and produce it here. It's not much longer than what you have already posted, just a couple of words short, but oh such a critical omission on your part.

I quoted Kerry's exact words...

How is that a "falsehood"??

Let me ask you a simple question..

IS PALESTINIAN TERRORISM AGAINST ISRAEL AN IMPEDIMENT TO PEACE IN THE REGION??

The problem is, is that they are NOT "illegal" settlements...

Israel was attacked.. It got that land fair and square by defeating a ruthless quartet of countries and people..

And the mere fact that Palestinians resort to terrorism means morally, ethically *AND* legally Israel is in the right in whatever they do...

When the UN pays HALF as much attention to the Palestinian's terrorism as they do to Israel's actions, THEN you might have an argument to make..

But as long as the UN just gives lip service to the Palestinian terrorism, which is the REAL problem in the region, Israel has the legal, moral and ethical high ground...

Holy crap!!!

Trump is da bomb!!!! :D

"For better or worse, this fleet can only have one commander!!"
"You're right!!! And we have the wrong one!!!"
-Battlestar Galactica

Obama should just quit now.... He is doing WAY more harm than good...

And, that is why it is so frustratingly hard to discuss anything with you, most of the time.

I just wish you would stop spreading falsehoods around here, of all places ...

There IS not two state "solution"...

What kind of "state" can the Palestinians, who freely elected a TERRORIST government, have???

With a two state solution, the Palestinians can have any sort of government they choose

And, when given the choice, they chose a TERRORIST government..

Obviously, the Palestinians are too uncivilized to be trusted with a state...

The US has a right to express its opinion on this topic, because we have, literally, skin in the game and money on the table.

The Obama administration DID express it's opinion..

The problem is, it's an opinion that is contrary to the wishes of the majority of Americans, INCLUDING many Democrats...

Liz,

Kerry and Obama are trying to ensure that Israel remains a Jewish and democratic state.

Except, Kerry said just the opposite..

Kerry said that Israel CAN'T be a jewish state AND a democratic state...

Kerry said that Israel has to be one or the other but they can't be both..

I would have thought you of all people here would understand the incredibly bad statement Kerry made...

Netanyahu, on the other hand, is effectively working to ensure that Israel is not only isolated in the world and remains in an extremely perilous security situation but, sadly, putting Israel on a path toward having to make a choice between being a Jewish state or an apartheid-like state.

They are not. They are trying, Kerry says, to “save the two-state solution while there was still time.”

Kerry: “Some seem to believe that the U.S. friendship means the U.S. must accept any policy, regardless of our own interests, our own positions, our own words, our own principles — even after urging again and again that the policy must change,” he said. “Friends need to tell each other the hard truths, and friendships require mutual respect.”

I thought the neo-GOP liked straight, blunt talk and "telling it like it is". Perhaps that isn't true when it comes to their right-wing friends.

Kerry: “The Israeli prime minister publicly supports a two-state solution, but his current coalition is the most right wing in Israeli history, with an agenda driven by its most extreme elements...The result is that policies of this government — which the prime minister himself just described as ‘more committed to settlements than any in Israel’s history’ — are leading in the opposite direction, towards one state.”

Moreover, said Kerry the settlements are strategically positioned in such a way as to prevent any coherent border for a Palestinian state.

With a two state solution, the Palestinians can have any sort of government they choose, and so can the Israelis. But if only one state is possible, then that state can be Jewish or it can be Democratic, but (because of the numbers that John M cites above) it cannot be both.

That would be bad for the Israelis, leading to more conflict, and bad for the US, because we'd be (by virtue of our 'special' relationship) also be knee deep in said conflict. The US has a right to express its opinion on this topic, because we have, literally, skin in the game and money on the table.

Context.

You know better ...

There is no context that is relevant.. Kerry/Obama is trying to dictate what kind of government the Israelis should have...

Ya'all are against that when it's a GOP administration...

"Israeli population is 8 million...

Palestinian population is half that..."

NOT QUITE. You FAIL to take into the Arab population of the West Bank, and Israel keeping control of it, which is what we were discussing. Let's break it down now.

Israel's population: 8 million. Consisting of 6 million Jews and 2 million Arabs. West Bank population, 4.5 million Arabs.

2 plus 4.5 equals 6.5 million Arabs total and 6 million Jews. That, my friend, gives the Arabs a half million majority. Care to dispute the math???

Israeli population is 8 million...

Palestinian population is half that...

You have a wierd definition of "majority" :D

Also, Trump under the Republican banner, said awful things about Mexicans, Muslims, women and African Americans, and Republicans ate it up.

Trump said awful things about ILLEGAL immigrants, terrorist muslims, SOME women who deserved it and NO blacks who didn't attack Trump first...

If Trump calls Obama and asshole (which he is) and a moron (which he is) you would take that to mean Trump is attacking ALL black Americans..

It's just spin..

It's NOT reality...

And you still don't think that Republicans practice identity politics also???

Of course, Republicans practice identity politics..

But, by and large, the ONLY identity that matters with the GOP is AMERICANS....

I have no problem with that...

Why do you insist on posting such rubbish ... because that's what happens to a quote when you omit the context within which it was spoken.

You know better ...

"why would Israel deny Palestinians Israeli citizenship??"

Because, IF they DON'T, then Muslim Palestinians become a democratically elected MAJORITY of Israel's population, and Israel stops being a Jewish nation. See how that works??? Can you imagine say, if Yasser Arafat had become the democratically elected Prime Minister of Israel? You would get a similar result with a one state solution. With continued Israeli settlement activity, we are headed in either one of two outcomes, either another Mideast war, or a one state solution. Either involves Israel's destruction. So why are we funding and supporting Israel's eventual destruction???

At one time aint in the here and now...

As to #244, why would Israel deny Palestinians Israeli citizenship??

But my point is, I thought ya'all were against a US Administration dictating to sovereign nations how togovern...

Apparently, ya'all are ONLY against it when it's a Republican Administration and the dictating is to our enemies...

Ya'all, apparently, have no problem when a Democrat Administration dictates to our friends and allies...

522

"The borders of Texas and Maine are not in dispute...

Further, Texas is not a sovereign country."

ACTUALLY, the borders of Texas AND Maine at one time, were both in dispute. In Fact, part of Texas's war with Mexico over independence was also over moving the border of Texas from the Nueces river, where Mexico wanted it, to the Rio Grande river, where Texas wanted it. Texas, before joining the USA, was also an independent nation for over a year.

COME ON Michale, you KNOW Kerry is RIGHT. IF Israel keeps ALL of the West Bank territory, and DOES NOT EXPEL all of the Palestinians living there, OR DENIES them FULL equal Israeli citizenship while they are living on what becomes Israel's territory, then Palestinians become a MAJORITY OF ISRAEL'S population. Israel is THEN either no longer JEWISH. or you then have a MINORITY, Jews, controlling a MAJORITY, Palestinians, without that majority's political input. How is that DEMOCRATIC? IT IS NOT. You then have a situation EXACTLY like apartheid South Africa.

The borders of Texas and Maine are not in dispute...

Further, Texas is not a sovereign country.

Now let me ask you...

You had a problem with the Bush administration dictating to sovereign nations how to conduct their government..

But you DON'T have a problem with Obama doing the exact same thing....

Why is that???

Oh, that's right.. Obama had a '-D' after his name...

Silly me...

But the silver lining in Traitor Lurch's statement is that it rips away ALL veneer that the Obama administration is a friend of Israel...

521

Now imagine if I had written: "A good solution is to return Texas to Mexico and let Mexico administrate it. Return acceptable pieces of Maine to Canada and let the Canadians administrate it."

and

"Texas can either be (exclusively) Christian or Democratic - it cannot be both."

Do you have a problem with either statement? If not, why not?

'ISRAEL CAN EITHER BE JEWISH OR DEMOCRATIC -- IT CANNOT BE BOTH'
-SecState John Kerry

And now the true face of the Obama Administration is shown... The mask of Friend Of Israel has been ripped away and the dictates of the Obama regime shines thru....

520

That's right!

So, really, there would be no net change involved ... just swapping one feature for another more useful one. Easy!

Coding is always hard... :D

But I agree that having a short editing window is the one feature I would love to see.. It would also negate the need for a Preview Comment button...

By the way, I don't think any changes need to be made here ... except for an edit after posting feature that would only be available for a short time after posting ... shouldn't be too hard to do, should it? :)

They can say what they want on a new thread, Michale.

The problem with that is that what they want to say might not be compatible with the new thread..

The MESSAGE TO MY READERS thread is a perfect example.. I went off on a tangent (with a little help to be fair :D) and now CW has to wade thru a bunch of off-topic posts to get to the suggestions that he has solicited...

The nice thing about using Friday commentaries is that it already has a reputation for being somewhat of a free-for-all.. For those that want to avoid such FFAs, it's easy to simply avoid that commentary...

JM,

Belated Merry Christmas Michale :-)

Danke :D

So, would that also include ANYONE from France and Germany as well???

I am sure the scale of said suffering of terrorism plays into the decision..

Besides, there is not a huge.... out-pouring (what's the antonym of influx??) of refugees from Germany or France that would necessitate carving out any exemptions...

The problem is that when you have such a huge emigration of refugees, it's easy to hide the wolves amongst the sheep...

Donald Trump is being attacked and castigated for being concerned about those wolves..

Where is the logic in that??

YES. Though NOT so in the case of Japan, Germany at LEAST would still have been defeated, even without the USA, because Russia was largely responsible for Germany's defeat on land in Europe. It just would have taken longer without the USA. But it was Russian troops who did most of the heavy lifting against the Nazis.

And then we would have had a BIGGER problem than Nazi Germany...

We would have had a Soviet Union that encompassed ALL of Europe...

Now THAT would make an awesome alternate reality TV series, eh? :D

AND YET, it is precisely people who see themselves as weak and hopeless, who feel like the world is NOT listening to them or hearing their voices, are exactly the ones who turn to terrorism as a response.

Which PROVES that these people are of weak character and principle that they don't DESERVE any consideration..

Think about what you are defending...

"The Palestinians have no hope so they brutally murder tens of thousands of innocent men, women and children.. The Palestinians should be supported and helped!!"

What part of NOTHING JUSTIFIES TERRORISM is unclear???

AND YET, changing just 80,000 votes across just 3 states out of over 137 million votes cast, would have resulted in us talking about a President Clinton right now instead of a President Trump. It was THAT CLOSE.

And IF the dog hadn't stopped, he would have caught the rabbit...

So it was close.. A rejection by 80,000 votes is as much of a rejection by 8 million votes..

This is again, the one thing that Michale has said that I have to completely agree with.

Thank you... :D

If Yasser Arafat had only been willing to give up the right of return in negotiations with Ehud Barak at Camp David in 2000, the Palestinians could have had an independent state over 15 years ago.

I know, right???

The Palestinians are a group that never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity.. They keep getting in their own way...

But what's the point of a two state solution if you insist on both states being majority population Palestinian and you deny the Jewish character of Israel? How is that not racist against Jewish Israelis?

I have come to the conclusion that a 3-State solution is needed here..

You can't have two states because the Palestinians simply can not, in the here and now, create a viable state.. Maybe back in 2000, they could have, but surely not today..

Their government IS a terrorist government..

A good solution is to return Gaza to Egypt and let Egypt administrate it.. Return acceptable portions of the West Bank to Jordan and let Jordan administrate it..

Personally, I completely and utterly solved the Palestinian/Israeli crisis years ago..

But who listens to me!?? :D heh

517

Michale wrote:

"Trump is calling for a temporary cessation of influx of refugees from countries suffering terrorism so that the safety of Americans can be assured.."

So, would that also include ANYONE from France and Germany as well???

"So, what you are saying is that if the US hadn't entered WWII, then Germany and Japan would still have been defeated?? I don't think so.."

YES. Though NOT so in the case of Japan, Germany at LEAST would still have been defeated, even without the USA, because Russia was largely responsible for Germany's defeat on land in Europe. It just would have taken longer without the USA. But it was Russian troops who did most of the heavy lifting against the Nazis.

"And the solution is so simple...

The entire world needs to turn their backs on the Palestinians utterly, unequivocally and completely and support Israel to the hilt until such time as Palestinians stop the terrorism..."

AND YET, it is precisely people who see themselves as weak and hopeless, who feel like the world is NOT listening to them or hearing their voices, are exactly the ones who turn to terrorism as a response. I am NOT saying that in any way justifies it, and you do have to isolate the radical crazies, but a blanket policy against a whole people which does not take this simple fact into account and consideration, is self-defeating, stupid and foolish in the long run.

"And yet, the American people elected TRUMP and not Obama 3.0...."

AND YET, changing just 80,000 votes across just 3 states out of over 137 million votes cast, would have resulted in us talking about a President Clinton right now instead of a President Trump. It was THAT CLOSE.

"The Palestinian people could live in peace side by side with Israel if they would just be content to live side by side with Israel.."

This is again, the one thing that Michale has said that I have to completely agree with. If Yasser Arafat had only been willing to give up the right of return in negotiations with Ehud Barak at Camp David in 2000, the Palestinians could have had an independent state over 15 years ago. But what's the point of a two state solution if you insist on both states being majority population Palestinian and you deny the Jewish character of Israel? How is that not racist against Jewish Israelis?

Donald Trump

Making America Great Again :D

516

President-elect Trump was the big winner politically. The Trump team has made no secret that it will be a much stronger supporter of Israel than Barack Obama ever was. Trump has a longstanding friendship with Israel’s prime minister Benyamin Netanyahu. Trump’s ambassador-designate for Israel, David Friedman, has called the two-state solution an "illusion” and called for implementing the 1995 law requiring the United States to move its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. And in the run-up to the vote on Resolution 2334 the president-elect convinced Egypt, the representative of the Arab world on the Security Council, to withdraw its sponsorship of the measure, though it still voted for the measure. Trump came off looking dynamic, effective and presidential. And his overt support for the Jewish state makes the liberal narrative that his administration would be tinged with anti-Semitism unsustainable.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/12/27/trump-israel-security-council-vote-james-robbins-column/95854656/

Obama just handed Trump a great victory.. Obama's legacy (such as it is) will be thrown on the trash heap of history...

Fitting..

514

I think I'll add that to the changes Chris is looking for ...

I guess there should be a little more leeway for an FTP column.

But, once we get to Wednesday, the Friday column should be history!

It's a Friday commentary..

They have an unusually long half life.. :D

That's your opinion, unsupported by any facts...

But it doesn't matter what you or I think...

It only matters what Clinton thinks.

And, if she knows she is dirty, she might not want Session's and Trump's DOJ poking around her affairs...

If Obama offered a pardon, which I think he will, then I think Clinton will accept it..

Obama has royally pissed off Trump and Trump just might take it out on Clinton..

Just as Bibi royally pissed off Obama and Obama took it out on Israel...

I do. Consumer Confidence has been rising steadily ever since we recovered (past tense) from the recession.

Bullshit....

It takes more than bluster to build enduring confidence in an economy, something Trump and the Republican Wrecking Crew are about to learn.

TRUMP IS TOAST esque prediction #312... :D

I do. Consumer Confidence has been rising steadily ever since we recovered (past tense) from the recession. It takes more than bluster to build enduring confidence in an economy, something Trump and the Republican Wrecking Crew are about to learn.

You haven't been paying attention. There's nothing to pardon Clinton for.

Princess Leia has passed

The force be with her.

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/the-administration/311883-pardon-the-interruption-clinton-allegation-may-force

Will Obama pardon Clinton??

Since accepting a pardon is a de-facto admission of guilt, would Clinton accept a pardon??

Interesting conundrum....

Yes, I know.. I have made that point myself many times..

But if you have another explanation for the rise in Consumer Confidence and the fact that a record number of Americans see hope in the incoming administration...

"Well, I'm all ears..."
-Ross Perot, 1992 Presidential Debates

Princess Leia has passed...

Not playing by Marquis Of Queensberry rules is NOT terrorism..

Guerrilla warfare is NOT terrorism..

No matter how you try to spin it, Palestinians are terrorists...

And, by supporting Palestinians, you are supporting terrorists...

And if you don't you're the sole exception. For instance: the Reagan-backed 'Contras' in Nicaragua. They didn't exactly play by Marquis of Queensberry rules. Jewish nationalists themselves waged guerrilla war against the British at one point in an attempt to force the formation of the State of Israel.

Right now, we're backing Iranian forces in Iraq, anti-Iranian forces in Yemen, and both in Syria. And you think this is simple?

Well, whaddya know..

Trump *IS* making America great again!! :D

So, the *ONLY* logical conclusion is that ya'all's definition of "terrorism" is SOLELY based on ideology...

I have plenty of knowledge about my opponent. More than you could ever hope to learn..

My first piece of knowledge is that the opponent is a terrorist... That is an assessment based on objective criteria and NOT based on ideology, as ya'all's definition is...

Let's cut to the chase. Netanyahu has ordered his ministers to cease talking about annexing the West Bank 'for now', but that's clearly the goal, and the point of settlements. That could spark a general conflict between Israel and its neighbors, complicating an already complicated mess in the middle east. If Trump backs Netanyahu, that would divide us and the Sunni Arab countries. That would be the perfect environment for a Russian-Iranian mutual defense pact, and Syrian-Iranian takeover of Iraq. What side would Trump take in an all-out mideast war? Would he side with the Sunni enemies of Israel, throw-in with the Russians and Shiite enemies of Israel, or try to fight everyone at once?

Lots and lots of IFs there...

All based on ideology...

Then rest assured that you have less knowledge than your opponent, because be assured that he's studying you.

Let's cut to the chase. Netanyahu has ordered his ministers to cease talking about annexing the West Bank 'for now', but that's clearly the goal, and the point of settlements. That could spark a general conflict between Israel and its neighbors, complicating an already complicated mess in the middle east. If Trump backs Netanyahu, that would divide us and the Sunni Arab countries. That would be the perfect environment for a Russian-Iranian mutual defense pact, and Syrian-Iranian takeover of Iraq. What side would Trump take in an all-out mideast war? Would he side with the Sunni enemies of Israel, throw-in with the Russians and Shiite enemies of Israel, or try to fight everyone at once?

But it is simply undeniable that Obama's bonehead and immature back stabbing of Israel has made peace in the middle east HARD to achieve... Not easier...

The Palestinians will be encouraged to just let the international community do their terrorism for them...

And, as long as the Palestinians resort to terrorism and calls for the destruction of Israel, Bibi has every moral and ethical justification..

In the 50s and 60s blacks in America ALSO had "no legal justification"....

But they had EVERY moral and ethical justification..

Funny how you want to forget that...

And, as long as the Palestinians resort to terrorism and calls for the destruction of Israel, Bibi has every moral and ethical justification..

In the 50s and 60s blacks in America ALSO had "no legal justification"....

But they had EVERY moral and ethical justification..

Funny how you want to forget that...

Like I said.. Obama has a '-D' after his name and that's all that matters to you...

Like I said.. Obama has a '-D' after his name and that's all that matters to you...

And the KKK defines "racism" as something completely different so as to justify their racism..

I really don't give a rat's ass how a terrorist defines terrorism..

I would have hoped YOU wouldn't care either...

But I have to concede I might be wrong about that..

There is a framework for peace, called the Oslo Accords. It was signed by leaders of both sides, and folks like Russia and the US. It prohibits, however, new settlements. Not Netanyahu's politics, but the Israelis agreed to that. So everyone knows who's really blocking the path to peace right now.

And then Arafat reneged the Oslo accords and demanded more..

The WHOLE history has been the Palestinians refusing to live up to their agreements and pursuing terrorism against Israel..

The Palestinian people could live in peace side by side with Israel if they would just be content to live side by side with Israel..

But the Palestinian government DEMANDS the destruction of Israel..

And YOU want Israel to negotiate with that government??

Are you nuts???

And thank you for defending Obama for that.

But what Obama did has some basis in international law including multiple signed agreements and treaties. Netanyahu can point to none of that. In his case, it's just nose-thumbing without legal justification.

And the UN just guaranteed that the US Embassy will be relocating to Jerusalem...

Once again.. Kudos to the UN for doing the worst possible thing.... :D

"terrorism" defined in the Palestinian mind as, "Resistance", y'know, like the rebel alliance in Star Wars. That won't work (and Netanyahu knows it).

There is a framework for peace, called the Oslo Accords. It was signed by leaders of both sides, and folks like Russia and the US. It prohibits, however, new settlements. Not Netanyahu's politics, but the Israelis agreed to that. So everyone knows who's really blocking the path to peace right now.

No, it's a great way to prove to asshole bigots at the UN that Israel will not be dictated to by a group of terrorism loving bigots...

It's how immature people assert themselves.

So, when China tells Obama not to sail near their islands and Obama turns right around and does it, Obama is acting like an immature 3yr old???

Here.. Let me help you out..

"Well... That's different... Obama has a '-D' after his name.."

There ya go...

It's called Freedom Of Navigation exercises and has nothing to do with childish immaturity and everything to do with what is right and just...

CLAIMING anything else IS childish and immature...

Yeah, a great way to prove that you're not building settlements just to screw with people is to build settlements just to screw with people.

My three year old nephew used to do the same when I told him not to throw his food on the floor; first thing he'd do is throw his food on the floor. It's how immature people assert themselves.

Israel won't be pushed or extorted or intimidated..

Real peace in the region will ONLY come thru direct negotiation...

And there will be no direct negotiation until such time as the Palestinians renounce terrorism...

The year of the Tea Pary wave. Yeah, that's why we never got an infrastructure bill. And then the Republicans caused a lowering of our bond rating. And then we got the stupid sequester bill. You're right, we hit a serious speedbump there.

Remarkable, then, that Obama was able to get around the GOP as well as he did. We'll see if the 'great negotiator' can get as easily around his loyal opposition.

Great job, UN....

You brought about the VERY thing your biased and bigoted resolution hoped to prevent..

Morons....

Yea, that's been the prediction..

Time will tell if you are right or you are wrong..

But I am constrained to point out that ya'all's predictions on this issue have been... ahem... found wanting... since 2010.... :D

http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/site46/2016/0726/20160726__27TCAFATw~1.jpg

'nuff said...

Or will be, once the GOP get their hands on it.

And, dear tell, where is the 'death and destruction' caused by pot smokers?

And yet, the American people elected TRUMP and not Obama 3.0....

So your "recovery" that is "doing well" is nothing but vapor ware....

..and why do you feel that the corollary of 'irresponsible drunk' is 'druggie pothead'?

Because I have seen the aftermath of both in death and destruction and they are, astonishingly, quite similar...

Are you kidding? When he entered office, the economy was on its knees, puking its guts out. His buddies the Iraquis couldn't wait to get rid of us. We were hemorrhaging jobs like an amusement park in October. We had a massive hangover.

Yet in the face of a Republican party that stood in the hallway with its arms crossed criticizing every move, he managed to recover every lost job, rebuilt our european alliances, and got the Iraquis to fight their own civil war, without a major commitment of US troops.

Oh, and the recovery is doing so well that the Fed just raised the interest rate, to back it down a half-notch.

The Republican fantasy that Obama's policies are bad for the country belong on HBO, along with "Game of Thrones".

As opposed to Obama who is a druggie pothead, abused, ignored and made our allies less safe, who gave aid and comfort to our enemies, totally ignored the American people when it came to jobs and gave us the most limp-dicked "recovery" in the history of the planet...

491

Yea, Democrats did a BANG UP job "fixing" things..

Look at all these jobs!!! That are gone...

Trump, like Bush, claims to not be a drinker. But those late night tweets prove that he still acts like one.

In your opinion...

But let's get back to the subject..

You are of the opinion that the Palestinians don't need to stop their terrorism??

490

The solution is always simple, in the eyes of the right. Never mind that Democrats always have to come in and fix things later.

I have lived with alcoholics, and the behavior is similar: an insistence on their point of view beyond reason, denial of poor spending choices, inability to muster compassion or care for dependents, inability to de-escalate disagreements, inability to learn from mistakes, tendency to blame others. I could go on, but you get the idea.

I used to say that just because Bush gave up drinking, it didn't mean that he stopped acting like a drunk: he abused friends, started fights, crashed the budget, and ignored the children.

Might as well have been chugging Jack Daniels.

Trump, like Bush, claims to not be a drinker. But those late night tweets prove that he still acts like one.

And the solution is so simple...

The entire world needs to turn their backs on the Palestinians utterly, unequivocally and completely and support Israel to the hilt until such time as Palestinians stop the terrorism...

As long as Palestinians support, aide and condone terrorism, Israel will ALWAYS have the moral, ethical and legal high ground..

ALWAYS....

489

Changing grievances into policy...

487

I know this might piss you off and, if it does, you have my sincere apologies..

But it is simply undeniable that support for Palestinians is a support for terrorism...

Just like support for Iran is support for terrorism...

You can't have it both ways..

485

I didn't think it possible that ANYONE could make Hillary feel more like kaa-kaa for losing..

But Obama was able to pull it off.. :D

484