Has President Bush totally lost it?
I like to be consistent with my arguments. Be it that I find abortion as well as the death penalty both wrong, be it that I believe in design across the board. I am consistent with my logic behind my views. I have to wonder if President Bush is being consistent with the following:
In a statement concerning the latest Israeli attack via helicopter attack on a Hamas leader.
However if Bush were to bomb or kill Osama or Saddam he departs to another view????????
? ? ? ? ? ? ?
Bush Link
I think Bush has lost it now.
What do you think?
Fellowship
In a statement concerning the latest Israeli attack via helicopter attack on a Hamas leader.
Quote:
PRESIDENT BUSH said the Israeli helicopter attack on the car of Hamas leader Abdel Aziz Rantisi in Gaza City did not promote Israel?s security. I'm concerned the attacks make it more difficult for the Palestinian leadership to fight off terrorist attacks
PRESIDENT BUSH said the Israeli helicopter attack on the car of Hamas leader Abdel Aziz Rantisi in Gaza City did not promote Israel?s security. I'm concerned the attacks make it more difficult for the Palestinian leadership to fight off terrorist attacks
However if Bush were to bomb or kill Osama or Saddam he departs to another view????????
? ? ? ? ? ? ?
Bush Link
I think Bush has lost it now.
What do you think?
Fellowship
Comments
Originally posted by murbot
Well, someone has lost it.
What did you lose your latest mac????
haha
Also because the Afghan and Iraqi governments were really not supported by their people anyway, so the sway cause by the actions weren't as severe as they could be. Imagine if Israel tried to completely retake the Palestinian controlled land and insert its own puppet regime.
Geography and proximity also play a factor. US troops are obviously no more safe now than ever, as we keep hearing about soldiers being wounded and killed by small arms fire.
They stole it and that's why the Palestinians are fighting.
Most land is stolen. Give it back to the real Canaanites then. Or give it to Italy, after all the Romans did lay claim to the land for a very long time.
Originally posted by tonton
Bush says something half-way intelligent and Fellowship says he's lost it.
Bush is right on with this remark. Contrary to popular belief, it is the leaders that keep the terrorists in line. Without the presence of established leaders, terrorists organizations are run by anarchy. Attacks go from targeted attacks against military aggressors (look at all the recent attacks by Palestinians - they have all been against soldiers) to random attacks on the public.
In fact I've been very impressed with some of the things Bush has said regarding the Israel/Palestine issue. Especially that Israel has the responsibility to remove settlements. Meaning established settlements, not "unauthorized" trailer parks like the ones Sharon weakly agreed to remove. What Israel doesn't understand is that ALL of the settlements are unauthorized. None of that land belongs to the Jews. They stole it and that's why the Palestinians are fighting.
But Bush's action is much weaker than his voice. I don't understand how he could accept Sharon's "concessions" based on the idea of the road map and what he said about the responsibility of Israel to withdraw from Palestinian land.
All I am saying is that the way Bush does things and the way he condemns others for effectively doing the same kinds of things is rather a bit shy of having integrity.
I agree with the statement Bush made however don't you know some in Israel think Bush is preaching something he himself does not practice.
That is all I was trying to say earlier.
Fellowship
Originally posted by Eugene
Most land is stolen. Give it back to the real Canaanites then. Or give it to Italy, after all the Romans did lay claim to the land for a very long time.
Blame the Romans..or Romulans...
Yes, the Romans came up with the name "Palestina" to piss the local Jewish population off..( diplomacy was never Rome's strong card ) Palestina is derived from the latin root.. "Pales "..meaning boundary..so people "beyond the pale" got a very early start in life.
It is interesting to note that historically & culturally the concept of Arabs being Palestinians is a recent ficticious construct...thanx to the Brits.
The first " Palestinians " were referred to as " sea-people " probably from Greece or Cyprus & therefore came from profoundly different cultural root stock than that of their Arabic / Semitic neighbours..
But who gives a stuff about history ?
Originally posted by tonton
Bush says something half-way intelligent and Fellowship says he's lost it.
Bush is right on with this remark. Contrary to popular belief, it is the leaders that keep the terrorists in line. Without the presence of established leaders, terrorists organizations are run by anarchy. Attacks go from targeted attacks against military aggressors (look at all the recent attacks by Palestinians - they have all been against soldiers) to random attacks on the public.
In fact I've been very impressed with some of the things Bush has said regarding the Israel/Palestine issue. Especially that Israel has the responsibility to remove settlements. Meaning established settlements, not "unauthorized" trailer parks like the ones Sharon weakly agreed to remove. What Israel doesn't understand is that ALL of the settlements are unauthorized. None of that land belongs to the Jews. They stole it and that's why the Palestinians are fighting.
But Bush's action is much weaker than his voice. I don't understand how he could accept Sharon's "concessions" based on the idea of the road map and what he said about the responsibility of Israel to withdraw from Palestinian land.
Bush has personally comitted himself to this process. There was more progress in the last two weeks than there was in three years.
And really...you are telling me that terror groups WON'T attack civilians if the leaders are allowed to live?
A Palestinian State is probably the best way to peace. But, the only way that is going to happen is if the Palestinians acknowledge Israel's right to exist and subsequently STOP the terror. But, Hamas, Islamic Jihad et al aren't going to do that. They want to push Israel into the sea. Tell me how one negotiates with that.
I have hope. Bush's statement was a little odd, though I think it was proabbly correct. That being said, Israel tends to use the tit-for-tat approach in retalliation for attacks...which I don't support.
Originally posted by tonton
Bush says something half-way intelligent and Fellowship says he's lost it.
Bush is right on with this remark. Contrary to popular belief, it is the leaders that keep the terrorists in line. Without the presence of established leaders, terrorists organizations are run by anarchy......
Um .... where did you get that from?
Originally posted by SDW2001
t Hamas, Islamic Jihad et alwant to push Israel into the sea. Tell me how one negotiates with that.
You can't argue with hatred ( both sides).
Both have right & wrong on their sides.
I just happen to think the jews have more right on their side than the terrorist groups.
If Hamas succeed in kicking out all Israeli Jews, then I would suggest they Israel could find a new home in the USA. or Europe..or Australia...
To me Jewishness means to be tied to a faith, a way of thinking, of living a cultural heritage..and not so much a piece of land..
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
Be it that I find abortion as well as the death penalty both wrong, be it that I believe in design across the board. I am consistent with my logic behind my views.
Gee, I find abortion wrong and the death penalty OK, and I'm completely logically consistent in my views, too.
of course, i don't think isreal or palestine thinks anything permanent will come from them, so they're less likely to treat it with the same importance.
Originally posted by alcimedes
of course, i don't think isreal or palestine thinks anything permanent will come from them, so they're less likely to treat it with the same importance.
this is why condoleezza rice advised him not to go down this road.
either president bush is getting full of himself, or he sees this as a way to save his presidency.
Originally posted by tonton
Bush is right on with this remark. Contrary to popular belief, it is the leaders that keep the terrorists in line. Without the presence of established leaders, terrorists organizations are run by anarchy. Attacks go from targeted attacks against military aggressors (look at all the recent attacks by Palestinians - they have all been against soldiers) to random attacks on the public.
A few attacks in the last week target soldiers and you try and make it sound like these guys only target military unless they are leaderless, then they attack civilians and that is then Israel's fault for killing the leaders...liar.
They attack soldiers when they can, they attack children when they can they kill civilians when they can. Period. There leaders plan the attacks on civilians, they plan the attacks on soldiers. But everything should be planned on the Jew, right Tonton.
Originally posted by tonton
What Israel doesn't understand is that ALL of the settlements are unauthorized. None of that land belongs to the Jews. They stole it and that's why the Palestinians are fighting.
I hope you are talking only about the internationally recoqnised occupied areas and not all of Israel. Though knowing you feelings Jews and past statements about Israel, I know you are talking about all of Israel.
Originally posted by tonton
But Bush's action is much weaker than his voice. I don't understand how he could accept Sharon's "concessions" based on the idea of the road map and what he said about the responsibility of Israel to withdraw from Palestinian land.
Because even with Sharon's concessions, Israel is moving forward with demonstratable action. Maybe it's all smoke a mirrors, but they are taking visible steps. PA is doing NOTHING, and you haven't complained about Bush 'accepting' that.
Originally posted by Scott
Um .... where did you get that from?
He made it up....anything to make a jew look bad for Tonton.
Originally posted by tonton
Tell me, then, when was the last time Hamas laid claim to a suicide attack on civilians?
Irrelevant. Your claim that the terrorist groups only attack civilians when they are leaderless is bullshit and you know it. They attack who they can, when they can.
Originally posted by tonton
Bull. And I am not anti-Semite. I just hold the strong belief that war begets war and that if not for Sharon's visit to the Temple mount, we would have had peace during the Clinton administration. I've gone through the numbers. Before Sharon, Isreali/Palestinian issue was heading for peace, with a few diplomatc setbacks. Sharon threw a wrench in those works and the harliners loved him for it, because they want nothing less than the elimination of all Palestinian control of all fertile areas in the region..
So, it had nothing to do with Arafat refusing the plan?
Originally posted by tonton
DUH. If it's Israel, they are not referred to as settlements. Once again you're incorrectly labeling me as an anti-semite.
Your history of statement regading the illegitamacy of Israel and your stated hatred of Israel paint a different picture.
Originally posted by tonton
You're right. PA isn't doing anything. But EVERYTHING Israel is doing is demonstrable action toward war, not peace. They need to back off. Otherwise no peace can be achieved. Ever.
Sharon agrees settlements should be removed (no not all of them) and begins removing them (no not all at once and not the most sensitve ones) but these are demonstratable actions toward war? PA allows and possible sponsors and plans attacks against Israel at the same time, but it's Israel that is doing everything wrong, right?
Originally posted by aquafire
Blame the Romans..or Romulans...
Yes, the Romans came up with the name "Palestina" to piss the local Jewish population off..( diplomacy was never Rome's strong card ) Palestina is derived from the latin root.. "Pales "..meaning boundary..so people "beyond the pale" got a very early start in life.
It is interesting to note that historically & culturally the concept of Arabs being Palestinians is a recent ficticious construct...thanx to the Brits.
The first " Palestinians " were referred to as " sea-people " probably from Greece or Cyprus & therefore came from profoundly different cultural root stock than that of their Arabic / Semitic neighbours..
But who gives a stuff about history ?
So?
Most modern nations are constructions. You're Australian, right?
The concept of Jews being Israelis is an even more recent fictious construction... thanx to the... ? Brits? UN?
... WHO CARES!?!
The land was stolen in modern times, we have, or should have, other standards than the Romans...
There's a strategy at work there, you don't start something like this without contingency plans. But, like the 970s and a good game of 5-card stud, nobody's going to show their true hand and their true feelings (although this is not personal)----or the lengths they are willing to go to to get what they want.
Originally posted by ena
It was just a PR release, something that policymakers craft with care.
the same people that crafted his pre war declarations of wmd's?
great!
Originally posted by superkarate monkeydeathcar
the same people that crafted his pre war declarations of wmd's?
great!
That's it, exactly---the acid test for the GWB administration---I think these two things will either make him or break him.