How Does Obama feel about Israel?

MrBrian
MrBrian Posts: 2,672
edited March 2007 in A Moving Train
An interesting write up on Obama and his stance on Israel.

Sen. Barack Obama isn’t quite sure how he feels about the lopsided situation between Israel and Palestine. Less than two weeks after Obama gloated to AIPAC about his love for Israel, he unexpectedly admitted the truth while campaigning in Iowa recently. “[N]obody is suffering more than the Palestinian people...” said Obama, “the Israel government must make difficult concessions for the peace process to restart...” The truth hurts indeed, and Obama has been feeling the wrath of the pro-Israel activists since his statement last week.

Nonetheless, Obama shouldn’t be trusted on the issue. While Rep. Dennis Kucinich hired avid pro-Palestine advocate Noura Erakat to sit on the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Obama has been backpedaling -- assuring AIPAC and others that he is unwavering in his support for Israel’s continued bullying of Iran and occupation of Palestine.

“[Iran] is a genuine threat” to the United States and Israel, expressed Obama at a forum sponsored by AIPAC on March 12 in Washington D.C., only one day after his lucid remarks in Iowa. At the event Obama also reiterated that he would not rule out the use of force in disarming Iran, a position shared by the other leading Democratic presidential contenders, Hillary Clinton and John Edwards.

Earlier this month on March 2, Obama spoke at an AIPAC Policy Forum in Chicago where he clearly laid out his full stance on Israel, promising he would not alter the U.S./Israeli relationship. “[W]e must preserve our total commitment to our unique defense relationship with Israel by fully funding military assistance and continuing work on the Arrow and related missile defense programs,” he said. “This would help Israel maintain its military edge and deter and repel attacks from as far as Tehran and as close as Gaza.”

So while Obama admits that Palestinians suffer more than Israelis, he still won’t do a damn thing to balance out the asymmetrical relationship. In fact, Obama has made it clear that U.S. tax payers will continue to foot the bill for Israel’s ever-growing arsenal of weapons and missiles if he is indeed elected president in 2008.

(More)

http://brickburner.blogs.com/my_weblog/2007/03/obamas_israel_p.html

For someone who goes on about being so fresh and unique, he sure knows the art of back-pedaling.
Post edited by Unknown User on
«134

Comments

  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    http://forums.pearljam.com/showpost.php?p=4226841&postcount=6
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • Milhouse VanHouten
    Milhouse VanHouten Posts: 755
    MrBrian wrote:
    “[N]obody is suffering more than the Palestinian people...” said Obama, “the Israel government must make difficult concessions for the peace process to restart...” The truth hurts indeed, and Obama has been feeling the wrath of the pro-Israel activists since his statement last week.


    MrBrian wrote:
    So while Obama admits that Palestinians suffer more than Israelis, he still won’t do a damn thing to balance out the asymmetrical relationship.

    Really? Didn't he recognize the concessions Israel would need to make to restart the peace process?
    "Of course it hurts. You're getting fucked by an elephant."
  • Bu2
    Bu2 Posts: 1,693
    http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2006/dec/20/obama_on_israel_palestine_same_old_same_old
    Feels Good Inc.
  • RainDog
    RainDog Posts: 1,824
    Is he supposed to call for Isreal's destruction?
  • spiral out
    spiral out Posts: 1,052
    MrBrian wrote:

    So while Obama admits that Palestinians suffer more than Israelis, he still won’t do a damn thing to balance out the asymmetrical relationship. In fact, Obama has made it clear that U.S. tax payers will continue to foot the bill for Israel’s ever-growing arsenal of weapons and missiles if he is indeed elected president in 2008.


    For someone who goes on about being so fresh and unique, he sure knows the art of back-pedaling.

    He really doesn't have a choice, he has to keep these people sweet, regardless of whether he agrees or not.
    Keep on rockin in the free world!!!!

    The economy has polarized to the point where the wealthiest 10% now own 85% of the nation’s wealth. Never before have the bottom 90% been so highly indebted, so dependent on the wealthy.
  • NOCODE#1
    NOCODE#1 Posts: 1,477
    MrBrian wrote:
    An interesting write up on Obama and his stance on Israel.

    Sen. Barack Obama isn’t quite sure how he feels about the lopsided situation between Israel and Palestine. Less than two weeks after Obama gloated to AIPAC about his love for Israel, he unexpectedly admitted the truth while campaigning in Iowa recently. “[N]obody is suffering more than the Palestinian people...” said Obama, “the Israel government must make difficult concessions for the peace process to restart...” The truth hurts indeed, and Obama has been feeling the wrath of the pro-Israel activists since his statement last week.

    Nonetheless, Obama shouldn’t be trusted on the issue. While Rep. Dennis Kucinich hired avid pro-Palestine advocate Noura Erakat to sit on the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Obama has been backpedaling -- assuring AIPAC and others that he is unwavering in his support for Israel’s continued bullying of Iran and occupation of Palestine.

    “[Iran] is a genuine threat” to the United States and Israel, expressed Obama at a forum sponsored by AIPAC on March 12 in Washington D.C., only one day after his lucid remarks in Iowa. At the event Obama also reiterated that he would not rule out the use of force in disarming Iran, a position shared by the other leading Democratic presidential contenders, Hillary Clinton and John Edwards.

    Earlier this month on March 2, Obama spoke at an AIPAC Policy Forum in Chicago where he clearly laid out his full stance on Israel, promising he would not alter the U.S./Israeli relationship. “[W]e must preserve our total commitment to our unique defense relationship with Israel by fully funding military assistance and continuing work on the Arrow and related missile defense programs,” he said. “This would help Israel maintain its military edge and deter and repel attacks from as far as Tehran and as close as Gaza.”

    So while Obama admits that Palestinians suffer more than Israelis, he still won’t do a damn thing to balance out the asymmetrical relationship. In fact, Obama has made it clear that U.S. tax payers will continue to foot the bill for Israel’s ever-growing arsenal of weapons and missiles if he is indeed elected president in 2008.

    (More)

    http://brickburner.blogs.com/my_weblog/2007/03/obamas_israel_p.html

    For someone who goes on about being so fresh and unique, he sure knows the art of back-pedaling.
    doesn't matter, his stance on israel is in no way a relevant political issue to the masses of voters.
    Let's not be negative now. Thumper has spoken
  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    RainDog wrote:
    Is he supposed to call for Isreal's destruction?

    I think the issue is with his stance on continuing to supply Israel with weapons while ignoring the needs of Palestinians. Now I don't think we should be giving either side weapons, but to continue our same policy of this one sided support and aid is only going to make matteres continue to grow worse over there. And it's really a disgrace to say we care about the Palestinian people but our leaders actions always seem to be pointing the other way.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • yield2me
    yield2me Posts: 1,291
    doesn't matter because he doesn't have a snowballs chance in hell of ever winning
    “May you live to be 100 and may the last voice you hear be mine.” - Frank Sinatra
  • RainDog
    RainDog Posts: 1,824
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    I think the issue is with his stance on continuing to supply Israel with weapons while ignoring the needs of Palestinians. Now I don't think we should be giving either side weapons, but to continue our same policy of this one sided support and aid is only going to make matteres continue to grow worse over there. And it's really a disgrace to say we care about the Palestinian people but our leaders actions always seem to be pointing the other way.
    I agree that we shouldn't be supplying Israel, but the whole situation is delicate all the way around. And I don't think we'll get any definitive, marketable plan from anyone running for office. It simply wouldn't fit into an entire speach, let alone a 30 second campaign commercial. Add to that the fact that I haven't the slightest how to fix that situation myself, so the idea of me endorsing any candidate's plan would be a bit out there.

    On the flip side, Barak Hussein Obama's support for Isreal seems a bit suspect, doesn't it? I mean, the guy's a dyed in the burka Muslim who wants nothing more than to impose Sharia law across the global spectrum, outlaw devotional Christianity (or at least tax Christians a la sanctioned dhimmitude), force women into subordinate roles in society, etc. I mean, shit, the first sign of all this came in 2001 when he endorsed a law that required food bearing a Halal label to actually be Halal food. The nerve. I mean, if I want to secretly feed pigs to Muslims, it's my right!! That doesn't sound like an Isreal supporter to me. And if he isn't a Muslim, that means he converted, and that means that one billion Muslims the world around are commanded - COMMANDED - to murder him on sight. What in the hell are the ... people .... in .. this.........

    Goddamn it. I need to stop reading Free Republic.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    I think the issue is with his stance on continuing to supply Israel with weapons while ignoring the needs of Palestinians. Now I don't think we should be giving either side weapons, but to continue our same policy of this one sided support and aid is only going to make matteres continue to grow worse over there. And it's really a disgrace to say we care about the Palestinian people but our leaders actions always seem to be pointing the other way.


    tell hamas to take "destruction of Israel" from its charter and we will be happy to help
  • yosi1
    yosi1 Posts: 3,272
    jlew24asu wrote:
    tell hamas to take "destruction of Israel" from its charter and we will be happy to help

    Why? This is the crucial clause in their charter.
    you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane.
  • RolandTD20Kdrummer
    RolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    I wonder if Obama likes Doritos, plain, or salt and vinegar. I wonder what he watches on TV and eats for dinner...I wonder what his shit looks like...my god it's all so fucking fascinating.

    What would Obama do?
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • onelongsong
    onelongsong Posts: 3,517
    MrBrian wrote:
    An interesting write up on Obama and his stance on Israel.


    “[Iran] is a genuine threat” to the United States and Israel, expressed Obama at a forum sponsored by AIPAC on March 12 in Washington D.C., only one day after his lucid remarks in Iowa. At the event Obama also reiterated that he would not rule out the use of force in disarming Iran, a position shared by the other leading Democratic presidential contenders, Hillary Clinton and John Edwards.


    he doesn't have a chance in hell to win so i don't care what he thinks. but it does concern me that all the candidates are willing to go to war with iran. does this mean war is ok if it's started by a democrat?
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    jlew24asu wrote:
    tell hamas to take "destruction of Israel" from its charter and we will be happy to help

    I think thats depenedant on Israel taking "conquer palestine" out of their charter.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    onelongsong wrote:
    he doesn't have a chance in hell to win so i don't care what he thinks. but it does concern me that all the candidates are willing to go to war with iran. does this mean war is ok if it's started by a democrat?

    No, war isn't ok from either party, especially not when it's based on false premises. I don't really undertsand the support for these guys either. I guess it doesn't matter. It's all about supporting your guy til the end no matter what that includes...kinda sad. I've always thoughts ideals like peace and good will where above simply getting a Dem in office.

    I know you'll say Dennis is unelectable, as well. But he has always been against this war and against one with Iran. He also doesn't blindly support Israel's aggression.
    http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/26/147221
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • MrBrian
    MrBrian Posts: 2,672
    RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:
    I wonder if Obama likes Doritos, plain, or salt and vinegar. I wonder what he watches on TV and eats for dinner...I wonder what his shit looks like...my god it's all so fucking fascinating.

    What would Obama do?

    The man is running for president, you don't think it's imporant to know where he stands on one of the biggest issues of our time? unlike say what he eats.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Ahnimus wrote:
    I think thats depenedant on Israel taking "conquer palestine" out of their charter.

    its not in their charter
  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    MrBrian wrote:
    The man is running for president, you don't think it's imporant to know where he stands on one of the biggest issues of our time? unlike say what he eats.

    Didn't ya know? That's just not as important as charisma and divorce rates!
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    jlew24asu wrote:
    its not in their charter

    Well damn jlew, you might need to go over it with them again.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    jlew24asu wrote:
    its not in their charter

    Oh, they took it out?

    I guess now they just gotta stop doing it.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire

Categories