Obama is not President yet …
posted at 4:15 pm on January 2, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Liza Porteus Viana at AOL’s Political Machine produces a round-up of blogospheric and media reactions to the deafening silence coming from Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton on Israel’s operations in Gaza. Obama has kept a low profile in Hawaii during the holidays, and even when conducting business, has limited himself to discussing Cabinet appointments and refrained from most policy discussions, especially on foreign affairs. The fact that he’s not yet President has sunk in with Obama, but not the Obamaniacs around the world:
-”The truce Hamas had meticulously upheld was shattered when Israel attacked Gaza, killing six Palestinians, as The Guardian reported on 5 November. A blatant disregard for the facts, it seems, will not leave the White House with George W. Bush on 20 January. Axelrod also recalled Obama’s visit to Israel last July when he ignored Palestinians and visited the Israeli town of Sderot. There, Obama declared: ‘If somebody was sending rockets into my house where my two daughters sleep at night, I’m going to do everything in my power to stop that. I would expect Israelis to do the same thing.’ This should not surprise anyone. Despite pervasive wishful thinking that Obama would abandon America’s pro-Israel bias, his approach has been almost indistinguishable from the Bush administration’s.” - Electronic Intifada
-”President-elect Barack Obama is getting whacked by the left for declining to comment on Israel’s onslaught on Gaza, but his prudent silence is just as discomfiting to the Israeli government and its allies here in the United States. They wanted a ringing endorsement of their bombardment.” – The First Post, U.K.
-”President-elect Barack Obama and Secretary of State-to-be Hillary Clinton were shamefully silent in the first hours after the attack. Bush’s reaction, and the non-reaction by Obama and Clinton, underscores the point that Hanan Ashrawi made on Saturday. ‘Israel has gotten used to not being held accountable and to being a country that is above the law,’ said the Palestinian legislator and human rights activist. She called the bombings a ‘massacre.’” — The Progressive
-”But some fear that the US president-elect’s reluctance to speak out on the Gaza raids could be sending its own message. ‘Silence sounds like complicity,’ Mark Perry, the Washington Director of the Conflicts Forum group, told Al Jazeera. ‘Obama has said that Israel has the right to defend itself from rocket attacks but my question to him is ‘does he believe that Palestinians also have the right of self-defence?’” AlJazeera.net
-”Former London mayor Ken Livingstone and rights activist Bianca Jagger joined campaigners who have staged a week of rallies, culminating in a demonstration Saturday which will include a symbolic shoe protest outside Downing Street. ‘I would like to make an appeal to president elect Obama to speak up,’ said Jagger. ‘People throughout the world were hopeful when he was elected and we must appeal to him to ask for the immediate cessation of the bombardment of the civilian population in the Gaza Strip.’” - AFP
-”This was the time for President Elect Barack Obama to make a strong statement. He has not said anything; he has failed his first test as incoming president abysmally. …Obama has made several statements on the economy, and has even already devised a $750 billion stimulus of his own, in addition to all the programs that have been announced by the Bush Administration. Now when it comes to a vicious and disproportionate attack by Israel that has already claimed the lives of many children and women, the President Elect is not permitted to say a word because of some sort of protocol? What kind of nonsense is this?” – Black Star News
-”Obama and his aides should be openly counseling the Bush administration to use every diplomatic avenue to promote a ceasefire and, above all, to urge against an Israeli invasion and occupation of Gaza. Unfortunately, the president-elect is doing nothing of the sort. Some may imagine that this disengaged approach confirms Obama as a true ‘friend of Israel.’” - The Nation-”Obama has massive political capital, and could have injected himself into the crisis before it happened. He did so during the beginning of the economic meltdown, and could have lent his credibility to a situation that has spiralled dangerously out of control. Obama has stated that ‘There is only one President at a time’, abdicating responsibility and essentially passing the buck.” – Huffington Post
Some of these are just hilarious, especially the first. Hamas meticulously kept the truce until Israel attacked? They must have missed the public pronouncements by Hamas that they had unilaterally decided to end the truce, followed by the 200+ missile and rocket attacks on Israeli civilians from Gaza. Others assume that the only policy that should be pursued is that which forces Israel to stop defending itself after Hamas attacks, a policy that even Mahmoud Abbas and Egypt didn’t have the chutzpah to demand. Arab Times, the mouthpiece of the Saudi royal family, roundly condemned Hamas as the author of its own misery in a rambling and disjointed editorial.
Even putting aside the policy insanity these outlets demand, they miss one important point, which is that we have only one President at a time, and he sets foreign policy. Obama will become President soon enough, but until then, George Bush sets the policy and handles American diplomatic efforts. Had Obama interjected himself into the situation by demanding a different course of action, it would cripple whatever efforts the US would make over the next few weeks in that region, and pretty much anywhere else.
Give Obama some credit for understanding this and remaining appropriately in the background. He’s not abdicating any responsibility because he has no position to abdicate at the moment. Anyone who doesn’t understand that shows a lack of comprehension about American government and its traditions.










Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »
Obama is just hoping that Israel completely crushes Hamas before January 20th, when he has to deal with it.
Realist on January 2, 2009 at 4:18 PM
Give me Barack Barack Barack and I’ll feel a whole lot better,
Give me Barack, Barack, Barack, send a dollar in a letter,
He’s our self appointed savior,
He will come to get us latter,
He’s Barack, Barack, Barack.
Mr. Joe on January 2, 2009 at 4:19 PM
O/T: John Travolta’s 16-year-old son had a seizure and died in the Bahamas.
amerpundit on January 2, 2009 at 4:20 PM
Obama is not formulating a stance to take on Israel vs. Hummus until the focus group numbers are out.
portlandon on January 2, 2009 at 4:22 PM
Is that true about Travolta? That is terrible. My sympathies and prayers to him and his family.
Mr. Joe on January 2, 2009 at 4:22 PM
Dope and Change!
Firebird on January 2, 2009 at 4:23 PM
I wish people would stop calling BHO “President”. That is not the job he was hired for. He was elected to be our Precedent. That is his true job.
progressoverpeace on January 2, 2009 at 4:24 PM
Fair enough. But Obama didn’t seem to mind flirting with the Logan Act when he was merely a candidate. Now that he’s actually got a reason to state his policy, it’s the silent treatment. You can hardly blame him though — taking an unwavering stance on an issue hasn’t been his strong suit.
LastRick on January 2, 2009 at 4:24 PM
he may be a moonbat, but that is horrible news.
upinak on January 2, 2009 at 4:25 PM
My condolences to the Travolta family.
And I just have to wonder if the sky is blue in that alternate world that the Left inhabits.
rbj on January 2, 2009 at 4:26 PM
He was being briefed daily on the way from the gym to the golf course.
Leave Barack alone!
/
JammieWearingFool on January 2, 2009 at 4:26 PM
First – hooray again for the Israelis, and may they continue the attack until the Palestinians join them in crushing Hamas.
As for Barry the Nothing, who cares what he says? He’s empty of ideas other than how to get stupid people to vote for him. Now that there is no other office to run for, he is stuck. He’ll actually have to perform of useful duty of some sort.
Heh.
Jaibones on January 2, 2009 at 4:29 PM
Typical. The UK and Euros will always side with the Palis. They also do not understand our political system.
As for Huffpo and the American Libs, they’re like the Europeans….. waiting, waiting, waiting for unicorns to fly out of their asses now that BO has been elected.
Nothing will change with these folks. They will whine as much now that they are in control as when they had no power. They can’t cope because they are incapable of dealing with reality.
Bunker down, everyone. It’s going to be a long 4 yrs.
Cody1991 on January 2, 2009 at 4:29 PM
This is quite true. Since he resigned his Senate seat, Obama is no longer an employee of the Federal government representing the state of Illinois in the Senate. Until 12:00 Noon on January 20th, Barack Obama is an unemployed private citizen who hired for a job which he will begin at that time on that date and not a minute before. Until that time he has no Constitutional authority over any facet of United States government.
I’m happy, surprised, and relieved to find out that Obama understands that.
t.ferg on January 2, 2009 at 4:30 PM
Wait…wait…wait! Bianca Jagger is having a symbolic shoe protest. This is important stuff I tell you.
By the way, is a “shoe protest” where liberals hold their breath and stamp their feet until someone pays attention to them?
Trafalgar on January 2, 2009 at 4:31 PM
There has to be a better resolution to this crisis than just bombing half of Palestine.
lodge on January 2, 2009 at 4:31 PM
I sense great disappointment in the left
Kini on January 2, 2009 at 4:31 PM
That nearly made me spit out a mouth full of coffee. Not only is it hysterically funny, it also sounds quite painful.
t.ferg on January 2, 2009 at 4:32 PM
President Baseball Cap.
fogw on January 2, 2009 at 4:32 PM
Maybe bombing ALL of it??
Trafalgar on January 2, 2009 at 4:32 PM
That’s why they call it “news”. When you read it, you say “Jeez, that’s news to me” with the appropriate tone of incredulity in your voice, of course.
mr.blacksheep on January 2, 2009 at 4:33 PM
Whenever an international conflict breaks out, I always wait to hear where Bianca Jagger comes down on it. Has-been models who are begging for relevance always have important geopolitical insights.
Now if only Roseanne Barr would break her silence on the issue.
Cicero43 on January 2, 2009 at 4:33 PM
He had all the answers right up until he was elected. Now he has restraint? Pulllleeeeez. I think he’s voting present once more.
drjohn on January 2, 2009 at 4:33 PM
Or that fat dyke — what’s her name?
mr.blacksheep on January 2, 2009 at 4:36 PM
Killing the terrorists also helps.
JammieWearingFool on January 2, 2009 at 4:36 PM
And not for the last time, by any stretch. You can expect more bills to drift into law, without the Precedent’s signature, than ever in our history.
progressoverpeace on January 2, 2009 at 4:37 PM
B.H.O., the laziest president EVAH!
upinak on January 2, 2009 at 4:37 PM
Yeah. Bomb all of it, but that presupposes it exists in the first place. Actauly it does. Today I think it’s called Jordan.
J.J. Sefton on January 2, 2009 at 4:38 PM
They should try that. Looks like mostly women and children so far.
lodge on January 2, 2009 at 4:40 PM
Be prepared for more of this nonsense.
Like Hamas is innocent of murder and vicious attacks against Israel.
There’s nothing disproportionate about what Israel is doing. Hamas is using civilians as human shields.
The expectations were set high and Obama set that bar himself. It will be interesting come January 20th.
Kini on January 2, 2009 at 4:40 PM
The loons that Ed cites tell us all we need to know about the Left. Let’s HOPE that Obama’s handlers point him in the right direction when he assumes the mantle of the presidency.
The first clue about his wishy-washiness was that he couldn’t attach the flag pin to those adorable pecs. When he attaches it to his latest $1000-dollar designer suit, we may get some verbal committmnet.
Jaibones: I like your attitude.
onlineanalyst on January 2, 2009 at 4:40 PM
The great P.J. O’Rourke:
On the morning of the 26th, the day after Violeta Chamorro’s victory over Danny Ortega, I walked into the Inter-Continental hotel in Managua and Bianca Jagger was sitting alone in the lobby. Bianca had been ubiquitous during the election campaign: There was Bianca looking smart in an unconstructed linen jacket and yellow socks to match, Bianca looking serious with press pass and camera, Bianca looking thoughtful listening to Jimmy Carter, Bianca looking concerned conferring with Senator Christopher Dodd, Bianca looking committed in simple tennis shoes and neatly mussed hair, Bianca looking important wearing sunglasses after dark. But this morning Bianca looked . . . her age. Here we had a not very bright, fortyish, discarded rock star wife, trapped in the lonely hell of the formerly cute — one bummed-out show-biz lefty.
I was feeling great myself, ready to turn somersaults over the Ortega defeat, full of good cheer, and pleased with all the world. But then the forlorn, sagging little shape of Bianca caught my eye and, all of a sudden, I felt EVEN BETTER.
Realist on January 2, 2009 at 4:41 PM
$1,000 dollar designer suit?? Maybe in 1985.
J.J. Sefton on January 2, 2009 at 4:42 PM
He’s not “president yet” only when it’s convenient for him.
CynicalOptimist on January 2, 2009 at 4:43 PM
But Barack has spoken — his allies just didn’t listen:
If the Islamists were hoping for a change of course from the new American administration, they don’t understand us.
unclesmrgol on January 2, 2009 at 4:43 PM
Nope, he is just acting like a President elect should. Obama did say, If someone were launching rockets into the house where my daughters were I would stop them. He has un-officially given Israel a green light to do what they need to do.
doriangrey on January 2, 2009 at 4:43 PM
Beautiful, thanks!
mr.blacksheep on January 2, 2009 at 4:44 PM
Yep, the women and children the terrorists force to live around them so they can put up ‘propaganda’ videos on the MSM.
Trafalgar on January 2, 2009 at 4:44 PM
Yo, lodge, Hamas is hiding its cache of weaponry behind women and children: you know, the ones willing to strap on bombs to destroy the Israelis. Get a clue.
onlineanalyst on January 2, 2009 at 4:44 PM
P-e Obama is still just a wannabe, but at least an elected wannabe. Whereas Franken is not.
John Cornyn, Franken National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) chairman, will lead the Senate Republican caucus filibuster of Al Franken.
maverick muse on January 2, 2009 at 4:44 PM
Perhaps you should go back and reread Ed’s post.
Kini on January 2, 2009 at 4:46 PM
lodge on January 2, 2009 at 4:40 PM
Are you for real? These barbarians use their women and children as human shields. They use houses and mosques as ammo dumps and when the Israelis warn them en masse of an impending airstrike beforehand, they still send them up on the roofs to get slaughtered.
Go crawl back into your Fuerher bunker and rehearse “Springtime for Hitler”
J.J. Sefton on January 2, 2009 at 4:47 PM
Ed, I’d give Obama a lot more credit if he was like any other candidate and president-elect. I understand that he’s supposed to be critical of the party he’s running against during the campaign, but for the first time in my adult life we’ve had a candidate who actually made up his own Presidential seal. He’s been playing at being president for so long that for him to all of the sudden turn around and say he’s not the President (yet) smacks of the worst kind of hypocrisy. He was gung-ho to play President when it was fun – on the campaign trail, in Berlin, and in his “Office of the President-elect.” Now, when he has a real crisis that people on both sides honestly want to hear his thoughts about it’s suddenly not fun anymore and he clams up. He can’t do that anymore in 18 days, and I think he’s in for a rude awakening.
I’ve said it before – Obama is the “I’m not the President, I just play one on TV” POTUS.
crazy_legs on January 2, 2009 at 4:47 PM
I think Obama is in part to blame for the expectations the world has of him. A strategy going back to the election campaign was to cloak the man in presidential symbols and settings — to the point where they’ve even created podium signs for the hitherto obscure office of the president-elect. The obvious intent was to make an inexperienced politician look like he’s ready. Well, the world thinks he should be ready, and Obama is partly to blame.
However, don’t ask me to explain the backward baseball caps. Maybe he’s running away from his own packaging. I don’t know.
Dennis_Second_Thots on January 2, 2009 at 4:48 PM
“As long as the roots are not severed, all is well. And all will be well in the garden
Chance Obama
moxie_neanderthal on January 2, 2009 at 4:51 PM
Food war.
the_nile on January 2, 2009 at 4:52 PM
I think Obama is in part to blame for the expectations the world has of him.
Dennis_Second_Thots on January 2, 2009 at 4:48 PM
Of course he is. Ummm….errrr…ahhhh….. who was it who decided to campaign rather lavishly before 200,000 screaming Germans? Our boy Barry.
/sheesh
Cody1991 on January 2, 2009 at 4:53 PM
Hey, he’s busy dealing with the Blago and Hsu scandals…
roux on January 2, 2009 at 4:54 PM
A better choice to play the first black prez.
moxie_neanderthal on January 2, 2009 at 4:55 PM
If they hadn’t taken down Barackopolis after The One’s acceptance speech, he could use it to issue pronouncements on the Gaza conflict like he was Zeus, and maybe even throw down a few lightning bolts. Now he’s just some dopey pug in a backwards baseball cap. Who’s going to pay any attention to that?
Cicero43 on January 2, 2009 at 4:55 PM
O!s silence on the latest round in Gaza is appropriate…
I mean, after all, he has to wait until he is the President to, you know, throw Israel under the bus..!
The wheels on the bus go ’round and ’round…
RocketmanBob on January 2, 2009 at 4:56 PM
I would’ve been perfectly fine with Palmer, even though he was a Dem. ;)
crazy_legs on January 2, 2009 at 4:59 PM
Heck, even Snoop Dog would have made a better prez. At least he and his posse know that anybody should have the right/obligation to SHOOT BACK!
Laura in Maryland on January 2, 2009 at 5:01 PM
The Associated Press has stopped providing a breakdown (for obvious propagandistic reasons), but as of December 28, it had reported that 251 people had been killed in the Gaza bombings. Nine of the people killed were women, and twenty were children under the age of 16. (Note, the average age in the Gaza Strip is 16, due to a very high birth rate.)
Claiming that mostly women and children are being killed is a libelous slur against Israel – if these were indiscriminate attacks, you would be seeing a lot more women and children killed. It looks as if civilian deaths are only about 10% of the total – phenomenally low results in such a crowded urban area.
Realist on January 2, 2009 at 5:02 PM
You’d be seeing a lot more people killed, period.
crazy_legs on January 2, 2009 at 5:04 PM
But he is uber-cool!
Under the circumstances, I think that might just be the best thing we could hope for.
pannw on January 2, 2009 at 5:09 PM
Oh well, only 20 children then! Hallelujah!
lodge on January 2, 2009 at 5:10 PM
Are you really that brain-dead stupid, or do you think the rest of us are?
If you have some psuedo-intellectual or quasi-intelligent debate materials like some of the other trolls, please bring them to the table. At least those would be entertaining. However, merely spouting Hamas talking points in a venue in which people have access to the full news as opposed to those who only have access to the Hamas propaganda only makes people laugh.
AZfederalist on January 2, 2009 at 5:10 PM
It never ceases to amaze me how some people come to the defense of a terrorist organization as the victims and never take into account the actions which they started.
You cannot defend the indefensible.
Kini on January 2, 2009 at 5:11 PM
Even one civilian death is unacceptable, because I’M PAYING FOR IT. US military aid to Israel is around $3 billion a year.
lodge on January 2, 2009 at 5:15 PM
Umm…let’s see Israel has been fighting for thousands of years against foes like the Roman empire and you think they are afraid of Obama? Ok…whatever!
sabbott on January 2, 2009 at 5:15 PM
You really need to go and read Ed’s piece on this.
Kini on January 2, 2009 at 5:16 PM
I will not disparage Obama for doing the right thing, even if there is some nefarious hypothesis going around to rationalize it.
Until he was elected, Obama was campaigning. Part of campaigning is voicing your positions so that the voters can decide if they want to vote for you. Regardless of how well Obama did that, once he was elected, he was no longer required to opine about American policy, and he’s done a fair job at keeping his mouth shut.
The Blago appointment is primarily an Illinois issue I don’t fault Obama for weighing in on it.
For now, it isn’t only proper for him to keep his opinions to himself, it’s smart. Whatever the situation is today in Gaza, it will be different in three weeks. Why should he spend capital or take heat for problems before his term begins? Because of some deep and abiding love for Hamas? Pfft.
There will no doubt be endless opportunities to criticize Obama in the next four years. I can wait.
Immolate on January 2, 2009 at 5:16 PM
Funny thing to see…
Lady at the Jerusalem Post likes a doll of Obambi that looks like a racist black face joke.
If this same doll were made in America, the company would be being sued by Jesse “Jew York City” Jackson.
BoomJunkie on January 2, 2009 at 5:17 PM
Lodge,
You’re right. I’m sure that Israel has rockets equivalent to Grads – they should just fire them off unguided into cities in the Gaza Strip – just as Hamas is doing to southern Israel. The only reason why dozens of kids haven’t been killed in Israel is that a million Israelis are sitting in bomb shelters, so when schoolrooms are destroyed by Beersheeba by Grads, no one is in the classrooms.
Then Israel can send the suicide bombers into crowds in Gaza…
Realist on January 2, 2009 at 5:17 PM
Wow.
Won’t these people be surprised when the whole world isn’t magically “healed” the minute Obama is sworn in.
What will they do then?
Probably blame it on Bush.
Sterling Holobyte on January 2, 2009 at 5:18 PM
When do I get to stop making my house payments, get free gas etc.? Free Free Free is what I’m about. It’s all about me, me, me! Me, me, me, Free, Free, Free… I can’t wait!!!
sabbott on January 2, 2009 at 5:18 PM
Lodge is either a brain dead troll, a 14 year old momma’s boy stuck in the back room of her trailer home while she’s off making a living at the local strip club or a liberal. Of the three the liberal is the most devastating…
sabbott on January 2, 2009 at 5:21 PM
Yeah…but they were all terrorists, so what the hell.
Itchee Dryback on January 2, 2009 at 5:21 PM
Tell me if this makes sense:
We send military aid to Israel so they can afford to bomb Palestine.
Then, we send humanitarian aid to Palestine to help the civilians injured.
In addition, we send aid to the Saudis which they funnel into terrorist groups attacking Israel.
We should take a more wise, neutral policy, which is consistent with the advice of the Founders.
lodge on January 2, 2009 at 5:22 PM
But are you enjoying your contribution to the financial institutions and the Big Three? I think you would be amazed at how much that 3 billion has contributed to our safety.
Cindy Munford on January 2, 2009 at 5:25 PM
Of course not. I’m a conservative.
And please, elaborate on how that 3 billion has helped us — other than giving me less money to spend.
lodge on January 2, 2009 at 5:28 PM
Their intelligence agency is second to none and they are in the center of the storm. I think I will worry more about the folks of Hamas when they show one ounce of cooperation and that they care about their own people until then, I am unmoved.
Cindy Munford on January 2, 2009 at 5:32 PM
I agree with crazy-legs on this one.
Obama interjected himself weakly,but still did it pertaining to the invasion of Georgia by Russian troops calling for “restraint” from “both sides”.
Thanks for the leadership great one.
He flaunts his President elect seal while his followers in the press and entertainment industry cry for Barry to “please take over now”.
He not only announced his cabinet appointees,but put forth
his stimulus plan (major pork for the unions)to help with all the FDR and Lincoln comparisons.
He made plenty of comments about the credit crises blaming it on the last few years of bad economic policy(I guess the democrats were on Mars when all these decisions were being made).
Obama is simply speaking out when it benefits him.
He will stay silent,check poll numbers,and wait for his staff to tell him if there is any political risks involved.
This will produce middle of the road statements that could be interpreted in many ways allowing him to play both sides of an issue(reference the nuance concerning troop levels in Iraq/ending the war.Went from ending the war to “reduction of troop levels during his tenor.Got elected then adopted Bush’s policy on reduction based on conditions on the ground.His base said “okay”.)
He played the same game with Blago/Rahm,smashing the bogus claim concerning transparency of government he ran on.
I love the Captain to death and learn a lot from his posting,but I disagree with this.
I will not give Obama credit for hiding when he has spent so much time telling everybody what a great leader with smarter judgment he will be.
He is nothing but a run of the mill politician that puts his own self preservation and political advancement ahead of what is best for the country. (Reference stating that he would still vote against the surge even with knowing then the success it is now.Politics before Country).
Baxter Greene on January 2, 2009 at 5:38 PM
Lovingly referred to as ‘lodge-podge’.
thomasaur on January 2, 2009 at 5:38 PM
Then your gripe should be with Hamas for placing arms in the middle of civilians and in mosques, for launching rockets from civilian areas and for hiding behind women and children. The Israelis have done a credible job in attempting to minimize civilian casualties, often to their own detriment.
Would love to hear how you would resolve this problem. How exactly should Israel stop Hamas from its terrorist acts?
AZfederalist on January 2, 2009 at 5:48 PM
Oh well, only 20 children then! Hallelujah!
lodge on January 2, 2009 at 5:10 PM
If Israel (a nation with both the A- AND H-bomb) actually wanted to target civilians, as Hamas does, then your number of dead children would be about 25,000 times higher right now.
Idiot.
TexasJew on January 2, 2009 at 5:50 PM
I couldn’t give a shit. I care about America.
lodge on January 2, 2009 at 5:50 PM
lodge, please explain yourself! Surely you aren’t saying that this is all about money? I can’t remember, are you Libertarian?
Vince on January 2, 2009 at 5:51 PM
I care about America.
lodge on January 2, 2009 at 5:50 PM
Then you should let the Israelis bomb the crap out of Hamas.
TexasJew on January 2, 2009 at 5:54 PM
I’m against all foreign aid and nation building. That makes me a conservative. Big government is big government whether it’s spent on the welfare state, foreign aid, or military adventurism.
lodge on January 2, 2009 at 5:55 PM
Could they pay for it on their own dime please?
lodge on January 2, 2009 at 5:55 PM
I would love for just once the people who condemn “civilian”
casualties all the time to explain how an enemy that sets up their weaponry in civilian locations can be taken out without civilian casualties.
Hamas has been perpetrating war crimes against Israel,they have a right to defend themselves:
We can’t be war criminals, we’re Palestinian
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/792365.html
In a thousand ways, in a thousand places, the Qassam rocket has been written off.
Unlike Hamas,Israel has purchased weaponry that has smart capabilities and has used them to go after military targets.
If the “civilians” of Gaza don’t want to get caught in the crossfire,then rebel against the terrorist in their midst and quite supporting them.
If the “civilians” of gaza don’t want to become war casualties,don’t support the launching of over 3000 rockets into a nearby country that has the military capability to blow you away.
Baxter Greene on January 2, 2009 at 5:57 PM
I bet you also didn’t a shit when the Taliban took over Afghanistan in 1996, and allowed Osama bin Laden to set up training camps. After all, what possible difference could a few Al Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan make to America?
Realist on January 2, 2009 at 5:58 PM
I deplore the loss of innocent lives. I suggest the Palistinians stop storing ammo and weapons among the innocents. It might also help if they weren’t firing their rockets from schools, mosques, hospitals, etc.
jorb on January 2, 2009 at 5:59 PM
Could they pay for it on their own dime please?
lodge on January 2, 2009 at 5:55 PM
They’re paying with it with their own lives.
As far as bitching about “your dime”, You can say that about every single ally in the history of this nation, even those, unlike Israel, who have sacrificed very little in their own defense.
But then again, your argument is really about something else, isn’t it, you transparant putz?
TexasJew on January 2, 2009 at 6:01 PM
lodge:
You are an isolationist with conservative leanings. Without the US, Israel would be wiped off the face of this goos earth.
Vince on January 2, 2009 at 6:02 PM
“good earth”
Vince on January 2, 2009 at 6:03 PM
It’s unfortunate you see it this way. There is nothing in this whole conflict that prompts any rational thought to consider neutrality.
Civilization or barbarism? The Founders weren’t neutral given these two choices.
anuts on January 2, 2009 at 6:05 PM
Could they pay for it on their own dime please?
lodge on January 2, 2009 at 5:55 PM
How about this: I’ll mail you back your dime glued to the dead ass of Sheik Nizar Rayyan.
TexasJew on January 2, 2009 at 6:06 PM
But that has nothing to do with how Israel defends itself. If you have a problem with foreign aid, then you have a problem with foreign aid. How you make the jump to Israel killing “women and children”, which is something that you shouldn’t care about – preferring to concentrate on the US, belies what you are really trying to get at. (I would love to hear your thoughts on our own tactics in WWII)
progressoverpeace on January 2, 2009 at 6:08 PM
I’m not an isolationist, I’m for free trade and diplomacy.
I do agree with John Quincy Adams though
lodge on January 2, 2009 at 6:09 PM
I just don’t see how Israel hopes to succeed with this strategy. It will end up like Napoleon in Spain, us in ‘nam, the soviets in Afghan, us in Iraq and Israel in Lebanon.
lodge on January 2, 2009 at 6:11 PM
Exactly! Until Obama is forced into a corner where he is legally responsible to address a situation he isn’tgoing to reveal his hand unless it gives him good press & he has looked at the polls.
The US has been a friend of Israel since its existensce and for anybody to think Obama is goingto do a 180 or even a 90 on that policy is mistaken. He is praying that in the 18 days before he takes office some easing of the tensions take place.
Kevin in Southern Illinois on January 2, 2009 at 6:16 PM
Ah yes, the old Founding Fathers for Suicide Bombers ploy!
So our Founding Fathers (like John Quincy’s father) are now used as cover for protecting psychotic murderous Jihadists?
How moral!
I’m sure that they would agree with any government that officially sanctions crucifiction, like Hamas just did.
And wasn’t John Adams hellbent against the murderous Jacobin murderers in Paris? Sounds like third-rate tinpot Jihadists to me!
TexasJew on January 2, 2009 at 6:16 PM
Oh please! The is political opportunism. Obama’s career is nothing but “present votes” and otherwise refusing to take a position on controversal issues. The man is a complete and total political coward. This isn’t doing the appropriate thing (which it is), this is just Obama being Obama. Remember that on January 21st when this filthy politician takes office and comes up with some other excuse why he refuses to make public statements.
highhopes on January 2, 2009 at 6:18 PM
Uh, what responsibility? The man is a civilian. He’s not a Senator and he’s not the President. He is simply a civilian/President-elect. He’s a man without an office, without any responsibility whatsoever except to prepare for his upcoming Administration.
Michael in MI on January 2, 2009 at 6:19 PM
Maybe you don’t, but that is not what you were complaining about. Personally, I think Israel will blow it, once again, by not finishing the job. There are more people that need to be killed than Israel is willing to kill, unfortunately. And, as with any mortal enemy that has its population behind it, women and children must be killed, as we did when we firebombed whole cities into ash – rightfully so.
Maybe. But that is because we have declared real war to be illegal after WWII (even though we retain our strategic nuclear arsenal, at the ready to incinerate tens of millions of men, women, children, and pets of the enemy – which most in the US choose to just make pretend doesn’t exist).
I have no problems with your desire to cut foreign aid, to Israel or anyone else. But comments about poor women and children being killed has no place in that argument and any real conservative knows that a nation/people risk everything by attacking another – especially one that could incinerate them in a minute, if it so decided.
The real question is why people, who have no defense other than the self-restraint of those they are attacking, keep attacking. Answer that and all else falls into place.
progressoverpeace on January 2, 2009 at 6:20 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »