He Will Always Side With War Instead of Taking a Positive Position.

[wbcoleman]

If you want to stick with a dogmatic agenda then this isn't going to go anywhere. If you want to try to discuss solutions for America then that's what I'm trying to get going here.

For example, Syria has no ambitions to be at war with Israel and the US and for that reason it has made peace overtures to both Israel and the US. You have to come to the understanding that Israel is not interested in peace with any country as long as they have their proxy bully pulpit to rely upon. If that was taken away, as it inevitably eventually will be, Israel has the military might to stand on it's own. No nation, nuclear armed or not, is going to wage an attack on another nuclear armed nation. That has never happened and likely won't happen in the foreseeable future, unless it's the US and Israel attacking Iran with tactical nuclear weapons. Border scurmishes will continue to happen but they will be understandably reactions to aggressions of the other side.

A UN peacekeeping force could end this in an instance and so why hasn't that been allowed to happen?

Oh, and what did Ahmadinejad 'really' say? Do you have the interest to at least find out the truth on that?

This isn't going anywhere.

 

[ReformCollege]

His power comes from the fact that he has envisioned a policy of fairness in the ME and that is not siding with the Zionist agenda. So call it what you like, but as you do you just further betray the fact that what I say is true and it's driving the right in the US crazy. It's a part of the Obama hate, the relevant part that is so ornery to not go away and die somewhere.

But thank you for your remark here. It's just exactly what I was hoping for because it doesn't take an IQ any higher than room temperature to understand that you made my point for me.

edit: Oh, and 'answers to the Ayatollah'?
Well pal, it's your credibility to throw away, not mine!

All hail, Iran has a theocratic moderate. Everyone bow to him and all of Iran's wishes. :roll:

 

[Michael66]

As a man who has laid behind many a fully automatic weapon waiting for what the 'new dawn' might bring I attest to the fact it isn't a light switch. The new dawn is timid with a period called the gloom where shadows move and lesser souls quail at imagined bad guys coming for them. The new dawn is a period that can try lesser souls, but the light will come. A moderate cleric is a new dawn, but it can be the same ****, different day- only time and patience will tell.

Now if I recall history, MLK and Gandhi were not seen as MLK and Gandhi in their day, but commies, and malcontents. And Israel is not without sin. The Current PM's brother was a fallen hero to the State of Israel, BiBi is more like a dead hero's coattail riding Cheney, who had other priorities in a nation that traditionally sees a very high percentage of male military service.

So BiBi doesn't inspire me to follow him anywhere but perhaps the snack bar, n he better be buying. eace

Ahhh, a knowing voice from the wilderness. Of course the correct approach is to give their new leader a chance and there will be lots of time to condemn him if he doesn't show promise. But of course you do understand how that approach is so dangerous to Israel.

In my opinion it is absolutely for Israel's future plans to keep it hot with Iran. And in fact, understanding that doesn't require a rocket scientist to understand that Syria is only a stepping stone to Iran.

So how politically correct are you going to have to keep it here? Very? Or not at all?

 

[notquiteright]

Ahhh, a knowing voice from the wilderness. Of course the correct approach is to give their new leader a chance and there will be lots of time to condemn him if he doesn't show promise. But of course you do understand how that approach is so dangerous to Israel. In my opinion it is absolutely for Israel's future plans to keep it hot with Iran. And in fact, understanding that doesn't require a rocket scientist to understand that Syria is only a stepping stone to Iran. So how politically correct are you going to have to keep it here? Very? Or not at all?

Wrong place to do much discussing of the ME. I'll just say Israel has far less of a threat from Iran than it does it's own policies. Syria will be a hot rock for Shia forces to try and leap for. Useful distraction at best.

 

[Michael66]

Wrong place to do much discussing of the ME. I'll just say Israel has far less of a threat from Iran than it does it's own policies. Syria will be a hot rock for Shia forces to try and leap for. Useful distraction at best.

What's wrong with this place to discuss ME topics? This was breaking news when I posted it. Are you suggesting that the ME needs to be separated from breaking news. I would suggest that to relegate something so important as this topic about Zionism's destructive forces on the US to the background noise would be nothing but a censorship of what's most important to a political discussion forum.

Let's not go there. In fact, why not join me in bringing the ME breaking news to this section where it obviously belongs, along with all other breaking news?

As to your comments that were on topic: Of course war in Syria between any factions is in Israel's best interests. US led war throughout the ME, in any country, is in Israel's best interests. I don't need to explain that to you.