Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is an issue near and dear to my heart and I also think that having peace in that area can only lead to good things for the Middle East and the rest of the world. I do believe that Obama would be better suited to move along a peace treaty, but what about McCain? What do you think he can do?
I'd go with Obama as well, even though they both are terrible when it comes to a sense of fairness towards Palestinians. The GOP is in bed with the Israeli right wing so forget any chance of progress if they are in charge.
BTW Haaretz polled Israelis and 65% favored talks with Hamas. There no reason why Americans should beat their leaders up for being more aggresive in pushing Israel to do what needs to be done.
This is an issue near and dear to my heart and I also think that having peace in that area can only lead to good things for the Middle East and the rest of the world. I do believe that Obama would be better suited to move along a peace treaty, but what about McCain? What do you think he can do?
Like the peace Jimmy brought to the Mid East? How about Bill? No I don't think he can. But I'm not sure anyone can as long as the Muslims want Israel wiped off the face of the earth.
The Palestinians don't deserve 'fairness'. They deserve to be annihilated.
I'm not sure you know what the he** you're talking about. If you know nothing about the subject, don't post. I find your comment to be rude, immature and completely ignorant. What in a sense you are advocating is genocide. You're a sick inhumane person.
This is an issue near and dear to my heart and I also think that having peace in that area can only lead to good things for the Middle East and the rest of the world. I do believe that Obama would be better suited to move along a peace treaty, but what about McCain? What do you think he can do?
Both candidates are beholden to give Israel whatever it desires. Because of this, there will never be peace, as when you help fund both sides and only political support one you are merely perpetuating the madness that exist.
Until the United States treats both sides with some equal measure more than mere words then we shouldn't hold our breath for progress.
Bear in mind, AIPAC is the second largest lobby group in the United States, it is second only to AARP and just above the NRA. This lobby group does nothing more than lobby for the interest of a foreign nation. That in itself should give you an idea of just how objective America treats this issue.
Both candidates are beholden to give Israel whatever it desires. Because of this, there will never be peace, as when you help fund both sides and only political support one you are merely perpetuating the madness that exist.
Until the United States treats both sides with some equal measure more than mere words then we shouldn't hold our breath for progress.
Bear in mind, AIPAC is the second largest lobby group in the United States, it is second only to AARP and just above the NRA. This lobby group does nothing more than lobby for the interest of a foreign nation. That in itself should give you an idea of just how objective America treats this issue.
I totally understand that, I am just hoping for some fairness in the next administration. But, alas, it's probably wishful thinking.
I totally understand that, I am just hoping for some fairness in the next administration. But, alas, it's probably wishful thinking.
While I really don't expect much, I did mention in a prior thread that Obama did make a very nuanced distinction about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He noted that Israel wasn't a monolithic or homogeneous entity, and that much of the desires to continue the conflict resided in the Likud Party of the Knesset. There is a desire by many in Israel to reevaluate the entire situation as well as Israel's approach, but in most cases, the hard line Likud and to a lesser degree the Kadima Party prevent this. So I suppose that is a hopefully sign that a Presidential candidate has a deeper understanding of the complexity of this issue.
While I really don't expect much, I did mention in a prior thread that Obama did make a very nuanced distinction about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He noted that Israel wasn't a monolithic or homogeneous entity, and that much of the desires to continue the conflict resided in the Likud Party of the Knesset. There is a desire by many in Israel to reevaluate the entire situation as well as Israel's approach, but in most cases, the hard line Likud and to a lesser degree the Kadima Party prevent this. So I suppose that is a hopefully sign that a Presidential candidate has a deeper understanding of the complexity of this issue.
I hope so. To get back to whether McCain or Obama would be better, we might be better off with a president whose political support and base is not dependent on Christian fundamentalists looking forward to the rapture and fulfilling their beliefs in their bible.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
