Sen. Obama: U.S. must help Israel defend itself

[Doondoo]

U.S. Sen. Barack Obama, a Democrat from Illinois who is competing for his party's presidential nomination, told Haaretz on Thursday that the United States should help protect Israel from its "dangerous" enemies.

"My view is that the United States' special relationship with Israel obligates us to be helpful to them in the search for credible partners with whom they can make peace, while also supporting Israel in defending itself against enemies sworn to its destruction," he said.

"Israelis want more than anything to live in peace with their neighbors, but Israel also has real - and very dangerous - enemies," Obama said.


http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/826665.html

[antiimperialist]

1. Special relationship?

I'll tell you what is special about this relationship:

If you are a politician and you say one (just one) negative thing about Israel behaviour against its enemies, not only are you toast, but your political career is over and you are considered an anti-semite.

In a political way this was a good move by Obama. It's the sad reality that kissing Israel ass is a must in order to stay alive in the race for '08.

[AnOhioan]

2. Agree wholeheartedly

US politicians must bow at the feet of the mighty :sarcasm: AIPAC to be considered credible. It is disgusting that our Democratic nominees (who should know better) see the need to appease the Israeli gov't.

[illinoisprogressive]

3. I agree with the postings. Look at Jimmy Carter when he tried to shed light

on this problem. It is sad. I see Israel as the spoiled child who knows it can get away with bad behavior because she can blame someone and the parent will believe her. I'm not saying Israel is bad but, has taken advantage, has gotten away with so much and cries prejudice if you question that behavior.
Black politicians are especially suspected in regards to Israel due to remarks in the past by leaders

[Hobarticus]

17. Edwards is coming to town this weekend....

...and I fully intend to ask him what he thinks of Carter's statement. It was the first honest thing I've heard a statesman say about Israel in a long time. Why can't one support Israel while also expecting them to play well with others? Why is that so incendiary a concept?

Jimmy's got more stones than all of them rolled together.

[rodeodance]

9. I second that E-motion.!!

[Freddie Stubbs]

52. Perhaps the Senator is just trying to follow the Democratic Party's Platform

[Alhena]

24. Hate to say it, but with "Hussein" as a middle name ...

Obama is pretty much politically forced to kiss some Israeli behind to not be suspected as a closet Muslim.

[primavera]

26. Well said

I'm not one who believes that the Israelis are necessarily wrong in every instance and Palestinians are necessarily right in every instance. But I do believe that the Arab-Israeli relationship is an extremely complex one and efforts to improve it are not aided by one-sided oversimplifications and unconditional blanket support of anything and everything one party happens to do. Yet because the American Jewish lobby is so organized, influential, and faithful to this one single issue, it becomes very difficult to get anywhere in national politics without pandering to them. And I do believe that produces bad policies which, in the long term, serve neither Israeli nor Palestinian (nor American, for that matter) interests.

[Freddie Stubbs]

45. He is parphasing the Democratic Platform

The Democratic Party is fundamentally committed to the security of our ally Israel
and the creation of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace between Israel and her neighbors. Our
special relationship with Israel is based on the unshakable foundation of shared values and a mutual
commitment to democracy, and we will ensure that under all circumstances, Israel retains the qualitative
edge for its national security and its right to self-defense.

http://www.democrats.org/pdfs/2004platform.pdf

[Tin Man]

59. Agree - what's so "special" about our relationship?

Do we owe Israel some type of debt of gratitude?

Israel needs to handle their shit; we'll handle ours.

[Freddie Stubbs]

70. "The unshakable foundation of shared values and a mutual"

http://www.democrats.org/pdfs/2004platform.pdf

[Tin Man]

72. That's odd. We share those same qualities with lots of nations, but *only* Israel is "special"

In the entire Democratic platform, the only "special relationship" identified is Israel - but the logic provided doesn't support the claim to uniqueness. :shrug:

All the other nations must be sooooooo jealous...

[Megahurtz]

81. It's just Unjustified Favoritism to me.

:popcorn:

[Tin Man]

92. You won't get any argument from me.

[ProudDad]

101. Other nations

don't represent the presence of a nuclear armed military force paid to protect "our oil"..

Israel is cheaper than another aircraft carrier group in the ME...

--------------

on edit: Their illegal, immoral occupation of the West Bank and Gaza sucks... I'm no fan of extreme right-wing governments whether in Israel or the U.S.

[saskatoon]

84. Hear hear!

Amen Tinman

[Cobalt Violet]

4. .......

:puke:

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MGD]

13. Israel has existed in the region for 3,000+ years-since Abraham purchased the cave of Machpelah

from Ephron the Hittite. It isn't a fable, it's reality. Deal with it. They have as much right to exist in the region as the Palestinians-possibly more.

[Dhalgren]

16. There is absolutely no proof of any of that except in the Bible. No external proof, at all.

The Palestinians have lived there for thousands of years and their claims mean nothing. So why should Israel's? Only because the Bible says so. This is a patently unfair treatment of the Palestinians and everyone knows it - even the Christians and the Jews know this. But no one will do anything because of bigotry and hatred against the Palestinians. You cannot give credence to one people's set of claims and then dismiss another people's claims as being unimportant without exposing your bigotry. The Palestinians should be given their rights, as well as the Israelis...

[MGD]

23. The jews have walked the earth for over 3,000 years. This is not disputed.

In that time, the disputed region has seen many kings, many wars, and more changes of "ownership" than anyone can easily name. After all the kings, empires, and Gods that have come and gone, the Jews are still here. As such, their claim to the land is legitimate. And the Palestinians are reaping what they have sewn. Intolerance and bigotry toward the Jew, sentiments shared by all non-Semites in the region is what kindled the everlasting fire that now consumes that region. It is not the other way around as you have asserted.

[Dhalgren]

28. The Palestinians have also been there for more than 3000 years.

The fact that their land has been conquered numerous times over the ages does not alter that fact. Remember Canaan? Those were your Palestinians of that time and didn't your book tell you that the Hebrews took their land from them by force? Be that as it may (and by the way, Palestinians are Semites, too), none of that justifies the removal of Palestinians from their homeland. This is too complicated an issue to rely on the disputed verses from some ancient book of disputed origin. These are real people in the real world. You may think that the Palestinians deserve what they are having to go through (even the children, MGD? Even the children?), but it cannot be justified, even in your "Holy Book"...

I'm out

[Megahurtz]

80. Agreed! n/t

[MGD]

85. I'm not speaking froma Biblical perspective, I'm speaking from a historical perspective.

And my only point was that they have all been there for a long long time and; as such, none of us has a right to tell any of them who has a right to be anywhere in that region.

[The Stranger]

114. No, everyone has a right to talk about who gets to live where they live.

And the bible has very little historical value, if any at all. Using it to base claims to land today is basically to engage in crusade or jihad.

[MGD]

138. Talk about it all you want, it's a free country.

But you do not have the right to tell a Jew that he has no right to live in Israel.

"And the bible has very little historical value, if any at all"
You obviously haven't done your research. Have you ever even read a history book? I think you have much to learn. Tell me then, from where did the Jews come and at what time did they they come into existence? provide a reference to support your position.

[The Stranger]

34. It is one thing to be proud of your heritage,

but when it begins to become excessive pride over and against the heritage of other peoples, it mutates into something disgusting and intolerable.

What is really telling is your statement regarding "sentiments shared by all non-Semites in the region" as it exhibits ignorance on a profound level. Jews, Palestinians, Arabs "in the region" are all Semitic peoples.

[Paranoid Pessimist]

21. If so, so what? The Native Americans existed on this

continent for thousands of years until white Anglo Saxons came and ethnically cleansed them. It's been a long time since I read the first few books of the Bible, but my recollection is that the Hebrews, after wandering around in the desert for a long time, did a pretty good job of ethnically cleansing their way through Jerico (which Joshua fit the battle of) and the rest of the places in Canaan because their God told them he promised the land to them.

Israel has every right to exist in the region. Does it have the right to keep the Palestinians in subjugation by arms?

[MGD]

25. I thought we were talking about Jews and Arabs.

As long as you're mentioning it though, why don't you move back to Europe or wherever you came from if it bothers you so much?

"but my recollection is that the Hebrews, after wandering around in the desert for a long time, did a pretty good job of ethnically cleansing their way through Jerico"
So what? They had lived in the region before the Canannites took it, before they were sold into bondage to the Egyptians.

[Paranoid Pessimist]

43. Good plan, but my parents' ancestors came from a bunch of

. . . different places so it would be hard to find the exact wherever I came from.

[The Stranger]

29. You are joking about arguing based on "Abraham," right?

I mean, this is just a joke here, and DUers don't argue about the bible when discussing contemporary politics and real-life, real-world issues, and people alive and striving to live today, right?

It IS a joke, right? (Right?!)

[MGD]

83. Abraham is a joke? A Myth? I don't think so.

The Bible has its share of myths to be sure; however, this is not likely one of them IMO. I do not reference a holy book here, I reference a history book. Do you deny that Jesus existed too? or Moses? I will accept certain aspects of their existence as mythological but I wouldn't be so naive to discount their existence entirely just because of the mythological aspects that have been ascribed to them.

[The Stranger]

115. Then prove that they existed.

You seem to have it backwards. I don't have to prove that something you found is true, rather, you have to prove it has historical value, that it is true.

And be quick about it.

[MGD]

89. Biblical characters are not completely mythological.

The Bible is a history book of sorts too. What's more, many of the events of the Bible are supported by multiple ancient historical texts and ruins. Only a fool would discount this reality. Only a fool would discount the mythological aspects of the book too. I discount neither. Abraham existed, he was the first Jew, and he purchased land in the region some 3,000 years ago. From him, the jewish people were born. Every race of people originates somewhere. Is it so difficult to imagine that the Jews descend from a man named Abraham and that he bought a cave from a local Hittite for a tomb for his wife? I don't see the need to become belligerent about these things incidentally. It's amazing to me how uncivil DUers become whenever someone defends a Jew or the Bible. very peculiar for supposed intellectuals.

[The Stranger]

116. Even according to the book you want to claim is historical, you are wrong.

Even according to the fictional text you seem to take as truth (without proof), Abraham came from Iraq (so he would be "Iraqi," not "Israeli", and he spawned Arabs as well has Jews.

Come on.

[MGD]

137. Abraham's origins do not matter.

He was an admitted stranger in a strange land and this has always been accepted. It is only the fate of his progeny that matters in this argument. This is, in fact, the heart of the entire argument from the biblical perspective. Whether you wish to believe in any of it or not, perspective is reality and this is their perspective. It is because Abraham fathered these two sons that Arabs and Jews fight. This is a 3,000 year old family feud over an inheritance. And BTW, there is much evidence which supports the Biblical perspective in many accounts. I'm not talking about parting the red sea and casting out demons and such, I'm talking about archeological consistencies and multiple written accounts from multiple sources documenting tribes and leaders and kings and wars and events. The old testament of the bible is one of the oldest existing documets on the planet. It is an incomplete record of civilization as witnessedand recorded by the descendents of Abraham, it is not a book of fairy tales.

[Porcupine]

33. Your mythology impresses nobody.

Other religions have books which contradict yours. Deal with it.

[MGD]

90. Why so uncivil? Did I strike a nerve

Or are you just naturally rude?

Other religions have books which contradict yours.

Really. Which book do speak of that contradicts the existence of Abraham?

[anotherdrew]

104. screw your damn books. they mean nothing except something to oppose.

If we're going top believe old books, there are a lot of options out there.

[spoony]

105. I hope you're monitoring your blood pressure

because from the level of frothing hatred that drip from your posts, one can only assume it shoots through the roof at even the mention of the Bib...well, you know. I don't want to add to your hysteria.

[Name removed]

108. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[anotherdrew]

136. ROFLMAO n/t

[Name removed]

50. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[spoony]

54. Such an articulate lad.

But you don't really have the "dame" right to tell any "dame" body to shove any "dame" thing any "dame" where.

[anotherdrew]

74. actually...

I can say whatever I like, it's called free speech. Something we have in this country.

nice one too, go after a typo... dame = same

[spoony]

99. By all means

continue to say any banal and pointless thing you'd like. I will continue to point out instances where it crosses a line into unbridled bigotry.

[anotherdrew]

103. yes, I'm bigoted against baseless fairly-tales used as an excuse for killing and torture

cry about it to your hearts content, I beg you, feel

[mitchum]

118. Be careful or their pissy magical skygod will strike you dead...

their magical book of fairytales for herdsmen is filled with "historical" incidences of that

[CRH]

68. The Jews and the Palestinians both lived there 3,000 years ago ...

with different religions. But, since Herzl's The Jewish State and the Balfour Declaration the Jews have exerted a doctrine of racism and exclusion of the Palestinian people. This is clearly documented in intent in The Jewish State. It is because of the racist actions of Israel, with no intent to share the land or give political voice to the Palestinians, that they will always have political detractors. Deal with it.

[MGD]

91. The Jews existed in the area long before Balfour and the White paper.

And it does seem somewhat biased on your part to accuse the Jews of being racist and exclusionary considering their complete history. In the end, btw, it is you who needs to deal with it.

[CRH]

110. Are we to search ancient history to justify ...

actions by the political forces in present day Israel that are exclusionary and racist?

I do stand corrected on one part of the post though, the Jews or the Jewish religion should not be held accountable for the political Zionist movement that found expression in 'The Jewish State', and gained traction when the Balfour Declaration ceded the land that is now Israel, with no regard for human and civil rights of the Palestinian people. It should also be noted, Palestine was the only country not allowed nationalism following World War I when the white imperialist forces of Europe divide up the spoils of the Turkish Ottoman empire. The Palestinians were left in their homeland with no political voice and subjugated to the doctrines of Zionism, which were basically, leave or forever be a second class citizen.

It is the political Zionist movement, that dominates the politics of Israel that is exclusionary and racist. And, it is the nation state of Israel that manifests in action the policies of Zionist principles. So if now we remove the religion and ancient history from the equation, are the politics and actions of Zionism and the state of Israel, a just solution? Should other countries allow Zionism to disproportionately influence their foreign policy in the face of unswerving excessive violations of civil and human rights of the Palestinians, while consistently ignoring the mandates of the United Nations?

When someone backs the principles depriving human and civil rights to any group of people, in the end, btw, it is they who will need to deal with it.

[classysassy]

123. We are all Gods children

[Malikshah]

127. Wow-- loooong sub-thread all about the veracity or lack thereof of the book of

Genesis, etc.

Well done folks. Nary a peep about Obama following the party line and discussing special relationships..

Good on ya for obfuscation at an appropriate time.

Happy face stickers for all!!! :):):):):);):):):):);

[InkAddict]

15. And riddle another

< Did Native Americans get treated properly by Settlers? If they had continued to attack us to get us out of their country, would they be terrorists? Would you then be justified in going onto their reservation and damming their river and tearing down the homes of the attacker's family and neighbors? >

Sorry, totally off-topic, and not meant to steal the purpose of this thread but try this on for another analogy.

Are the American Workers get treated properly by the Global Corporatist Collusionists? If that group continued to attack them for their failures to recognize the Bill of Rights and the US Constitution because it clearly obstructs continuance of their arrogant gluttinous lifestyle, would they be terrorists? Would you then be justified in destablizing the land of the American Worker, damning up the rivers of their locally earned income, and foreclosing on their homes and the careers of the nay-sayers' family and neighbors?

Until much larger reservations are necessary? Shall we call those reservations MI, OH, (MidWest Reservation) MS, LA (Southern Reservation), NY (East Coast Reservation) and CA (West Coast Reservation)?

OY VEY! GERONIMO! Dollars trump peace! No difference.

[sufrommich]

31. Our kids are dying for Israel?

Arab terrorist fly planes into the World Trade Center and you blame Israel for that??Can you cite some examples of how you came to that conclusion?

[primavera]

37. US unconditional support for Israel...

... is probably the number one tool used by extremists throughout the Middle East to fan the flames of anti-American sentiment. Extremists will observe that we bash Palestinians for their practices, ostracize Syria, invade Afghanistan and Iraq, bring international pressure to bear and threaten to invade Iran, but, when Israel uses US tanks to roll over refugee camps, or builds more settlements, or invades, we don't breath so much as the tiniest little whisper of criticism. That undermines not only our credibility, but the credibility of democracy overall. We open ourselves up to charges that we're complete hypocrites who talk a big line about freedom and fairplay and liberty and rule of law, but, when push comes to shove, we don't seem to care at all about any of those things, we just back Israel no matter what they do. It's not important whether you personally share that interpretation of our actions; the point is, our unswerving support for Israel, regardless of the propriety of their policies, does impress a very great many people throughout the region as evidence of our hypocrisy and hostility to the Arab world. And it is from that steadily growing population of disaffected, disillusioned people that organizations like al Qaeda recruit their members. So US policy towards Israel and attacks against the US by groups like al Qaeda are very much connected.

[oldtimecanuk]

6. Why the hell does Obama keep stepping on his tong? ..

Although that is a rhetorical question, damn why did he have to say something like that? The hell the US must back Israel against there self made enimies..... Shit like that is going to sink his chances of getting the nomination in 08. IMO

ww

[youngdem]

27. A glaring lack of experience?

:shrug:

That's my bet.

I love the guy, but he has less governmental experience than George W., for Christ's sake.

He has the education, the message, the look, the family, the smile, the charisma - but he lacks experience, and he is OFTEN outmaneuvered and is often speaking things that any serious candidate would find more artful ways of dealing with.

Pandering to Israel is the unspoken requirement of any candidate. Otherwise, they brand you as an anti-Semite. So, he had to say something for the warmongers over at AIPAC, but damn, he really has some growing to do.

[cali]

106. He certainly does NOT have less experience than

georgie had when he ran in 2000. That's a flagrant untruth. Bush was governor of Texas for what? 6 years? That's it. He had no intellectual background in law or government other than that, and the Texas governorship is known as a remarkably weak one. Obama not only taught constitutional law for many years, he was in the Illinois State Leg for 7 and he's been a U.S. Senator for 2+. Not to mention of course, that he has far, far, far more intellectual depth than the mental midget in the WH.

[silvermachine]

109. You are correct...

...the governorship in Texas is regarded as being closer to a ceremonial position than any other governorship in the U.S.

[Freddie Stubbs]

46. He is simply following the Democratic Platform

It's not stepping on your tongue if you mean what you say.

[Divernan]

7. Clinton wouldn't concede the black vote to Obama; he won't conced the Jewish vote to her.

Run, Al, run !

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ryanmuegge]

14. How about looking for ways to get out of the Middle East as a whole?

Rather than trying as hard as we can to get ourselves further entrenched there.

[progressivebydesign]

42. That makes the most sense of all. n/t

[skipos]

18. What did Obama say that is so wrong?

This sounds like something any politician would say about our allies.

"My view is that the United States' special relationship with England obligates us to be helpful to them in the search for credible partners with whom they can make peace, while also supporting England in defending itself against enemies sworn to its destruction," he said.

[Freddie Stubbs]

47. It sounds a lot like the Democratic Platform

The Democratic Party is fundamentally committed to the security of our ally Israel
and the creation of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace between Israel and her neighbors. Our
special relationship with Israel is based on the unshakable foundation of shared values and a mutual
commitment to democracy, and we will ensure that under all circumstances, Israel retains the qualitative
edge for its national security and its right to self-defense.

http://www.democrats.org/pdfs/2004platform.pdf

[IronScorpio5]

131. Exactly.

it would be foolhearted not to follow it.

[Skip Intro]

19. Why is it necessary for our politicians to pledge allegiance to Israel? nt

[rebel with a cause]

20. Ok, here is my take on this.

I lived in NYC for eight years, and on Long Island six months before that. The six months were spent working for and living with a family that were liberal Jews, I was a small town Protestant so this was a new experience. During the next eight years I had some very good friends, some of whom were Jewish, but I also had some very bad experiences with a radical Jewish group (especially after I had my Latino children) that lived in the same area that I did. These experiences left me a bit prejudice against them for quite some time. My bad. I have had to work hard to get over those feelings, but when I see some of the things done to the Palestinians, those memories come flooding back. By the way, my friends shared my dislike for the way this group treated others.

Now to get to what Obama said. "My view is that the United States' special relationship with Israel obligates us to be helpful to them in the search for credible partners with whom they can make peace, while also supporting Israel in defending itself against enemies sworn to its destruction,"

To me this says that we have a strong relationship with Israel, and this relationship makes it necessary for us to try to help them find peaceful solutions to their problems with those that are willing to do so. This does not say that we will support them in oppressing other groups. It then says that we will support Israel in their need to defend themselves against those who are set on destroying Israel. This is not really unreasonable for him to say. It is what we would say to any of our allies. Anyway, this is my take on it, and I don't have a problem with it.

Sorry if I offended anyone, but just being honest.

[loyalsister]

22. I agree

This sounds like an approach that is open minded and "negotiative" to me.
He doesn't seem to want to keep supporting a model of unconditional support.
It seems reasonable to assume that he knows the surrounding countries tend to disagree with Isreal and that he knows the best peace partners are going to be regional.
This is actually the most open minded way of looking at that situation we have seen for a long time.
Sounds to me like he wants to expand diplomacy beyond Palestine to get all of the stakeholders who are subject to Isreal's nukes at the table.

[ileus]

30. You are the man Obama! you've got my vote.

[ShortnFiery]

58. You are the men Clark and Obama! How about a Clark / Obama ticket?

We keep the special relationship, but also keep our friends, Israel, HONEST and COMPASSIONATE? :shrug:

[Superman Returns]

32. I'm happy Obama is pro-Israel.

Israel has made many mistakes, but it still is a democratic nation and our strategic ally.

[CrazyForKucinich]

38. Now it makes sense why Obama was out campaiging for Holy Joe

They sleep in the same bed.

[Freddie Stubbs]

53. What makes sense? That he supports the Democratic Party's Platform?

:shrug:

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BrokenBeyondRepair]

36. double puke

:puke: :puke:

[Megahurtz]

82. Lol No Kidding! n/t

[The Sushi Bandit]

39. Special Relationship??

well it's time to end that way of thinking

Only 5 Deleted messages??

[Freddie Stubbs]

48. That special relationship is mentioned in the Democratic Platform

The Democratic Party is fundamentally committed to the security of our ally Israel
and the creation of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace between Israel and her neighbors. Our
special relationship with Israel is based on the unshakable foundation of shared values and a mutual
commitment to democracy, and we will ensure that under all circumstances, Israel retains the qualitative
edge for its national security and its right to self-defense.

http://www.democrats.org/pdfs/2004platform.pdf

[gorbal]

40. Somebody buy him Jimmy Carters book, quick

I knew his centrist tendencies were going to annoy me after a while.

[progressivebydesign]

41. Why do we have a "special" relationship with Israel?

I mean.. I think it's noble if US chooses to help a country that's under actual attack, from like another country.. but what is with this "special" relationship thing? Do all the candidates have to do this to get the lobby money? I honestly don't understand why we spend billions helping one country... and seem to ignore all others. Seems to me the people in Durfur need more help than Israel lately, and lack the resources.

[primavera]

44. The American Jewish lobby is very powerful

They are very well organized and represent a large, affluent, and disciplined constituency of reliably single-issue voters. They're also extremely politically active, definitely not fence-sitters: if they are not with you, they can be counted on to be with your opponent. Unless your base is absolutely rock solid and your position completely secure, you generally do not want to risk pissing off the American Jewish lobby.

[Amused Musings]

56. Maybe he actually believes it?

[primavera]

57. Could very well be the case

My point was only that, whether he believed it or not, it would be politically costly for him to not go on the record supporting a continuation of our policy of unwavering and uncritical support for Israel.

[ShortnFiery]

60. But it's our *uncritical* support and poor counsel of Israel that has

us and Israel VIEWED as the two most powerful and loathed nations within the World Community, i.e., not just within the Middle East neighborhood. :shrug:

We need to make BETTER and more "carrot vice stick" involved decisions.

Dealing with the Middle East, without trying to be glib, is like dealing with your beloved teenager. They blurt out horrible things, but deep down underneath all the hurt, they don't mean it because WE ARE ALL HUMANS! ... Israelis, Jews, Arabs, Sunnis, Persians, Shias, Turks, Christians, etc. etc.

[theboss]

64. And they are, you know, strong Democrats

Gore got 79 percent of the Jewish vote. Kerry - after a massive attempt by Bush to make inroads - got 74.

So...go, us!

[Zynx]

65. Wow, that sort of thing belongs on Stormfront.

That does not belong on these forums.

[primavera]

73. Oh please!

Observing that a group is politically well organized now makes one a racist? Don't you think that's carrying political correctness way, way, waaay too far? At no point have I ever said that the American Jewish community shouldn't be organized, or that they don't play fair, or that they shouldn't articulate their interests, or that politicians shouldn't listen to them. All I said was that they represent a political force to be reckoned with, as is NAACP, as is ACLU, as is the NRA, and so on and so on and so on. That's just a neutral statement of fact. So get a grip and stop being so defensive, no one's attacking anyone.

[Zynx]

129. You accuse them of orchastrating supposedly vast political power

, which they do not have, in a very organized manner for a single issue which is simply not true. The Jewish community in the United States is hardly monolithic in their political views just as any particular subset of the electorate. Many many Jews do not support what Israel does. I have a number of Jewish friends and their opinions are diverse.

[anotherdrew]

76. why?

what could it be that makes it so powerful?

[primavera]

78. There are a variety of reasons

Part of it is simple demographics: there happen to be significant Jewish populations located in several swing states, Florida being the most famous example, but also including Ohio and Pennsylvania. Moreover, voter registration and turnout amongst Jewish communities tends to be very high. For instance, in California, Jews make up 2.9% of the state's population, but 6% of the state's registered voters. The Jewish community also has a sizable swing percentage. About 50-55% traditionally support Democratic candidates; only about 10% have consistently supported Republicans. But that leaves about 30-35% that can - and do - go either way and, among that 30-35%, a candidate's perceived support for Israel is commonly the determinative factor. There have been a number of instances over the last 50 years in which, in close competitive races, perceptions of a candidate being too pro-Arab (for instance Jimmy Carter in 1980) or wavering in their support of the Israeli state (for instance George Bush in 1992) ended up costing the candidate crucial votes that might have tipped the scales in their favor.

Another consideration is that being pro-Israel is politically cost free. Most agenda items cannot be capitalized on without alienating the other side of the debate: if you're pro-choice, you'll piss off the anti-choice people; if you're pro gun control, you'll piss off the pro-gun community, etc., etc.. Being pro-Israel costs nothing as there is no electorally significant population of Palestinians within the US to offend. So, if you're a politician, there's no downside to being pro-Israel and, you never know, it just might gain you the extra votes you need in a close contest.

[anotherdrew]

93. good explanation, thanks n/t

[cali]

107. Single issue voters?

Nonsense. American Jews are hardly single issue voters, and indeed are to be found in the forefront of many, many liberal causes.

[Freddie Stubbs]

49. Because of the "unshakable foundation of shared values and

mutual commitment to democracy."

[ShortnFiery]

51. Well, now I'm back to supporting only Kucinich OR Clark for President

Newsflash Obama, et. al., Israel is NOT, I repeat NOT our 51st state! :grr:

[Freddie Stubbs]

55. No, but we do have a special relationship with Israel

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[0rganism]

62. but those were SPECIAL spies!

:spank:

[Freddie Stubbs]

67. The Democratic Party Platform states we have a special relationship

The Democratic Party is fundamentally committed to the security of our ally Israel
and the creation of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace between Israel and her neighbors. Our
special relationship with Israel is based on the unshakable foundation of shared values and a mutual
commitment to democracy, and we will ensure that under all circumstances, Israel retains the qualitative
edge for its national security and its right to self-defense.

http://www.democrats.org/pdfs/2004platform.pdf

[Name removed]

86. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sufrommich]

96. Nice site.....

Make sure to tune into the David Duke interview on their main page.:grr: :puke:

[badgervan]

77. If So...

... Just how "special"? Do we afford Israel the same, and I do mean the very same, protection that we afford the 50 United States? Do we risk bringing on WW III? By the way, for the fanatics out there, this is a legitimate concern to have.

[sufrommich]

112. Ask yourself

If we would afford any European country the same promise to come to aid if they found themselves surrounded by groups vowing to destroy them.Of course we would.

[jonnyblitz]

63. He has no choice but to say this or his political career is

otherwise doomed.

[latebloomer]

66. And what else does he have no choice about?

I really do believe that you have to sell your soul in order to be "electable". By the time he finishes going along to get along, he'll be another corrupt slimeball.

Like Hillary.

[Freddie Stubbs]

69. It would not be wise for a candidate to take a position in opposition to the Party's Platform

[jonnyblitz]

88. I completely agree. nt

[geek tragedy]

71. Wow, he really went out on a limb. NOT!

Listen, if he says anything critical of Israel during the campaign, you're going to see cartoons of him wearing an explosive belt saying "Barack Hussein Osama/O-bomba."

[anotherdrew]

75. we SHOULD help Israel defend itself - by FORCING it behind the green line

and to make peace generally; if they want to build a wall, build it along the green line, basically.

[dkofos]

79. They have one of the best (if not the best) armies in the world,

They can take care of themselves.

[ProudDad]

102. Had

They got their clock cleaned in Lebanon last I heard...

Sic Semper Tyrannus

[donkeyotay]

87. If only we could choose among representatives as dedicated to promoting

the welfare of the US as those dedicated to Israel. One thing I don't understand, it is well documented that "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm" is not a policy in search of "credible partners" for peace. It is the policy of war that we are seeing enacted by a congress that needs AIPAC for it's election, but does not need the American people. Are we required to support Israel no matter what? Are we bigots if we protest that a foreign nation has more control over our own government than we do? Should we be silent as we see congress roped into the expanding this war into Iran? Supporting Israel should not be unconditional support, support at the expense of our own interests or something that we are not allowed to openly debate.

[Megahurtz]

95. Here! Here!

:applause:

[Vidar]

94. The majority of lobbyists belong in prison & AIPAC is no

exception. Say no to corruption. I don't think this is a mark against Obama, since Hillary & Edwards have already caved, so much as it is an indictment on our political system. Kucinich might do the right thing, but if so, he will be crucified for it.

[AnOhioan]

97. Dennis has the right idea re: Israel/Palestine

From his website:

"We need to keep in mind that there is no such thing as a victory for one side. No "win-lose" solutions are possible, only "win-win" outcomes. Coercion of one side or the other cannot succeed, no matter how strongly one might want it, or how much force might be brought to bear."

Snip

"Israelis are living in fear, an understandable result of more than three years of suicide bombings and other terror attacks against civilians. The measures carried out against the Palestinian population have the support of many Israelis, because of the logic of fear. But as those outspoken military men have pointed out, this logic is leading to unacceptable outcomes, both in failing to protect Israelis, and in terms of human rights abuses committed against Palestinians."

"These measures include hundreds of roadblocks, mostly separating Palestinians from each other. The roadblocks are one of the two defining features of the occupation, since they define every sphere of existence: access to jobs, schools, medical care, relatives and friends. The other defining feature is the growth and spread of settlements, all of which are illegal under international law. The daily hardships imposed by Israel and the loss of land fuel the despair that leads to terror. It's time to fight terror with the only weapon left in Israel's arsenal: hope."

"As we watch our brothers and sisters suffer and die, we shouldn't be asking which side to join, which side to strengthen so as to defeat the other. The question is, how can we use our power to foster healing and reconciliation? The power and faith of the American people has been used that way in the past in that part of the world, particularly by President Carter and President Clinton. Today we need to call on that spirit and go with it further than ever before."

Snip

"Israelis and Palestinians, locked in to a recursive conflict that feeds on itself, need to see more private initiatives, and more American support for them, as evidence that we will be there to assist in ending the conflict with our resources and moral power. We cannot do this when what investment we currently have is so overwhelmingly weighted towards military means."

Entire text at http://kucinich.us/issues/middleeast.php


I worked for Dennis in '04. What he wants for the mideast is for the US to treat the Palestinians and Israeli with an equal, unbiased hand. That is the ONLY way the region will ever see a lasting peace. The "Special Relationship" with Israel needs to be ended.

Defend them, Yes

Support them, Yes

But not at the expense of other peoples, other countries.

[Hardrada]

100. I agree with DK too.

I hope he comes back to campaign before our (Iowa) caucuses. He was the most accessible of the candidates though Dean was fine also.

[Name removed]

98. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Amonester]

111. Beware, Israel. Saddam Hussein also had "special" relationship...

with the U.S. and... see what happened to him?

[dysfunctional press]

113. it's disgusting how our candidates have to suck up to the isreali lobby.

we need to get ourselves energy independent from the middle east, and then take our collective nose out of their business completely.

let israel stand or fall on it's own.

[Danmel]

117. Last I checked we didn't get any oil from Israel

Energy independence is certainly a worthy goal- what it has to do with our relationship with Israel escapes me.


Sorry, even if I wasn't Jewish, if I had to pick a middle eastern country to live in, as an American, I would pick Israel. It is the only country in the area that is "Western" in it's worldview. I won't even touch some of the stuff in this thread- I don't think it even deserves response- it does remind me always, that I have to always know that I am a Jew and that when push comes to shove, I am a Jew not only to myself but to everyone else too.

[mitchum]

119. True, so exactly what strategic advantage does our "special relationship"...

provide?

[Name removed]

122. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sufrommich]

133. I doubt that weaning ourselves from oil

will shake our commitment to Israel.For all the talk about AIPAC and veiled snipes at the powerful(read jewish) money that supports Israel,it's much more likely that the majority of Americans support it's right to exist and Democrats(and republicans)heed that.If it were nothing more that raw power and money that caused candidates to speak about protecting our friends,they would all be singing the praises of Saudi Arabia.Notice they all tend to shy away from that.Whether some on this board choose to acknowledge it or not,the majority of Americans support Israels right to exist and American power to back it up.
The last sentence in your post is pure anti semitism,by the way.

[Danmel]

134. Ah....so the truth comes out

Jew. More loyal to Israel than the US. Jew. Get out Jew.


No thread devolves faster than any thread involving Israel. Gee, I wonder why.

[dysfunctional press]

124. we need an ally and safe haven in the region to protect our 'vital interests'

i.e. mideast oil.

how that could escape anyone is beyond me.

[sufrommich]

120. Would you be O.K.

with what would happen to all those people in Israel were it to "fall on it's own"?It would be a bloodbath,you realize that,right?

[dysfunctional press]

125. as a nation, we don't seem too concerned about the bloodbath in sudan...

why should one in israel be any different?

[sufrommich]

132. I'm not O.K. with bloodbaths anywhere.

And I didn't ask about how "the nation" would react.I asked if it would be O.K. with you.

[dysfunctional press]

135. i certainly wouldn't loose any sleep over it.

seeing as i have no family or friends anywhere near the region- let them have at it. it's not my fight.

if they can't come to a peaceful solution- if each side feels that the relatively small strip of land is worth they, their families, children and grandchildren all dying over- then let them kill each other over it until one side wins.

[Ronnie Roach]

121. To say," help Israel" is a gross generalization

Israel has 17 political parties, most of them are left of center. The Neo-Cons in the states have been propping up the right wing, "LIkud Party" of Israel. The USA religious right supports this party too. So, when the American right says they support Israel, they mean the Likud Party. Mr.Obama must clarify which political faction he supports in Israel, the right wing Jewish nationalists or the progressive Zionists?

Check out my site.
No censorship.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Enronscam/

[goforit]

126. Touting DLCr

[mvd]

128. Well, he's still the best of the front runners IMO

I don't think any of the front runners will propose a truly neutral strategy in the Middle East. I realize that Israel is a democratic influence in the Middle East, but they have done some things wrong, too. I'm remain only thrilled about Kucinich.

[Demeter]

130. Who Is Going To Protect Israel From Itself?

Until the Israelis show some signs of overcoming their worst instincts, I see no reason for the US to do more than offer refuge for the sane and victimized.

[yurbud]

139. this is why we need someone like Feingold or Clark on the ticket or at least as Secretary of State

only someone Jewish can get tough with Israel and make them accept peace.