wow..israeli leaks that attack on iran can happen within days

[jameznyhc]

or as little as a few hours ..Israel doesnt leak info like this one official said ..im guessing these leaks issued over the last few hours ..it could give the obama administration the advantage of good cop and israel acting as bad cop .. supposedly netanyahu will return the west bank if given the green light to bomb iran .. Rahm and Bibi reportedly in intense negotiations .. seems like a very fair deal .. considering this will not be WAR and iran will suffer no casualties .. we know for a fact the the west bank deal will fall through .. hamas and hezbollah will respond ..giving bibi the right to reclaim the west bank .. what do you think?? ..why else would israel be leaking this info from multiple sources within hours.. i could be totally wrong ..

the only other reason is bibi sending Obama a message .. since Obama turned down bibis request for a meeting .. he was too busy chatting up chavez and posing for pictures with him today .. that would be really bad .. israel decides to strike after obama disses netanyahu .. honestly if these leaks are just bullshit i fgind that hard to believe netanyahu doesnt play games ..


Israel stands ready to bomb Iran's nuclear sites
Sheera Frenkel in Jerusalem
The Israeli military is preparing itself to launch a massive aerial assault on Iran's nuclear facilities within days of being given the go-ahead by its new government.

Among the steps taken to ready Israeli forces for what would be a risky raid requiring pinpoint aerial strikes are the acquisition of three Airborne Warning and Control (AWAC) aircraft and regional missions to simulate the attack.

Two nationwide civil defence drills will help to prepare the public for the retaliation that Israel could face.

“Israel wants to know that if its forces were given the green light they could strike at Iran in a matter of days, even hours. They are making preparations on every level for this eventuality. The message to Iran is that the threat is not just words,” one senior defence official told The Times.


Officials believe that Israel could be required to hit more than a dozen targets, including moving convoys. The sites include Natanz, where thousands of centrifuges produce enriched uranium; Esfahan, where 250 tonnes of gas is stored in tunnels; and Arak, where a heavy water reactor produces plutonium.

The distance from Israel to at least one of the sites is more than 870 miles, a distance that the Israeli force practised covering in a training exercise last year that involved F15 and F16 jets, helicopters and refuelling tankers.

The possible Israeli strike on Iran has drawn comparisons to its attack on the Osirak nuclear facility near Baghdad in 1981. That strike, which destroyed the facility in under 100 seconds, was completed without Israeli losses and checked Iraqi ambitions for a nuclear weapons programme.

“We would not make the threat [against Iran] without the force to back it. There has been a recent move, a number of on-the-ground preparations, that indicate Israel's willingness to act,” said another official from Israel's intelligence community.

He added that it was unlikely that Israel would carry out the attack without receiving at least tacit approval from America, which has struck a more reconciliatory tone in dealing with Iran under its new administration.

An Israeli attack on Iran would entail flying over Jordanian and Iraqi airspace, where US forces have a strong presence.

Ephraim Kam, the deputy director of the Institute for National Security Studies, said it was unlikely that the Americans would approve an attack.

“The American defence establishment is unsure that the operation will be successful. And the results of the operation would only delay Iran's programme by two to four years,” he said.

A visit by President Obama to Israel in June is expected to coincide with the national elections in Iran — timing that would allow the US Administration to re-evaluate diplomatic resolutions with Iran before hearing the Israeli position.

“Many of the leaks or statements made by Israeli leaders and military commanders are meant for deterrence. The message is that if [the international community] is unable to solve the problem they need to take into account that we will solve it our way,” Mr Kam said.

Among recent preparations by the airforce was the Israeli attack of a weapons convoy in Sudan bound for militants in the Gaza Strip.

“Sudan was practice for the Israeli forces on a long-range attack,” Ronen Bergman, the author of The Secret War with Iran, said. “They wanted to see how they handled the transfer of information, hitting a moving target ... In that sense it was a rehearsal.”

Israel has made public its intention to hold the largest-ever nationwide drill next month.

Colonel Hilik Sofer told Haaretz, a daily Israeli newspaper, that the drill would “train for a reality in which during war missiles can fall on any part of the country without warning ... We want the citizens to understand that war can happen tomorrow morning”.

Israel will conduct an exercise with US forces to test the ability of Arrow, its US-funded missile defence system. The exercise would test whether the system could intercept missiles launched at Israel.

“Israel has made it clear that it will not tolerate the threat of a nuclear Iran. According to Israeli Intelligence they will have the bomb within two years ... Once they have a bomb it will be too late, and Israel will have no choice to strike — with or without America,” an official from the Israeli Defence Ministry said.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6115903.ece

[just b u]

Barak is dismissing the report and saying its false :hmmm

wtf is going on here, i just woke up and cant think lol

[jameznyhc]

Barak is dismissing the report and saying its false :hmmm

wtf is going on here, i just woke up and cant think lol

Im not sure the times of london is a damn legit paper ..but things are not looking good between bibi and Obama ..see this is why i worried about his aipac speech and not backing it up ..this guys thinks he can play both sides of the street .. so the week in review THE FRENCH and ISRAELI govt are very upset with Obama .. VENEZUALA and HAMAAS are loving him right now..OPbam is telling Israel what to do instead of hosting a summit to negotiate i thought we elected Obama to improve relations not inflame them



CAN Israel still call the United States its best international friend? Apparently not, if you believe the tone of the local media.

Watching the drama unfold inside Israel, the increasingly tense dialogue between US President Barack Obama and new Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is taking on all the trappings of a duel.

Almost every day brings news of another sore point between the two countries, a source of yet further inflammation of their once warm relations.

One could be forgiven for thinking that the more immediate threat to Israel's national security lay across the Atlantic rather than from closer to home.

It is bad enough that President Obama uses almost every opportunity he can to set the parameters of a final peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. Now US officials are openly using Israeli anxiety over Iran's fledging nuclear program as a bargaining chip to force Israel's hand on giving up control of the West Bank Palestinian territory.

No less a figure than White House chief-of-staff Rahm Emanuel — whose father fought with the militant Zionist group the Irgun, and whose appointment had provided such reassurance to Israeli officials — was quoted this week laying down the law to Israel.

If Israel wants US help to defuse the Iranian threat, Mr Emanuel was reported to have told Jewish leaders in Washington, then get ready to start evacuating settlements in the West Bank.

Talkback radio blazed with fury across the country the same day, as Israelis protested that no US official had the right to tell them where to live.

Then on Thursday came the news that Mr Netanyahu's planned first meeting with President Obama in Washington next month had been called off.

Mr Netanyahu had hoped to capitalise on his attendance at the annual American Israel Public Affairs Committee conference in Washington to visit the White House.

But Administration officials informed Mr Netanyahu's office that the President would not be "in town".

Washington sources added that the Obama Administration would not be continuing the tradition that had developed during the Bush years of hosting Israeli prime ministers whenever they showed up in town, sometimes with just a phone call's notice.

It might have been no more than coincidence, but yesterday Israeli defence officials told the liberal daily Haaretz that Israel's $US15 billion ($A21 billion) purchase of 75 US-made F-35 Joint Strike Fighter jets was now under review due to "the unexpected high cost and disagreements with the manufacturer".

Contrary to initial expectations, President Obama has wasted no time becoming fully engaged in the Middle East peace process, despite the magnitude of his domestic political agenda. While Mr Netanyahu has refused to endorse a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict agreed to by his predecessor, President Obama has made it abundantly clear that the US will accept nothing less than Israel living side by side with a sovereign Palestinian state.

Mr Obama is also demanding a freeze on Jewish settlement expansion in the West Bank, and has dropped the Bush administration's opposition to Hamas being part of a future Palestinian Authority government.

According to prominent Israeli political commentator Maya Bengal, who writes for the country's second-largest selling newspaper Maariv, the holiday is over.

"As Passover comes to an end, so comes to an end, it seems, the days of grace granted to the Netanyahu Government by the American Administration," says the commentator.

Tel Aviv barman Meir Avraham, 30, says he can feel on the street the tensions being played out between the US and Israel.

"This is one of the the main things that the people are talking about at the moment," says Mr Avraham, who recently returned to Israel after several months in Townsville.

All Israelis, says Mr Avraham, understand the vital nature of the relationship between Israel and the US. "If we lose America, then we are alone," he says. "So we must listen to what America wants. But really I think this is more about the little brother testing the limits of the big brother."

[just b u]

Im not sure the times of london is a damn legit paper ..but things are not looking good between bibi and Obama ..see this is why i worried about his aipac speech and not backing it up ..this guys thinks he can play both sides of the street .. so the week in review THE FRENCH and ISRAELI govt are very upset with Obama .. VENEZUALA and HAMAAS are loving him right now..OPbam is telling Israel what to do instead of hosting a summit to negotiate i thought we elected Obama to improve relations not inflame them



CAN Israel still call the United States its best international friend? Apparently not, if you believe the tone of the local media.

Watching the drama unfold inside Israel, the increasingly tense dialogue between US President Barack Obama and new Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is taking on all the trappings of a duel.

Almost every day brings news of another sore point between the two countries, a source of yet further inflammation of their once warm relations.

One could be forgiven for thinking that the more immediate threat to Israel's national security lay across the Atlantic rather than from closer to home.

It is bad enough that President Obama uses almost every opportunity he can to set the parameters of a final peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. Now US officials are openly using Israeli anxiety over Iran's fledging nuclear program as a bargaining chip to force Israel's hand on giving up control of the West Bank Palestinian territory.

No less a figure than White House chief-of-staff Rahm Emanuel — whose father fought with the militant Zionist group the Irgun, and whose appointment had provided such reassurance to Israeli officials — was quoted this week laying down the law to Israel.

If Israel wants US help to defuse the Iranian threat, Mr Emanuel was reported to have told Jewish leaders in Washington, then get ready to start evacuating settlements in the West Bank.

Talkback radio blazed with fury across the country the same day, as Israelis protested that no US official had the right to tell them where to live.

Then on Thursday came the news that Mr Netanyahu's planned first meeting with President Obama in Washington next month had been called off.

Mr Netanyahu had hoped to capitalise on his attendance at the annual American Israel Public Affairs Committee conference in Washington to visit the White House.

But Administration officials informed Mr Netanyahu's office that the President would not be "in town".

Washington sources added that the Obama Administration would not be continuing the tradition that had developed during the Bush years of hosting Israeli prime ministers whenever they showed up in town, sometimes with just a phone call's notice.

It might have been no more than coincidence, but yesterday Israeli defence officials told the liberal daily Haaretz that Israel's $US15 billion ($A21 billion) purchase of 75 US-made F-35 Joint Strike Fighter jets was now under review due to "the unexpected high cost and disagreements with the manufacturer".

Contrary to initial expectations, President Obama has wasted no time becoming fully engaged in the Middle East peace process, despite the magnitude of his domestic political agenda. While Mr Netanyahu has refused to endorse a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict agreed to by his predecessor, President Obama has made it abundantly clear that the US will accept nothing less than Israel living side by side with a sovereign Palestinian state.

Mr Obama is also demanding a freeze on Jewish settlement expansion in the West Bank, and has dropped the Bush administration's opposition to Hamas being part of a future Palestinian Authority government.

According to prominent Israeli political commentator Maya Bengal, who writes for the country's second-largest selling newspaper Maariv, the holiday is over.

"As Passover comes to an end, so comes to an end, it seems, the days of grace granted to the Netanyahu Government by the American Administration," says the commentator.

Tel Aviv barman Meir Avraham, 30, says he can feel on the street the tensions being played out between the US and Israel.

"This is one of the the main things that the people are talking about at the moment," says Mr Avraham, who recently returned to Israel after several months in Townsville.

All Israelis, says Mr Avraham, understand the vital nature of the relationship between Israel and the US. "If we lose America, then we are alone," he says. "So we must listen to what America wants. But really I think this is more about the little brother testing the limits of the big brother."
Didnt Obama say that he will not force anyone or any country to follow his orders and his views?? so why the hell is he trying to enforce Israel to do just that?

Obama is a fucking prick, going around kissing, bowing, hugging Chavez, Ahmadinejad, Saudi Arabian princes and insulting and evading meetings with his allies. This is horrible. What is this showing these oppressors, the more you oppress and threaten to obliterate others the more you will be rewarded?

I'm at least happy that US is not joing the Durban II conference but that's after strong persuasion from American Jews. Obama is extremely regretful that he has to obstain from that Anti-Semetic Conference. I also just read that Australia and Holland jumped on the protesting Durban II conference, much props and appreciation to them.

and that bolded statement is scary.

I have heard a month ago that many Jews are really afraid taht Obama is nominating Jews to work for him. They said that in the past that's how anti-semitic leaders covered up their real beliefs. hmmmm

[jameznyhc]

Id never in my life thought the FUCKIN FRENCH would be worried bout US appeasement ..
France has been cooing along with everyone else over the arrival of Bo Obama at the White House, but the master of America’s new First Dog is no longer in good odour with President Sarkozy.

Mr Sarkozy is pouring cold water on President Obama’s efforts to recast American leadership on the world stage, depicting them as unoriginal, unsubstantial and overrated. Behind leaks and briefings from the Elysée Palace lies Mr Sarkozy’s irritation at the rock-star welcome that Europe gave Mr Obama on his Europan tour earlier this month.

The American President’s call “to free the world of the menace of a nuclear nightmare” was hot air, Mr Sarkozy’s diplomatic staff told him in a report. “It was rhetoric – not a speech on American security policy but an export model aimed at improving the image of the United States,” they said. Most of Mr Obama’s proposals had already been made by the Bush administration and Washington was dragging its feet on disarmament and treaties against nuclear proliferation, the leaked report said.

Personal pique and French politics are also behind the souring of Mr Sarkozy’s self-promoted honeymoon with the United States. On the personal side, the French President is needled by the adulation for an unproven US leader whose stardom has eclipsed what he sees as his established record as a world troubleshooter. “The President is annoyed by what he sees as the naivety and the herd mentality of the media,” said a journalist who is privy to Elysée thinking.



Sarkozy blasts Obama, Merkel and Barroso
The Times is among the papers to pick up on French president Nicolas Sarkozy's attack on other world leaders.

According to the paper, Sarkozy suggested that "the US president is weak, the Spanish leader is dim, the German chancellor is clinging on to France's coat-tails and the head of the European commission is irrelevant".

Sarkozy is reported to have made the comments at a lunch meeting following a series of recent international summits where he felt that media reports had not reflected that Obama's decision making is "not always up to standard".

The paper claims that France has recently picked various quarrels with Washington, for example by demanding a separate headquarters for a new European defence force, as well as criticising the US president's call for Turkish membership of the EU.

The French leader is also quoted as saying that Angela Merkel had only backed his position at the G20 because she realised Germany had "no other choice" and that commission president José Manuel Barroso had been "totally absent" from the London negotiations earlier this month.

[just b u]

Id never in my life thought the FUCKIN FRENCH would be worried bout US appeasement ..
France has been cooing along with everyone else over the arrival of Bo Obama at the White House, but the master of America’s new First Dog is no longer in good odour with President Sarkozy.

Mr Sarkozy is pouring cold water on President Obama’s efforts to recast American leadership on the world stage, depicting them as unoriginal, unsubstantial and overrated. Behind leaks and briefings from the Elysée Palace lies Mr Sarkozy’s irritation at the rock-star welcome that Europe gave Mr Obama on his Europan tour earlier this month.

The American President’s call “to free the world of the menace of a nuclear nightmare” was hot air, Mr Sarkozy’s diplomatic staff told him in a report. “It was rhetoric – not a speech on American security policy but an export model aimed at improving the image of the United States,” they said. Most of Mr Obama’s proposals had already been made by the Bush administration and Washington was dragging its feet on disarmament and treaties against nuclear proliferation, the leaked report said.

Personal pique and French politics are also behind the souring of Mr Sarkozy’s self-promoted honeymoon with the United States. On the personal side, the French President is needled by the adulation for an unproven US leader whose stardom has eclipsed what he sees as his established record as a world troubleshooter. “The President is annoyed by what he sees as the naivety and the herd mentality of the media,” said a journalist who is privy to Elysée thinking.



Sarkozy blasts Obama, Merkel and Barroso
The Times is among the papers to pick up on French president Nicolas Sarkozy's attack on other world leaders.

According to the paper, Sarkozy suggested that "the US president is weak, the Spanish leader is dim, the German chancellor is clinging on to France's coat-tails and the head of the European commission is irrelevant".

Sarkozy is reported to have made the comments at a lunch meeting following a series of recent international summits where he felt that media reports had not reflected that Obama's decision making is "not always up to standard".

The paper claims that France has recently picked various quarrels with Washington, for example by demanding a separate headquarters for a new European defence force, as well as criticising the US president's call for Turkish membership of the EU.

The French leader is also quoted as saying that Angela Merkel had only backed his position at the G20 because she realised Germany had "no other choice" and that commission president José Manuel Barroso had been "totally absent" from the London negotiations earlier this month.
i do have a question, why are the Europeans against letting Turkey becoming a member of EU?? is it because of the ongoing massacring of the Kurds by the Turks??

[sadelb]

lol everything is Obama's fault huh James.

[Bekim...]

come on now obama did have a seder in the white house

[Bekim...]

lol everything is Obama's fault huh James.

of course it is, everything was bushes fault, everything was clintons fault etc etc

[jameznyhc]

lol everything is Obama's fault huh James.

im saying he needs to work with people not dictate them what to do .. and you cant say one thing and do another .. see people hated bush .. but you allways knew where he stood cause he was principled .. I never hear Obama really promote the great things of this country .. So i dont know where his core principles are .. i know he believes in goverment more than the people .. that worrys me .. I see him ordering this surge in afghanistan..but when bush was waging war in the ME it was his core principles leading him .. I worry about how obama was so ready to throw the polish under the Bus for Russia'.. i know for a fact that would never have happened with bush or reagan lmao .. I never heard him cricize anyone except us everytime he leaves the country ..

But here my Question .. Will Obama stick to his foreign polcy promises as he sold himself to the jewish people cause bro his speech to aipac and message to isralis was NOTHING GONNA CHANGE between us .. his speech sounded like goerge bush ..

Or will he have misled our allies .. the way he lied to us with his 12 broken lied campaign promises .. this is when it gets serious

do we Aipac Obama?? I STILL DONT KNOW and neither do you .. and nobody in this forum does

[TrippinFace101]

Ill believe it when it happens :agree. Talk is cheap

[jameznyhc]

of course it is, everything was bushes fault, everything was clintons fault etc etc

but beck i supported Clinton bombing of iraq ..and beck if you listen to Clinton speech after he bombed Iraq it was fuckin great lol .. i wish fuckin bush spoke and communicated the danger of Sadaam hussein as well as Clinton did .. what a great speech that was ..

let me tell clinton tried dman hard and arafat fucked him on oslo but Clinton worked his ass off on that deal .. and Clinton was no pussy bro he knew how to fuckin deal with leaders .. i mean he didnt give a fuck he bombed iraq in secret .. the chinese and russians were fuckin flippin out .. he didnt give a fuck! .. .. but dude he didnt even go to the security council ,, bush went 6 times .. you wanna know why Clinton knew the russians and chinese would do to him what they did to Bush

Clinton put americas security first he knew russia and china would say no and he secretly did it along with another great leader tony blair .. Clinton was no joke when dealing with enemies .. an you too know where he stood when it came to Americas security

[jameznyhc]

Bill clinton was a moderate and a hardcore believer in capitalism & free markets .. he was the first democratic president to say no more big goverment ..he passed welfare reform .. Clinton was no fuckin socialist left wing radical like this schmuck who knows zero nothing about the economy ..

[metfan85]

Bill clinton was a moderate and a hardcore believer in capitalism & free markets .. he was the first democratic president to say no more big goverment ..he passed welfare reform .. Clinton was no fuckin socialist left wing radical like this schmuck who knows zero nothing about the economy ..

huh?

goverment grew under Clinton as did the national debt.

and what is tough about a man sitting in a fancy office ordering the deaths of hundreds of thousands overseas as well as domestically?

I have an infinite more respect for a much tougher people. A people whose lives were made many times worse and actually had to endure hardship not get flown around in billion dollar jet, and those are the US troops, Iraqi people, the Serbian people and everyone else who died because of him.

that's tough.

[jameznyhc]

huh?

goverment grew under Clinton as did the national debt.

and what is tough about a man sitting in a fancy office ordering the deaths of hundreds of thousands overseas as well as domestically?

I have an infinite more respect for a much tougher people. A people whose lives were made many times worse and actually had to endure hardship not get flown around in billion dollar jet, and those are the US troops, Iraqi people, the Serbian people and everyone else who died because of him.

that's tough.

my point about his goverment it was a big step towards the center vs carter, johnson, and the left wing.. as for the looney left they hated Clinton

as for tough meaning he didnt let our enemies influence his decisions on national security ..

[metfan85]

Carter was probaly one of the most conservative president we've had in decades. A true believer in TS Eliot's "permanent things." He was also the one who got Paul Volcker to increase interest rates and wash out the malinvestments of the 60s and 70s.

And what enemies do we have? America is not Israel they have different interests than us. Iran can not touch us and never will. You think Venezuala is a threat? That'4 crazy. Russia and China combined spend 10% of what we do on defense, if we weren't around the world thumping our chest shoving American liberal/neo-conservative exceptionalism down everyone's throat, defending the parasite state Israel at all costs, we would have no enemies.

Why have we forgotten our motto that kept us out of war? Malica towards none and goodwill towards all.

[jameznyhc]

[QUOTE]Carter was probaly one of the most conservative president we've had in decades. A true believer in TS Eliot's "permanent things." He was also the one who got Paul Volcker to increase interest rates and wash out the malinvestments of the 60s and 70s.

and carter also forced bank to lend money to lowi income high risk ..the CRA was the paveway for subprime mess .. i dont see anything conservtive about the feds forcing banks to do that ..secondly your right interest rates were at the highest levels this country ever saw and nobody bought homes ... he left office with 10 perscent unemployment ..now you mst be in favor of Obamas tax plan cause its nothing vs Carters .. if you were wealthy under Carter 70% of your income was gone .. and you could not buy gasoline ..As anti israel as carter was ..we has americans held hostage and the middle east refused to give us oil .. except for Sadaam




And what enemies do we have? America is not Israel they have different interests than us. Iran can not touch us and never will. You think Venezuala is a threat? That'4 crazy. Russia and China combined spend 10% of what we do on defense, if we weren't around the world thumping our chest shoving American liberal/neo-conservative exceptionalism down everyone's throat, defending the parasite state Israel at all costs, we would have no enemies.

china and russia may spend 10% of what we do .. but they still forced us to go war by not enforcing resolurtion 1442 and arming Sadaam .. they promised him we wouldnt attack .. Is venezu
ala a threat? ..not yet ..the only people chavez is hurting is his own people ..id hate to see our Country empower man who destroys people, robs their wealth and promotes the downfall of america and the free arkets ..



Why have we forgotten our motto that kept us out of war? Malica towards none and goodwill towards all.

we showed goodwill to afghan vs russia ... we got fucked

we showed good will towards muslims in bosnia .. they knocked our towers down 2 years later

we showed goodwill with oslo ..yet hezbollah and hamas still murdered americans abroad

we were helping somalia ..our men were murderd dragged thru the streets

we liberated kuwait from sadaam , shai and kurd from sadaam, women from taliban... see they dont mind when sadaam externminates muslims .. only when a christain does . . the world has heart attack .. where was muslim outrage when sadaam murderd hundreds of thousands? haha gimmie a break brro ..they didnt give 2 fucks



we freed eastern europe ..spare me the anti us bullshit .. even when you sacrifice and help we still hated

[Gspot555]

And what enemies do we have? America is not Israel they have different interests than us. Iran can not touch us and never will. You think Venezuala is a threat? That'4 crazy. Russia and China combined spend 10% of what we do on defense, if we weren't around the world thumping our chest shoving American liberal/neo-conservative exceptionalism down everyone's throat, defending the parasite state Israel at all costs, we would have no enemies.

Why have we forgotten our motto that kept us out of war? Malica towards none and goodwill towards all.

Well said, i agree with all this

Enough of the policing and fear mongering

[jameznyhc]

Well said, i agree with all this

Enough of the policing and fear mongering

what fear mongering? the 17 ataacks bush prevented? or the right wing that Obama decides are terrorists??

..every dictator is popping champaign corks ..so now we will see if you and alex are right

the only people were policing now is israel lol ..we aint sayin shit to hamas .. lets see if attitudes change .. if you and alex believe that your insane

oh wait im Sorry Obama wants hamas included in talks .. no changing their position on destroying israel .. thats great policy

[Gspot555]

what fear mongering? the 17 ataacks bush prevented? or the right wing that Obama decides are terrorists??

..every dictator is popping champaign corks ..so now we will see if you and alex are right

the only people were policing now is israel lol ..we aint sayin shit to hamas .. lets see if attitudes change .. if you and alex believe that your insane

oh wait im Sorry Obama wants hamas included in talks .. no changing their position on destroying israel .. thats great policy

i want our troops back here, i want every right wing nut (cheney, rove) to stop saying we are setting ourselves up for another attack...that is where the fear mongering is coming from...

lets get the troops back here and rebuild this country and pay attention to our own problems FIRST.

Jamez a terrorist attack can happen at any time, our troops all over the world will not help that, in fact it is hurting us.

I dont think any of that is insane

[jameznyhc]

[QUOTE]i want our troops back here, i want every right wing nut (cheney, rove) to stop saying we are setting ourselves up for another attack...that is where the fear mongering is coming from...

but cheneys policy prevented 17 attacks correct? and now we wont enforce that ..yet were starting to expand afghanistan .. Obama clearly stated during the campaign he would send more troops than McCain there was one issue he didnt lie about.. so if Cheney/bush prevented 17 attacks here why focus on right wingers?



lets get the troops back here and rebuild this country and pay attention to our own problems FIRST.

no doubt .. why did he lie for 2 years about ending the iraq war? now were gonna have troops there his entire first term.. he should be held accountable but he wont .. see people hated bush or else people would be flipping the fuck out about this broken promise .. they wont .. where is every idiot who screamed at for years in this forum outrage about obama flip flop? .. dude do you get that yet? .. they never cared about our soldiers .. or there would be mass protests against this fraud ..

I agree afghanistan is no longer a threat nor have they been since 2001 when we accomplished our goals .. so why start another surge? .. we did our job we overthrew the taliban, shut al qaeda training camps, and they had elections .. i dont view them as a threat this is a policing issue .. so whjy not work with sarkozy like bush did ? and get nato to offer troops .. again whats the goal of this surge


Jamez a terrorist attack can happen at any time, our troops all over the world will not help that, in fact it is hurting us.

thats correct so why not keep bush/cheney prevention tactics in place here at home? the only reason why sheik khalid spilled his guts and we prevented a huge terror attack was waterboarding.. he never would have given that info otherwise .. so thats what cheney meant


I dont think any of that is insane

what i said was if you believe this new policy of appeasing our enemies, telling israel what to do, making hamas legit by recognizing them, will make the world love us your crazy .. but we will see .. now we have a pro pa;lestine policy where israel is being told to give land to people who want to destroy them .. lets see if anything changes

[jameznyhc]

Gino one other thing .. are you happy italy was liberated in ww2 ?? did the italians become anti american? ..i ask cause i never met a russian jew or pole who did not love Reagan .. whats the sense in harming relations with poland when they offered troops in afghanistan? then we sell them out to Russia??..what did Russia do they made Obamas sneaky backhanded offer public at laughed at him

Poland was outraged, now were pissing off Netanyahu, and Sarkozy .. in favor of appeasing people that are going to hate us anyway..please explain

the french and polsh spilled blood and died fighting OUR war in afghanistan .. Israel saved America by bombing Sadaamss nukes in 1981 .. why is this better than the Bush Doctrine?