Please lets not appease any terrorist this Easter Day!

“Terror and violence” are “the legitimate hopes and aspirations of the Palestinian people.”

Says it all!

Have I missed something? Is this new or has Cheney been riding the Pali bandwagon for a while and I was just too depressed to notice?

BIG CHOCOLATE BUNNY IS RIPPING US OFF!

Someone must have put some Cool Aid in the DC water system.

“Achieving that vision will require tremendous effort at the negotiating table and painful concessions on both sides,” said Cheney, whose stop in Ramallah came just two months after President Bush’s trip to the West Bank.

What do the Jordyptians concede, pray tell?

Some useless document they'll sign condemning terrorism, promises to fight it, blah,blah,blah, that they'll break in less time than it takes the ink to dry. And who holds them accountable ? Themselves, terrific. I didn't need this on Easter, Mr. Cheney, thanks for that.

Ah, the illness progresses. Is it now a given that every President in their waning days will "bring peace to the Middle East" by forcing the Israelis and the Palis to make "painful concessions"?

/And what they mean by "painful concessions" is that the Israelis give up everything while the Palis advance.

re: #3 infidelia

The VP may just be following the instructions of POTUS. I have no idea where Cheney's true opinions of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are.

This must be a ploy by the administration to appear more centrist during the election year.

Pretty pathetic, if you ask me.

This is an issue where one should never grovel.

Dhimmi-style behavior in high office is never good. Or even decent-looking. Kaffir version of kitman or taquiya appears unlikely to be at work in this case.

Nothing that hadn't been said or done before. More terrorist appeasement from the Bush administration. Expect more money to be given to PA as humanitarian aid to buy rockets to fire at Israel.

I bet that by "painful concessions” by Israel the PALS mean the Jews will blow themselves up with their own nukes and save them the trouble of "freedom fighting".

It's official,I no longer believe ANYTHING these panderers say, including the Israeli ones.

Wait, I thought according to the left, Cheney was the bloodthirsty mogul pulling Bush's strings...

re: #7 mitthrawnurdo

Is it now a given that every President in their waning days will "bring peace to the Middle East"

It's their attempt to cement their "legacy" as a great president.

They're jealous that Jimmy Carter got the Nobel Peace Prize for palling around with Sadat and Begin. Hey -- if Jimmy can get a peace prize, why not me?

Sort of like a version of Presidential Alheimer's. Every 8 years or so, we go through the same stages of PEPA (Presidential End-of-Term Palestinian Alzheimer's): disorientation, forgetting the past, followed by complete dementia.

“It also will require a determination to keep those who are committed to violence and who refuse to accept the basic right of the other side to exist,” Cheney said.

To keep them what? In positions of authority in the P.A.?

I think vis a vis the Palestinians, Israel is satisfied that the situation is livable and could be worse. The main frontline enemy of the Israelis is divided into separate nations through civil war. Gaza and the West Bank are essentially East and west Palestine. I think this represents a suitable option among the ones which offer themselves.

There is no victory. There is only management of the threat, or defeat. I think the game is called TIME. Push it along, year after year. With each passing year the Israeli economy grows stronger, as 'Palestine' devolves into a deeper mess. How different is this from our management of the Cold War?

With each passing year the Palestinians' actual claim to the land of Israel grows weaker, rather than stronger. Already, only some (I think) 3 to 5 percent of living Palestinians ever actually lived in what is now Israel.

I once heard an Israeli say 'The opposite of bad is not always good. Sometimes the opposite of bad is worse.'

re: #14 zombie

It's their attempt to cement their "legacy" as a great president.

They're jealous that Jimmy Carter got the Nobel Peace Prize for palling around with Sadat and Begin. Hey -- if Jimmy can get a peace prize, why not me?

Sort of like a version of Presidential Alheimer's. Every 8 years or so, we go through the same stages of PEPA (Presidential End-of-Term Palestinian Alzheimer's): disorientation, forgetting the past, followed by complete dementia.

especially if Jimmy can get it without actually accomplishing anything...

re: #7 mitthrawnurdo

Painful concessions - see my post at #11.

Did Cheney at least invite Abbas to go bird hunting after?

re: #16 Luigi

Already, only some (I think) 3 to 5 percent of living Palestinians ever actually lived in what is now Israel.

But they still have the keys!

/s

re: #17 Hengineer

especially if Jimmy can get it without actually accomplishing anything...

Sure he accomplished something. He committed the US to a treaty which forces us to provide billions of dollars in foreign aid to Egypt year after year for eternity, for absolutely no purpose.

And to think that some of us used be regularly attacked on this site for pointing out that Bush and Company weren't exactly the warriors against terrorism which many used believe.
It's always the same shit...one standard for the US when it comes to fighting terrorism and another standard for Israel.

Anyone know if Mary Cheney is working for the Saudis?

re: #14 zombie

I believe your diagnosis is correct. Hopefully a cure for PEPA will be found before something irreversible happens.

What did you expect, for Cheney to stand up and say "US policy on the PLO was completely and utterly wrong for the past 15 years, they aren't peace partners but a bunch of murderers"?

I'm sure Cheney knows what the bloggers know and much more. But politics is politics. They'd rather let all Israelis die before aknowledging policy faults.

re: #17 Hengineer

You're onto something there. In medicine it's referred to as paliative care. Cannot cure it, just keep it in comfortable check for as long as possible.

The "Palestinian national aspiration" remains a Judenrein Middle East. It's in the Hamas charter, for those who bother to read it (especially Article Seven where they quote the hadith regarding the day of judgment, and Article Eleven where they describe all of Palestine as waqf for Muslims to reconquer).

Hamas is their elected government.

I'm guessing that the Israelis and "Palestinians" will meet at the negotiating table again one day. The only issue to resolve is what each side might concede.

Israel has everything to offer.

The "Palestinians" have nothing to offer - but there will surely be demands.

re: #21 zombie

Sure he accomplished something. He committed the US to a treaty which forces us to provide billions of dollars in foreign aid to Egypt year after year for eternity, for absolutely no purpose.

Oh yea that's right, reminds me of Gray Davis (who destroyed California's economy for years to come).....

What is it about Democrats and destroying economies by forcing the state/nation into fixed payments outside of the state/nation?

“It also will require a determination to keep those who are committed to violence and who refuse to accept the basic right of the other side to exist,” Cheney said.

Moral equivalence at it's worst. Who on the Israeli side is committed to violence and refuses to accept the basic right of the other side to exist?

Who on the Palestinian side doesn't accept violence and does accept the basic right of Israel to exist either as a State or just as importantly, a Jewish State?

The poor Hateastinians, why do they look to Great Satan's 1 & 2 for all their needs? Why don't Jordan, Egypt, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Kuwait and Marin County, CA help them out? With all that oil money every 'stinian could be living in a four-bedroom three bath, plasma TV house in no time.

Then again, I'm just a Typical Whitey.

I've never understood why we in the West are so intent on projecting the Palestinian "people" as a bunch of peace-loving pacifists hijacked by a few violent terrorists. These are people who dance in the streets and hand out candy over terrorist attacks on Israelis and Americans. Maybe if we and the Europeans stop indulging their pathetic whining and didn't throw money at them every time they complain about some imaginary blockade or "humanitarian crisis" they'd start acting like civilized human beings. But no, in their sick world it actually pays to be a murderous Islamic wacko.

re: #30 Sol Roth

The poor Hateastinians, why do they look to Great Satan's 1 & 2 for all their needs? Why don't Jordan, Egypt, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Kuwait and Marin County, CA help them out? With all that oil money every 'stinian could be living in a four-bedroom three bath, plasma TV house in no time.

Then again, I'm just a Typical Whitey.

Aren't you supposed to be apologetic for those years and years of white estrablishment power?

How moderate is he?

Abbas did not rule out resuming the armed conflict against Israel, according to the Jordanian newspaper al-Dustur. In the interview, Abbas boasted that he had fired the PLO's first shot in 1965; and that the Palestine Liberation Organization, of which he was a leader, had taught terror groups around the world, including Hizballah, how to fight.

What was that word taqya?

re: #31 Diamond Bullet

I've never understood why we in the West are so intent on projecting the Palestinian "people" as a bunch of peace-loving pacifists hijacked by a few violent terrorists. These are people who dance in the streets and hand out candy over terrorist attacks on Israelis and Americans. Maybe if we and the Europeans stop indulging their pathetic whining and didn't throw money at them every time they complain about some imaginary blockade or "humanitarian crisis" they'd start acting like civilized human beings. But no, in their sick world it actually pays to be a murderous Islamic wacko.

These are the people whose kids watch a cartoon mickey mouse talk about killing the Jews and espousing hatred and bloodshed.

re: #30 Sol Roth

The poor Hateastinians, why do they look to Great Satan's 1 & 2 for all their needs? Why don't Jordan, Egypt, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Kuwait and Marin County, CA help them out? With all that oil money every 'stinian could be living in a four-bedroom three bath, plasma TV house in no time.

Then again, I'm just a Typical Whitey.

Answer: If those countries fixed the problem by helping their own (which they could do easily and cheaply), Israel would still exist. So that doesn't solve the "common" problem. Their collective contempt for the "Palestinians" isn't as strong as their collective hate for the Israelis.

Let's not forget that it was the Bush administration which promoted the election which lead to Hamas controlling the government.
Let's also not forget that it was the Bush administration which promoted the phony "road map to peace".
Finally, let's not forget that it was the Bush administration which made the establishment of a Palestinian State the official policy of the US Government.

Trying to end the "Middle East Crisis" is like the myth of Tantalus. They all think it's right within their reach but it's not and it never has been.

"The Middle East Crisis" will basically end when the Arabs get over having Jews in their 'hood and Israel crushes the Palestinian Death Cult once and for all.

I thought Bush said we were either "for the terrorists,or against them",or something like that. I'd like to hear the president explain how bending over and grabbing the ankles is fighting terrorists. If there is still any doubt that our country is screwed no matter who is president,this ought to remove that doubt. This administration is promoting the very policy that will guarantee WAR in the Middle East,not peace. This administration,and all of CONGRESS, is promoting PEACE WITH TERRORISTS at the expense of the free nation of Israel. That is a sellout of a true ally of the United States if I've ever seen one. But watching Congress sell out free people isn't anything new (think "illegal alien").

re: #35 rwmofo

Answer: If those countries fixed the problem by helping their own (which they could do easily and cheaply), Israel would still exist. So that doesn't solve the "common" problem. Their collective contempt for the "Palestinians" isn't as strong as their collective hate for the Israelis.

Oh they are only using the Israelis as a scapegoat. Focus on the common enemy and people forget the piss-poor conditions that their own dictator forces them to live in.

This carries no authority. 9 months left in this presidency. Lame duck indeed. I'm tired of looking this duck in the bill.

Good luck President McCain.

re: #4 MandyManners

BIGHOLLOW CHOCOLATE BUNNY IS RIPPING US OFF!

That's a better descriptor.

Olmerde is prepared to make maximo concessions that will be painful for religious Jews and Zionists and everyone who reverences Jerusalem, but not at all painful for the "yefe nefesh" who inhabit the upscale cafes and boutiques of Ramat Aviv.

The only concessions the Palestinians are prepared to make are the ones that cause the most pain for the Jews!

The policy is consistent. The folks of this administration believe they can negotiate, then change the hearts and minds of Islam. Silly thinkers.

re: #36 MJ

Let's also not forget that it was the Bush administration which promoted the phony "road map to peace".

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert on Sunday ordered the defense establishment to completely stop the infiltrations into Israel from Sinai, saying the infiltrators must be stopped even before they reach Israeli territory.
Olmert demanded greater activity from all government ministries in dealing with the phenomenon. "It is a tsunami that is likely to get bigger," he said. "We must take all possible steps in order to stop it."

Tsunami Road.

re: #32 Hengineer

Aren't you supposed to be apologetic for those years and years of white estrablishment power?

I will vote for Comrade Obama and atone for my typical whiteyness.

Stick it to da Man!

re: #35 rwmofo

Answer: If those countries fixed the problem by helping their own (which they could do easily and cheaply), Israel would still exist. So that doesn't solve the "common" problem. Their collective contempt for the "Palestinians" isn't as strong as their collective hate for the Israelis.

Given that Islam is used as a political doctrine to subdue and control the population, it serves these tyrannical regimes to have both, a) an external enemy; The Jews, and b) a grievance theater in the Hateastinians to illustrate the evil of that external enemy to their subjects. IMHO, this is why we see the status quo maintained.

That and the fact that 7 million Israelis are prepared to destroy any nation that threatens its existence or die trying.

Once Islam is decoupled from politics then we may see a solution to this conflict.

Abbas, the nominal head of the "moderate" terrorists, is a guy who has not even admitted that a Jewish state exists in the Middle East. And he never will, because his goal is to end the existence of the Jewish state, in accordance with the PLO's 1974 phased plan for annihilating Israel, so he finds it advantageous to not even admit that there is a Jewish state there.

This is for propaganda purposes. If there isn't any Jewish state, then murdering it cannot happen; and if it actually does, then it is deniable.

For that matter, Obama's mentor, Jeremiah Wright, also doesn't admit that there is a Jewish state in the Middle East. He uses scare quotes to write about the "state" of Israel, putting "state" in quotation marks to show that he does not admit that it is a state (let alone a Jewish state).

"I used to be against terrorists before I was for them".

John Kerry Bush

"“It also will require a determination to keep those who are committed to violence and who refuse to accept the basic right of the other side to exist,” Cheney said."

Something's missing there, and the statement makes no sense. Of course, appeasing killers makes no sense anyway.

No sense.

No...

This notion of 'legacy' is a bad one. The presidency is not about leaving a 'legacy' it is about leading the country and doing the right thing for Americans and our allies. A 'legacy' of squashing terrorists is the best one I can think of.

This mistake is made, and this sin committed, with every administration. It matters not a whit whether it be Republican or Democrat... all fall into the same trap. It is a spiritual issue, a spiritual problem, and the 'solution' is being attempted in a non-spiritual fashion.

NO president will ever do what is right toward Israel. Even Israel will not do what is right toward Israel.

Jerusalem is the burdensome stone, and anyone who messes around with it is cut to pieces. Israel is God's property; divide the Land at your peril!

Also, call me a cynic, but I truly believe nobody in Washington is sincere about a resolution of the mideast nightmare. They all just mutter along and muddle along.

re: #36 MJ

Let's not forget that it was the Bush administration which promoted the election which lead to Hamas controlling the government.

Well, they've got the government they deserve now, haven't they? And, one must admit, that politically divided as they are, they have to spend some of their efforts on internecine conflict now, which has to be a good thing, from Israel's standpoint.

Let's also not forget that it was the Bush administration which promoted the phony "road map to peace".

The "road map" came before the elections, as I recall. What's really new here, though, is that despite the outcome of the elections shattering any such illusion, there's still a pretense that there's someone with power to conclude an agreement who wants peace with Israel, and will abide by it.

Finally, let's not forget that it was the Bush administration which made the establishment of a Palestinian State the official policy of the US Government.

Likewise, the longstanding U.S. policy has been to always give the Palis one more chance to fail to achieve a "two state solution".

re: #52 M. Murcek

Also, call me a cynic, but I truly believe nobody in Washington is sincere about a resolution of the mideast nightmare. They all just mutter along and muddle along.

I wouldn't say that.
Jimmy Carter was very sincere about his desire to destroy Israel.

James Baker is also sincere about destroying Israel.

re: #39 WayDownSouthInBama

I thought Bush said we were either "for the terrorists,or against them"....

Well he said a lot of things, including how pro-Israel he is. His actions have never matched those speeches.

1. Bush visited Israel only once, 3 months ago, at the end of his term.

2. He visited Jordan, Egypt and Qatar in 2003 and Jordan again in 2006.

3. First president to call for the existence of a "Palestinian" state, despite Sharon's reservations. Carter didn't even do that.

4. Bush has yet to acknowledge Jerusalem as the capitol of Israel even after the Congress did.

5. Influencing Sharon to abandon the West Bank settlements.

6. Encouraging Hamas elections.

7. Putting in European monitors at the Philadelphi corridor despite Israel's objections.

8. Acceptance of Baker's Iraqi Study Group report calling for a 2 state solution, returning the Golan Heights to Syria, and pulling back to the 1967 borders.

9. Warning Sharon not to attack the Arabs after they attacked Israel.

10. Recent visits between Condi and Abbas and now this delcaration by Cheney.

I think history will show that Bush was never really pro-Israel.

Dishonest nonsense from Dick Cheney. It is sad.

re: #51 cookielady

NO president will ever do what is right toward Israel. Even Israel will not do what is right toward Israel.

Not true. Nixon was Israel's greatest friend and ally. And yet we now know he was an anti-Semite, but he did the right thing where Israel is concerned. In fact, I wager to say that Israel would not be there today if it wasn't for Nixon.

There are people with Israel's best interests at heart both here and in Israel, because those interests are the same interests of America and the world. If McCain continues on with the Bush/Israel agenda, he won't be one of them.

“Terror and violence do not merely kill innocent civilians, they also kill the legitimate hopes and aspirations of the Palestinian people,” Cheney said.

Someone ask Cheney about the "hopes and aspirations" of the Israeli people who are being bombed DAILY by a bunch of terrorists that the world pretends wants peace. For instance,here is PHASE 1 of the Road Map for War (I'll be damned if I lie and call "for peace". I'm not a blind fool.) :

Phase I (as early as May 2003): End to Palestinian violence; Palestinian political reform; Israeli withdrawal and freeze on settlement expansion; Palestinian elections.

Am I the only one who has noticed that it is the Israeli's who are expected to keep their word on the Road Map for War while the terrorists just keep on killing Israeli's while the U.S. Congress,and the world,sticks it's head up it's ass?

'Pologies if anyone else posted this and I am getting to it a bit late, but... Fitna the Movie a big joke? If so, we all know whom it's on!

Oh, and Happy Easter, Gentiles!

re: #42 saberry0530

This one's solid.

re: #57 marjoriemoon

Please note that I did not say that no president ever HAD done right by Israel. I said no one WILL. It's the times.

A spiritual situation, not a political one, is driving the times.

RAMALLAH, West Bank - A Mideast peace agreement will require “painful concessions” by Israelis and Palestinians...

How many more "painful concessions" will Israelis have to make, 'fercryinoutloud!?
With all due respect, Mr.Cheney...what are you guys thinking?
Do you honestly believe the Failestinian dogs will cease their barking and nipping at the heels of Israel, if the Jews just give in "just a little bit more"?
And I have yet to see the Failestinians make any "painful" concession of their own.

re: #61 cookielady

Please note that I did not say that no president ever HAD done right by Israel. I said no one WILL. It's the times.

A spiritual situation, not a political one, is driving the times.

Well I don't agree we can say never. We don't know what the future holds despite how bleak it looks.

However spiritual the situation is, and has been since Moses lead the Jews into Israel some 3500 years ago, it has also been political. It was then, too. Jerusalem had been sacked 11 times prior to the 1st century CE, all by warring political factions wanting to control the land.

Charles should have included one more sentence in the article:

In their meeting, Abbas asked Cheney to help stop Israeli settlement expansion and military operations targeting militants, said Saeb Erekat, an Abbas aide.

Yeah,here's a guy who wants peace. Stop killing our "militants". Now if he really WANTED peace,he would be killing the militants himself,and SUPPORTING anyone else who was killing them as well. The very fact he wants the terrorists protected shows me what he wants,and it ain't peace. AAAAARRRRRRGGGGG! HOW CAN THE WORLD COMMUNITY BE SUCH IDIOTS?

Iran would like nothing better than to use renewed Palestinian/Israeli hostilities as a pretext to kick off the fight we all know is coming while making our side look like the aggressors. This would tie our hands diplomatically and force the US and Israel into another game of Whack-A-Mole, at least until a Democrat is elected in November, and held to an irresponsible promise to extricate us from the region.

Yeah, we all know the Palis are lying through what's left of their teeth, and the Israelis hate being the only guys negotiating in good faith, but as long as both sides are "officially" in the midst of a hudna

Now, let us imagine what that gullible fool, Obama, will do.

re: #66 pat

gah, unthinkable.

Damn HTML

Anyway, as long as the Palis/Israel are in a "peace process," Iran would have no choice but to become the undeniable aggressors, and give us a blank check to kick their asses.

In an election year with the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan being unpopular with the electorate, it is best to keep Iran at bay until we are beyond the ability of the American electorate to retaliate foolishly and elect a Democrat who may be held to promises to withdraw from the region.

re: #1 coquimbojoe

Please lets not appease any terrorist this Easter Day!

Too late. The Bush Administration already made its mark.

I had such high hopes for this administration. Now I wonder what will they do next to make me lose what respect for them that I have left.

I think a eight-year old boy losing his leg, eight yeshiva boys being gunned down in cold blood, three kidnapped soldiers whose whereabouts are still unknown are painful enough concessions, fuck you very much.

re: #66 pat

Now, let us imagine what that gullible fool, Obama, will do.

No NO a thousand times NOOOOOO!

re: #73 LEGION

The mind boggles.

Now if we could only get President McCain to stop buying the global warming lies and drill in Anwar, ect. ect. That would be mind boggling!

"Painful concessions’ for peace." - by Israel only - is similar to an outrage that was once explained by Tex Antoine, a local NYC weatherman:

He quipped, "If rape is inevitable, lay back and enjoy it."

It was the immediate end to Tex Antoine' career.

The various politicians and leaders who want Israel to enjoy it are "statesman".

Cheney..... Calls for End to Terror

Well he was just at a meeting with his Saudi overlords. An "end to terror" would begin with telling them where to shove their blood-soaked oil.

Though that meeting should've occurred on september 12, 2001.

Those Administration whispers to end terror never seem to be as loud as their shouts to send more and more US tax Dollars to terrorists who murder Jews.

The terror doesn't end even as the money flow increases.

Someone might even see a cause and effect.

I hope Macain Cleans house of all these disgusting dhimmi arabist saudi Schills

Cheney: `Painful concessions’ for peace.

Well, let's look at this:

Israel's Painful Concessions:

-Sucking up murder and mutilation of their people.
-Giving up stragtegic depth.
-Supplying their would be murderers with food, fuel, health care, jobs, and territory.

The Arabs ('palestinians') Painful Concessions:

-Giving up murdering and mutilating Israelis, at least in large numbers, or for a little while.
-Gaining perhaps less territory that they have no legal or moral right to than they want to.
-Accepting food, fuel, health care and jobs from the Israelis.

Yup. Painful concessions will be required from both sides, alright.

'After meeting with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Cheney stressed the U.S. commitment to the creation of an independent Palestinian state, saying it was “long overdue.”'

I support driving the Muslims out of Israel (including Gaza and the West Bank) because it doesn't belong to them, and because the so-called Palestinians have murdered Americans (and other westerners) in their attempts to retain political control over lands that don't belong to them.

We will never have peace with the Muslim conquerer, any more than there was ever peace in Spain until, after centuries of warfare, Muslim rule was destroyed and the Muslims expelled.

re: #80 pegcity

I hope Macain Cleans house of all these disgusting dhimmi arabist saudi Schills

I wouldn't count on any President doing that.
However, a strong-willed President can ignore State.
A President with experience in foreign affairs is more likely to ignore the ( Saudi influenced ) advice given by State. For example, Reagan and Nixon, both strong-willed Presidents, knew what they wanted and ignored State. McCain knows the score and knows where he stands.
Conversely, a weak and inexperienced President tends to embrace both State the those incompetent morons at the CIA. Witness Kennedy and Carter.
Obama will be weaker and have less experience than any modern President should he be elected.

The only way Israel will have peace with the Palestinians is when the Palestinians ability and will to fight is destroyed. Only then will Israel enjoy Peace with the Palestinians.

re: #79 opinionated

Those Administration whispers to end terror never seem to be as loud as their shouts to send more and more US tax Dollars to terrorists who murder Jews.

Not only US sending military help to palis, but Russia and EU do it as we, with a nod from Olmert and Co.

Having palis with guns would give IDF a better justification for a stronger campaign, when right time comes up, so this may not neccesary be a bad thing.

re: #42 saberry0530

I remember when I was a kid and FIRST saw the chocolate bunny! Being a chocoholic, my eyes lit up and I eagerly forked out the cash to buy one.

When I got home and tore open the box, my teeth and mind were all set to get a mouthful of the addictive concoction as I bit off the ears. Instead, all I got was a thin veneer of chocolate and air!

With a broken heart and deep disappointment, I vowed NEVER AGAIN to fall into the trap of the BIG HOLLOW CHOCOLATE BUNNY ripoff!

re: #5 Pvt Bin Jammin

Someone must have put some Cool Aid in the DC water system.

LSD, actually. I believe they started it in about 1965.

Ohhh and...... let's give them a state!

End the addiction for oil
and come up with an alternative source of energy from our OPEC friends
and the Arab-Israeli conflict will end overnight.

Period

re: #87 wolfie

LSD, actually. I believe they started it in about 1965.

I remember that! Also remember the CIA using LSD while interrogating people to see what kind of info they could get (other than "the walls are melting", and people jumping out windows thinking they could fly)

re: #89 Earth56

End the addiction for oil
and come up with an alternative source of energy from our OPEC friends
and the Arab-Israeli conflict will end overnight.

Period

I do believe our alternative source of OPEC oil lies in ANWAR, but saying that, does anyone think we will ever get up the balls to go get it and to hell with all the LLL envirowhackos that whine every time the subject is brought up.

I know what USED to happen to whining kids but nowdays it means jailtime.

re: #23 Twilight

I believe your diagnosis is correct. Hopefully a cure for PEPA will be found before something irreversible happens.

I'm no medical expert, but I believe the disease has no true cure. All we can do is hope for remissions.

I think this just some political BS he says for the cameras. Remember, he's been in DC for 40-something years, he's a master at the art of BS.

re: #92 wolfie

I'm no medical expert, but I believe the disease has no true cure. All we can do is hope for remissions change.

re: #50 daledog

This notion of 'legacy' is a bad one. The presidency is not about leaving a 'legacy' it is about leading the country and doing the right thing for Americans and our allies. A 'legacy' of squashing terrorists is the best one I can think of.

Yes. You would think that being a lame duck would free you from having to worry too much about public opinion. You'd have the chance to do some things that are RIGHT, w/o caring what the MSM and "enlightened" elites make of it.
Odd.....sad....maddening.

re: #37 lazypadawan

Trying to end the "Middle East Crisis" is like the myth of Tantalus. They all think it's right within their reach but it's not and it never has been.

"The Middle East Crisis" will basically end when the Arabs get over having Jews in their 'hood and Israel crushes the Palestinian Death Cult once and for all.

All of this has happened before
And will happen again...again...again...again...again...again...ag ain...again....

/The First Hybrid

A Mideast peace agreement will require “painful concessions” by Israelis and Palestinians who must work together to defeat those “committed to violence,” Vice President Dick Cheney said Sunday.

The Israelis made their "painful concession" when they forcibly removed their own people from Gaza.

It's the "Palestinians'" turn.

re: #90 Gumby

I remember that! Also remember the CIA using LSD while interrogating people to see what kind of info they could get (other than "the walls are melting", and people jumping out windows thinking they could fly)

Yep. Oh my. Some people reading what you said will think you phrased that improperly....you know, "the CIA using LSD." No, my lizards, it's not a gaffe.
Of course, when we were young and naive, we did assume that in these little experiments the acid was given to the people being interrogated. Now that we are older and wiser about all things governmental, we realize it is indeed the agents who are dropping it.

re: #83 MJ

I wouldn't count on any President doing that.
However, a strong-willed President can ignore State.
A President with experience in foreign affairs is more likely to ignore the ( Saudi influenced ) advice given by State. For example, Reagan and Nixon, both strong-willed Presidents, knew what they wanted and ignored State. McCain knows the score and knows where he stands.
Conversely, a weak and inexperienced President tends to embrace both State the those incompetent morons at the CIA. Witness Kennedy and Carter.
Obama will be weaker and have less experience than any modern President should he be elected.

I'd count Nixon really as the only president who was so strong willed. Reagan was similar to W on the issue. Verbally supporting Israel, given their shared religious views, but not so much on the ground.

I posted this on another thread, but here's some of Reagan's policy. [Link: web.israelinsider.com...]

Reagan's greatest substantive contribution to the U.S.-Israel relationship was the formalization of strategic cooperation, which created a web of ties between the Pentagon and IDF and a progressive strengthening of Israel's military capability. At the same time, however, he also significantly strengthened the Arabs by selling them some of America's most sophisticated weapons. In 1981, Reagan successfully overcame the Israeli lobby's opposition to his proposed sale of AWACS radar planes to Saudi Arabia. This was a watershed event because the lobby never mounted a significant challenge to an arms sale again. The AWACs campaign was also notable for its nastiness. It was cast as Reagan versus Israeli Prime Minister Begin, and the President did not hide his distaste for the Israeli leader.

Also in 1981, Israel bombed the Iraqi reactor at Osirak. Reagan was furious and the U.S. supported the UN Security Council resolution condemning Israel....

re: #85 Winston Y. Smith

Not only US sending military help to palis, but Russia and EU do it as we, with a nod from Olmert and Co.

Having palis with guns would give IDF a better justification for a stronger campaign, when right time comes up, so this may not neccesary be a bad thing.

Olmert doesn't nod, he twitches from the hot poker up his ass.

Interesting theory you have, the enemy should be armed and trained [bu us] because it wouldn't be fair to defeat terrorists who are not heavily armed and skilled.

Seems crazy to me but crazy does explain this administration. On the other hand, Saudi whores explains this administration better.

With all this in mind, I'd like to call on my fellow lizards to confirm the authenticity of this photo (and to note with irony the story it's correlated to), which is NYTimes thus inherently untrustworthy: [Link: www.nytimes.com...]

So, any input's welcome!

Cheney knows better. They all know better. Yet another administration decides to equivocate, obfuscate, and string along the status quo indefinitely. They just don't want to deal with it.

Given that there will never be a functional Palestinian state, or a peace process, what is the solution? How to settle it? Anybody?

There will never be peace without Victory.
Accept no substitutes.

re: #101 emorykid10

With all this in mind, I'd like to call on my fellow lizards to confirm the authenticity of this photo (and to note with irony the story it's correlated to), which is NYTimes thus inherently untrustworthy: [Link: www.nytimes.com...]

So, any input's welcome!

WOW.

If it's real you have to wonder what alternative they gave this poor woman who must be atoning for some "honor" trespass.

re: #16 Luigi

I think vis a vis the Palestinians, Israel is satisfied that the situation is livable and could be worse. The main frontline enemy of the Israelis is divided into separate nations through civil war. Gaza and the West Bank are essentially East and west Palestine. I think this represents a suitable option among the ones which offer themselves.

There is no victory. There is only management of the threat, or defeat. I think the game is called TIME. Push it along, year after year. With each passing year the Israeli economy grows stronger, as 'Palestine' devolves into a deeper mess. How different is this from our management of the Cold War?

With each passing year the Palestinians' actual claim to the land of Israel grows weaker, rather than stronger. Already, only some (I think) 3 to 5 percent of living Palestinians ever actually lived in what is now Israel.

I once heard an Israeli say 'The opposite of bad is not always good. Sometimes the opposite of bad is worse.'

Good point. The idea of the "management of the threat" is the only possible reason that I can give for not smashing the Palestinians during the next rocket attack. Some problems cannot be solved. Maybe this is one of them. It's kind of like trying to prevent traffic accidents. One does what one can, but they will never be completely eliminated.

On the other hand, why should I--as an American taxpayer--pay additional funds to keep these creeps alive? I would like to cut the Palestinians off the American teat. Let the EUropeans pay for them, for a change.

Hi Promethea. Just happened to be cruising here and saw your thoughtful response.

obviously somebody put something in his drink. that's NOT dick cheney.

re: #102 Wm T Sherman

Cheney knows better. They all know better. Yet another administration decides to equivocate, obfuscate, and string along the status quo indefinitely. They just don't want to deal with it.

Given that there will never be a functional Palestinian state, or a peace process, what is the solution? How to settle it? Anybody?

Well, I vote for the William Tecumseh Sherman solution.

What has giving land ever gotten Israel?

re: #99 marjoriemoon

I'd also have to include LBJ in that category. In June 1967, he apparently told Brezhnev that if he didn't get his Arab "friends" back on their side of their respective borders pronto, Cairo, and possibly Moscow, would soon look like Hiroshima, or words to that effect. In his case, though, I suspect it was personal wounded pride, stemming from the fact that in 1956, as senior Senator on the Armed Services Committee, LBJ had been one of those who advised Ike not to support Great Britain and France in retaking Suez from the UAR. It seems he expected Nasser to return the favor and not go to war against Israel while he (LBJ) was POTUS. If he'd bothered to study the history of Islam, I suspect he wouldn't have made such a fundamental error.

As for the "painful concessions" both sides are expected to make, in the end it will boil down to this;

Israel will be expected to agree to die.

The Palestinians will be expected to continue trying to destroy Israel.

The Palestinians will say, "Yes!", the Israelis will say "Are you nuts? Not only 'No', but, 'Hell No!'".....

And when the talks fall through, Israel will get blamed.

There is a steadfast belief in this nation's elite circles, irrespective of party, that any problem can be negotiated. Our leaders would rather believe that they can talk any problem out of existence by the "We're Both Sane Men" (WBSM) method. Born of the Cold War, this method was credited with avoiding a full nuclear exchange. And maybe it did. What it did not do was solve the problem, namely the determination of the USSR to conquer the world. It took direct confrontation to do that.

And during that period, while WBSM was more-or-less succeeding at the "macro" level, it was failing miserably at the "local" level. Panmunjom, the Paris Peace Talks, and repeated attempts to broker MidEast peace all failed to greater or lesser degree because WBSM only works if both sides actually are fundamentally sane. WBSM failed miserably at Munich in 1938 for precisely the same reason- the failure to recognize that the adversary was not sane, by any definition of the word.

The same holds true in the MidEast today. We are repeatedly trying to apply a cherished theory of diplomacy to a situation in which its primary requirement is totally absent on one side, due to an eschatological belief system which rejects reality on an everyday basis. You'd have a better chance of negotiating realistically with someone who believes that the Galactic Empire is real, and destined to rule the Universe, and that they are in fact Emperor Palpatine. It sounds funny put that way, I know, but would it be so funny if someone in such a state had millions of armed followers and possible access to WMDs?

I don't know what the answer to the "Palestinian question" is. But after seeing this particular approach fail repeatedly since I was in diapers, I am reasonably certain that this isn't it.

cheers

eon

re: #100 opinionated

Interesting theory you have, the enemy should be armed and trained [bu us] because it wouldn't be fair to defeat terrorists who are not heavily armed and skilled.

I have not said it should not be fair. It is certainly fair to defeat them by any means. However when they are armed it can be better justified, and therefore better to achieve from practical point of view. Both as a deterrence from Euro-defeatists economical pressure, but also as show of strength to some vigilant neighbors who smell weakness.

re: #110 eon

Well said!

Just a thought exercise, but what would happen if Israel declared that the Palestine people had no "right to exist" and devoted all their energies towards that goal? Would the world conveniently ignore it like they do the Palestine goal?

re: #108 cookielady

Well, I vote for the William Tecumseh Sherman solution.

it's a solution that works.

I agree with zombie.

The give them a “country” crap is Political Correctness on a famous holiday.

Palatine is made up of a group of pirates, killers and con-men whose only skill is killing (and to live off of hand-outs from other people).

None of them could hold an honest job for long. If they could they would have been re-absorbed by Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and other countries.

They are useful peons of various Arab countries who what to wage a proxy war against Israel and the USA.

It’s time we stop giving them any more money and that goes for the violence instigators in the region (Syria, Egypt, Iran, and so on). In fact, we should be putting the heat on said countries for spreading terrorism via their expansionist policies.

Sadly, the whole stinking region needs to be cleaned up. But, that will take years and many wars.

re: #116 ploome hineni

Arabs accounted for 12 percent of all drivers in Israel, but were involved in 16 percent of the accidents and in 30 percent of all fatal accidents.

12% and 16% is not significant difference. More accidents with arabs as they drive older cars. They all drive like idiots out there, hence the traffic stats worst in developed world. (One doesn't want to compare with the third world). The cause: corrupt driving instructors trade union and corrupt driving license departments.

I'd count Nixon really as the only president who wre: #99 marjoriemoon

as so strong willed. Reagan was similar to W on the issue. Verbally supporting Israel, given their shared religious views, but not so much on the ground.

I posted this on another thread, but here's some of Reagan's policy. [Link: web.israelinsider.com...]

Reagan's greatest substantive contribution to the U.S.-Israel relationship was the formalization of strategic cooperation, which created a web of ties between the Pentagon and IDF and a progressive strengthening of Israel's military capability. At the same time, however, he also significantly strengthened the Arabs by selling them some of America's most sophisticated weapons. In 1981, Reagan successfully overcame the Israeli lobby's opposition to his proposed sale of AWACS radar planes to Saudi Arabia. This was a watershed event because the lobby never mounted a significant challenge to an arms sale again. The AWACs campaign was also notable for its nastiness. It was cast as Reagan versus Israeli Prime Minister Begin, and the President did not hide his distaste for the Israeli leader.

Also in 1981, Israel bombed the Iraqi reactor at Osirak. Reagan was furious and the U.S. supported the UN Security Council resolution condemning Israel....

Actually, I was thinking more about Reagan's policy vis-a-vis the USSR than about Israel. State was horrified with Reagan's stance toward the USSR.

As for Reagan's policy toward Israel, I agree with the comments via Israel Insider. Reagan too often has gotten a pass. He was dead wrong on the Iraqi nuclear reactor. He was dead wrong on the AWAC's. He buckled under that Jew-hater Caspar Weinberger regarding Pollard. He was wrong in pulling the troops out of Lebanon.
He was also dead wrong in pressuring Israel to release hundreds of prisoners in exchange for the hostages on flight TWA 847.

As for Nixon, he couldn't stand Sec. of State Rogers. The so-called "Rogers plan" went nowhere. Nixon saw Israel as a strategic ally-part of the West- in the struggle against communism.

re: #110 eon

I'd also have to include LBJ in that category. In June 1967, he apparently told Brezhnev that if he didn't get his Arab "friends" back on their side of their respective borders pronto, Cairo, and possibly Moscow, would soon look like Hiroshima, or words to that effect. In his case, though, I suspect it was personal wounded pride, stemming from the fact that in 1956, as senior Senator on the Armed Services Committee, LBJ had been one of those who advised Ike not to support Great Britain and France in retaking Suez from the UAR. It seems he expected Nasser to return the favor and not go to war against Israel while he (LBJ) was POTUS. If he'd bothered to study the history of Islam, I suspect he wouldn't have made such a fundamental error.

As for the "painful concessions" both sides are expected to make, in the end it will boil down to this;

Israel will be expected to agree to die.

The Palestinians will be expected to continue trying to destroy Israel.

The Palestinians will say, "Yes!", the Israelis will say "Are you nuts? Not only 'No', but, 'Hell No!'".....

And when the talks fall through, Israel will get blamed.

There is a steadfast belief in this nation's elite circles, irrespective of party, that any problem can be negotiated. Our leaders would rather believe that they can talk any problem out of existence by the "We're Both Sane Men" (WBSM) method. Born of the Cold War, this method was credited with avoiding a full nuclear exchange. And maybe it did. What it did not do was solve the problem, namely the determination of the USSR to conquer the world. It took direct confrontation to do that.

And during that period, while WBSM was more-or-less succeeding at the "macro" level, it was failing miserably at the "local" level. Panmunjom, the Paris Peace Talks, and repeated attempts to broker MidEast peace all failed to greater or lesser degree because WBSM only works if both sides actually are fundamentally sane. WBSM failed miserably at Munich in 1938 for precisely the same reason- the failure to recognize that the adversary was not sane, by any definition of the word.

The same holds true in the MidEast today. We are repeatedly trying to apply a cherished theory of diplomacy to a situation in which its primary requirement is totally absent on one side, due to an eschatological belief system which rejects reality on an everyday basis. You'd have a better chance of negotiating realistically with someone who believes that the Galactic Empire is real, and destined to rule the Universe, and that they are in fact Emperor Palpatine. It sounds funny put that way, I know, but would it be so funny if someone in such a state had millions of armed followers and possible access to WMDs?

I don't know what the answer to the "Palestinian question" is. But after seeing this particular approach fail repeatedly since I was in diapers, I am reasonably certain that this isn't it.

cheers

eon

eon-
You might like both of these interviews with Kenneth Levin-author of the Oslo Syndrome. The first is from a couple of years ago when his book came out:
[Link: www.frontpagemag.com...]

Here's a more recent interview from last week:
FP: I want to talk to you today about how the Oslo Syndrome infects the West overall. But let’s first begin by you telling us what the Oslo Syndrome is itself.

Levin: The Oslo Syndrome, taking Israel’s Oslo agreements with Yasir Arafat and his PLO as a model, refers to the inclination of some within populations under chronic attack to take to heart the indictments of their attackers, however hateful or absurd, and to insist, despite all evidence to the contrary, that sufficient concessions and self-reform will appease the attackers and end the threat....
[Link: www.frontpagemag.com...]

Hallelujah...

Ah hell - wrong thread. Mea culpa.

I have yet to read a newspaper report that that did not go out of its way to qualify Abbas as "moderate." The following six words come to mind: "Methinks thou dost protest too much."

I am wondering, has any other person in the history of journalism ever been repeatedly qualified when mentioned? Actually, now that I think of it, James Brown, the hard working man in show business, and just about every WWE wrestler (i.e. the superfly, jimmy snooka; stone cold, steve austin).

It should be funny, but the fact that it is continuing after all these years makes it so tragic.

Cheney is an idiot. Asking for peace with rabid dogs, is futile.

re: #115 ploome hineni

what a thoughtful and well written post

/why are you cheerful?

Thank you :-)

As to why I'm cheerful, it goes back to something Col. Jeff Cooper once said;

When your enemy openly declares himself, you can enter into battle with a light heart.

It's not like the Islamists in general, or the PLO in particular, have ever been secretive about their nihilistic dreams. The only problem is, so far the majority of the world outside of Israel and certain other groups of realists (like Lizards) have ever comprehended the basic fact that it really doesn't matter if a given groups' goals are realistic, or even physically possible. All that matters is whether or not they believe they can accomplish them.

There was no logical reason for Napoleon Bonaparte' to invade Egypt, Spain, or Russia. But he believed he could win, his advisors agreed, and they ended up losing most of the French Army, plus the war that up to then, they'd been winning in walkovers. His grandson Napoleon III had no reason to believe that he could take on both Prussia and Austria-Hungary and succeed; he did anyway, and would have gotten clobbered even if his generals had handled the French Army competently, which they manifestly did not. One observer put it this way (regarding the French Army's habit of marching their troops back and forth across country instead of sending them by rail, and never delivering supplies to the troops where they would be needed);

The French General Staff seems to regard this war as simply an excuse for huge military parades, and to regard France herself as merely a vast parade-ground.
-Dr. Richard J. Gatling, 1870

And of course there was that little exhibition of hubris called "Operation Barbarossa" that a certain Austrian Corporal turned politician put on in 1941-43.

In each case, any rational expert would have said that the aggressor(s) were out of their minds to try what they did. Well, that didn't stop them- they did it anyway. In each case, something made them believe that, in spite of all evidence to the contrary, they would triumph. In Bonaparte and his grandson's cases, it was their belief in their "imperial destiny". In You Know Who's case, it was his belief in "Aryan superiority".

And in the Islamists' case, it's their belief that their God will not allow them to lose.

Up against that sort of belief, it's pretty much useless to try to use reason. If you contradict the ideology, you will be at best ignored, or at worst considered to be trying to undermine the belief-system. Either way, don't expect an impartial hearing.

The real problem, of course, is convincing the "rationalists" on our side that it doesn't matter that the adversary's plans are bizarrely out of touch with reality.

All that matters to the adversary is that they are convinced that they are right and that they will win because they deserve to.

Our biggest problem, in the near term, will be to "break the paradigm" of the "We're Both Sane Men" mindset, and finally get it through our "leaders'" heads that they are not dealing with "rational actors", but with mystically-motivated "visionaries" who firmly believe that their
dogma will inevitably trump reality.

And that to achieve true, lasting peace, they have to break that paradigm as well.

cheers

eon

re: #120 MJ

Thank you very much! I've bookmarked both of those.

/new computer, already getting loaded up with bookmarks. :-)

cheers

eon

re: #110 eon

I don't know what the answer to the "Palestinian question" is. But after seeing this particular approach fail repeatedly since I was in diapers, I am reasonably certain that this isn't it.

Transfer.

There is no other long term solution, except genocide in self defense.

re: #128 Maine's Michael

Transfer.

There is no other long term solution, except genocide in self defense.

Perhaps poorly worded. There are no other solutions that will stop the point of the arab spear which is the 'palestinian nation' from continously attempting to spear Israel in the heart.

As genocide is unspeakable, short of self defense in extremis, TRANFER is the only solution that will adress that problem.

As to whether TRANSFER is politically doable, the answer is not yet.

When, I do not not know, but probably some time after europe starts forcibly expelling its muslim population.

Probably within our lifetimes, but not tomorrow.

Cheney & Bush are Drek.

Gog and Magog will be the end game. It's the same prattle and fight since Amelek took out the stragglers.

Divine intervention is the only thing which will ever end this once and for all....and we can see that the sides are being chosen. Ask Bush and Cheney.

re: #55 marjoriemoon

re: #39 WayDownSouthInBama

I thought Bush said we were either "for the terrorists,or against them"....

Well he said a lot of things, including how pro-Israel he is. His actions have never matched those speeches.

1. Bush visited Israel only once, 3 months ago, at the end of his term.

2. He visited Jordan, Egypt and Qatar in 2003 and Jordan again in 2006.

3. First president to call for the existence of a "Palestinian" state, despite Sharon's reservations. Carter didn't even do that.

4. Bush has yet to acknowledge Jerusalem as the capitol of Israel even after the Congress did.

5. Influencing Sharon to abandon the West Bank settlements.

6. Encouraging Hamas elections.

7. Putting in European monitors at the Philadelphi corridor despite Israel's objections.

8. Acceptance of Baker's Iraqi Study Group report calling for a 2 state solution, returning the Golan Heights to Syria, and pulling back to the 1967 borders.

9. Warning Sharon not to attack the Arabs after they attacked Israel.

10. Recent visits between Condi and Abbas and now this delcaration by Cheney.

I think history will show that Bush was never really pro-Israel.

Excellent post.

In re: your point #3 above: The "right wing" blogosphere and talk radio world basically gave GWB a free pass when he called for a two-state solution, whereas they would likely have crucified Clinton (or, God-forbid, Obama or Clinton II) for doing the same.

What's worse, related to your point #.4 above: If I am not mistaken, it was GWB who CAMPAIGNED (during his first White House run) to GET the US embassy moved to Jerusalem. As you so indicate, Congress gave him the authorization to do just that, but he has yet to do it.

I wonder if anyone in authority or in policy-making positions in either the White House or at the Dept of State ever reads threads like these on lgf?

If they did they would see the loathing and disgust that they are generating with PEOPLE WHO FOR THE MOST PART HAVE SUPPORTED THEM with their spineless "appease-the-Palis-at-any-cost" policies.

Abbas is a fraud. He does not control anything outside of his compound.

His Fatah Murder Group continues under his leadership and encouragement.

He continues to bamboozle both the Israeli and American governments.