man, i'm liking Dubya more and more every day. and i'm a freaking liberal!

"you bet, we'll defend israel" - well, you cant get any clearer than that.

Posted by: archduke at February 1, 2006 2:29 PM

That's the way I like my politicians; All stuff, no fluff! Go Dubya!

Posted by: ShortBoard Surfer at February 1, 2006 2:45 PM

Robert,

What you're seeing there is the difference between an Englishman and a Texan. You see, Bush is from Midland, and if you've ever been there you know that if you keep your mouth open too long, your tongue gets a thick coating of sand. Therefore, people out there quickly learn to make their points short and sweet.

Posted by: Big G In TX at February 1, 2006 2:45 PM

OK, fine. Let's make it official. How about a formal treaty alliance between Israel and the US which states that an attack upon one State is an attack upon the other State and will thus automatically be met by all available military options.

Further, it is time, or rather, way past time, for Israel to be included in NATO. If Turkey is a member, then there is no reason to exclude Israel.

Posted by: MJ at February 1, 2006 2:48 PM

as far as i know, there are moves in the European right wing to make Israel a NATO member. Even the extreme far right Vlaam Blok in Belgium have gone all "pro Israel" and are in favour of it.

(the crazy thing is Vlams Blok have a background in neo-Nazism - such is the upside-down-world turmoil of European politics right now. there is a serious re-alignment going on, in response to the rise of Islamism)

Posted by: archduke at February 1, 2006 2:53 PM

Something about carrying a big stick. Churchill was eloquent, as fit the times. Times now, message is clear.

Posted by: GodfreyBouillon at February 1, 2006 2:59 PM

archduke

Yes, there are some moves afoot to have Israel formally become a member of NATO:

Is Israel headed for NATO?

There are increasing signs that NATO is interested in upgrading relations with Israel
Uzi Arad

Italian Defense Minister Antonio Martino recently announced that in his opinion, the time has come to include Israel in NATO as a regular member, and he intends to raise the issue at the meeting of NATO defense ministers next week.

Martino emphasized further that any future aggression against Israel would be considered an act of aggression against all the NATO states,
and such recognition would undoubtedly contribute to the stability in the region.

The idea itself is not new. It has been considered for some time by diplomatic and security circles in Europe and the United States, mainly with regard to the status of “partnership” in NATO—in other words, without the collective defense guarantee that accompanies full membership.

More here:

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3209438,00.html

However, for it to become a reality, the US needs to be behind it and so far there doesn't seem to much US interest.

Posted by: MJ at February 1, 2006 3:03 PM

I'm no fan of GWB, but no complaints on this statement by him. In the war against jihad, we must all be united, Americans and Canadians and Europeans and Asians, Christians and Jews and Buddhists and atheists. They've said repeatedly that it's them or us; we should start to listen to them.

Putting rhetoric to the test, does this mean that the "Roadmap to Peace" is officially dead?

Posted by: special_guest at February 1, 2006 3:07 PM

"That's not exactly....Still, it will have to do for now."

I'm starting to wonder if this site isn't becoming more extreme by the day! Can you not give any credit where credit is due? Posted by: Constantinople

Constantinople....here is a part of the speech:

No one can deny the success of freedom, but some men rage and fight against it. And one of the main sources of reaction and opposition is radical Islam – the perversion by a few of a noble faith into an ideology of terror and death. Said President Bush

The ''rule of law'' in Islam:

Mass Murder..............009.005 033.061

Mass Rape of non-Muslim women.....033.052

That includes all females in your family Constantinop... mothers wives and daughters - less they be Muslims

Beheadings........................047.004

Crucifixions......................005.033

Robbery...........................008.041

Telling lies to non-muslims.......003.028

Cutting off hands and feet........005.033

Treason...........................008.067

SO says the 'allah' of the Koran

Two Questions:

How does ANYONE call those teachings 'Peace'?

What should we expect for the future if those teachings are aloud to have free reign among the young?

Posted by: Beth at February 1, 2006 3:08 PM

It's not fighting on the beaches, streets, and whatnot, but "You bet, we'll defend Israel" is unambiguous and fits on a tee shirt.

Posted by: Beagle at February 1, 2006 3:13 PM

Paraphrasing ... "A conservative is a liberal that has been mugged"

As special_guest said we must all stand together. This applies to liberals and conservatives also. I feel that the artistic community (Cartoonists) were mugged by Islam, and are now "taking to the streets" throughout all of Europe. You can only push these free spirits so much.

Posted by: ShortBoard Surfer at February 1, 2006 3:20 PM

In related news, "Justin" Raimondo's head just exploded.

Posted by: igor at February 1, 2006 3:24 PM

Are you more concerned with Bush's intent or his oratory? Word-wise, Churchill was a hard act to follow. But what were Eisenhower's words in the moment, when it counted?

"OK. We'll go". (June 6, 1944)

Still gives me chills.

"You bet, we'll defend Israel" says it all.

Posted by: Mr. Phillips at February 1, 2006 3:26 PM

How about "Let's Roll"?

Posted by: ShortBoard Surfer at February 1, 2006 3:32 PM

From above: "credit ... where credit is due..."

Indeed -- give it time -- give it time...! I'm happy to hear this latest rhetoric from the President ... "America is addicted to oil which is often imported from unstable parts of the world"...

Some here seem to forget that US rhetoric, and especially Presidential Rhetoric sometimes appears glacial, and seems ton only morph and change in geological timeframes... But it can lend a certain gravitas to the message... And like another large mass of ice, the iceburg, there's often more there than meets the eye...

Sometimes less is more... Understatement can be very powerful, despite how much we yearn for more dramatic and sensational commentaries regarding Islam and their cancerous Jihad... (I am one of those!)

Nevertheless, in issues that really matter, in matters of WAR and PEACE, I'd say 'talk softly and carry a big stick' fits the bill just fine... Especially when the Muslim maniacs are all sharpening their hate filled rhetoric, amping up the volume and showing their true colors... our rhetoric must become even more subdued, and less grandiose... In fact, my intuition tells me that the more subdued we become, the more we'll convince them that they can throttle up on the hate speech -- the more they'll be convinced that we're afraid -- the more we'll hear and see the true face of the triumphalist evil face of Islam...

Talking about glaciers, or geologic timeframes for that matter, the recent and repeated accusation that "radical Islam" is the cause of global terrorism is also a great development... Not the whole enchilada, not as sensational as it might be, and still those dependent irritating clauses about "perverters of a great religion" and all the other delusional icing...

Anyway,I like the trend of Presidential rhetoric, even if it's been a long time coming! The trajectory is away from ROP and towards war with the true infidels -- the Muslims...

Posted by: jsla at February 1, 2006 3:37 PM

"How about Let's Roll?"

ha ha..

written by the same people that also wrote:
"Hello Mum, this is Todd Beamer"

Posted by: archduke at February 1, 2006 3:40 PM

Constantinople SAID

That's not exactly....Still, it will have to do for now."
Jesus Christ!! I'm starting to wonder if this site isn't becoming more extreme by the day! Can you not give any credit where

YOU'RE MAKING FUN OF MY BELIEFS AND YOU ARE EXTREME I DEMAND AN APOLOGY AND MONETARY COMPENSATION AND HAM AND EGGS AND A NEW CAR AND - AND - AND...

Posted by: Report at February 1, 2006 3:47 PM

I think the response is okay, but definitely not great. I think that was Robert's point. If Iran was threatening let's say the UK or even Canada for that matter, if asked if America would defend it, Bush wouldn't have responded with a "Yeah, sure", it would have included a lengthy speech that touched on the common culture of each country and their tradition of standing up to tyranny. I'm not saying defending Israel merits a lengthy speech, but it definitely deserves something better than this. It is a part of the West afterall and they are on the frontlines of the jihad. Bush could have atleast thanked them for Osirak. What's so "extreme" about that?

Posted by: igor at February 1, 2006 4:04 PM

"You bet"

It’s better than

"A statement on that may be issued at a later time after a careful and thoughtful analysis of geo-political and cultural ramifications of such an action. Rest assured we will be working closely with all interested parties in the region in case such a situation may arise”

"You bet"
I'll take that over a nuanced non-statement every time. (You betcha)

Posted by: Mr Ape Pig at February 1, 2006 4:06 PM

igor said "I'm not saying defending Israel merits a lengthy speech..."

Why not have a lengthy speech? Our national policy towards Israel has been schizophrenic at best for decades. Yes, this comment was pro-Israel, but tomorrow he may again invoke the "right" of the poor downtrodden "Palestinians" to have their own "nation". Why not have a lengthy coherent speech that says "okay, we were wrong, Israel has been unjustly attacked and vilified since its creation. Israel is our friend and ally, she has the right to exist, and we will defend her to the end, period."? No equivocation, no "buts", no conditions.

I think it's reasonable to ask for this speech from this President, but for now "yeah, sure" will have to do.

Posted by: special_guest at February 1, 2006 4:21 PM

We might not have to defend Israel. I remember seeing a news clipon TV where an Israeli spokesman was asked "How far would Israel go to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons?", and the spokesman without missing a beat said "Oh, about 1200 kilometers."!

Posted by: Bohemond_1069 at February 1, 2006 4:27 PM

Among politicians, the habit of saying a lot is more often an excuse to equivocate, or to just spout off a bunch of lofty, substance-free rhetoric (though usually without with a Howard Dean-style "Yeaaaaagghh!" at the end).

One can think of countless news interviews where it is frustratingly impossible to get a politician on record with a simple yes-or-no answer.

In that light, Bush's answer is rather refreshing.

Posted by: Shinoliite at February 1, 2006 4:34 PM

I'm hard on Bush too, but give the guy a break!
Not only was he clear, there's no way, even if
he were an avid JW reader, that he could say
(yet!) that Islam is the menace it is. It is up to
us to make it clear at every level what we think about "Islam".

There are enough legitimate things to complain
about with respect to President Bush that this
whine is over the top.

Robert, lay off the Tuborg and Danish vodka. No one
likes a depressing drunk!

Posted by: American at February 1, 2006 4:45 PM

Bohemond:

Courtesy of Judeoscope blogsite -- you are referencing an item that originiated in The Economist:

From the Economist:

Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, says Israel is an alien implantation whose people should return to Europe or perhaps settle in Alaska. So it is an irony that Israel's president, Moshe Katzav, is in fact a Farsi-speaker born in Iran. Ditto Israel's defence minister, Shaul Mofaz, who is doubtless preoccupied nowadays with how to destroy Iran's nuclear programme. He is advised by Dan Halutz, Israel's former air-force commander and now chief of staff. Lieut-General Halutz was born in Israel, both his parents in Iran. They seem to have taught him a sense of humour. Asked how far Israel would go to stop Iran's nuclear programme, he replied: “two thousand kilometres”.

I don't know, statistically, how many Jewish Israelis are expat Iranians or the children of, but they sure are well represented in the higher ranks of Israeli government and society. Perhaps MADmood aMADinejad should be asked to comment on this given his assertion that European nations should pony up land for a Jewish state by the Iranian media (but I won't hold my breathe waiting).

Posted by: waterdragon52 at February 1, 2006 4:51 PM

"Why not have a lengthy speech?"
-asked special_guest

Because I don't want to feed into the antisemites who already think that the Jews control America. And Israel is a young country and its historical relationship with America does not have the same signficance as say England's relationship with America. I am only pointing out that if it was the UK in Israel's shoes then that they would merit a lengthy speech. Israel, maybe not, but it certainly deserves better than what it got. As much as I don't like it, America has to act like an fair arbitrator between Israel and the "Palestinians", so for political reasons, they cannot condemn the "Palestinians" outright. Just a few lines about how Israel is our ally (as opposed to our fake allies like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Pakistan) and thanking them for Osirak would have been more than enough.

Posted by: igor at February 1, 2006 5:16 PM

G.W. answered the question. He gave the right answer, an answer that gives me hope. I can't speak for Robert, the longer answer is not only an affirmation but a commitment An eloquent statement of how far we'll go to stop you and we'll never be broken. The "You bet, we'll defend Israel" answer would carry the same weight as the longer answer if I felt GW understood Islam.

If we cure the infection or actually treat the wound rather than just applying band aids, "You bet, we'll defend Israel" would carry much more weight.

I'll take it, I'm not complaining. I'll take it.

Posted by: Wretched Simpleton at February 1, 2006 5:41 PM

waterdragon said:"I don't know, statistically, how many Jewish Israelis are expat Iranians or the children of, but they sure are well represented in the higher ranks of Israeli government and society. Perhaps MADmood aMADinejad should be asked to comment on this given his assertion that European nations should pony up land for a Jewish state by the Iranian media"

well, lets start with the israeli defense minister...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaul_Mofaz

"Born in Teheran (Iran), Mofaz immigrated to Israel with his parents in 1957"

and the current Israeli president

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moshe_Katsav
"Moshe Katsav was born in Yazd, Iran. He moved with his family to Tehran when he was an infant; in August 1951, they emigrated to Israel."

not to mention the Persian Jewish community - who have lived in Iran for around 2,700 years:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_Jews

Posted by: archduke at February 1, 2006 6:05 PM

"Not only was he clear, there's no way, even if
he were an avid JW reader, that he could say
(yet!) that Islam is the menace it is. "

i agree American.
any U.S. president who did that would immediately lose any sort of inside knowledge from collaborators on the Muslim side who see bin Laden as a threat - such as Musharrif , and indeed, the Saudi Royal Family. Not to mention the countless Iraqi sympathisers that hate Al Zaqwari and Al Qaeda , and who help and support the U.S.forces in Iraq.

intell is everything in this war. we can deal with the Saudis and Musharraf later on.

Dubya has the thumbs up from me. He struck the right balance.

and quite frankly, i'm still reeling from the "oil addiction" quote. never in a million years did i think an oilman like Bush would ever say something like that. I'm liking the guy more and more everyday (and that's coming from a European who normally supports the Democrats)

Posted by: archduke at February 1, 2006 6:12 PM

debka reporting 4 kassam rockets fired out of Gaza..1 or 2 injured..in Sderot

Posted by: hammerhead at February 1, 2006 7:16 PM

"Tehran has successfully procured two types of equipment, the Hot Isostatic Press and the Hot Press, to shape enriched uranium as part of nuclear weapons production at the “Materials and Energy Research Centre” (Pazhuheshgah-e Mavad va Enerzhi), she said.

Both machines are banned items, she added.

Belgian security chief resigns over Iran nuke parts sale
Wed. 01 Feb 2006
Iran Focus

London, Feb. 01 – The head of the Belgian federal security service (VS) was forced to resign after it emerged that his force oversaw sales of machines related to nuclear weapons production to Iran.

Belgian press reported on Tuesday that Justice Minister Laurette Onkelinx and Interior Minister Patrick Dewael jointly announced that VS chief Koen Dassen had submitted his letter of resignation.

The resignation came after talks between Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt and his deputy prime ministers Onkelinx and Dewael, the daily 'De Standaard' reported on Tuesday.

A report presented by Committee I to the Belgian Senate on Tuesday noted that in November 2004 an Isostatic Press machine was supplied by the Temse-based firm Epsi to Iran.

The export breached international regulations which forbid the sale of nuclear-related goods to Iran.
more..
http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=5588

Posted by: hammerhead at February 1, 2006 7:30 PM

Bush is no paper tiger, he means what he says... for those who think going into Iraq was a mistake, perhaps if they stalled and given UN more oil for millions deal to Saddam, Iran would of bombed Israel already. islamofacists do know Bush backs up what he says, they are problably a little confused with the Democratic party and leftist media giving off misleading information. Iranian prez knows the Europeanwiennies are just talk and is testing the waters. maybe was scared of madame clinton's remarks on Iran last week.

Posted by: Lulu at February 1, 2006 7:45 PM

If Bush spoke eloquently, would it matter? Even when the President is right on the money, all the sudden it's about HOW he said it. Sad.

Posted by: kevin at February 1, 2006 7:54 PM

"That's not exactly....Still, it will have to do for now."

Jesus Christ!! I'm starting to wonder if this site isn't becoming more extreme by the day! Can you not give any credit where credit is due? Just to say what everyone already knows - that we'll defend Israel - is a strong enough statement.

Except of course that of late... the US demanded the 'road map' and demanded the 'vision' for peace, and demanded the surrender of Gush Katif, and demanded the 'Quartet' and poor Israel, has been railroaded to go along with the appeasers in Europe who'se legacy was to have homicided 1/2 the jews of Europe, and sucked up to arab oil and to hell with jews and Israel.
Now... my president, whom I otherwise like, gives his big time, 'we're right behind you Israel' even as they demanded Israel surrender lot's of land.

And for what.... Hamas comes to power calling for the annihilation of Israel, of Jews, and so you get all excited because the President says... 'we're right behind you' as he sets up Israel to create an Hamastan, even as nowhere in the world, is anyone being asked to create an 'al-qaidastan'.

What a load of bovine fertilizer.

Israel is the bait thrown into the mouth of the Tiger of Islamic hatred and tyranny. It is as if they are used to feed the alligator of terror, with the hope that it will then become satisfied and become a vegetarian.

Mark

Posted by: mgoldberg at February 1, 2006 9:12 PM

Israel's got our back,
http://www.israelmilitary.com/product_info.php?cPath=21&products_id=539&osCsid=6a44ccba3011f98c3d97934f5043b4f5

Posted by: Carolyn2 at February 1, 2006 9:35 PM

Robert

Another problem with your 1938 alert byline - Israel is not Czechoslovakia, and Iran does not have the military machine of Nazi Germany, even though Mahmoud may be desperately trying to impersonate der Fuhrer.

In 1991, the US had the Patriot missiles shoot down Saddam's scuds - and that was with anti-Israel people at the helm, like Baker and Sununu. Iran's defence establishment should be fretting at the idea that if they attach Israel, they will face the wrath of the US.

Igor

I disagree on your assertion that the US has to be a mediator. One can only be a mediator if one has leverage with both sides. In this case, the US has all the leverage one could have with Israel, and no leverage with the Palestinians (and now, even less with Hamas).

The US should use the next terror act by Hamas to shed this mediation role, and declare complete sanctions against the Palestinians. If Egypt, Saudi Arabia & others protest, follow it up with similar action against them. Time to end their status as allies - with friends like them, who needs....

Posted by: Infidel Pride at February 1, 2006 9:40 PM

At present, Israel and the Jews are much more deserving of aid from Americans than France is (good grief).

Thus that old verse posted by Robert is in need of an updating and revision anyway. So Bush wouldn't be reciting it as far as I can see--at least without revision).

Posted by: pythagoras at February 1, 2006 10:20 PM

All this talk is nonsense. US cannot handle the occupation of Iraq or Afganistan really. You think they will go into Iran. Hell no. Realistically, all they can do is fly over and drop some bombs which will probably not penetrate the deep bunkers where the atomic program labs are hidden.

And what will happen when? Iran attacks Iraq and together with Shia they turn it into a Sharia super empire. What, the Europeans going to help the US. Yeah, right. They will line up to make deals trading oil for nuclear reactors and weapons.

Some say that Islam is going through a phase of growth, similar to what Christianity went through during the Crusades. Islam and Arabs are not yet socially and politically advanced and they will get there. I say, they are too advanced. What you need is to have some really smart Jew who can invent a replacement for oil and maybe we can rely more on natural gas and coal and nuclear energy for god sakes. Turn Arabia into Africa. They got nothing else. Why can they put a man on the moon and invent an atom bomb, but they cannot invent some replacement for oil. All kinds of ordinary people make their cars run on everything from McDonalds' griese to cow excriment. Damn Exxon probably blocks all research. Anyways, military solution will not work because it would not be radical enough. Just stop the petro dollars and starve them.

Posted by: mosmike at February 2, 2006 12:36 AM

Infidel Pride,

I agree with you but I just don't see it happening, ever. Well maybe if Hamas set off a nuke in Israel, then maybe America would be "forced" to choose sides. I don't really like complaining about America's policy towards Israel because compared to everyone else, they have been very generous towards the Israelis and I am grateful for that despite their inconsistencies (and despite the Saudi-owned Arabists within their ranks). The reality of the situation is that the UN and the EU wouldn't stand for it if America designated the "Palestinians" (both inside and outside of Israel proper) as a fifth column and proposed a transfer to Jordan instead of a "Palestinian" state. And as long as we are dependent on oil, we cannot just blow off the Arabs and expect to walk away unscathed.

Posted by: igor at February 2, 2006 1:35 AM

It is great that President Bush stated that America will defend Israel if Israel is attacked. This is what we should do.

President Bush has expended tens upon tens of billions of American taxpayer dollars and over 2,000 American have been killed in Iraq.

President Bush has left America vulnerable from within since 9/11.
1. He has left our borders open to anyone that wants to walk across them and many enemies of America and of the drug trade have entered America this way.
2. Has not rounded up everyone in American that shouldn't be here and sent them home.
3. Believes that the invasion of our nation by Mexico and the Mexicans is good for America. Tens of billions of American dollars go to Mexico ever month instead of being earned by Americans and spent in America.
4. Wants those at the bottom of the economic stratum to improve themselves, but President Bush still keeps the invaders of our nation in our nation driving down our economy where those at the bottom have no chance to be paid a decent wage for the work they would do because the "illegal immigrants" have taken the work for a lot less in pay.
5. Called Islam a “”noble”” religion. Islam is the religion started by a child molesting child rapists. Islam is the religion that tells a husband to beat his wife and lock her up if she does not follow is commands until she follows his commands. Islam is the religion that has been responsible for the murder of tens of thousands of innocents since across the globe since 2000.

What reason is there to not fence our borders and send the people that have broken our laws home????

How many illegal aliens have injured and murdered innocent Americans????

How many illegal aliens are in our prisons????

How many 100’s of billions of American dollars will it take going out of America before our economy collapses?

When will President Bush wake up and realize America is in peril from within and that President Bush has done very little to protect Americans from harm from within.

The Texican,
It is better to fight and die free that to ever live under Islam.
Freedom or Death

Posted by: Texican at February 2, 2006 1:40 AM

Igor: The reality of the situation is that the UN and the EU wouldn't stand for it if America designated the "Palestinians" (both inside and outside of Israel proper) as a fifth column and proposed a transfer to Jordan instead of a "Palestinian" state. And as long as we are dependent on oil, we cannot just blow off the Arabs and expect to walk away unscathed.

Igor

It isn't up to the UN. Yeah, there is the illusion of 200 countries comprising the world community, but that's a fiction: you think that the average person in Malawi cares one way or another about the final borders between Israel & the Palestinians? Once you break it up into comprehendible packets, you have

- US
- EU
- Arab League/OIC
- Russia
- China
- OAU
- Others

But even if the US doesn’t adapt the Arabs as an enemy, it does it no good to pretend that it has any leverage with the likes of Hamas. The only ones who do are Iran and Syria, maybe Saudi Arabia, but certainly not Egypt. After all, Hamas is affiliated with the Muslim brotherhood, which is certainly no ally of President Mubarak.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at February 2, 2006 2:02 AM

Jimmy Carter today said "Give Hamas a Chance", predicting that Hamas could turn away from violence.

Carter expressed hope that 'the people of Palestine -- who already suffer ... under Israeli occupation -- will not suffer because they are deprived of a right to pay their school teachers, policemen, welfare workers, health workers and provide food for people.'

Deprived of a right to receive jizya from the infidels? If they want to have money to pay their salaries, why don't they try manufacturing something other than Kassam missiles and suicide belts?

However, Carter noted, Hamas has adhered to a cease-fire since August 2004

Adhered to the cease-fire? WTF? Do they not carry CNN in Atlanta, Georgia?

I hereby take back any nice thing I've ever said about Jimmy Carter. The man is beyond redemption. GWB may only express tepid support for Israel, but Carter is spouting the idiotic "suffering under Israeli occupation" rhetoric in 2006. Unbelieveable.

Posted by: special_guest at February 2, 2006 2:08 AM

Tex--I agree with you--have wanted a fence all my life--in the Boise valley here in Idaho we have been having GUNFIRE--you quessed it, illegal immigrant gangs--and if they wound themselves they get free medical care. May they shoot straight at each other.

Posted by: bobalharb at February 2, 2006 4:00 AM

Thanks for your support for Israel. Yet, we would have less of a problem defending ourselves if it were not for all the "peace" diplomacy. Carter is a good example of how diplomacy can make things worse, not better.
I read specialguest's link about jiminy Carter. No wonder the American people got rid of him after one term. But the damage had already been done. Does anyone remember how Carter's diplomacy helped Khomeini get rid of the Shah? The NYT at that time was full of reports on how mean the Shah was. But Khomeini's unattractive sides were overlooked. Then Carter did nothing to help Lebanon as far as I can remember, and his Camp David diplomacy was pro-Sadat and pro-PLO.
Now carter thinks that the Hamas can moderate and sort of become civilized-like. That reminds me that after Hitler took power in Germany, Goebbels came to a League of Nations pow wow in Geneva and told how the new govt in Germany was fond of democracy and liberalism and justice, etc. [see Genevieve Tabouis' books]. The Hamas is now pretending to be respectful of human rights and all that jazz. They should get as much credence as we today would give to Hitler and Goebbels. But no doubt carter's fanaticism about hamas moderation will continue unabated until it becomes unfashionable, just as Ramsey klark eventually stopped praising Khomeini, although he had initially perceived civil libertarian proclivities in the new regime in Teheran.

Posted by: Eliyahu at February 2, 2006 6:19 AM

On Goebbels' claims of Nazi fondness for liberalism, see Genevieve Tabouis' Ils l'ont appelee Cassandre [They called her Cassandra] and Vingt Ans de Suspens Diplomatique [not translated]. This material may be in one or two of her other books.

Posted by: Eliyahu at February 2, 2006 6:24 AM

"However, Carter noted, Hamas has adhered to a cease-fire since August 2004"

lets ask the israelis so, eh?

http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Palestinian+terror+since+2000/Victims+of+Palestinian+Violence+and+Terrorism+sinc.htm

Jan 2, 2005 - Nissim Arbiv, 25, of Nissanit in the Gaza Strip was mortally wounded in a mortar shell attack while working in the Erez Industrial Zone. He died of his wounds on January 11. Two others were wounded in the attack, for which Hamas claimed responsibility.

Jan 18, 2005 - Oded Sharon, 36, from Gan Yavne, an ISA officer, was killed, an IDF officer seriously wounded, and four IDF soldiers and three members of the ISA were lightly wounded in a suicide bombing attack at the Gush Katif junction in the central Gaza Strip. While search procedures were being implemented at a post at the junction, the suicide bomber with explosives strapped to his body detonated himself. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack.

July 14, 2005 - Dana Galkowicz, 22, of Kibbutz Bror Hayil, was killed by a Kassam rocket fired at Netiv Ha'asara north of the Gaza Strip. Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Fatah all claimed responsibility for the attack.

Sept 21, 2005 - Sasson Nuriel, 55, of Jerusalem was kidnapped and slain by Palestinian terrorists. His body was found on Sept 26 in a garbage dump in the industrial zone of Bitunya, west of Ramallah. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack.

Posted by: archduke at February 2, 2006 6:45 AM

Someone help me out with my numbers . . .
I often see '1938 Alert from Reuters:' What is the significance of that number?
And some "rasling fan" tell me what the '619' stands for that WWE's Ray Mysterio does. I'll come back to this site today and will also check tomorrows posting carefully.
Thanx - Kleo - Anderson, Ca.

Posted by: kleo at February 2, 2006 11:37 AM

1938 = Krisallnacht- the start of the Nazi genocide against Jews.

Posted by: MJ at February 2, 2006 1:37 PM

RE: Robert's apparent disgust that it wasn't spoken out in a more statesman like manner.

I am suprised at Robert's reaction as he knows
better than anyone that we are not dealing with
"statesmen". A blunt statement is exactly what is needed as many view America as all talk and no action which the terrorists have taken advantage of.

One has to fight fire with fire when dealing with the "mad mullahs" Gee, I wonder how they got that nickname, certainly not by being statesman like.

Posted by: learjet0450 at February 2, 2006 7:52 PM

I love the term "leftist idiots" coined by Stalin and Lenin and it fits Carter to a tee. Carter should keep his mouth shut and go back to peanut farming as it matches his peanut brain.

Posted by: learjet0450 at February 2, 2006 7:56 PM

Words, when used by a true statesman and man of conviction, have the power to inspire, educate, motivate. We need that right now, desperately.

The Speech.

Words, amazing symbols, like little bricks, one stacks them, sorts them, arranges them just so to make a thing of beauty, or a house of horrors.

Posted by: butterfly at February 2, 2006 9:19 PM

I'm hard on Bush too, but give the guy a break!
Not only was he clear, there's no way, even if
he were an avid JW reader, that he could say
(yet!) that Islam is the menace it is. Posted by: American

The greatest thing President Bush ever did - was put that UN on the hotseat! {SEE? I'm not picking on him - just complaining that he had to add a lie, that Islam is a religion of peace

What should our children think when we tell them the truth - and then they hear the President say something like that?

It is better to fight and die free that to ever live under Islam. Posted by: Texican

I agree!

Posted by: Beth at February 2, 2006 10:04 PM

I don't think that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad needs any flowry prose. He needs to be told quite simply the consequences of any action against Israel will be met with a response from the USA > no ands, ifs, or buts......

The stage has been set for military action against Iran. Iran called for the destruction of Israel and they actively seek nuclear weapons.
That alone will be the justification and the world will not wait til Iran physically attacks Israel before we respond.

The magnitude of nuclear weapons requires premptive action.

Posted by: learjet0450 at February 3, 2006 7:32 AM