Anyone just hear Ron Paul re: resolution supporting Israel on CSPAN?

[Mika]

He said that we are seeing blowback (in the form of Hamas, in this case) from the radicalization of the Muslims in the CIA's war on the USSR.

A vote in support of this bill only further radicalizes with resulting blowback, and does no one any good.

[annm4peace]

1. Yes, He gives the truth

I am so sick of these Reps giving one sided reports.

Did anyone visit Palestine states in the past year ? any Congress person? buller? Buller?.

It is sickening. They think we are all so stupid and don't know of the blocades, the check points, the harassment of Palestine civilians.

[malaise]

5. I watched Brzezinski on GEM$NBC

a few minutes. He was scathing in his condemnation of Israel and said Israel is alienating herself as votes in the UN demonstrate.

[bdamomma]

7. Israel is going to alienate themselves they are screwing themselves

and we are too if this Congress keeps on pledging their allegiance to Israel, it is sickening. Damn them.

[ShortnFiery]

Ron Paul's perspective is The Only One that I can relate to so far.

Now, I apologize for the twit, Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA) who is regrettably from our state.

But not just the GOP, otherwise Progressive Democrats have figurative "blinders on."

What these people do NOT realize is that through the Internet and live update video sites, such as YouTube, us "unwashed masses" have caught on to the fact that they are DRIVING a march to BOMB IRAN for the sake of Israel.

The only question I have for my fellow DUers is "do you wish to send your son or daughter to the ME" to fight for Israel? Because the forgoing is EXACTLY where we are headed if we don't FORCE our "illustrious" representatives to TONE DOWN THE RHETORIC. :grr: :thumbsdown:

[L0oniX]

14. I love Ron Paul's suggestion to pull out all of our military bases.

Just think what we could do for health care with 600 billion a year.

[LeftishBrit]

19. You think RON PAUL wants to use the money for health care???????

[Hydra]

21. Ron Paul controls the money when it gets freed up?

Agreeing with an idea of Paul's does not mean accepting the entire package, you know.

[L0oniX]

24. Lame response speaks for itself.

[High Plains]

28. Me, too. We don't need to be the world's SWAT team.

We could use that money elsewhere, doncha think?

[LeftishBrit]

18. What about Kucinich? And others who have recommended a ceasefire, e.g. Lois Capps and Donna Edwards?

[leftchick]

2. I did hear Pelosi's speech

and I tasted a little puke in the back of my throat. Can they not see how this is bad for both Israel and the US? Or perhaps they just want to keep feeding the MIC latest 'enemy'.

[ShortnFiery]

3. It's the Power Brokers of the Military Industrial Complex pushing the need for this Rhetoric.

It's VILE.

I love Israel and they should exist in peace, but they have been behaving like THUGs. The people living in Gaza are living in horrible conditions and are restricted, not much unlike Apartheid in South Africa in the 1980s.

Dammit! You have to give the Palestinians something to lose (a half-assed decent quality of life) before they will WILLINGLY CEASE supporting guerrilla organizations such as Hamas.

But it's so much easier to KILL than to provide true Humanitarian Assistance. :(

[bdamomma]

34. this whole thing is going to blow up in our faces, the world is catching on

how we keep on supporting Israel giving them money and weapons(white phosphorus is being used) all with bushie blessing.

[Ian David]

4. Ron Who? n/t

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

6. I think Kucinich would agree with him on this n/t

[Mika]

8. Kucinich up now. He's agreeing with Paul. Not voting for the resolution.

Also saying that Israel has broken the US arms export agreement.

[slipslidingaway]

9. Good for him...

'We will not have peace until we recognize there are two parties to this dispute'

[NNN0LHI]

10. I bet the KKK does too

Not sure how good that is though?

Don

[originalpckelly]

13. Kelly's 1st of foruming: comparisions to the KKK are like comparision to Hitler.

EOM.

[NNN0LHI]

16. How about Stormfront? They were big Ron Paul supporters too

Is that OK?

Don't forget what happens when you lay down with dogs.

Don

[High Plains]

29. What's the correct phrase here: Anti-semite baiting?

Yeah, and I'm sure some Freepers are cheering Israel on. So what?

Your post was a pretty shitty attempt at guilt by association, and it was a stretch at that. Go crawl back in your hole.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

35. The Klan folks I know

don't like the Arabs any more than the Jews--in fact, they feel they are worse.

And yes, they are scary folks to talk to--you try not to set them off.

[GoesTo11]

11. Maybe dissatisfied Dems should support Ron Paul instead of Green

[L0oniX]

15. Oh you'd rather have them lock step huh ...just like the repukes and freepers.

[GoesTo11]

23. They can vote for Donald Duck or Lizard King

It's not up to me.

[High Plains]

31. I imagine the Green platform on Israel/Palestine is pretty fair.

But I'm too busy/lazy to look it up right now.

This issue is one of the ones that makes me an independent, not a member of the liberal wing of the Single Unified Capitalist War party.

[Recursion]

36. Here's an example

http://www.gp.org/press/pr-national.php?ID=162

"Green Party condemns Israel's massive air attack on Gaza, calls on US to rein in Israel and seek a ceasefire"

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

12. While our "liberal" reps line up to posture and obey the lobbyists.

What a pathetic bunch of opportunists.

[LeftishBrit]

17. The resolution is wrong IMO; they should instead be calling for a ceasefire and pushing more

actively for peace.

www.allmep.org

However, Ron Paul is a monster of pure right-wing evil, who is against Israel (and many other countries) on xenophobic, not humanitarian, grounds.

If his views on healthcare and taxes were ever implemented, they would kill more Americans than were ever killed on 9-11.

He is also a religious-rightie who has labelled gay rights 'heterophobia'.

Progressives everywhere should NEVER make alliances with right-wingers, even if they agree on a few points.

[Mika]

22. I agree. Just interesting that he was the only one pointing out the blowback issue. n/t

[Barack_America]

20. I didn't catch Paul, but Kucinich spoke the truth. And I called my Rep...

...to ask him to vote against the resolution.

[Sebastian Doyle]

25. Hamas had nothing to do with the CIA's war on the USSR

But Al Qaeda did. On the other hand, Hamas was involved in Mossad's war on the PLO.

In both cases, it's a Frankenstein monster that seemingly turned on its master, and the only real question is whether they're still on the payroll or not, because their actions always seemed timed just when the right wing of their respective countries need them the most.

[Uzybone]

26. Has he disavowed his racist mailings yet?

he is right about this bill but he is still a muthafucker.

[Bucky]

27. Sloppy analysis

We aided some Muslim groups against the Soviets in Afghanistan, therefor we're responsible for all Muslim violence anywhere. Got it. What a maroon!

The US aided Fatah against Hamas just last year--that's why Hamas is so violent and powerful now.

Grow a brain, moRon

[EFerrari]

30. Didn't the US and Israel "aid" Hamas against Fatah?

We should just change our name to the United States of Blowback.

[G_j]

32. some reading for you,

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/america-is-primarily-at-f_b_154285.html

America Is Primarily at Fault for the Conflict in Gaza -Cenk Uygur

<snip>
So, let me offer you something you hardly ever hear in the American media. The American government had a great deal to do with the outbreak of violence in the Gaza Strip right now. The Bush administration demanded - against the advice of nearly every expert in the field and the Israeli government - that the Palestinians hold elections. They did. Hamas won.

When Hamas won, we could have pulled them in toward the direction of political action and reconciliation. Instead, we chose to isolate them, start a coup against them (read this terrific article in Vanity Fair about our attempt to overthrow Hamas) and further radicalize them. We made a mockery of the idea of democracy. We proved to them that we never meant a word of the so-called Freedom Doctrine. We only wanted elections in which our guys won.

This kind of hypocrisy has consequences. It sends a message that democracy and voting doesn't work. And our botched coup against Hamas had the effect of sending the message that violence is the answer. If you don't get your way, the proper course of action is to try to change the results through use of force.

We should have never insisted on the elections that everyone - but the inane Bush team - realized Hamas was going to win. It's not that elections are a bad idea, but it was too early in this instance. We should have laid the groundwork for Palestinians to vote in a direction that would have led to more constructive solutions. Instead, as usual, Bush was lazy and insisted on getting his way right away.

And if we were going to have elections, we absolutely, positively should have recognized the legitimate results of those elections and dealt with the consequences. In fact, this might have pulled Hamas into a governing role that demanded more pragmatism and a less radical outlook. It's easier to be a radical when you don't have to get anything done.
<snip>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2009/01/11618_gaza_war_bushs_legacy.html



Gaza War Bush's Parting Gift to Middle East

At one point or another, most American presidents concern themselves with bringing peace to the Middle East. Ultimately, all other foreign policy achievements pale in comparison. It's the brass ring of presidential greatness, the elusive key to ensuring kind treatment in the eyes of history. Such thinking must become particularly acute as presidents reach the twilight of their terms and begin in earnest the inevitable consideration of how they will be remembered. Bill Clinton made a last-ditch effort late in his second term to become the great peacemaker. He failed, as had all others before him. But at least he tried. For his part, our current outgoing commander in chief, just weeks away from relinquishing his office, has steadfastly refused to get involved even as Gaza disintegrates into violence.

Not that this should come as a surprise. Bush's lack of engagement this late in the game, says the National Security Network, is nothing if not consistent with the rest of his term. As the group describes in press release issued today:

episodic involvement has been muddled and without coherent vision: supporting Palestinian elections in 2006, despite the very clear possibility that Hamas would win, then refusing to honor the results; asserting that the 'road to Jerusalem ran through Baghdad;' belatedly engaging through the Annapolis peace conference, which has proved to be too little too late. Experts and regional actors with differing views on the road ahead share the belief that the US absence from the scene is counterproductive and harmful to the interests of all concerned. The outbreak of war in Gaza confirms that after eight years in office the Bush administration will leave behind a region that is further from achieving a lasting peace than when it came to office.

A tough accusation to be sure, but one that enjoys support from an unlikely array of former diplomats and foreign policy specialists across the political spectrum. Bush's own first-term ambassador to Israel, Daniel Kurtzer, acknowledges the administration's shortcomings. "The sum total is that if you measure Israeli security at the beginning of this administration and at the end of the administration, based on things the president either could have done, should have done or failed to do, the report card is pretty negative," he says.

Several other former US ambassadors to Israel, Egypt, Pakistan, Tunisia, Bahrain, and the United Arab Emirates, contributed to a policy paper (.pdf) released by the Israeli Policy Forum, which accuses the Bush administration's inaction of enabling the violence in Gaza and damaging the security interests of the United States:

"During the past eight years, the United States has appeared to have no sense of urgency about ending the Arab-Israeli conflict... The Bush administration did not pick up where Clinton left off, giving the impression that the United States was indifferent to the worsening conditions (the second intifada) on the ground in Israel and the Occupied Territories. This seeming indifference helped turn public opinion against the United States throughout the Muslim world to the disadvantage of a myriad of U.S. interests"

..more.

[mmonk]

33. He hits the nail on the head every once in awhile.