If Obama treated Israel like Reagan did, he’d be impeached

[defcon4]

Eagle, you are just dancing to his tune of revisionist Reagan bashing. Who the fuck cares?
ADIOS AMIGOS

 

[Avorysuds]

Sweet, now I'm almost an Obama fan... All I have to do is become a hyper partisan nutter and be ok with the fact that Obama pretty much lied to every single person that voted for him... Not all because the 1%ers got paid back a few times over.

Can you address anything in the OP, or is this just a desperate attempt at deflection?

I can't care about an opinion on what people would think of Reagan's stance on any topic if done the same under Obama.

For instance, Obama continued the war in Iraq despite telling all those that voted for him that he would end it as "the first thing he would do" once made President. Now, under Obama all protests and bad media disappeared overnight... never to return for years upon years of the war continuing and even being expanded.

So here we have Bush just president prior to Obama getting destroyed for the Iraq war mess yet Obama received no criticism despite lying about the time line to end the war, lying that he would end the war and then re-starting the war after as Obama said himself, Bush ended....

The one thing we know for sure is that if a past President was a white racist male people like you would lose their shit... But again, people like yourself wouldn't care that Obama avidly attended a well known racist black church.... for 20 years.... Hell, a white male going to church offends you but Obama doing the same thing is A-Ok.

Now I'm not a church goer, nor am I religious... But I'm also not a white trash, ignorant, hate filled partisan Democrat, that happens to go to church and believe in Gawd as something like 80% of Dems do... Someone should tell them that means they don't believe in evolution and that Jesus hated women.

So once again, I have no interest in you trying to do a side by side of Obama next to Reagan.

 

[Stephanie]

Sweet, now I'm almost an Obama fan... All I have to do is become a hyper partisan nutter and be ok with the fact that Obama pretty much lied to every single person that voted for him... Not all because the 1%ers got paid back a few times over.

Can you address anything in the OP, or is this just a desperate attempt at deflection?

I can't care about an opinion on what people would think of Reagan's stance on any topic if done the same under Obama.

For instance, Obama continued the war in Iraq despite telling all those that voted for him that he would end it as "the first thing he would do" once made President. Now, under Obama all protests and bad media disappeared overnight... never to return for years upon years of the war continuing and even being expanded.

So here we have Bush just president prior to Obama getting destroyed for the Iraq war mess yet Obama received no criticism despite lying about the time line to end the war, lying that he would end the war and then re-starting the war after as Obama said himself, Bush ended....

The one thing we know for sure is that if a past President was a white racist male people like you would lose their shit... But again, people like yourself wouldn't care that Obama avidly attended a well known racist black church.... for 20 years.... Hell, a white male going to church offends you but Obama doing the same thing is A-Ok.

Now I'm not a church goer, nor am I religious... But I'm also not a white trash, ignorant, hate filled partisan Democrat, that happens to go to church and believe in Gawd as something like 80% of Dems do... Someone should tell them that means they don't believe in evolution and that Jesus hated women.

So once again, I have no interest in you trying to do a side by side of Obama next to Reagan.

Excellent. what's sad is they can't find anything for that man Obama to stand on his two feet. just like they blamed Bush's for all his failures.

 

[natstew]

As you read each thing that Reagan said and did, stop and imagine Obama saying/doing the same things. For that matter, imagine the Right-Wing defense of each of Reagan's were he POTUS today. This is from Israel's leading newspaper.

If Obama treated Israel like Reagan did, he’d be impeached

Imagine if Israel would launch a successful preemptive strike against a country that is building a nuclear bomb that threatens its very existence, and the American president would describe it as “a tragedy”.

And then, not only would the U.S. administration fail to “stand by its ally”, as Republicans pledged this week, but it would actually lend its hand to a UN Security Council decision that condemns Israel, calls on it to place its nuclear facilities under international supervision and demands that it pay reparations (!) for the damage it had wrought.

And then, to add insult to injury, the U.S. president would impose an embargo on further sales of F-16 aircraft because Israel had “violated its commitment to use the planes only in self-defense”.

Can you imagine the uproar? Can you contemplate the brouhaha? I mean, if Mitt Romney believes that President Obama “threw Israel under the bus” just for suggesting that a peace settlement with Israel be based on the 1967 borders - what would he say about a president who actually turns his back on Israel in its greatest time of need? That he hurled Israel over the cliff with a live grenade in its pocket and into a burning volcano?

And what if that very same president, only a few months later, would decide to sell truly game-changing sophisticated weaponry to Saudi Arabia, an Arab country that is a sworn enemy of Israel? And not only would this president dismiss Israeli objections that these weapons endanger its security, but he would actually warn, in a manner that sent shivers down the spines of American Jews, that “it is not the business of other nations to make American foreign policy”. And his Secretary of State would mince no words, just in case Walt or Mearsheimer hadn’t heard the first time, saying ominously that if the deal would be blocked by Israeli influence, there would be “serious implications on all American policies in the Middle East... I’ll just leave it there.” And then the two of them would extend the above mentioned arms embargo, just to twist Israel’s arm a little bit more.

I mean, what words would be left to describe such behavior, after the entire thesaurus’ arsenal of synonyms for “insult” “perfidy” and “knife in the back” have been exhausted to describe the official White House photo of President Obama talking to Prime Minister Netanyahu with his shoes on the table?​

This is bullshit! There's nothing here to convince me the accusations are true.

 

[The Rabbi]

Obama is throwing Israel under the bus. Reagan never treated any Israeli the way Obama has treated Netanyahu. The OP got kicked off for plagiarizing the first time and I complained about it. It's no better reheated.

 

[Synthaholic]

The OP is BS...............Reagan made sure the attack on Iraq ended with nothing more than a slap on the wrist for Israel.

Yes, AIPAC was strong back then, too.

Address the statements Reagan made at the time.

I stated what Reagan said..............and they guaranteed a VETO...........non argument.

VETO is the default position of the U.S. government, and has been since Israel was created.

Try again.

 

[Synthaholic]

Eagle, you are just dancing to his tune of revisionist Reagan bashing. Who the fuck cares?
ADIOS AMIGOS

See ya! You won't be missed.

Now - if any adult conservatives have anything to contribute...

 

[Synthaholic]

I have no interest in you trying to do a side by side of Obama next to Reagan.

I can certainly see why! Compared to Obama Reagan comes across as an Israel-hater...or as Right-Wingers here conflate, an anti-Semite.

 

[eagle1462010]

Comparing Obama to Reagan is like giving Obama a Peace Prize.............

Oops, they already did that.........

 

[Synthaholic]

As you read each thing that Reagan said and did, stop and imagine Obama saying/doing the same things. For that matter, imagine the Right-Wing defense of each of Reagan's were he POTUS today. This is from Israel's leading newspaper.

If Obama treated Israel like Reagan did, he’d be impeached

Imagine if Israel would launch a successful preemptive strike against a country that is building a nuclear bomb that threatens its very existence, and the American president would describe it as “a tragedy”.

And then, not only would the U.S. administration fail to “stand by its ally”, as Republicans pledged this week, but it would actually lend its hand to a UN Security Council decision that condemns Israel, calls on it to place its nuclear facilities under international supervision and demands that it pay reparations (!) for the damage it had wrought.

And then, to add insult to injury, the U.S. president would impose an embargo on further sales of F-16 aircraft because Israel had “violated its commitment to use the planes only in self-defense”.

Can you imagine the uproar? Can you contemplate the brouhaha? I mean, if Mitt Romney believes that President Obama “threw Israel under the bus” just for suggesting that a peace settlement with Israel be based on the 1967 borders - what would he say about a president who actually turns his back on Israel in its greatest time of need? That he hurled Israel over the cliff with a live grenade in its pocket and into a burning volcano?

And what if that very same president, only a few months later, would decide to sell truly game-changing sophisticated weaponry to Saudi Arabia, an Arab country that is a sworn enemy of Israel? And not only would this president dismiss Israeli objections that these weapons endanger its security, but he would actually warn, in a manner that sent shivers down the spines of American Jews, that “it is not the business of other nations to make American foreign policy”. And his Secretary of State would mince no words, just in case Walt or Mearsheimer hadn’t heard the first time, saying ominously that if the deal would be blocked by Israeli influence, there would be “serious implications on all American policies in the Middle East... I’ll just leave it there.” And then the two of them would extend the above mentioned arms embargo, just to twist Israel’s arm a little bit more.

I mean, what words would be left to describe such behavior, after the entire thesaurus’ arsenal of synonyms for “insult” “perfidy” and “knife in the back” have been exhausted to describe the official White House photo of President Obama talking to Prime Minister Netanyahu with his shoes on the table?​

This is bullshit! There's nothing here to convince me the accusations are true.

So you are taking the position that Israel's leading newspaper cares nothing about it's own credibility and is lying, and just making all of this up?

 

[Stephanie]

So, another thread that is lie?

anyone surprised. the Democrats are getting desperate. they know Hillary isn't so popular. so it's going for the ALL OUT SMEARS on Republicans

I think the people will see through it this time

 

[Synthaholic]

The OP got kicked off for plagiarizing

False. Please point out any plagiarizing.

If cutting and pasting from news sources is plagiarizing, then may I introduce you to PoliticalChic?

 

[bodecea]

Why can't Stephanie say whether she's a fan of Reagan or not?

 

[natstew]

As you read each thing that Reagan said and did, stop and imagine Obama saying/doing the same things. For that matter, imagine the Right-Wing defense of each of Reagan's were he POTUS today. This is from Israel's leading newspaper.

If Obama treated Israel like Reagan did, he’d be impeached

Imagine if Israel would launch a successful preemptive strike against a country that is building a nuclear bomb that threatens its very existence, and the American president would describe it as “a tragedy”.

And then, not only would the U.S. administration fail to “stand by its ally”, as Republicans pledged this week, but it would actually lend its hand to a UN Security Council decision that condemns Israel, calls on it to place its nuclear facilities under international supervision and demands that it pay reparations (!) for the damage it had wrought.

And then, to add insult to injury, the U.S. president would impose an embargo on further sales of F-16 aircraft because Israel had “violated its commitment to use the planes only in self-defense”.

Can you imagine the uproar? Can you contemplate the brouhaha? I mean, if Mitt Romney believes that President Obama “threw Israel under the bus” just for suggesting that a peace settlement with Israel be based on the 1967 borders - what would he say about a president who actually turns his back on Israel in its greatest time of need? That he hurled Israel over the cliff with a live grenade in its pocket and into a burning volcano?

And what if that very same president, only a few months later, would decide to sell truly game-changing sophisticated weaponry to Saudi Arabia, an Arab country that is a sworn enemy of Israel? And not only would this president dismiss Israeli objections that these weapons endanger its security, but he would actually warn, in a manner that sent shivers down the spines of American Jews, that “it is not the business of other nations to make American foreign policy”. And his Secretary of State would mince no words, just in case Walt or Mearsheimer hadn’t heard the first time, saying ominously that if the deal would be blocked by Israeli influence, there would be “serious implications on all American policies in the Middle East... I’ll just leave it there.” And then the two of them would extend the above mentioned arms embargo, just to twist Israel’s arm a little bit more.

I mean, what words would be left to describe such behavior, after the entire thesaurus’ arsenal of synonyms for “insult” “perfidy” and “knife in the back” have been exhausted to describe the official White House photo of President Obama talking to Prime Minister Netanyahu with his shoes on the table?​

This is bullshit! There's nothing here to convince me the accusations are true.

So you are taking the position that Israel's leading newspaper cares nothing about it's own credibility and is lying, and just making all of this up?

Yes

 

[Agit8r]

And of course there was Caspar "I'm not a Jew" Weinberger:

Casper Weinburger s tenuous ties to Jewish community j. the Jewish news weekly of Northern California

 

[Avorysuds]

I have no interest in you trying to do a side by side of Obama next to Reagan.

I can certainly see why! Compared to Obama Reagan comes across as an Israel-hater...or as Right-Wingers here conflate, an anti-Semite.

But as I so clearly and correctly pointed out, Obama next to Bush is identical only really different in that Obama took the Bush era polices further than Bush himself did...

So we're back in Iraq, lets talk about Reagan! =) =) =)

 

[Two Thumbs]

RR was an actual leader
obama isn't
RR clearly loved America
ob doesnt
RR actually made things much better for everyone
ob has made it worse


so when RR says something, everyone knew he supported the country and it's people
when ob says shit we know it comes from hate

there's a huge difference between these 2 men, you should compare ob to Carter or the vile fdr

 

[Synthaholic]

Why can't Stephanie say whether she's a fan of Reagan or not?

Is Stephanie in this thread? Do me a favor and quote something REALLY stupid (not just her regular stupidity) from her so that I am reminded why I put her on Ignore.

 

[Synthaholic]

As you read each thing that Reagan said and did, stop and imagine Obama saying/doing the same things. For that matter, imagine the Right-Wing defense of each of Reagan's were he POTUS today. This is from Israel's leading newspaper.

If Obama treated Israel like Reagan did, he’d be impeached

Imagine if Israel would launch a successful preemptive strike against a country that is building a nuclear bomb that threatens its very existence, and the American president would describe it as “a tragedy”.

And then, not only would the U.S. administration fail to “stand by its ally”, as Republicans pledged this week, but it would actually lend its hand to a UN Security Council decision that condemns Israel, calls on it to place its nuclear facilities under international supervision and demands that it pay reparations (!) for the damage it had wrought.

And then, to add insult to injury, the U.S. president would impose an embargo on further sales of F-16 aircraft because Israel had “violated its commitment to use the planes only in self-defense”.

Can you imagine the uproar? Can you contemplate the brouhaha? I mean, if Mitt Romney believes that President Obama “threw Israel under the bus” just for suggesting that a peace settlement with Israel be based on the 1967 borders - what would he say about a president who actually turns his back on Israel in its greatest time of need? That he hurled Israel over the cliff with a live grenade in its pocket and into a burning volcano?

And what if that very same president, only a few months later, would decide to sell truly game-changing sophisticated weaponry to Saudi Arabia, an Arab country that is a sworn enemy of Israel? And not only would this president dismiss Israeli objections that these weapons endanger its security, but he would actually warn, in a manner that sent shivers down the spines of American Jews, that “it is not the business of other nations to make American foreign policy”. And his Secretary of State would mince no words, just in case Walt or Mearsheimer hadn’t heard the first time, saying ominously that if the deal would be blocked by Israeli influence, there would be “serious implications on all American policies in the Middle East... I’ll just leave it there.” And then the two of them would extend the above mentioned arms embargo, just to twist Israel’s arm a little bit more.

I mean, what words would be left to describe such behavior, after the entire thesaurus’ arsenal of synonyms for “insult” “perfidy” and “knife in the back” have been exhausted to describe the official White House photo of President Obama talking to Prime Minister Netanyahu with his shoes on the table?​

This is bullshit! There's nothing here to convince me the accusations are true.

So you are taking the position that Israel's leading newspaper cares nothing about it's own credibility and is lying, and just making all of this up?

Yes

May your sheer ignorance keep you warm.

 

[Synthaholic]

I have no interest in you trying to do a side by side of Obama next to Reagan.

I can certainly see why! Compared to Obama Reagan comes across as an Israel-hater...or as Right-Wingers here conflate, an anti-Semite.

But as I so clearly and correctly pointed out, Obama next to Bush is identical only really different in that Obama took the Bush era polices further than Bush himself did...

So we're back in Iraq, lets talk about Reagan! =) =) =)

Are you trying to claim that the U.S. wasn't as close to Israel in Reagan's day? That Reagan's remarks and positions were in line with our relationship back then?

Because that would be ridiculous. This is not an apples to oranges comparison.