Jimmy Carter to meet with the leader of Hamas??

[hellokeith]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
So Jimmy Carter may visit with the leader of Hamas when he goes to Syria.

PJ,

I have a very simple solution. Once Carter gets over there, we put him on the no-fly list. Then he'll get the opportunity to spend a very long time talking to these terrorists.

 

[Socio]

Jimmy Carter going to talk with the leader of Hamas is kind of like a lamb going to negotiate with a wolf.

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: Socio
Jimmy Carter going to talk with the leader of Hamas is kind of like a lamb going to negotiate with a wolf.

Comparing Hamas a wolf is absurd, If Carter is a lamb then Hamas is a badger at most. Besides,there are plenty of reasons to belive Hamas would accept a reasonable two state solution to this conflict, but of course those who are unwilling to accept the Palestinians right to the independence of their homeland will continue ignoring such reasons.

 

[seemingly random]

I believe the Chicago Tribune is a right wing paper with values similar to Fox News which makes anything they write suspect. This may be good fodder for wannabe manipulators and spinners though.

 

[Genx87]

This is a classic example of the difference between the delusioned left and the right in this country. How does one talk to somebody who has made it their mission in life to destroy your friend? What basis of discussion does one start from?

Hamas: Destruction of Isreal, we will toss rockets at schools
United States: Please stop
Hamas: Destruction of Isreal, we will toss rockets at schools.

At some point talking to peple with an agenda is beyond futile.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Genx87
This is a classic example of the difference between the OPENMINDED left and the SUICIDAL, MANIACAL right in this country.

Fixed it for ya.

 

[Fern]

I'm curious what Carter is specifically trying to accomplish; what's his point?

Fern

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Genx87
This is a classic example of the difference between the delusioned left and the right in this country. How does one talk to somebody who has made it their mission in life to destroy your friend? What basis of discussion does one start from?

Hamas: Destruction of Isreal, we will toss rockets at schools
United States: Please stop
Hamas: Destruction of Isreal, we will toss rockets at schools.

At some point talking to peple with an agenda is beyond futile.

Speaking of delusional, that's a pretty impressive mischaracterization of the conflict you've got there.

 

[feralkid]

Originally posted by: Fern
I'm curious what Carter is specifically trying to accomplish; what's his point?

Fern

Probably the same thing he accomplished between Israel and Egypt.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Fern
I'm curious what Carter is specifically trying to accomplish; what's his point?

Fern

He's an individual with access because of his history and a personal mission to promote peace. He specifically does NOT speak for or represent the U.S. Government, which works to his advantage and ours because he's proof that not all Americans are not war mongering piles of shit like the Bushwhackos.

 

[JSt0rm]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Lemon... I want you dead. Maybe you can send your mom or dad over and we can talk about removing my main grievance, your life. :roll:

You lose ALL credibility when you wish death on people with opposing views. This is fundamentally the problem with how the entire human race interacts with each other.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Lemon... I want you dead. Maybe you can send your mom or dad over and we can talk about removing my main grievance, your life. :roll:

You lose ALL credibility when you wish death on people with opposing views. This is fundamentally the problem with how the entire human race interacts with each other.

Come on, he's not actually saying he wants LL dead.

He is illustrating a point and using an analogy. Hamas wants Israel "dead", so what's to talk about until they drop that etc - is what I get from it.

Fern

 

[CallMeJoe]

IIRC, the Bush administration agenda is the spread of democracy throughout the Middle East. It is certainly consistent with Bushbot logic that we do so by refusing to negotiate with the democratically elected representatives of the Palestinian people.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Lemon... I want you dead. Maybe you can send your mom or dad over and we can talk about removing my main grievance, your life. :roll:

You lose ALL credibility when you wish death on people with opposing views. This is fundamentally the problem with how the entire human race interacts with each other.

^ What Fern said.

But you did help illustrate my point.

"You lose ALL credibility when you wish death on people with opposing views." That is exactly what Hamas does which is why talking them until they drop their "death to Israel" chants is a waste of time.

 

[Lemon law]

To PJ,

And Israel does not chant death to Hamas in its own way? And will cheerfully kill any number of civilians to kill just one from Hamas. As the incursion into Lebanon proved.

Oh such quaint and curious double standards you have PJ. You see the sins in some so clearly while being totally blind to those same exact sins in other places.

Why not be more unbiased and see that both Israel and Hamas are wrong. And the solution lies somewhere in the middle.

 

[Jhhnn]

Israel isn't a person, PJ, it's both an occupying power and an abstract concept to the Pals. The concept being apartheid, and the denial of equal rights to almost half the inhabitants effectively under Israeli rule.

"Death to Israel" isn't about killing the Israelis, but about killing the underlying justifications and implementation of their policy as a way to gain what amounts to civil rights for palestinians in their own land.

They recognize that the Israelis have no intention of granting them enough to actually survive in a two state scenario, so they therefore demand a one state solution, and equality under the law for all the people who live there...

I'm really having trouble figuring out why Americans are so opposed to others demanding the same thing we hold so dear...

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
I'm really having trouble figuring out why Americans are so opposed to others demanding the same thing we hold so dear...

Because for many, their real interest in any broad-minded principles extends about as far as their usefulness for feeling self-righteously smug, while grabbing all they can?

All men being created equal didn't quite extend to the Native Americans or blacks, and not to mankind, i.e., women - and those were in our better days, before being the world's only superpower with the military spending of the rest of the world combined and where any itch we feel is easily turned into a threat to our nation justifying action, when the mere implied threat of such action from our overwhelming military might isn't coercive enough to get others to do as they're told.

Need we look further than Vietnam where the people wanted tobe free of colonial rulers (France, Japan, US puppets), and we killed millions of them for our own reasons - there the people there had gone so far to make it clear as to model their own 'declaration of independance' based on ours?

Need we look forther than the Mexican-American war, a war we started to take half of Mexico under false pretenses, being nothing more than a bully?

Need we look further than our treatment of Mexican immigrant workers, with no care for their well-being in Mexico, but taking advantage of their services here, on the one hand keeping it illegal to deny them benefits, rights and our own minimum wage, and on the other keeping it easy enough for them to come where we rarely prosecute employers and have over 10% of the population of Mexico now inside the US, while we are happy to tell the grand stories of our own immigrant ancestors?

There are those who are more noble in the US, and those less so.

You ask why those who are less so say what they do. For them, the principles are little more than marketing to make them feel good about their country, not things to do.

 

[Braznor]

Screw Jimmy Carter. :thumbsdown:

 

[seemingly random]

Originally posted by: Braznor
Screw Jimmy Carter. :thumbsdown:

I agree. He's credited with injecting religion into politics. Damn baptist peanut farmer.

 

[Lemon law]

Ya right-------screw Jimmy Carter---that vicious peacemonger---after all one good apple might spoil a whole barrel of rotten ones in GWB&co.

But it kind of seems like a poker game some of you are trying to crash. To play you have to have a Nobel Peace prize as the minimum ante to join the game.
Since I don't have one, I will just remain content to back the peanut farmer.

I am still waiting for Braznor and seemingly random to show us their Peace prizes. Other wise, they are just posting from the peanut gallery.

 

[seemingly random]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Other wise, they are just posting from the peanut gallery.

Isn't that what most of these threads are?

 

[Braznor]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Ya right-------screw Jimmy Carter---that vicious peacemonger---after all one good apple might spoil a whole barrel of rotten ones in GWB&co.

But it kind of seems like a poker game some of you are trying to crash. To play you have to have a Nobel Peace prize as the minimum ante to join the game.
Since I don't have one, I will just remain content to back the peanut farmer.

I am still waiting for Braznor and seemingly random to show us their Peace prizes. Other wise, they are just posting from the peanut gallery.

Yeah, Carter and Zbigniew Brzezinski funded the mujaheddin in the first place. A 40$ billion dollar program back then, this began the radicalization of Afghanistan, the fertile breeding grounds for Sunni Islamism.

Carter also abandoned the Shah, betraying him when he needed help at the most and this created the Shiite Islamic republic of Iran.

Some man of peace! George W Bush doesn't have anything on him when it comes to Carter and his record of wreaking the world with the best of intentions! :disgust:

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Braznor

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Ya right-------screw Jimmy Carter---that vicious peacemonger---after all one good apple might spoil a whole barrel of rotten ones in GWB&co.

But it kind of seems like a poker game some of you are trying to crash. To play you have to have a Nobel Peace prize as the minimum ante to join the game.
Since I don't have one, I will just remain content to back the peanut farmer.

I am still waiting for Braznor and seemingly random to show us their Peace prizes. Other wise, they are just posting from the peanut gallery.

Yeah, Carter and Zbigniew Brzezinski funded the mujaheddin in the first place. A 40$ billion dollar program back then, this began the radicalization of Afghanistan, the fertile breeding grounds for Sunni Islamism.

Carter also abandoned the Shah, betraying him when he needed help at the most and this created the Shiite Islamic republic of Iran.

Some man of peace! George W Bush doesn't have anything on him when it comes to Carter and his record of wreaking the world with the best of intentions! :disgust:

The Shah should never have been put into power.

 

[Braznor]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Braznor

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Ya right-------screw Jimmy Carter---that vicious peacemonger---after all one good apple might spoil a whole barrel of rotten ones in GWB&co.

But it kind of seems like a poker game some of you are trying to crash. To play you have to have a Nobel Peace prize as the minimum ante to join the game.
Since I don't have one, I will just remain content to back the peanut farmer.

I am still waiting for Braznor and seemingly random to show us their Peace prizes. Other wise, they are just posting from the peanut gallery.

Yeah, Carter and Zbigniew Brzezinski funded the mujaheddin in the first place. A 40$ billion dollar program back then, this began the radicalization of Afghanistan, the fertile breeding grounds for Sunni Islamism.

Carter also abandoned the Shah, betraying him when he needed help at the most and this created the Shiite Islamic republic of Iran.

Some man of peace! George W Bush doesn't have anything on him when it comes to Carter and his record of wreaking the world with the best of intentions! :disgust:

The Shah should never have been put into power.

The alternatives to him were much worse. Too bad, we found this out the hard way. Carter's administration is responsible for promising support to the Shah only to withdraw it at the very last moment. Thus paving way for Mullahs in Iran.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Braznor
The alternatives to him were much worse. Too bad, we found this out the hard way. Carter's administration is responsible for promising support to the Shah only to withdraw it at the very last moment. Thus paving way for Mullahs in Iran.

First of all, what gives you the right to say who should be in charge of Iran, mister pro-democracy?

Second of all, why don't you go crack a book sometime, and learn the history of how the guy democratically in charge had simply made the terrible mistake of raising the price of oil to England, leading them to ask the US for help in 'fixing' that 'problem', since they liked the old setup where they got oil at exploitave prices.

What paved the way for Mullahs to rule Iran? You might want to do some reading on that, too. Hint: Had we not put the Shah in power, the Mullahs weren't likely to be in charge.

If you had any principles, I'd ask you to explain and justify the US siding with Saddam in his invasion of Iran, with a million casualties, but I can see what a waste that would be.