Palin on Israel...AKA The Black and White World of Sarah Palin

[yerazhishda]

Palin: Israel is the 'good guy'



Israel is the "good guy" in the Middle East, Sarah Palin said, repeating her assertion that the United States should not second-guess its Iran strategies.

Alaska Gov. Palin, the Republican vice-presidential nominee, was speaking on CBS Thursday in her second foreign policy interview since Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) selected her as his running mate a month ago.

Interviewer Katie Couric pressed Palin on her earlier insistence that the United States should not second-guess Israel even if it were to strike Iran to prevent it from getting a nuclear weapon.

"We shouldn’t second-guess Israel's security efforts because we cannot ever afford to send a message that we would allow a second Holocaust," Palin said. "They are our closest ally in the Middle East and they need us we need them and we shouldn't second-guess them."

Palin said the United States would naturally consult with Israel on such matters, but added that it was Israel's right "to fight against a regime like Iran who would seek to wipe them off the earth."

She added: "It is obvious to me who are the good guys and who are the bad guys."

source: http://www.jta.org/cgi-bin/iowa/breaking/110568.html

[yerazhishda]

Re: Palin on Israel...AKA The Black and White World of Sarah Palin

So the war count is now totalled. Under a McCain/Palin administration we'd have to go to war with Iraq, Afghanistan, Russia, and now Iran? With the economy the way it is? IS SHE ON CRACK?! I mean even your most extreme redneck evangelists don't go this far. This just shows how far out of touch with reality she really is. Why is she so hell-bent on starting a Third World War? How Christian is that?

This really says more about the people that follow Palin than it does about Palin herself.

****************

Palin: Don't 'second guess' Israel

Ynetnews
Published: 09.26.08, 09:44

The United States shouldn't second guess Israel if it decides to attack Iran, according to Gov. Sarah Palin, Republican presidential candidate John McCain's running mate, in an interview with Katie Couric on CBS.

When asked to elucidate this statement, which she has made several times in the past, she explained: "We shouldn't second guess Israel's security efforts because we cannot ever afford to send a message that we would allow a second Holocaust, for one." (But it would be just dandy if the Azeris/Turks ever invaded Armenia - hey maybe she'd even get our military to help the Azeris out. )

"Israel has got to have the opportunity and the ability to protect itself. They are our closest ally in the Mideast. We need them. They need us. And we shouldn't second guess their efforts," she added.

When asked about whether the US was not in its right to express its position to Israel, Palin clarified: We don't have to second-guess what their efforts would be if they believe … that it is in their country and their allies, including us, all of our best interests to fight against a regime, especially Iran, who would seek to wipe them off the face of the earth."

"It is obvious to me who the good guys are in this one and who the bad guys are. The bad guys are the ones who say Israel is a stinking corpse and should be wiped off the face of the earth," Palin asserted.

"That's not a good guy who is saying that. Now, one who would seek to protect the good guys in this, the leaders of Israel and her friends, her allies, including the United States, in my world, those are the good guys," she said.

During the interview, Palin criticized Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama regarding his support of dialoguing with Iran's leader, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

"I think, with Ahmadinejad, personally, he is not one to negotiate with. [And she would know this how? This is coming from the woman who met with her first world leaders - including Saakashvili - just this past week. None of them were Ahmadinejad) You can't just sit down with him with no preconditions being met. Barack Obama is so off-base in his proclamation that he would meet with some of these leaders around our world who would seek to destroy America and that, and without preconditions being met. That's beyond naïve. And it's beyond bad judgment," she said.

"I've never heard Henry Kissinger say, "Yeah, I'll meet with these leaders without preconditions being met." Diplomacy is about doing a lot of background work first and shoring up allies and positions and figuring out what sanctions perhaps could be implemented if things weren't gonna go right. That's part of diplomacy," she added.

source: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...602429,00.html

[Armanen]

Re: Palin on Israel...AKA The Black and White World of Sarah Palin

As if the u.s. pulls the strings in tel aviv.


Bush won’t support Israeli attack on Iran


/PanARMENIAN.Net/ US president told Israeli prime minister he would not back attack on Iran, senior European diplomatic sources said.

Israel gave serious thought this spring to launching a military strike on Iran’s nuclear sites but was told by President George W. Bush that he would not support it and did not expect to revise that view for the rest of his presidency, The Guardian reports.

“The then prime minister, Ehud Olmert, used the occasion of Bush’s trip to Israel for the 60th anniversary of the state’s founding to raise the issue in a one-on-one meeting on May 14, the sources said. "He took it [the refusal of a US green light] as where they were at the moment, and that the US position was unlikely to change as long as Bush was in office", they added.

The sources work for a European head of government who met the Israeli leader some time after the Bush visit. Their talks were so sensitive that no note-takers attended, but the European leader subsequently divulged to his officials the highly sensitive contents of what Olmert had told him of Bush’s position.

Bush’s decision to refuse to offer any support for a strike on Iran appeared to be based on two factors, the sources said. One was US concern over Iran’s likely retaliation, which would probably include a wave of attacks on US military and other personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as on shipping in the Persian Gulf.

The other was US anxiety that Israel would not succeed in disabling Iran’s nuclear facilities in a single assault even with the use of dozens of aircraft. It could not mount a series of attacks over several days without risking full-scale war. So the benefits would not outweigh the costs.

Iran has repeatedly said it would react with force to any attack. Some western government analysts believe this could include asking Lebanon’s Shia movement Hizbollah to strike at the US.

Even if Israel were to launch an attack on Iran without US approval its planes could not reach their targets without the US becoming aware of their flightpath and having time to ask them to abandon their mission.

"The shortest route to Natanz lies across Iraq and the US has total control of Iraqi airspace", the official said. Natanz, about 100 miles north of Isfahan, is the site of an uranium enrichment plant.

In this context Iran would be bound to assume Bush had approved it, even if the White House denied fore-knowledge, raising the prospect of an attack against the US.

Several high-level Israeli officials have hinted over the last two years that Israel might strike Iran's nuclear facilities to prevent them being developed to provide sufficient weapons-grade uranium to make a nuclear bomb. Iran has always denied having such plans.

Olmert himself raised the possibility of an attack at a press conference during a visit to London last November, when he said sanctions were not enough to block Iran’s nuclear program.

"Economic sanctions are effective. They have an important impact already, but they are not sufficient. So there should be more. Up to where? Up until Iran will stop its nuclear program," he said.

The revelation that Olmert was not merely saber-rattling to try to frighten Iran but considered the option seriously enough to discuss it with Bush shows how concerned Israeli officials had become.

Bush’s refusal to support an attack, and the strong suggestion he would not change his mind, is likely to end speculation that Washington might be preparing an "October surprise" before the US presidential election. Some analysts have argued that Bush would back an Israeli attack in an effort to help John McCain’s campaign by creating an eve-of-poll security crisis.

Others have said that in the case of an Obama victory, the vice-president, xxxx Cheney, the main White House hawk, would want to cripple Iran’s nuclear program in the dying weeks of Bush’s term.

During Saddam Hussein’s rule in 1981, Israeli aircraft successfully destroyed Iraq’s nuclear reactor at Osirak shortly before it was due to start operating.

Last September they knocked out a buildings complex in northern Syria, which US officials later said had been a partly constructed nuclear reactor based on a North Korean design. Syria said the building was a military complex but had no links to a nuclear program.

In contrast, Iran's nuclear facilities, which are officially described as intended only for civilian purposes, are dispersed around the country and some are in fortified bunkers underground.

In public, Bush gave no hint of his view that the military option had to be excluded. In a speech to the Knesset the following day he confined himself to telling Israel’s parliament: "America stands with you in firmly opposing Iran's nuclear weapons ambitions. Permitting the world's leading sponsor of terror to possess the world's deadliest weapon would be an unforgivable betrayal of future generations. For the sake of peace, the world must not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon.''

Three weeks after Bush’s red light, on June 2, Israel mounted a massive air exercise covering several hundred miles in the eastern Mediterranean. It involved dozens of warplanes, including F-15s, F-16s and aerial refueling tankers.

The size and scope of the exercise ensured that the US and other nations in the region saw it, said a US official, who estimated the distance was about the same as from Israel to Natanz.

A few days later, Israel’s deputy prime minister, Shaul Mofaz, told the paper Yediot Ahronot: "If Iran continues its program to develop nuclear weapons, we will attack it. The window of opportunity has closed. The sanctions are not effective. There will be no alternative but to attack Iran in order to stop the Iranian nuclear program."

The exercise and Mofaz’s comments may have been designed to boost the Israeli government and military’s own morale as well, perhaps, to persuade Bush to reconsider his veto. Last week Mofaz narrowly lost a primary within the ruling Kadima party to become Israel's next prime minister. Tzipi Livni, who won the contest, takes a less hawkish position.

The US announced two weeks ago that it would sell Israel 1,000 bunker-busting bombs. The move was interpreted by some analysts as a consolation prize for Israel after Bush told Olmert of his opposition to an attack on Iran. But it could also enhance Israel's attack options in case the next US president revives the military option.

The guided bomb unit-39 (GBU-39) has a penetration capacity equivalent to a one-tonne bomb. Israel already has some bunker-busters,” the article says.

http://www.panarmenian.net/news/eng/?nid=27175

[Armenian]

Re: Palin on Israel...AKA The Black and White World of Sarah Palin

Why is she so hell-bent on starting a Third World War? How Christian is that?

Well, in a sense its very 'Evangelical Christian' since they believe that Jews are God's chosen people and only through a global catastrophe will Jesus return to earth.

[Anoush]

Re: Palin on Israel...AKA The Black and White World of Sarah Palin

Well, in a sense its very 'Evangelical Christian' since they believe that Jews are God's chosen people and only through a global catastrophe will Jesus return to earth.

Then why in the world she has had as many children as she already had? What was the sense when indeed she wishes to make a global catastrophe? Where is her motherly love for her children and for all the children of the world, when the world will no longer be a safe globe any more? Where is her womenly nurturing side? Vanished it seems. I think she and the others in Washington are fighting amongst themselves that who can outdo in kissing Israel's ass more.

[yerazhishda]

Re: Palin on Israel...AKA The Black and White World of Sarah Palin

Sarah Palin: The W'hore of Babylon?



source: http://open.salon.com/content.php?cid=18580

[yerazhishda]

Re: Palin on Israel...AKA The Black and White World of Sarah Palin

Israel, Azerbaijan Close Multi-Million Dollar Arms Deal

TEL AVIV (Haaretz)--Israel and Azerbaijan have closed a weapons deal worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

According to agreements signed by the Defense Ministry and the government of Azerbaijan, which borders on Iran, Israel will sell the southern Caucasus state ammunition, mortars and radio equipment.

Predominantly Muslim Azerbaijan has increasingly been caught in a tug-of-war for influence between its large southern neighbor, and the secular West.

Rumblings of Shi'ite political Islam have been particularly noticeable in the more conservative regions that border Iran, and the secular government has displayed concern over Iranian influence.

A number of Israeli firms were involved in the various deal. Soltam will sell mortars and ammunition to Azerbaijan, Israel Military Industries will sell the country rocket artillery and Tadiran Communications will sell it radio equipment.

Israeli companies have also recently signed deals worth tens of millions of dollars with Kazakhstan, a neighbor of Azerbaijan's.

Minister of National Infrastructures and former defense minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer has visited Azerbaijan in the past, and has said that the country can serve as a source of oil and gas for Israel.

Foreign news outlets have reported that the two countries maintain intelligence and security contacts. The bolstering of these ties has reportedly been achieved by former Mossad agent Michael Ross. The Canadian-born Ross describes Iranian intelligence operations in Azerbaijan in a book he published last year.

Azeri President Ilham Aliyev has met with Israeli leaders at various international forums as well as at Baku, his nation's capital. He has voiced the desire for closer relations with Israel and has also spoken of threats that both countries face from Iran.

source: http://www.asbarez.com/#AMC=Open&ASBSC=Closed

[Merv]

Re: Palin on Israel...AKA The Black and White World of Sarah Palin

Well, in a sense its very 'Evangelical Christian' since they believe that Jews are God's chosen people and only through a global catastrophe will Jesus return to earth.

No, that's not consistent with the Bible at all. A proper evangelical reading does not support that. God never told us to "further his kingdom" (or whatever Sarah & co. thinks she's doing) by supporting a man-made state of Israel. The xxxs may indeed be God's chosen people but that doesn't entitle them to do what they've done to the Palestinians and in fact they are held to a higher standard because God gave them a law and they do not follow it. Jesus told us to spread the good news, not to create and destroy nations to fit Israel's agenda.

And re: Jesus' return, there are multiple views on this. Some believe He will come before the tribulation (pre-millenialism), some during, and some after (post-millenialism). Most evangelicals are pre-millenial, which means that there's no precondition that must be met before Jesus returns; the seven years of global catastrophe occurs after his second coming and rapture of the saved.

[Armenian]

Re: Palin on Israel...AKA The Black and White World of Sarah Palin

Very poignant.

Sarah Palin: The W'hore of Babylon?

[Armenian]

Re: Palin on Israel...AKA The Black and White World of Sarah Palin

No, that's not consistent with the Bible at all. A proper evangelical reading does not support that. God never told us to "further his kingdom" (or whatever Sarah & co. thinks she's doing) by supporting a man-made state of Israel.

My comment was about the "Evangelical Christian" establishment here in America and it has nothing to do with reading perspectives or Hebrew theology per se.

The xxxs may indeed be God's chosen people

According to who, Jews? Other than their words to that effect, what are you basing this belief on, their deeds on earth? Other than you being 'told' that their scriptures are God inspired, do you know if it really is? If I write a book that we Armenians were God's first creation and his chosen and I backed it up with credible evidence to support my claims, would you change your mind, or are you satisfied with having Jews be God's favorite people? This is silly talk. All the stories found in the Tanakh and the Torah were parables meant for the Jewish peasantry at the time. And Christ was not the "Messiah" the Jewish people were and still are waiting for.

but that doesn't entitle them to do what they've done to the Palestinians and in fact they are held to a higher standard because God gave them a law and they do not follow it. Jesus told us to spread the good news, not to create and destroy nations to fit Israel's agenda.

No, that's not consistent with the Bible at all. They are doing to the Palestinians what they have done to all their neighbors since Biblical times. I suggest you reread the Tanakh and the Torah to recall what I am saying. Jews and their god Yahweh have been warlike and ruthless throughout history. On the other hand, Christ, not Jesus but Christ, came to spread the good news of our Triune God and his love for humanity - needless to say Christ was rejected by the Jews.

And re: Jesus' return, there are multiple views on this. Some believe He will come before the tribulation (pre-millenialism), some during, and some after (post-millenialism). Most evangelicals are pre-millenial, which means that there's no precondition that must be met before Jesus returns; the seven years of global catastrophe occurs after his second coming and rapture of the saved.

This discussion is irrelevant. The point is, a very significant number of "Evangelical Christians" think Jews have to populate Palestine (by any means necessary), Solomon's Temple has to be rebuilt, Israel has to get attacked, a devastating world war has to occur for Jesus to return...

Protestants are nothing but modified Jews and they are the enemies of Christ and the Apostolic Church.

Sorry Merv, you know that I respect you. I just don't like Protestants, especially the American ones. Welcome back.