That is a good point. Imagine if it was Putin speaking the same way about how the US President doesn't understand the realities of why Russia needs to occupy Chechnya and Ingusetia.
Yes, because Russia is led by a man that George W. Bush shook hands with, looked in the eye, peered into his soul, and knew he could trust him....and then they invaded Georgia. ...oops
Here's an op-ed from Danny Danon, a member of the Likud Party, deputy speaker of the Israeli Knesset, to the New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/19/opinion/19Danon.html?_r=1 Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat. What version of democracy is that? So let me get this straight: 1) It's cool for Israel to break agreements and accords, continue building settlements, but the moment Palestine attempts to do something they're the ones in the wrong? 2) Okay you want to annex the rest of the land....but only give the Jewish communities citizenship? Where do the rest of the Palestinians go with this wonderful "no option to become citizen" parting package? Let's create more refugees and push them back out to the deserts? 3) So the international community was against Israel taking harsh steps but Israel did it anyways in the past and people eventually "got over it" so they should do it again? If you seriously don't see the plain black/white here, I can't help you. I understand the Likud is the more militarized, right wing party in Israel but imagine the Republican party or any other Right wing party in any "democratic" nation saying this stuff.
can't wait for the follow up tomorrow evening. I'm no expert but I believe it's said that you won't know when it's coming and don't bother trying to predict it because you can't. Am I wrong? I'll give that there are TONS of stuff that fit into the End Times story. But since the 1st Century AD people have believed that the end was coming. They were wrong. Anyway, in the event it happens, let's get a ClutchCity underground movement going. Meet at Toyota Center on the 22nd and let the resistance begin!!!!
Netanyahu Urges U.S. Return to 1845 Borders Israeli PM calls for “just solution” to end the conflict. Aboard Air Force Aleph (Reuters) – Speaking to reporters accompanying Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on his long flight to the United States tonight, Netanyahu spoke of the injustice and hardship Mexicans have endured since American forces annexed Texas in 1845. “Tens of thousands of ordinary Mexicans were driven out of their homes – the only homes they had known for centuries – and forced to live in poverty and squalor south of the border imposed by American aggression,” Netanyahu said. “The Israeli and Mexican people agree on this: This festering wound will never heal until America takes bold steps to return to the internationally accepted lines of 1845. Clearly the settlement activity that’s taken place in occupied Mexico since then is illegal. When I meet the President tomorrow I will tell him to halt all building activity in Texas immediately. Two lands for two peoples, yes, but not on land taken by force from Mexico,” the Prime Minister said. Asked if his hard-line stance could hurt the U.S.-Israel relationship, Netanyahu reiterated Israel’s commitment to America’s security and the unshakeable friendship shared by the two countries, then added, “But who was it who said, part of friendship is being able to tell your friend the truth. The ball is now in Obama’s court.”
Your lack of understanding the agreements and actions that have happen and continue to happen regarding the Israel/Palestinians situation is remarkable. I don't think it would be possible for a person to show they know less of the reality there.
Your words are meaningless: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_242#Preamble John McHugo says that by the 1920s, international law no longer recognized that a state could acquire title to territory by conquest. Article 2 of the Charter of the United Nations requires all members to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations. Michael Lynk says that article 2 of the Charter embodied a prevailing legal principle that there could be "no title by conquest". He says that principle had been expressed through numerous international conferences, doctrines and treaties since the late 19th Century. Lynk cites the examples of the First International Conference of American States in 1890; the United States Stimson Doctrine of 1932; the 1932 League of Nations resolution on Japanese aggression in China; the Buenos Aires Declaration of 1936; and the Atlantic Charter of 1941. Surya Sharma says that a war in self-defense cannot result in acquisition of title by conquest. He says that even if a war is lawful in origin it cannot exceed the limits of legitimate self-defense.
Remind me which state subsidizes the other, and which one is the unruly child that could soon see its' allowance taken away.
I was never a blind Bush supporter. There were a lot of things he did that I did not agree with. I never agreed with his stance stance on Israel. I am a firm believer in the Bible. In Genesis 12:2-3 God said the following to Abraham: 2 “I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing. 3 I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you.” Any nation who blesses Israel will be blessed and any nation who curses Israel will be cursed. If ANY President speaks out against Israel, I believe it is a HUGE mistake.
As long as we are getting our opinions from the good book... Read Psalms 137:9 and you will know my opinion on abortion
