Quote:
Originally posted by Diane_Keaton
I don't care about "standards of decorum" like which leader flubbed a bow/curtesy or that kind of gaffe.
|
Yes, that's Hank's issue.
Quote:
|
It's the idea that our ex President is suggesting the U.S. (in cohort with the Zionists) is out to get the Palis.
|
Come now, that's not what he said. A judge who sentences ("punishes") a defendant is not necessarily out to get the defendant.
Quote:
|
But to suggest the U.S. isn't trying to deter terrorism (by not supporting terrorist leaders/organizations voted into power) and that, instead, it is out to get Palis as some sort of revenge or otherwise...is irresponsible.
|
Not "revenge or otherwise." The U.S. policy was to try to ratchet up the pain experienced by Palestinians in the hopes of undermining support for Hamas. Not revenge. It was forward-looking. I happen to think it was misguided, but that's what they were thinking.
Quote:
|
You say you want to talk about things of more "substance" and not decorum? Well, I think Carter's words express the big (substantive) question, Ty -- how should our government approach blood that is shed (including our's) in order to get Jews out of Israel/Palestine, or in the name of Allah against the evil U.S. empire. Carter suggests we aren't trying to stop bloodshed, but simply punishing people for voting a certain way.
|
No, he was talking about the way in which we were trying to pursue peace in the Middle East. The question is, what can be done to undermine Hamas and support Fatah -- which I assume you would agree is better for us and Israel, on balance, which is not to say that Fatah is a bunch of angels. Whatever the preferences of most Palestinians, Fatah has been chased from Gaza.
Quote:
He has also said (infamously and I'm sure you read this):
Even Carter has admitted the poor choice of words here.
|
It sounds to me like a poor choice of words, and I have a hard time believing that he thinks it's OK for suicide bombings to continue until then.
