Should Libertarians support Obama in Obama-neocons War on Israeli Settlements issue? [Archive]

Liberty Star

06-03-2009, 07:58 PM

The Libertarian Party should take no position. We can expect another war. Vegas will probably be taking odds on who Obama will support. IMO, he is a closet Muslim and it's going to be politically difficult regardless of his position.

So his private religion is more important to you than fixing a deep hole in US foreign policy that has created various perpetual welfare states in middle east?

Without Israeli settlemets on arab land, we not only won't have to give billions in tax dollar donations to Israel but billions of dollars of yearly bribery to dictators in Egypt, Jordan will also come to end.

In principle, do you support end of open-ended Israeli occupation of Palestinians? Do you agree that it is one of the primary causes for anti-American terror threats emerging out of mideast?

ceakins

06-03-2009, 08:03 PM

Libertarian party should support an end to us giving other countries money.

Objectivist

06-03-2009, 08:10 PM

You need to follow Obama why?
Then you believe anything coming out of his mouth why?

Here, let me introduce you to his buddy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rahm_Emanuel

Then Rahm's papa was in this group....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irgun

klamath

06-03-2009, 08:14 PM

Since I am not a libertarian I guess I don't count but as a RP republican I think RP republicans should support not pressuring countries or giving money to any county in the middle east or elsewere.

TastyWheat

06-03-2009, 08:26 PM

Liberty Star

06-03-2009, 08:27 PM

Libertarian party should support an end to us giving other countries money.

Well put.

You need to follow Obama why?
Then you believe anything coming out of his mouth why?

Here, let me introduce you to his buddy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rahm_Emanuel

Then Rahm's papa was in this group....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irgun

You cynicism is not misplaced but did you by any chance click on the link above? And it is an "IF" what question.

Quote:

http://www.haaretz.com/hasite/images/iht_daily/D030609/248obama22.jpg

A collage portraying U.S. President Obama wearing a kaffiyeh which is set to be posted across Israel by rightist group Hazit.
(Hazit)

03/06/2009

'We're launching a campaign against anti-Semitic Obama'

By Raphael Ahren, Haaretz Correspondent and Haaretz Sevice

Tags: Israel news, Obama, Jerusalem

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1090166.html

Liberty Star

06-03-2009, 08:36 PM

Even though I agree with Obama more than the neocons on this issue I still disagree with his intervention. I take Michael Scheuer's position that we should have nothing to do with Israel. No country has a right to exist.

There would be no Israeli settelements without our financial and military support.

So you think giving them billions in money and arms and looking the other way on selletlement expansions
is better than
giving billions in money and arms and insisting on immediate settlements freeze on arab land that ceeate anti American terror threats?

Since I am not a libertarian I guess I don't count but as a RP republican I think RP republicans should support not pressuring countries or giving money to any county in the middle east or elsewere.

You're not a libertarian ?

I thought you were :)

Number19

06-03-2009, 08:39 PM

So his private religion is more important to you than fixing a deep hole in US foreign policy that has created various perpetual welfare states in middle east?

Without Israeli settlemets on arab land, we not only won't have to give billions in tax dollar donations to Israel but billions of dollars of yearly bribery to dictators in Egypt, Jordan will also come to end.

In principle, do you support end of open-ended Israeli occupation of Palestinians? Do you agree that it is one of the primary causes for anti-American terror threats emerging out of mideast?I am an American. I support a policy of minding our own business and staying out of the affairs of foreigners. Our government shouldn't be funding any foreign policy.

Liberty Star

06-03-2009, 08:41 PM

I am an American. I support a policy of minding our own business and staying out of the affairs of foreigners. Our government shouldn't be funding any foreign policy.

Care to take a stab at this question then?

There would be no Israeli settelements without our financial and military support.

So you think giving them billions in money and arms and looking the other way on selletlement expansions
is better than
giving billions in money and arms and insisting on immediate settlements freeze on arab land that ceeate anti American terror threats?

LibertyEagle

06-03-2009, 09:01 PM

Liberty Star

06-03-2009, 09:10 PM

The answer to the poll question, from my perspective, is NO. It's none of our business what Israel does. What IS our business is what is done with our money and our government should not be funding any foreign government whatsoever, regardless of their plans.

How is it not our business when they use our supplied funds, machinery and weapons to build settlements on others land and occupy them in the most oppressive denial of human liberties? When US gov/tax payers bail out GM, they run GM.

Ideally we should have no involvement in that occupation mess but if we are to be involved with our tax dollars, won't having a say in how our money is spent the lesser evil than giving money and washing our hands off like nothing happened?

US Aid to Israel to Continue despite Financial Crisis

10/05/2009 Despite the deep financial crisis in the United States, Washington has no plans to halt its foreign aid. The American administration recently asked the Congress to approve the full security aid to Israel, which stands at $2.775 billion, as part of the 2010 budget plan.

Outgoing Israeli Ambassador to Washington Salai Meridor expressed his appreciation Saturday night following the US administration's decision to include the full security aid in the budget plan.

"This move is an implementation of part of the memorandum of understanding for 10 years, which was signed between the two countries, and an expression of the ongoing American commitment to Israel's security and to guaranteeing its exceptional advantage," he said.

Despite the economic crisis, the Obama administration has no plans to renege on the Bush administration's commitment to provide Israel with aid for 10 years – starting in 2009.

As part of the aid, this year Israel will receive $2.5 billion, in 2010 - $2.775 billion, and in 2011 the sum will reach $3 billion. In total, the security aid Tel Aviv is slated to receive from Washington stands at some $30 billion until 2019.

In addition, the US is expected to help the Israeli defense establishment develop defense systems against a variety of rockets and missiles – from Qassams to ballistic missiles.

pappy

06-03-2009, 09:19 PM

tonesforjonesbones

06-03-2009, 09:26 PM

I am sick of the middle east. tones

LibertyEagle

06-03-2009, 09:40 PM

How is it not our business when they use our supplied funds, machinery and weapons to build settlements on others land and occupy them in the most oppressive denial of human liberties? When US gov/tax payers bail out GM, they run GM.

Ideally we should have no involvement in that occupation mess but if we are to be involved with our tax dollars, won't having a say in how our money is spent the lesser evil than giving money and washing our hands off like nothing happened?

We stop funding them. Period. The rest is none of our business.

Liberty Star

06-03-2009, 09:50 PM

We stop funding them. Period. The rest is none of our business.

I couldn't agree more.

But as long as we keep giving them billions of tax dollars, bulldozers and bombs, should we have a say in how our supplies in their hands are used?

That's the question.

Dr.3D

06-03-2009, 10:06 PM

I couldn't agree more.

But as long as we keep giving them billions of tax dollars, bulldozers and bombs, should we have a say in how our supplies in their hands are used?

That's the question.

I can sense your frustration.

What you are saying is, since we have not stopped sending Israel money, shouldn't we support Obama in his attempt to stop Israel from making more settlements?

While we shouldn't be sending any country any money, we are and since we are, shouldn't we support who ever is trying to stop a country that is receiving that money from doing something we don't approve of?

Since we can't stop the government from sending those countries money, perhaps we should at least try to keep them from using it the wrong way.

Liberty Star

06-03-2009, 10:19 PM

it is our business today because we have made it so.

tomorrow we should make it not our business, and let that be that.

we cannot right the wrongs that we have already done, only try to do the right thing from today forward.

pappy

Question is about today. Tomorrow when we stop sending them aid, it will no longer be our problem.

We all didn't make this mess our business; Israeli firsters, neocons and some religious extremists made this our businesss and sadly we all get collectively punished from resulting blowbacks.

I can sense your frustration.

What you are saying is, since we have not stopped sending Israel money, shouldn't we support Obama in his attempt to stop Israel from making more settlements?

While we shouldn't be sending any country any money, we are and since we are, shouldn't we support who ever is trying to stop a country that is receiving that money from doing something we don't approve of?

Since we can't stop the government from sending those countries money, perhaps we should at least try to keep them from using it the wrong way.

I'm not th eonly one who pays taxes, has to take shoes off at airport or is concerned about America losing liberties and turning into a police state like Israel :)

You don't think there is blowback risk for us all from US money and weapons used by Israel to take Palestinian land?

Dr.3D

06-03-2009, 10:28 PM

Snip~
I'm not th eonly one who pays taxes, has to take shoes off at airport or is concerned about America losing liberties and turning into a police state like Israel :)

You don't think there is blowback risk for us all from US money and weapons used by Israel to take Palestinian land?

Sure there is blow-back. It's not just a risk anymore, it's happening.
The question is, exactly what can we do about it?

Liberty Star

06-03-2009, 10:34 PM

Sure there is blow-back. It's not just a risk anymore, it's happening.
The question is, exactly what can we do about it?

We can change our policies for the better?

We should have a good idea how many Palestinian arab, Iraqi, Afghan children today will grow up hating us if we are to talk objectively about blowback theory. Seeds of what is heppning today were sowed deacades ago. We can't keep doing the same things and expect different results, that's insanity.

This is especially insane considering that big majority of Americans had called Israel the main factor for 9/11 attacks in a poll taken soon afterwards. That Reuters poll seem to have disappeared from news websites oddly.

Dr.3D

06-03-2009, 10:37 PM

We can change our policies for the better?

We should have a good idea hoe many Palestinia, Iraqi, Afghan children today will grow up hating us if we are to talk objectively about blowback theory. Seeds of what heppns today were sowed deacades ago. We can't be keep doing the same things and expect different results, that's insanity.

Well, I think you are preaching to the choir here.

I believe everyone on these forums (apart from the infiltrators) is trying to change the United States policies for the better.

It's not the kind of change that happens over night though.

Liberty Star

06-03-2009, 10:42 PM

Well, I think you are preaching to the choir here.

I believe everyone on these forums (apart from the infiltrators) is trying to change the United States policies for the better.

It's not the kind of change that happens over night though.

I agree for the most part.

But when more than a few people here suggest that Israeli settlements or policies are not our problem, that really gives me a pause about our collective grasp of current situation in the world, America's involvement and underlying causes of problems we keep on facing. It's astounding almost.

Number19

06-03-2009, 10:44 PM

Liberty Star

06-03-2009, 10:49 PM

I stated my position that we shouldn't involve ourselves at all in middle-eastern policies, and you countered with the statement that we are involved, already. So, since we are play acting at being a statist, I'm going to side with the underdog Israelis. Lets bomb the hell out of the Muslims. We can take anything they throw at us and send it back a hundred fold.

4th most powerful country in the world and armed to the teeth is the underdog? LOL It's the most disliked aparthied in the world today.

Where do you get your news from, this completely throws off the blowback theory. So you then agree with neocons reasoning that they hate us because of our freedoms?

I was against him because he was a suspected Israeli lobby tool, I have no problem with his faith whatsoever otherwise. In fact, he seems like a good well earned punishment for war monger crowd, it's too bad he may end up being bad for all of America if he didn't change course.

Dr.3D

06-03-2009, 10:53 PM

I agree for the most part.

But when more than a few people here suggest that Israeli settlements or policies are not our problem, that really gives me a pause about our collective grasp of underlying causes of problems we keep on facing, current situation in the world and America's involvement.

Well, perhaps I can explain it like this.

If you think of one of those old trains where they were fired by coal.
We have the engineer in the engine. We can look at him as being the Congress and Senate right up to the President.
Behind that engine we have the coal tender. We can look at that as being the people of the United States.

When the engineer is pointing a gun at the people in the coal tender and telling them to shovel more coal, they shovel more coal.

Now even if the people in the tender notice the bridge is out, there isn't much they can do about it as the engineer won't let them stop shoveling the coal to fuel the engine and it soon runs off the bridge and crashes.

We still are trying to get the engineer to listen to us but he is more interested in getting us to shovel more coal under the boiler.

There isn't much those in the tender of the train can do to keep it from running off the bridge. We can keep trying to get his attention, but he thinks he knows more than we do and won't listen.

If you notice, most of the people tried to get congress not to pass the TARP package but they did it anyway. They think we are stupid and they know better than we do.

I'm not sure we are going to be able to get the so called leadership of our country to listen to anything we say. It seems they are intent on doing what they think is best and as you have noticed, they are usually doing the opposite of what the people are telling them to do.

Liberty Star

06-03-2009, 11:03 PM

Well, perhaps I can explain it like this.

If you think of one of those old trains where they were fired by coal.
We have the engineer in the engine. We can look at him as being the Congress and Senate right up to the President.
Behind that engine we have the coal tender. We can look at that as being the people of the United States.

When the engineer is pointing a gun at the people in the coal tender and telling them to shovel more coal, they shovel more coal.

Now even if the people in the tender notice the bridge is out, there isn't much they can do about it as the engineer won't let them stop shoveling the coal to fuel the engine and it soon runs off the bridge and crashes.

We still are trying to get the engineer to listen to us but he is more interested in getting us to shovel more coal under the boiler.

There isn't much those in the tender of the train can do to keep it from running off the bridge. We can keep trying to get his attention, but he thinks he knows more than we do and won't listen.

If you notice, most of the people tried to get congress not to pass the TARP package but they did it anyway. They think we are stupid and they know better than we do.

I'm not sure we are going to be able to get the so called leadership of our country to listen to anything we say. It seems they are intent on doing what they think is best and as you have noticed, they are usually doing the opposite of what the people are telling them to do.

That's an interesting analogy. So we are shoveliing coal under the gun knowing full well that bridge ahead is out?

That's not good :) But I would add that our leaders are our relflection and more often than not they reflect our collective igonorance or awareness. We can't just scapegoat the "leaders", we have to take responsibility for our choices collectively. In the end, we reap what we sow.

Imperial

06-03-2009, 11:10 PM

I stated my position that we shouldn't involve ourselves at all in middle-eastern policies, and you countered with the statement that we are involved, already. So, since we are play acting at being a statist, I'm going to side with the underdog Israelis. Lets bomb the hell out of the Muslims. We can take anything they throw at us and send it back a hundred fold.

We already make plenty of minor exceptions to our principles. Like Ron Paul would vote for a flat tax even if it is not as good as no tax. We may accept public funding of campaigns in some situations. For some it is an exception to work in the Republican Party. We already have plenty of statist exceptions we make. All it is is where you draw the line.

Dr.3D

06-03-2009, 11:11 PM

That's an interesting analogy. So we are shoveliing coal under the gun knowing full well that bridge ahead is out?

That's not good :) But I would add that our leaders are our relflection and more often than not they reflective our collective igonorance or awareness. We can't just scapegoat the "leaders", we have to take responsibility for our choices collectively.

I didn't vote for Obama.

The United States was not founded as a democracy. It was founded as a Constitutional Republic. The problem is, somehow it seems the majority of the people in the United States have been brainwash into thinking their country is supposed to be a democracy.

If everybody understood our government is supposed to be limited by the United States Constitution, then none of what is happening would be happening.

Sending aid to other countries is not authorized by the Constitution.
Getting involved with the affairs of other countries is not authorized by the Constitution.

Our government is in violation of the United States Constitution.

The engineer is deaf and the train is running toward a damaged bridge.

We (those who understand our country is supposed to be a Republic) are still trying to communicate with the engineer but so far, we are not getting the message across to him.

We can't be considered a collective. Everybody in our country is an individual and they do what they think is best. The big problem is, most have been brainwashed into believing we are supposed to be a democracy.

TastyWheat

06-05-2009, 11:43 AM

There would be no Israeli settelements without our financial and military support.

So you think giving them billions in money and arms and looking the other way on selletlement expansions
is better than
giving billions in money and arms and insisting on immediate settlements freeze on arab land that ceeate anti American terror threats?
We shouldn't give any country, much less Israel, anything. If they can produce something of value then we should trade them for it. Money for oil, guns for intelligence, I don't care. Israel takes, takes, takes, and we get nothing in return but headaches.

Liberty Star

06-05-2009, 11:47 AM

We shouldn't give any country, much less Israel, anything. If they can produce something of value then we should trade them for it. Money for oil, guns for intelligence, I don't care. Israel takes, takes, takes, and we get nothing in return but headaches.

We have created multiple arab/jewish perpetual welfare states/dictatorships in mideast thanks to our insane policies of recent decades. Once we cut off Israel's aid, there settlements would no longer be our problem. That highlighted part is an understatement.

Number19

06-05-2009, 12:43 PM

... Israel takes, takes, takes, and we get nothing in return but headaches.This isn't exactly accurate. The United States gives and gives and gives - willingly. What we have gotten in return is egotistic satisfaction in being the big dog on the world stage - the dominate power capable of acting as we please and under the delusion it is we who determine outcome of world politics.

TastyWheat

06-07-2009, 08:02 AM

This isn't exactly accurate. The United States gives and gives and gives - willingly. What we have gotten in return is egotistic satisfaction in being the big dog on the world stage - the dominate power capable of acting as we please and under the delusion it is we who determine outcome of world politics.
Well, chicken or egg? Is it their fault for not asserting their sovereignty or ours for not respecting it?

Shami-Amourae

06-07-2009, 08:27 AM

Wouldn't it make more sense that Obama is telling the Muslims "We are on their side", (not apologizing), considering Israel finally is waking up. Antisemitism (AKA people who disagree with the Israeli government) is on the rise in Europe and other places. Basically Israel created such a large fire with the Gaza invasions and their other stunts that they need to use Obama to put some water on the fire.