1 posted on
04/23/2008 8:01:50 AM PDT by
seanmerc
To: seanmerc
What about Americans? I really don’t care if Iran wants to nuke their Islamic neighbors. Sans Israel.
2 posted on
04/23/2008 8:03:52 AM PDT by
blackdog
To: seanmerc
TOE-SUCKER SPEAKS!
3 posted on
04/23/2008 8:04:21 AM PDT by
Old Sarge
(CTHULHU '08 - I won't settle for a lesser evil any longer!)
To: seanmerc
It’s really important to create as much distance as possibls between Herself and the “Football.”
4 posted on
04/23/2008 8:05:31 AM PDT by
Eurale
To: seanmerc
There goes what’s left of her Moonbat support.
5 posted on
04/23/2008 8:06:28 AM PDT by
DogBarkTree
(The correct word isn't "immigrant" when what they are doing is "invading".)
To: seanmerc
Clinton astonishingly responded that she’d use American nukes not just to defend Israel, our traditional strategic ally, but also other neighboring states such as the U.A.E., Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait from an Iranian nuclear attack.
:::::::
This, from a woman who is a well-establish professional liar? Now what do you REALLY believe?
6 posted on
04/23/2008 8:07:13 AM PDT by
EagleUSA
To: seanmerc
I was watching Dick on H & C a few nights ago, and I have to agree with Colmes; all the dude does is slam The Beast. He never stops, never takes a breath, just keeps bitching. After awhile, it does get somewhat old, something the Colmes was alluding to.
7 posted on
04/23/2008 8:15:37 AM PDT by
toddlintown
(Censorship is alive and well.)
To: seanmerc
....
she can't even "protect" female WH interns from Bubba, how does she propose to protect our friends.
14 posted on
04/23/2008 8:37:22 AM PDT by
skinkinthegrass
(just b/c you're paranoid,doesn't mean "they" aren't out to get you..our hopes were dashed by CINOs :)
To: seanmerc
Wouldn’t a preventative strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities be easier? Cleaner? Less deadly?
To: seanmerc
Here we go again.....protecting the Arabs. Let them solve their own problems.
17 posted on
04/23/2008 8:41:31 AM PDT by
RC2
To: seanmerc
I can understand Dick’s criticism of Hillary; but not his hatred of her. I seems to really be eating at his soul. It is palpable whenever he’s on the tube...he never seems to have the same burning vitriolic feelings for Bill and he really has been non-critical of Obama all-the-while dinging Hillary and throwing a barb or two at McCain too.
18 posted on
04/23/2008 8:43:04 AM PDT by
meandog
(Please pray for future President McCain--day minus 273 and counting! Stay home and get Baraked!)
To: seanmerc
Barack Obama's far more sensible answer was simply to commit to definitively and aggressively extend our deterrent protection to Israel . . . period. No bias from these writers! Fair and balanced as always...
20 posted on
04/23/2008 8:46:26 AM PDT by
Edgerunner
(At the heart of every absurdity, lies a liberal lie)
To: dennisw; Cachelot; Nix 2; veronica; Catspaw; knighthawk; Alouette; Optimist; weikel; Lent; GregB; ..
If you'd like to be on this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.
High volume. Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking on the Topic or Keyword Israel, WOT
..................
I certainly wouldn't trust Hillary, and I wouldn't support a formal commitment, but this is precisely what we should be telling Iran, and our oil producing allies in the region. An attack the heart of America's economic strength is an attack, and will be responded to.
21 posted on
04/23/2008 8:52:17 AM PDT by
SJackson
(before we work on problems, have to fix our souls. Our souls are broken in this nation, Michelle O.)
To: seanmerc
Not long ago the Dems were suggesting that we consider taking action against Saudi Arabia because 19 of 21 hijackers were Saudi nationals. Now they’re suggesting we use our nuclear deterrent to protect them? Which is it?
Reminds me of that dialog in “Animal House”: Hey, they can’t do that to our Pledges! Yeah, only we can do that to our Pledges! Government by National Lampoon.
22 posted on
04/23/2008 9:11:11 AM PDT by
Tallguy
(Tagline is offline till something better comes along...)
To: seanmerc
Am I missing something? Why are we promising to protect anyone in the Middle East? IT’s a cauldron always ready to blow. Our nukes are for when we get attacked.
As I understand it, Israel has enough nukes to annihilate Iran many times over...Let them deal with things in their neighborhood.
23 posted on
04/23/2008 9:12:34 AM PDT by
onguard
To: seanmerc
But now Sen. Clinton appears willing to mortgage America's cities to protect nations like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the U.A.E., which includes Dubai, which has paid her husband (and the Clintons' joint bank accounts) almost $15 million in the past seven years. Indeed, is it a coincidence that all three of the countries that she mentioned were generous benefactors to her husband's library? (While donations to the library remain secret, it's known that the Saudi monarchy gave $10 million.)
There are no coincidences when it comes to the Clintons and money.
To: seanmerc
No American president has ever made so sweeping a commitment in the region but Hillary appears eager to break new ground.Anything via political rhetoric to achieve personal gain and live in the White House again.
The Clinton dogma with life...
27 posted on
04/23/2008 6:11:22 PM PDT by
EGPWS
(Trust in God, question everyone else)
To: seanmerc
Clintons: Liars Lie
28 posted on
04/23/2008 6:12:43 PM PDT by
bannie
(clintons CHEAT! It's their only weapon.; & Barry/Barack has two faces.)
To: seanmerc
Politicians will SAY ANYTHING....
If Iran nukes ANY middle east country..including Israel...The United States of America will do what it did in Vietnam and what it will do in Iraq...it will run away and let the people it promised to defend on its own...in other words the States will do ZERO (0) !
I wonder if America would even retaliate with nukes if one of its city's were hit by nuclear weapon???
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson