3rd intifada coming – thanks to Bush

World Net Daily ^ | Friday, May 26, 2006 | Patrick J. Buchanan

[streetpreacher]

As a Roman Catholic, Pat simply doesn't get it and neither do most secular Jews. On a strategic or even rational level, Pat's argument might make sense (although I think we could make a strong case against it on those grounds as well) but as a Catholic traditionalist who thinks world peace and the second advent is going to come through a Middle eastern peace treaty, he (along with liberal Protestants and replacement theologians) denies the Biblical God ordained right of Israel's claim on the land.

I find it less than ironic that at the same time Israel is acquiescing to terrorist demands for Israeli withdrawal from Covenant lands, the United States is on the verge of passing into law a bill that will allow the U.S. to be supplanted by a foreign population that will be instrumental in deconstructing her sovereign borders and making us merely the part of a super-regional province in a globalist super state.

How long can we be from the "covenant of peace" which will divide Jerusalem and reveal the man of sin?

I don't expect most here to agree with this (especially the post-millennial types and reconstructionists) but for those who have discernment, it is time to wake up (stop looking for an escapist rapture) and to be aware of the signs of the times. In light of this, how are we to live?

As the late Leonard Ravenhill said, "Are the things we living for worth Christ dying for?"

[sinkspur]

An enemy of Israel is Pat's friend, no matter who that enemy is or what they stand for.

[Celtjew Libertarian]

And the first two intifadas worked out soooo well for the Palestinians.

[Txsleuth]

There goes Pat....at least he doesn't even try to "couch" his anti-semitism.

I also hear his in thing of running for POTUS again...this could be a plank in his platform.

Small tent party...LOL

[bkepley]

I imagine a lot of anti-war conservatives wish Pat would stop taking their side.

[paul51]

Consider: Suppose Bush declared that Ehud Olmert's proposed withdrawals from the West Bank were insufficient, that an official Palestinian presence in East Jerusalem was imperative, and that the United States needed to aid the Palestinians whom Israel is starving out and to talk in back channels to Hamas,

He says that as if it would satisfy the palis and something would be gained other than demands for further acquiescence. What a shortsighted fool. On second thought, I think he knows exactly what would happen.

[Pox]

Buchanan seems to have the good old Megalomaniac complex, IMO.

Of course, if his lordship was the ruler of the U.S., and by extension the world (as he seems to see it), there would be Peace In Our Time!

What a Maroon!

[tet68]

He wants U.S. support for Israel's wall that is fencing in large slices of the West Bank and all of Jerusalem, forever denying the Palestinians a viable state.

The Palestinians themselves have denied a viable Palestinian
state over and over again for the chance at the destruction
of Israel and it's Jewish population.

Viable State? Let them move to Jordan, or Egypt or Saud.

Jeruselum is the capital of All Israel and nothing else.

[stop_fascism]

And then he says that he hates the damn jews and Hitler was right and.. and...

[tet68]

You just know where people are coming from when the term
"American Hegemony" creeps into their lexicon.

[Mike Darancette]

Olmert wants Bush to remain steadfast in refusing to talk to the Hamas-dominated Palestinian Authority.

Bush does not negotiate with terrorists.

[goldstategop]

The truth is Olmert's plan is exactly the reverse of what Buchanan imagines and its why true friends of Israel oppose it. Buchanan has also come out in opposition to it! I guess he thinks the people opposed to Olmert are Israel-bashers, Islamofascists and anti-Semites. He should have done his homework first.

(Denny Crane: "Every one should carry a gun strapped to their waist. We need more - not less guns.")

[Stepan12]

He's a frustrated powerluster -- he and the rest of the Paleos. He is taking out his rage on Joos except he doesn't have the guts to say he hates them so he calls them neocons.

[Fudd Fan]

Buchanan?... you must be joking.

[Sender]

There are times when I agree with Pat Buchanan, but not this time. He keeps saying "no Arab nations will recognize Israel's borders" if they build the wall, but of course no Arab nations will ever recognize the existance of Israel. He claims Israel is "starving out" the poor Palestinians when in fact Israel and the EU have supported them for so many years. It is not Israel's fault if Palestinians cannot learn to feed themselves or develop an economy. The whole Palestinian culture is one of victimization and occupation so they never learn to grow crops, make goods, look around them. What would Pat have as a viable Palestinian state? Perhaps from the river Jordan to the sea.

[Fudd Fan]

I wish I could figure out what side this anti-Jew, anti-Israel jerk is on.

[OKIEDOC]

Hey what belonged to the Jews in the year 0000 and before still belongs to them according to my religion.

As far as I am concerned their is no imminent domain process for the interlopers called Palestinians.

[Stepan12]

Bush does not negotiate with terrorists.

Stoopid Pres. Bush shouldn't be President! He stole the election from Pat jess like he did from Al Gore. Instead of stoopid Bush, people need a genius like Pat to rule over them and he will solve all the world's problems by blaming the Joos for them. Oops! I mean blaming the neocons (hope no one heard the previous remark). /sarcasm

[streetpreacher]

There are times when I agree with Pat Buchanan, but not this time. He keeps saying "no Arab nations will recognize Israel's borders" if they build the wall, but of course no Arab nations will ever recognize the existance of Israel

Key point right there. Besides, to be entirely consistent as a paleoconservative with a traditionalist foreign policy (which I wholeheartedly subscribe to), he should be advocating "no role" for the U.S. in the middle east with Israel or the Arab states.

I think if left alone, Israel could not only take care of themselves but would clean house if need be. Arab countries would be put on notice that no longer will America be tying Israel's hands when it comes to dealing with terrorism or existential threats.

America has done more harm than good concerning Israel as of late. If it weren't for our pressure, Israel would have never surrendered any of her land.

[Sender]

IMHO, the role I would have the US play is to say to Israel "we support you" and let them figure it out. And to Hamas, "we do not support you".

I am not in favor of the US trying to micromanage Israeli affairs, or to force compliance with some "road map". That map leads to a bad place.

My sentiments are not fair and balanced; I am a Zionist. I would no sooner give Judea and Samaria to the Palestinians than to give Aztlan to the Mexicans.