Skip to comments.
Bush Middle East Speech Discussion Thread
Posted on 06/24/2002 12:48:28 PM PDT by RCW2001
Bush Middle East Speech Discussion Thread
TOPICS: Breaking News; Government; Israel
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,221-1,240, 1,241-1,260, 1,261-1,280 ... 1,561-1,568 next last
To: Deb
Deb wrote:
Mark seems to think that there's no such thing as diplomacy and that Bush is selling out if he doesn't nuke gaza.It's a dictum with Rush that no war can be won unless the enemy is totally crushed, and I assume Levin believes likewise.
According to Rush Israel should roll over the Palestinians with a scorched-earth campaign a la Berlin in '45 until they plead for peace.
That this would probably engulf the whole Middle East in a war which might entail the use of nukes seems not to be a factor in the thinking of Rush & co.
I'm sorry I missed this discussion.
I would have been interested in asking Levin to lay out his plan for Middle East peace in detail.
From what I read of his posts he seemed to be as mad about Rush-bashing here as anything.
To: hinckley buzzard
That is the most SANE statement on this whole thread!
To: Howlin; Miss Marple
Do you find that as offensive as calling somebody a "little puke?" Dane is a little puke, quit trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill.
I think holdonnow should be commended for calling 'em as he sees them.
Why don't you address his substantive points, rather than nitpicking? Oh, I forgot, you're both nitpickers extraordinare.
To: Howlin
Hey, I agree with that post too!
Seeeeeee, you and I can agree on something. :-)
To: quidnunc
It was just more of the mindless venting your thread generated last night. Nothing new.
To: Fred Mertz
You're a little late to the party, pal.
They did that at first.
To: quidnunc
"According to Rush Israel should roll over the Palestinians with a scorched-earth campaign a la Berlin in '45 until they plead for peace." Oddly, it sounds like Rush is attending the Billy Kristol institute for foreign policy.......
To: oldvike; Howlin
Break out the glasses and the champaign -- we have agreement on this thread!
To: oldvike
Yep!
To: Texasforever
He signed off on having us subsidize abortion, here and elsewhere. Money's fungible, and it goes to organizations whose members decapitate babies. You can check out the "Bush Signs Largest Family Planning Bill in U.S. History" [foreign] FR thread link on my profile. He also signed off on forcing us to subsidize Planned Parenthood via Title X. ~$100 million. My money. Your money.
To: oldvike
Hey now, you'll have to do some leg work on your own. LOL That reference I just posted was at #213. Go there and start reading LOL
To: Miss Marple
You're mixing the comments. Try again.
To: quidnunc
I have a feeling Rush will be giving us Levin's theory on what to do in Israel tomorrow. Both he and Hannity have been channeling The Great One for weeks.
1,253
posted on
06/24/2002 9:37:43 PM PDT
by
Deb
To: Fred Mertz
think holdonnow should be commended for calling 'em as he sees them. And those would be?
To: quidnunc
"From what I read of his posts he seemed to be as mad about Rush-bashing here as anything"
Yep, that is how he seemed to me as well.
To: Howlin
I find that "tone" to be around this site all the time. Are you offended because it was Mark Levin? Do you find that as offensive as calling somebody a "little puke?" Sadly, I also find "that tone" and epithets far worse than "a little puke" kicked around this site all the time. My point pertained to your comment that it looked like Mark struck the first blow (at least in the exchange you highlighted).
I do think talking down to someone right out of the gate will get you in trouble. At least that's been my experience. (I know it sets my teeth on edge.)
To: LarryLied
Notice how Mark lists all the things Bush has done in the past which are not conservative. But he says it now. He wasn't on here complaining about the Education Bill or the Farm Bill that I recall. It is all about Israel. It always is. Republicans cannot win when it comes to Israel. Eisenhower didn't, Nixon didn't, Reagan didn't.It's late, I'm a little dense. Could you spell out what you're saying here? It looks like you're implying that his loyalty is to Israel first because he's Jewish. Am I wrong here?
To: section9
This is one of the best posts that I've ever seen on FR. Bigtime bump!
To: truthkeeper
Well, my point was he was hardly the victim; he gave as good as he got. As so many of us do around here. ;-)
To: PhiKapMom; Howlin
LMAO
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,221-1,240, 1,241-1,260, 1,261-1,280 ... 1,561-1,568 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson