Huckabee on Israel with Wolf AIPAC Blitzer

Post by Ry » Thu Jan 03, 2008 1:24 pm

Post by **Chow Chee Bai Superbitch** » Thu Jan 03, 2008 1:45 pm

HAHAH!!!! Is this for real!?

Yes lets relocate the Palestinians to Bavaria and keep the immigrant Poles and Russians there along with the Golan Heights which is Syrian land and to hell with soverignty and international borders, Israel needs it more than they do for security purposes.

I'm starting to appreciate Bush.

Post by **general hoke** » Thu Jan 03, 2008 10:41 pm

this guy lets his personal religious beliefs cloud all logic and compramise he is not even capable of seeing this issue through the eyes of the palistinians even for a second. he is a very ignorant man with no sympathy for the Arabs. Israel has 300 nukes what more security do they need? what a fucking moron.

Post by **Khanverse** » Thu Jan 03, 2008 11:55 pm

we really need some intelligent gentiles who care about the future of this planet to go into israel as spies, figure out where the nukes are and smuggle them the fuck OUT, then give the knesset and the entire government 48 hours to vacate or get invaded by a real COALITION of the WILLING.

Post by **Chow Chee Bai Superbitch** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 1:32 am

thats such an immature Zionist thing he said "the arabs have more land"

how retarded.

i usually deal with statements like that from hardcore Zionists but this is more evidence that he really doesn't know shit when it comes to foreign policy.

Post by **Irie Dave** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 1:41 am

^Chow Chee Bai Superbitch this is off-subject but I'm not sure that Jimmy Carter is really worth having a signature of given the atroscities that went down under his watch, regardless of what 'nice things' he has to say now about the Palestinians. Just my opinion.

Post by Ry » Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:52 am

Khan we know where the nukes are Vannu took pictures of them. It doesn't matter Israel does not fight its own wars it sends in the US.

Huckabee is a racist and a bigot. How can he not understand that the source of the conflict is BECAUSE Israel occupies people's land kills their children and demolishes their homes. It's not for security any more than the US attacking the Apache Indians was for Security. Israel has nothing to fear from a Palestinians state. Israel does not want peace because as things are they are occupying land and driving the Palestinians out by force.

Post by **Khanverse** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 7:17 am

Ry wrote:Khan we know where the nukes are Vannu took pictures of them. It doesn't matter Israel does not fight its own wars it sends in the US..

That was years ago. They recently put out a propaganda film about where they might be again but its obviously counter-intelligence bullshit..

And I'm looking at this long term, Israel will be reckoned with, most likely by the US, just a matter of time... The US is the only country with a citizenry willin to fight and die for them through their ignorance...

Once they realize they don't have the US they will threaten the whole world with their nukes and dare others to come @ them cuz they'll take down the whole world with them... They only got these nukes for that latent potentiality and they were willing to murder JFK for that reason alone.

Plus they run the most important and sensitive nuclear weapons facilities in the US through Magal, a part of IAI, owned by Shalom Yaron which probably leased the remote controlled planes to the airlines used on 9/11.

The day of reckoning will come, we need agents on the ground in Israel to smuggle their nukes out and dismantle them completely.

Post by **black_action_hero** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 3:51 pm

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShAr ... mNo=937943

The panel doesn't believe Huckabee's pledge to 'stand by Israel'
By Shmuel Rosner
Tags: U.S. presidential race, Iran

Mike Huckabee was never a favorite of the Israel Factor panel. In the early days of the Factor, the panel had difficulties deciding who exactly he was and what policies he believes in. Later, Huckabee got some credit because of the assumption that an evangelical candidate would probably be supportive of Israel, but lost more on the grounds that he is a novice who has no real knowledge or background when it comes to the issues of the troubled Middle East.

But now, with the comprehensive article Huckabee penned for Foreign Affairs, the panel had a chance to take a closer look at the hottest Republican candidate. And more specifically, at his views regarding the crisis over Iran's nuclear weapons program.

Two weeks ago, when we ranked the candidates on their reactions to the NIE report on Iran, Huckabee was not part of the group we ranked. Famously, his reaction the NIE was a blunder ("Have you heard of the finding?" "No"). So this is our chance to rank Huckabee on this most crucial question - and the panel doesn't like what it sees.

We sent the panelists the fairly long excerpt dealing with Iran from Huckabee's article. The candidate is very critical of the Bush administration: "After President Bush included Iran in the 'axis of evil,' everything went downhill fast", he wrote. Earlier in the article Huckabee blames Bush for an "arrogant bunker mentality," but on some matters does support the president's policies: "I welcome the Bush administration's new sanctions against Iran and its decision to designate Iran's Revolutionary Guards as a proliferator of weapons of mass destruction."

The bottom line, however, is quite clear: "Whereas there can be no rational dealings with al Qaeda, Iran is a nation-state seeking regional clout and playing the game of power politics we understand and can skillfully pursue. We cannot live with al Qaeda, but we might be able to live with a contained Iran. Iran will not acquire nuclear weapons on my watch. But before I look parents in the eye to explain why I put their son's or daughter's life at risk, I want to do everything possible to avoid conflict. We have substantive issues to discuss with Tehran. Recent direct negotiations about Iraq have not been productive because they have not explored the full range of issues. We have valuable incentives to offer Iran: trade and economic assistance, full diplomatic relations, and security guarantees."

We asked the panel to compare Huckabee's views to those of other candidates, and also to comment on some of his more specific statements. This is what we got:

The panel, in general, is less than happy with Huckabee. The fact that he got a score of 3 when we asked the panel to compare him to other Republicans shouldn't fool anyone. It is only because some panelists don't like the tone of some of the other Republican candidates and found an opportunity to express their misgivings.

There are two important numbers in this survey. The first one is the paltry 2.87 Huckabee scored on the "stand by Israel" question. This is very low for any American presidential candidate, whom the panel generally regards as supportive of Israel. We should also note that on this question the panel was basically in agreement, which is not the case when it comes to questions of policy (for example, some panelists enthusiastically support a dialogue with Iran).

The other significant number is the 1.87 Huckabee scored for his comment "Iran will not acquire nuclear weapons on my watch." The panel does not believe him, and for good reason. If containing Iran is possible - and he thinks it is - stopping it at all cost becomes less important.

As we wrote in the past, as far as this panel is concerned, good on Iran is good for Israel. I'd assume that in the next monthly ranking Huckabee will lose some points.

Related links:
# Top Republican candidate wants dialog with Iran
# Republicans reacted much better to NIE on Iran
# Mike Huckabee's profile page on The Israel Factor

Post by **Rio** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 4:02 pm

^^^yeah I posted that a few days ago. I' at work now and I can't watch the vid but it sounds like he's just pandering.