The American Spectator : Petraeus Sets the Record Straight on Israel

Michele San Pietro| 3.25.10 @ 6:43AM

Only a madman could withdraw support to Israel!

Gabrielle| 3.25.10 @ 7:11AM

We have one at 1600 Pennsylvania.

Christopher Holland| 3.25.10 @ 8:40PM

Obama is a madman. Anything can happen with that guy. The saying in Russia is 'like a monkey playing with a hand grenade'. An explosion is virtually inevitable. I hope Israel lands the first punch because they won't get a chance if they wait to have the second.

Alan Brooks| 3.26.10 @ 12:04AM

"Only a madman could withdraw support to Israel!"

Or a sc*mbag such as Toddard; a confederate such as Red Phillips. And to HELL with Jefferson Davis-- take it in the ear, confederate chump.

Herman King| 4.1.10 @ 2:22PM

Only a madman would continue remaining a patsy for Israel.

Larry Tate| 7.9.10 @ 12:25PM

America needs Israel as, Israel needs America. Israel is the only true friend America has in the Middle East. Israel is democratic and therefore, the only country in the region that practices the policies that closely relate to the American agenda. We are allies and have I hope always will be. The country who does not stand by Israel will not stand long. Obama and his so called council should heed history and strive to the side of Israel and leave the West Bank alone.

debalazo| 4.3.10 @ 5:27PM

Michele, Gabriele, Cristofer,
Only a traitor or anti-American could support 'israel', and order American fodder to die for it. One who was not was John F Kennedy, denying arming the terrorists with nukes. And he paid with his life, typical. But Crypto Johnson helped, and all Hell broke loose in the ME.
To defog your eyes, read 'Final Judgment'- M.C. Piper.
Puppet Obama, half-black-half-jew, is only pretending to discord with the orchestra. Why don't you ALL just pick up a gun and go and 'defend' your 'israel'? Why ONLY American fodder all the time for your wars? Why are you so abusive of dumb goys?

mark | 3.25.10 @ 7:11AM

I didn't know "Jabuti" was a country. You may want to consult an atlas next time.

Jerry| 3.25.10 @ 4:56PM

The country is "Djibouti". Misspelled.

Howard| 3.25.10 @ 7:22AM

The hard left in this country hates Israel with a passion. They will spin any and everything to suit their needs. We must continue to work for a real peace in that area, but demonizing Israel and Jews is not a recipe for success.

crookedwren| 3.25.10 @ 8:56AM

And it's odd to me how so many Jewish people -- whose families were endangered or nearly wiped out in the Holocaust -- are leftists.

crookedwren| 3.25.10 @ 9:02AM

Lest anyone think I am an anti-Semite, let me just say that my first husband and the father of my sons was Jewish (via his mother). He nor his parents were religious, although some of her family were quite traditional and very religious. They were lovely people.

Anti-Semitism is something I've never understood.

But I also can't understand why the media shows little "Palestinian" children weeping and wounded, but they never have shown the Jewish children suffering in the wake of Palestinian terror strikes.

Why is that? Is the mainstream media guilty of anti-Semitism? Could that possibly be the case?

thepip3r| 3.25.10 @ 12:46PM

i debated this much at my previous job. the reason the news only publishes pictures of Palestinian suffering is because the suffering is so one-sided.

back when the UN was talking of investigating israel for human rights' violations and war crimes, i had a bunch of conservative coworkers who were "aghast" at the premise because "palenstine terrorists constantly attack israel with rockets!"

on the surface, that argument sounds valid. however, when you look at the statistics, only a handful of israelis have been killed by palestinian missiles while israels actions and retaliations have killed thousands.

your argument is like saying: when russia invaded georgia a few years ago, WHY IS THE NEWS FOCUSING SOLELY ON GEORGIA! WHAT ABOUT THE SUFFERING OF THE RUSSIANS!

Al| 3.25.10 @ 1:01PM

Your argument is ridiculous.
Q: How many Germans were killed by Allied bombings and troops during WW2?
A: A lot less that Allied troops were killed by Germans.
Did that make the Allies "the oppressor"?!
Obviously not, the Germans were the ones instigating the war.
Here too, the Arabs have refused, time and time again, to accept any peace plan.
The Arabs are the ones constantly instigating war with terrorist bombings, missile attacks, etc. Israel is merely responding.
Hello?

debalazo| 4.3.10 @ 4:52PM

AL,
your arguments ARE ridiculous! Search "World jewry declares war on Germany (1933)". Document and video. Only because Germany would not let jew banksters (a-la-FED) destroy Germany economically for the Second Time. Remember Germany and WWI? Who is to blame for these 2 wars?
And am not including here terrorists from Brooklyn, Lenin and Trotsky, Bolsheviks destroying Czarist Russia, with Germany next in sight, and after, the USA. Sick!
Next, Palestinians (Philistines) refuse become peaceniks? After living there for 3000 years (1100 BC)? While Ashkenazi-Khazars ('israelis', NOT Israelites!) were implanted by Rothschilds in 1948; only wandered there occassionally; and originate from Shinar (sin), Babyloonie?
"If my husband wanted to stop the war, he could do it." Mme. Vampire Rothschild (er, a Muslim fanatic, right?)
And PLEASE, become a loyal citizen of the country that hosts you, whichever it is.

AuntieMadder| 4.3.10 @ 7:13PM

debalazo, you're so full of shit that you stink. Start reading history books that aren't on the White Supremist recommended reading list or the flaming libtard's must read list. Idiot.

Ken (Old Texican)| 3.25.10 @ 1:32PM

Hi pip???
Uh...Israelis shoot straight when murderers shoot crooked?

Dumbbunny!

Tom in Michigan| 3.25.10 @ 5:49PM

Dear thepip3r, Please forgive my apparent incivility but, your way of thinking is insidious. Your argument is based upon a concept of numbers, how many on each side are killed or wounded, "suffering" as you say. This simple fact is this; the vast, vast majority of Palestinian Muslim attacks on Israelis (the Israelis live quite peacefully with Palestinian Christians –a distinction is in order) are purposefully directed at "soft" targets; civilians - whether they are men, women or children is of absolutely no consequence whatsoever to the attackers. The Israelis, on the other hand go after the real bad guys; collateral damage to civilians occurs, as it always does in war but, not by design. Moreover, the Israelis, like we Americans are much better soldiers.

By your “logic,” because Americans killed Nazis and Japanese in ratios sometimes exceeding hundreds or even thousands to one, their “suffering” was somehow more worthy of sympathy, more moral than the suffering of Americans at war due to the numerical disparities when, in fact the whole bloody mess was started by the Nazis and the Japanese Imperialists.

We saw exactly the same phenomenon in other wars such as Vietnam where the Vietcong sometimes killed entire villages – to a man, woman and child because they “collaborated” (meaning, they’d accepted our medical care or food or even a pack of cigarettes) yet, the Left made US out to be the “baby killers.”

I would bet my life and fortune that if Palestinian attacks ceased tomorrow, peace would prevail in Israel and Palestine. For you own sake, find your moral compass and free your mind from such fallacious and specious thinking.

wags101| 4.7.10 @ 12:03AM

I am willing to bet that if Palestinian attacks ended tomorrow, Israel would find another excuse to attack them. Israel never wanted peace and America is waking up to that fact.

Larry Tate| 7.9.10 @ 12:53PM

If memory serves correctly, the Palestinians did not want the land that is now known as Israel, even when the land was given to Israel. What changed, the fact Israel went in and worked the land and the sea and turned it from a rock barren desert into a land that basically flows "milk & honey". No one wanted the place, except the Jews, who were forced out millineas ago, and only were able to return back in 1948 and become the land of Israel. The Palestinians only want the land, because Israel changed the living conditions there. Kind of like, the Mexicans want what we have, but do not want to work for it.

thepip3r| 3.25.10 @ 12:58PM

and since this site appears to be a conservative haven. here are a few statistics to support my assertions pulled from a study done by an ISRAELI newspaper:

http://www.ifamericansknew.org/stats/deaths.html

Al| 3.25.10 @ 1:03PM

One more point.
The Palestinians deliberately shoot their missiles from civilian areas and even from mosques and hospitals. Hence, any attempt to hit the source of fire may result in Palestinian casualties.

Rob Miller | 3.25.10 @ 1:10PM

Hey, Congratulations thepip3r! You found a far Left 'newspaper' from a group that is likely funded by the EU, just like Britzedek, Peace Now and the other self-hating lefty groups are.

Why not just quote Uri Averny or the International Solidarity Movement, boyo?

The reality is that the Arabs have killed and expelled far more 'Palestinians' than th eIsraelis have. Study up on how many Jordan killed during Black September or what happened to 'Palestinians' in Iraq and Kuwait.

If the Israelis were actually anywhere near as brutal as the fairy tales say, or even as brutal as the Arabs this war would have been over long ago.

Tom in Michigan| 3.25.10 @ 6:50PM

Thanks for the anti-Semitic propaganda rag web site. I'll be sure to add it to my "favorites."

Are these your sources? You dissed one of the other posters for paraphrasing Limbaugh and you use this neo-Nazi filth as a reference? Ignore my earlier heartfelt post. If you are some d-----bag kid, you ought to be ashamed of yourself and move out of your mother's basement or change your major from sociology to engineering or stop watching Olbermann or ANYTHING to escape whatever influences you read or watch or listen to that compel you to reference such a noxious and reprehensible anti-Semitic web site.

If you are an agent provocateur and you are PAID to write your "posts," I call on every other poster here to ignore you.

Tom in Michigan| 3.25.10 @ 6:58PM

Here's a bio on the founder of thepip3r's source above. Lovely:
http://www.discoverthenetworks.....indid=1599

Irmlin Chapin| 3.25.10 @ 3:24PM

Yes, they are. You answered your own question. And so is BBC.

Christopher Holland| 3.25.10 @ 8:49PM

One of the tragedies of being Jewish is that there has always been a judenrat who think they can save themselves by co-operating with their persecutors. And yes, the mainstream media is guilty of anti-semitism. They are happy to see Jews killed and they hate seeing them defend themselves. If that is not antisemitism then I am a monkey's uncle. Of course, they will say they actually like Israel and are merely offering friendly advice - Obama and Clinton both do that. Fall for that one and you are too silly to come in out of the rain. After World War 2, every German could say that he personally liked Jews and there was one in particular he had helped. There are 6 million reasons to say that this is BS.

Jesus For The Jews| 3.26.10 @ 1:21AM

That is the most ridiculous chain of straw men and false equivalencies that I have ever seen in my life.

debalazo| 4.3.10 @ 4:29PM

Christopher Holland,
You like the Christ? Why so many of you use that name? i strongly recommend you search and read "Simple Arithmetic vs the 6 Million Myth", printed in the US, and available free on the Net. You might be embarrassed to publicly claim such number. Not only, it seems 'evil', biblicaly speaking. Like, a sacrifice (holocaust) to Moloch?

Chalkdust| 3.25.10 @ 11:44AM

You think it could be because Hitler's political party was;"The Socialist Democratic Party"?

Boo Hoo| 3.26.10 @ 1:30AM

You've studied history and are smart. I can tell. Just Kidding.

obamamama| 4.3.10 @ 2:49PM

Yes, and why so? I've been wondering about this
for so long and yet can't find the answer.

Melvin| 3.25.10 @ 7:51AM

There is a small fact that is always left out of the Israel issue. Yes, Israel, has a large contingent of lobbyists on "K" Street to influence legislative opinions that may have an indirect or direct impact on Israel.
But the Arab's, Turks also have an equally large contingent of "K" Street lobbyists to also influence opinion against Israel.
Take for example the Palestinian influence inside academia most notably in Duke University. Time and time again I have noted through the media of various militant Palestinian speakers allowed with all the ruffles and flourishes that the Duke University could provide.
I shouldn't have to note to many of you, what the topic of these speakers were.
As Rush Limbaugh likes to call these young idealists in the audience, "Young skulls full of mush" wearing their newly minted Palestinian headscarf's fresh of the latest Palestinian Intifada.
It is an extreme understatement of the extreme hatred against Israel from all the Muslim Nations and college academia here.
For those Duke students proudly sporting their Palestinian headscarf's out and about the campus fail to realize that some Palestinian more in likely wiped his backside with it before he gave it to the student.
Reason being these Duke University students are useful idiots in a much, much larger game of international brinkmanship than they fully will ever realize.

Ken (Old Texican)| 3.25.10 @ 8:05AM

Melvin see below.
Many US Universities seek and recruit rich young foreigners to fill their chairs. Donations and "grants" from their families often follow.

My professor cousin had one young rich Arab sign up for his class, do quite well, and it was over a year later that he discovered that the young man's "servant" was the person who had actually "done quite well." hmmmmm.

KyMouse| 3.25.10 @ 9:19AM

Ken, some friends of mine invited a Saudi high school student to live in their home while he was an exchange student. One day he phoned his family to ask for more money -- he had only $60,000 left in his checking account.

Melvin| 3.25.10 @ 9:24AM

Good morning Ken,
Your absolutely correct. I have had the pleasure of having minor conversation with a number of Kuwaitis, and Egyptians and I'll tell you right now these guys are not the guys depicted from the film Lawrence of Arabia as bubbling, disheveled goat herders.
These gentlemen were highly educated, articulate, and from their interaction with me very polite.
During our brief conversations both parties steered clear of religion and or Israel, but nevertheless I really had some really enjoyable conversations with them.
Despite our pleasantries between each other. I walked away form these men as dangerous and a threat to the Untied States.
No where in the conversation did either of them say anything that would convince me with the last statement, it was just a feeling that I walked away with.

thepip3r| 3.25.10 @ 12:51PM

melvin,

i'm sorry but as soon as i saw you were regurgitating rush limbaugh, all reasonable expectation of a valid argument went out the window. try educating yourself through some other means than from the biggest shock jock in history. there are plenty of people (including myself) who would characterize you as having a "brain full of mush" for voluntarily listening to such lunacy. hth.

Melvin| 3.25.10 @ 1:31PM

What can I say, I'm just a product of government run education and I just don't know any better.
Your right though, maybe I should rephrase with something more original. I know!
"Young skulls full of shit." How is that. Can I have my sticky gold star?

Batman| 3.26.10 @ 1:34AM

Only if you realize you're the one full of shit. Then you win a gold star!

mike NZ| 3.25.10 @ 2:20PM

Rush has it on the head in one!
It is true of students worldwide even my generation in the 70's.
they were all over poor old Cuba and band aid etc too

mike NZ| 3.25.10 @ 2:19PM

Melvin
Well said, lets not forget the businesses that endow chairs at UNI's to create an academic backstory for the activists and lobbyists to work with.
Nor the congressmen who aid and abett them, talk about working with your enemies.

Pingback| 3.25.10 @ 7:54AM

Must Know Headlines 3.25.2010 — ExposeTheMedia.com links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…Act The Obama Defense Budget: Inadequate And Unbalanced Obama Transportation Secretary: ‘This Is The End Of Favoring Motorized Transportation At The Expense If Non-Motorized’ Petraeus Sets The Record Straight On Israel GOP Wants Obama To Enroll In Obamacare Government-Run Healthcare Oops: Dems Forgot To Cover Preexisting Conditions For Children Obama Signs Executive Order Claiming No Abortion…

Ken (Old Texican)| 3.25.10 @ 7:58AM

Mr. Klein, thank you.

You do realize of course that this column is going to burn a lot of electrons in the comments section don't you?

Every Jewish hater and Israel hater in the universe is going to be here today spewing their filth.

The ones I am going to get the biggest chuckles out of are the ones who will try to couch their yada yadas in the standard lines of "concern", or "realism", or "Realpolitik".

Then will come the ones who bring a "moral equivalency" to the issue saying the murderors are somehow equal in rights to the Israelis.

Before all that gets started, I just wanted to remind all of us that after WWII, dispossessed Jewish folks
bought a little piece of cheap crappy desert from some Arab type folks to build a home in Palestine.

The Jews began building a pretty neat little oasis in that desert with sweat and tears and hard work, only to have the Palestinians decide to confiscate it at a much improved value, then left the land depending on their muslim brothers to push those Jews into the Med. or kill them.
OOPs!

mike NZ| 3.25.10 @ 2:22PM

Ken
Thats the Arab way, look at how islam got it's foorhold in Arabia and then spread in the 200 yrs after mohameds death.

tnxplant| 3.25.10 @ 8:02AM

"Jabuti" = "Djibouti"

Tim| 3.25.10 @ 8:03AM

Since Jewish Americans Don't Seem To Give A Crap And Voted In Droves For Field Marshall OBama ,Why Should The Rest Of Us ?

Doorgunner| 3.25.10 @ 8:22AM

Because you shouldn't base who your friends are going to be on the wishes of those who are already your friend (or so they claim). That's how girls in junior high behave.

And you shouldn't base who your friends are going to be on what they can do for you, or what the 'cost' of that friendship might be. That's how the S.L. Toddards of the world behave.

Not sometimes, but rather, all the time you have to man up and stand by shared principles, no matter the cost.

ExConServative| 3.25.10 @ 9:51AM

A country's national interest has nothing to do with friendship. If you think so, then you're the one harboring a junior high school mentality.

Ken (Old Texican)| 3.25.10 @ 10:29AM

Exconservative
Uh...I think is OK to be "friends" with loyal allies.
Not necessary of course, but sorta' nice.

See Jay's post below.

Doorgunner| 3.25.10 @ 10:29AM

The litany of Israeli misdeeds that is always recited by the chickenshit isolationists is always unaccompanied by the biblically proportioned list of misdeeds perpetuated by the "Palestinians" and their Arabic financiers. They self-same financiers that could have assisted in the creation of a Palestinian nation at at least a score of junctures in history.

Unless a non-tyrannical, predominately muslim-populated state(s) emerges in the Mid-East, terroristic attacks will continue, and probably escalate, in the West. The representative governments in the Mid-East? Initially Israel, and now Iraq. Two states isolationist-types would condemn to bloody failure.

And the "we're only trying to save Israel from it's own impending demographic doom" argument? Yeah, go tell lies to your Mommy, she'll at least act like she believes you.

You guys are hardly worth the expression of contempt.

Chalkdust| 3.25.10 @ 1:21PM

I hate it when people talk pass each, let their fingers run wild and miss the common interest they share. Makes for a lousy conversation.
Most fair minded American, given time to think about it, can separate in their own minds, the Jewish Religion from the Israeli Nation and refuse to blame an entire religion for crimes of a state or nations ruling power bloc and that goes for Arabs and Muslims nations also.

It is unfortunate when a few Afghans get wasted because the government of the sovereign nation of Afghanistan couldn't prevent some fanatical Muslims from killing Americans on American soil. Just like someday the sovereign state of Israel will have to pay for selling US military secrets to China and trying to kill, with repeated attacks on a unarmed vessel, every man aboard the USS Liberty.

M ike NZ| 3.25.10 @ 2:25PM

hey didn't you know the liberty was sizing up the wavelenghts and onsending in real time?
If I'd had sigint happening to me I'd have smoked it too.
Good call by Israelis but bad call byu the US.
Why are you guys so arrogent and dumb?
That is not what you do to your "friends".
But I've never thought of anyone as America's friend, just opportunities.

axbucxdu| 3.26.10 @ 10:02PM

Mike NZ wrote:"...That is not what you do to your "friends"."

What a coincidence; your statement is similar to this quote regarding one Ben-Ami Kadish:

"These kinds of activities whether they occurred long in the past or present time are not the kind of actions we would expect from a friend and ally and we would expect that Israel would not be engaged in such activities," said (Bush) State Department spokesman Tom Casey.

Of course then there are the cases, or should I say the "opportunities" seized by the likes of Lawrence Franklin et al, and Jonathan Pollard...sure by all means we should do as they say, but not as they continue to do...some friends.

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 12:04PM

"And you shouldn't base who your friends are going to be on what they can do for you, or what the 'cost' of that friendship might be. That's how the S.L. Toddards of the world behave."

Oh my. Doorgunner thinks nations have buddies, and that there is no difference between an "alliance" and a "friendship".

The poor, confused little boy.

Ken (Old Texican)| 3.25.10 @ 1:39PM

Hi SL
Same ole' one stringed violin I see.
Heh...dumbbunny

Doorgunner| 3.25.10 @ 2:30PM

Way to go, omniscient one; you take what you wish literally, and accuse others of lack of nuanced thought.

I believe there's a position for you in the current administration... with Tiny Dancer and the rest of the little boys.

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 2:44PM

Your words, not mine. The United States, according to "Doorgunner", should not consider the effects an alliance will have on our national security!

You are a very serious thinker.

Doorgunner| 3.25.10 @ 2:58PM

Really? Lies? So soon?

"...should not consider the effects an alliance will have on our national security! "

Provide the quote. And please do better than an alllegorical "...you shouldn't base who your friends are going to be on what they can do for you, or what the 'cost' of that friendship might be. That's how the S.L. Toddards of the world behave"
because I think most here can interpret that correctly and see beyond your cheap theatrical parsing.

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 5:58PM

I don't understand the question, I guess. You've asked me a question we both know the answer to (what quote I was referring to) but you won't let me tell you that? I don't get it. Those are the words I was talking about when I said "your words". Are you attempting to implying that you don't know that this is the case?

You wrote:

"And you shouldn't base who your friends are going to be on what they can do for you, or what the 'cost' of that friendship might be. That's how the S.L. Toddards of the world behave."

Are you not talking about our ally Israel? Or are you going to pretend that you were not speaking of our alliance? Are you claiming that you were not arguing that alliances should not be based "on what they can do for you, or what the 'cost' of that (alliance) might be?"

I don't see how my description is faulty at all. You wrote that you believe alliances should not be based on "what the cost" (say, to national security) "of that friendship might be". If you want to rephrase or clarify please do so.

Christopher Holland| 3.25.10 @ 8:56PM

Do people cross to the other side of the street when they see you coming?

Tim| 3.25.10 @ 9:41AM

Because you're full of shit, that's why.

mike NZ| 3.25.10 @ 2:23PM

As Winnie Churchill said - Never never never give in.
Unless you want to become a Dhimmi?

Desotobill| 3.25.10 @ 8:25AM

Djabouti is a country surrounded by Somalia on the south, Ethiopia and Eriteria. It sit s on the shores of the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden. We have a large air force base there.

NavyBrat | 3.25.10 @ 8:37AM

Oh gosh. Where's Doddard to obfuscate & spin the General's words? Must be getting his talking points off of his "Turner Diaries" website.

PS. Tim. This is one American Jew who knew the score on our Pres. LONG before the election. We ain't ALL liberal schmucks.

Lavrenty Beria| 3.26.10 @ 5:07AM

Please try to help some of your brethren see the light, please!

Jay| 3.25.10 @ 8:42AM

The Loonie Left is trying so hard to sabotage America's relationship with Israel the total distortion of what Petraeus said is no real surprise.
In the real world Israel has SAVED many American lives - including the soldiers in Iraq and 'stan. See: http://www.washingtonexaminer......14752.html

Israel supplied the Americans with many other Soviet weapons systems, from 130mm artillery to T-72 tanks. Gen. George Keegan, the former head of U.S. Air Force Intelligence, was quoted in the New York Times on March 9, 1986, saying that the intelligence the U.S. received from Israel could not have been obtained if the U.S. had “five CIAs.”
Keegan went further: “The ability of the U.S. Air Force in particular, and the Army in general, to defend whatever position it has in NATO owes more to the Israeli intelligence input than it does to any single source of intelligence.”
Even after the Cold War, Israel continues to be a vital American strategic partner. In 2007, the U.S. ambassador to Israel revealed that Israeli technology was being used by the U.S. armed forces in Iraq to protect them from Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) that were responsible for most U.S. casualties in the Iraq War.
In short, Israel was helping save American lives in Iraq.

Mike NZ| 3.25.10 @ 2:28PM

The real time ongoing intelligence is the cream of the crop, Sure the Israelis take your equipment, test it in real time and improve it for you, then give it back as well as procure opposition equipment for you all the time.
But its knowing whats going on in heads and hearts that counts to fill in the cracks.
the US has never been that good in the non euro areas like Mid East.

Christopher Holland| 3.25.10 @ 9:02PM

If Israel had not bombed the Osirak nuclear reactor then Saddaam would have had the bomb and would probably be still in power and still in Kuwait. Israel never got any thanks for doing that and only gets treated with contempt.

tdiinva| 3.25.10 @ 8:42AM

The administration is the midst of developing a new narrative to justify its pro-Palestinian/pro-Islam realignment. The narrative has two contradictory components. The first component is the classical anti-Semitic “the Jews are the cause of all our problems” argument. The current manifestation of this argument is that our support for the Israelis is undermining our ability to fight Sunni extremism and therefore the strategic imperative of the War on Radical Islam requires this realignment.
This argument is easily disposed of by examining Arab/Muslim behavior over the past decade. One of the first things the Iraqi people did when Saddam was overthrown was to expel all the Palestinians from Iraq. That indicates that the Iraqis only give lip service to the “plight” of the Palestinian people. Given an opportunity, the Iraqis treated the so-called Palestinian people worse than the Israelis.
In May of 2007, the Lebanese army attacked Palestinian extremists affiliated with Al Qaeda at the Nahr al-Bared Palestinian refugee camp in Northern Lebanon. In the process of rooting out these terrorists the Lebanese army destroyed the camp, caused hundreds of civilian casualties and displaced 50,000 people. The Arab and Islamic world was silent. Again this demonstrates that the rest of the Muslim world only gives lip service to the cause. They couldn’t care less.
Finally, the false reporting of General Petraeus’ by the usual suspects stated that our tilt towards Israel makes it hard to win the support of the Afghan and Pakistani population. That this is blatant nonsense should be obvious. The typical Afghan doesn’t know where “Palestine” or Israel is let alone care about the people there. The idea that Pakistani militants are motivated by the Israeli-Palestinian dispute is laughable. They are motivated by Kashmir and not events in the far away Middle East.
The second line of argument, which is being made to justify Obama’s continuing efforts to court Iran, is that the enemy is Sunni extremism and a strategic alliance with Iran would help to defeat the Sunnis. Iran makes noises about the Palestinians but since they are Sunnis they really don’t care. What they are, the mullahs that is, are Holocaust denying Jew haters who would gladly exterminated both Jews and Sunni Arabs. If the US were to make such an alliance it would not enhance our relations with the Sunni world. Instead it would inflame them and increase support for the radicals as act of self defense.
The Obama administration is doing what every anti-Semitic government does. It uses contradictory rationales for an anti-Jewish policy. This Administration is deliberately taunting the Israelis with the intention of creating a break with Israel so they can create a justification for flipping sides in the dispute. Obama understands that an outright abandonment of Israel would not work politically but if he can make it look like Israel’s fault then he might get away with it.

William R| 3.25.10 @ 9:37AM

Total nonsense.

Former prime minister Ehud Olmert and current Defense Minister Ehud Barak have warned that if the two-state solution fails, then Israel can remain a Jewish-majority state only by denying voting rights to most of the Palestinians under its control. In Barak's words, Israel would become an "apartheid state."

Obama and Rham are trying to save Israel from itself. Demographics is the biggest threat Israel faces. Israel is looking more and more like South Africa.

Doorgunner| 3.25.10 @ 10:56AM

"Obama and Rham are trying to save Israel from itself."

Stop it. You're killin' me. Dang. (whew, sniff, wipe tear) Now that's funny.

William R| 3.25.10 @ 11:25AM

Ehud Barak Israels most decorated soldier, former Prime Minister, and current Defense Minister recently said demographics not Iran is Israels biggest threat. Without a two state solution Israel will end up like South Africa. An apartheid state.

KyMouse| 3.25.10 @ 3:44PM

William R., "an apartheid state"? Approximately one in five Israelis is Arab; and in a recent survey by Harvard folks, 77 percent of them said that they would rather live in Israel than in any other country.

Israel has always welcomed people who are willing to live in peace.

Bob Miller| 3.25.10 @ 11:12AM

Recent info suggests that there is no demographic threat, Olmert & Barak's sales pitch notwithstanding.

mike NZ| 3.25.10 @ 2:29PM

what do you smoke mate?

Christopher Holland| 3.25.10 @ 9:12PM

Why is Israel called an apartheid state? South Africa was a white minority oppressing a black majority? Where is the oppressed black majority in Palestine? The Palestinians have repeated been offered their own state, but they never take it - how does this fit in with your model of black oppression? And how does Palestinian terrorism dating back more than 50 years indicate an oppressed people? Your comparison has no foundation whatsoever. Calling Israel an apartheid state is the self-rigtheous drivel that the left likes to pass off as morality. It saves them from having to admit they don't like Jews.

tryingtounderstand| 5.7.10 @ 2:54PM

While I oppose the kind of ad hominem arguments I see on this website, I suggest sincerely that you need to educate yourself. Your ignorance is profound.

This will do for a start:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcUfWc371Fo

but there is a lot more you need to know about what's going on in Israel and the Occupied Territories in the name of Judaism. Fortunately if you're willing to learn the web will help you.

Northern Rebel| 3.25.10 @ 8:50AM

I hear The General is making a trip to New Hampshire soon.

It would be nice to have a patriot back in the White House, again!

William R| 3.25.10 @ 9:02AM

Petreaus is doing damage control.

UPDATE 2--from Mark Perry: A senior military officer told Foreign Policy by email that one minor detail in my report, "The Petraeus Briefing" was incorrect: a request from General Petraeus for the Palestinian occupied territories (but, as I made clear, not Israel itself), be brought within CENTCOM's region of operation was sent to JCS Chairman Mullen - and not directly to the White House. My information was based on conversations with CENTCOM officials, who believed they were giving me correct information. It is significant that the correction was made, not because it is an important detail, but because it is was inconsequential to the overall narrative. In effect, the U.S. military has clearly said there was nothing in this report that could be denied.]

Nick| 3.25.10 @ 11:20AM

William R,

Is that the same Mark Perry that would like to "talk to the terrorists", like Hezbollah and Hamas?

"If I could walk with the terrorists, talk with the terrorists,

Grunt and squeak and squawk with the terrorists,

And they could talk to me."

victor| 3.25.10 @ 3:17PM

Thanks Nick,
I was just thinking the same thing and the same tune popped into my head. Beat me to it again.
What's that olde sayinge?
Graet minds think alike?

Nick| 3.25.10 @ 3:32PM

Victor,

I concur!

In all modesty, of course!

tdiinva| 3.25.10 @ 9:33AM

William R.

It has never made military sense to assign Israel to EUCOM. The reason that it was done is to prevent "Friends on Friends" engagements. Pakistan was apportioned to CENTCOM and India to PACOM for the same reasons. Placing Gaza and the West Bank in CENTCOM makes military sense. Israel should also be in be in the CENTCOM AOR as well but it will never happen.

Val| 3.25.10 @ 9:46AM

As a Christian, I stand with Israel. The bible clearly states the Jews are God's chosen people. I see no evidence that they have acted unjustly. I see much evidence that the Palestinians have continually acted unjustly. Obama is going to start WWIII.

Ryan| 3.25.10 @ 11:24AM

An oversimplification, particularly in light of the New Testament teaching on who God's people are - Christians who accept Christ as Messiah - Paul made this point (Jew nor Greek, slave nor free; joint heirs with Christ; sons of Abraham, etc...)

In a secular sense, they are "chosen" - their remarkable preservation throughout history (outlasting as a core society the neighboring tribes, who are practically gone); but it in no way assures their eternal salvation.

Margie| 3.25.10 @ 1:40PM

"There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, but glory and honor and peace for every one who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. For God shows no partiality." Rms. 2:9-11.

And God is not on the side of the terrorists who continually attack Israel. Israel desires to live in peace. They have the right to defend themselves. They are also our strong strong ally.
There is no justification for the terrorists. We should be supporting them in word and in deed.
We ought not betray them by agreeing with the terrorists themselves in saying things like they do such as "yes, we foment anger by our stance in favor of Israel."
This is how Obama and Hilary also speak. It is wrong.

C.M. Boyer| 3.26.10 @ 7:23AM

Margie, I like your answer. Good use of Scripture to support your thesis.

Margie| 3.27.10 @ 3:59PM

Thank you, I appreciate you saying so. That whole chapter is amazing! When it comes down to it all, God judges the heart. And thankfully so. I can only depend on His mercy for my own salvation because I know how unworthy I am. If Jesus didn't die for the sins of the whole world, there would be no hope for any of us, Jews, Greeks, anybody!

Ryan| 3.26.10 @ 9:16AM

Context, context...the entire passage is stating about how grace is equally divided to all; yes, there is a special sort of privilege given to Jews, but their salvation - as Paul points out - is through the saving work of Christ, NOT through the law they were given. The law just makes things better or worse for them because they were given more to be responsible for.

Paul isn't setting them above Christians, and makes the point that all Christians are the true children of Abraham.

I am NOT saying that we shouldn't be supporting Israel in their time of need - they are an excellent ally and a stem against the tide of Islam.

But the Dispensationalists - of which I partially count myself (not totally convinced) - oftentimes take their support of Israel a little TOO far.

Margie| 3.27.10 @ 4:23PM

If you have a beef with Rms. 2:9-11, that's your problem.

Ryan| 3.29.10 @ 10:25AM

How am I wrong?

Mike NZ| 3.25.10 @ 2:32PM

Obama's not going to start WW3
He screwing up your country first and you voted for him!
then he can get on to WW3 but first the 7 yr peace deal :-)

mike nz| 3.25.10 @ 2:34PM

Hilary's even more against Israel than OB1
haven't you read her UNI history?
radical mush head who never got right

Nick| 3.25.10 @ 10:01AM

"[...] and then repeated it a couple of times and bloggers picked it up and spun it. And I think that has been unhelpful, frankly."
-General David Petraeus

Hey, Toddard, the good general is singling you out for harsh rebuke, specifically.

I've never been slapped down by a four-star general. How does that feel?

I infer, from what he said, that it is people like you, that are endagering our troops. With lies.

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 12:02PM

I stand corrected: it was not Petraus himself who said that. It is however the official finding of Central Command (of which Petraeus is commander) that “perception of U.S. favoritism for Israel”… "foments anti-American sentiment", "limits the strength and depth of U.S. partnerships with governments and peoples in the AOR and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world," that "al-Qaeda and other militant groups exploit that anger to mobilize support," and that "gives Iran influence in the Arab world through its clients, Lebanese Hizballah and Hamas." This Central Command report stands, by the way -nowhere in his backpedaling did Petraeus repudiate the Central Command report. Also note that when asked directly whether the US being "too reflexively pro-Israel puts American soldiers at risk", Petraeus did not answer "No". He answered: “There is no mention of lives anywhere in there. I actually reread the statement. It doesn’t say that at all.” And it doesn't - all it says is that it “perception of U.S. favoritism for Israel”… "foments anti-American sentiment", "limits the strength and depth of U.S. partnerships with governments and peoples in the AOR and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world," that "al-Qaeda and other militant groups exploit that anger to mobilize support," and that "gives Iran influence in the Arab world through its clients, Lebanese Hizballah and Hamas." Now, I suppose you could argue that strengthening Al Qaeda and increasing the influence of Hizballah and Hamas does *not* endanger our troops at all.

Is that what you’re arguing?

Anyway, you've already noted that you agree with those findings in the other thread any how. So you, myself, General Petraeus and Central Command agree that “perception of U.S. favoritism for Israel”… "foments anti-American sentiment", "limits the strength and depth of U.S. partnerships with governments and peoples in the AOR and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world," that "al-Qaeda and other militant groups exploit that anger to mobilize support," and that "gives Iran influence in the Arab world through its clients, Lebanese Hizballah and Hamas." I can live with that.

Nick| 3.25.10 @ 12:39PM

Mr. Toddard,

So, you must also agree with Gen. Petraeus that you have wrenched these quotes (from the report), out of context. And, that this "has not been helpful", right?

I would argue that this attempt at propaganda by you, and others, has put our troops in danger.

How long have I warned you about the liberal "sources" that you choose to use?

This is a prime example of what happens when "conservatives" have to use bleeding heart liberals to make their "conservative" arguments.

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 12:51PM

"So, you must also agree with Gen. Petraeus that you have wrenched these quotes (from the report), out of context. And, that this "has not been helpful", right?"

I have found it extremely helpful. I do agree that like every quote singled out from a source they are not in context, but the context does not change the meaning. As you, myself and U.S. Central Command agree, “perception of U.S. favoritism for Israel”… "foments anti-American sentiment", "limits the strength and depth of U.S. partnerships with governments and peoples in the AOR and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world," that "al-Qaeda and other militant groups exploit that anger to mobilize support," and that "gives Iran influence in the Arab world through its clients, Lebanese Hizballah and Hamas."

Now, I suppose you could argue that strengthening Al Qaeda and increasing the influence of Hizballah and Hamas does *not* endanger our troops at all.

Is that what you’re arguing?

Nick| 3.25.10 @ 1:16PM

Mr. Toddard,

"Wrenching a quote out of context" means that the meaning HAS been changed, by omitting the pertinent facts.

Like the fact that the report, nor Gen. Petraeus, said our support of Israel is "endagering" our troops, like you claimed it implied.

Simply repeating the same lies, over and over again, does not make them magically become true.

But, what should I expect from someone who is ignorant of the fact that Bubba the pervert put conditions on Israel for peace talks. And when your ignorance was exposed, you ran away, and never answered the questions.

Are you a big fan of Mark Perry? The man who likes to "walk with the terrorists, talk with the terrorists.
Grunt and squeak and squawk with the terrorists?"

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 1:19PM

What lies, Nick? As you, myself and U.S. Central Command agree, “perception of U.S. favoritism for Israel”… "foments anti-American sentiment", "limits the strength and depth of U.S. partnerships with governments and peoples in the AOR and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world," that "al-Qaeda and other militant groups exploit that anger to mobilize support," and that "gives Iran influence in the Arab world through its clients, Lebanese Hizballah and Hamas."

Now, I suppose you could argue that strengthening Al Qaeda and increasing the influence of Hizballah and Hamas does *not* endanger our troops at all.

Is that what you’re arguing?

Nick| 3.25.10 @ 1:22PM

I fear this robo-troll is stuck in a feedback loop!

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 1:24PM

I have to keep asking the questions until you man-up and answer. As you, myself and U.S. Central Command agree, “perception of U.S. favoritism for Israel”… "foments anti-American sentiment", "limits the strength and depth of U.S. partnerships with governments and peoples in the AOR and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world," that "al-Qaeda and other militant groups exploit that anger to mobilize support," and that "gives Iran influence in the Arab world through its clients, Lebanese Hizballah and Hamas."

Now, I suppose you could argue that strengthening Al Qaeda and increasing the influence of Hizballah and Hamas does *not* endanger our troops at all.

Is that what you’re arguing?

Nick| 3.25.10 @ 1:30PM

Mr. Toddard,

I've made my argument. I can't help it that you are too obtuse to figure it out.

But, what should I expect from someone who is ignorant of the fact that Bubba the pervert put conditions on Israel for peace talks?

And, when your ignorance was exposed, you ran away, and never answered the questions.

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 1:34PM

We can resume discourse if you ever elect to respond.

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 1:43PM

"But, what should I expect from someone who is ignorant of the fact that Bubba the pervert put conditions on Israel for peace talks?"

Oh my god. You are talking about the argument last week? Nick - are you alleging that Clinton threatened to end U.S. support to Israel if they did not engage in peace talks?

Nick| 3.25.10 @ 1:58PM

Mr. Toddard,

As I asked last week:

Really? Are you really this ignorant?

Have you never heard of "Land for Peace?" The Oslo Accords? The Hebron Agreement?

If you are this uninformed on this subject, it is pointless to discuss it further.

I supply fact, after fact, to make my arguments; and all you offer is assertions, opinions, and obtuse questions.

I should also ask, what should I expect from someone who doesn't even know that "compare" and "contrast" are synonyms!?

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 2:06PM

"Have you never heard of "Land for Peace?" The Oslo Accords? The Hebron Agreement?"

Yes. What do those have to do with American support of Israel? Are you alleging that Clinton threatened to end U.S. support to Israel if they did not engage in peace talks?

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 2:07PM

"I should also ask, what should I expect from someone who doesn't even know that "compare" and "contrast" are synonyms!?"

Nick, if I am comparing the similarities of two objects, am I "contrasting" them?

Yes or no.

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 2:10PM

"I supply fact, after fact, to make my arguments; and all you offer is assertions, opinions, and obtuse questions."

Now you are simply lying. You do not marshal "facts", you regurgitate talking points you heard on the radio. When they are questioned, you THEN (and only then) do any research on them, and then not to find the truth of the matter but rather to back up the arguments of your talk-show-host heroes whom you so revere.

Nick| 3.25.10 @ 2:40PM

Mr. Toddard,

"You do not marshal 'facts' [...]" Blah, blah, blah!

You are projecting.

Since you probably don't know what that means, like everything else, let me enlighten you.

You are "projecting" the things that you do, i.e. finding bogus claims to try to buttress your specious arguments, onto me.

At the same time you are "projecting" the things that I do, i.e. providing facts and quotes, to yourself.

When did you become so delusional?

Nick| 3.25.10 @ 2:32PM

Mr. Toddard,

Okay, I'll play again.

If I am comparing the differences of two objects, am I not "contrasting" them?

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 2:39PM

"If I am comparing the differences of two objects, am I not "contrasting" them?"

Yes! But you're not playing the game, Nick. Why don't you go back through our little discussion and consider how you've behaved - the evasiveness, the refusal to answer questions directly, the refusal to admit when you're wrong etc. You argue exactly like a hard-core liberal ideologue. You have the answers before the questions are asked - before you yourself have even considered the questions. Let's see if you can muster up some measure of honesty:

Nick, if I am comparing the similarities of two objects, am I "contrasting" them?

Yes or no.

Nick| 3.25.10 @ 2:45PM

Mr. Toddard,

I don't have to answer your question.

The fact that you answered "yes" proves that I am right, that "compare" and "contrast" are synonyms.

Not in every case. But in some cases. You claimed they were NOT synonyms. You were wrong, yet again.
I'm glad you could finally admit your mistake!

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 2:52PM

"I don't have to answer your question."

Hahaha. No, you don't have to. You would, if you had any measure of honesty, though. Just read through your own posts here and contemplate how you've debated. Ask yourself if it reads like the writings of a grown man who is not afraid to engage in discourse honestly and openly, without womanly evasions and subterfuge.

If you ever turn into such a man, please answer my questions, and we can continue. It is not a "debate" if I'm the only one responding honestly and in good faith, and frankly I'm not here to help boost your self esteem.

Nick| 3.25.10 @ 3:10PM

Mr. Toddard,

Oooo! You called me a woman! Ouch!
I'm deeply hurt, Toddard. Ha-ha!

Why are you losing your cool?

Because the truth hurts, doesn't it?

Also, you seem to have misunderstood my statement, "I don't have to answer your question." Not surprisingly.

I meant there was no need to answer, since you admitted you were wrong all along, lo' these many months.

victor| 3.25.10 @ 5:19PM

Actually Nick, you should only be worried if he sends you roses on your birthday.
Wink,wink, nudge, nudge.

Nick| 3.25.10 @ 7:59PM

Victor,

Yuck!

It would explain his misogyny, wouldn't it?

Nick| 3.25.10 @ 2:29PM

Mr. Toddard,

I "allege" nothing.

Try doing a little reading. Those accords required that Israel DO certain things (which she did) before the next level of talks could begin.

We call those CONDITIONS, here on planet Earth.

mike NZ| 3.25.10 @ 2:36PM

conditions from a friend?
more like bend over I've got something for you and I promise it won't hurt!

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 2:37PM

"We call those CONDITIONS, here on planet Earth."

Yes, we do. Those accords did have conditions. What they have to do with U.S. support of Israel is beyond me, though. Are you alleging that Clinton threatened to end U.S. support to Israel if they did not engage in peace talks? If not, then why are you bringing up these accords?

You know, if you wanted to score a cheap semantic point you could point out that the U.S. has intelligence sharing agreements with Israel. Those are "conditions" on our support, I believe. Also, I'm sure our support hinges on the "condition" that Israel not use our aid to attack the United States. Those would at least be relevant arguments at least (however puerile) - but what you are arguing is that various peace efforts imposed conditions on both sides, something that is utterly and absolutely not relevant to whether U.S. support of Israel is subject to meaningful conditions.

Nick| 3.25.10 @ 3:20PM

Getting Israel to give up 95% of the West Bank is not being very supportive, if you ask me.

victor| 3.25.10 @ 4:29PM

Actually, giving the Jews directions to the sea or the nearest cemetary is very helpful according to Toddard.
"attributed to Imam Hassan al-Banna: "Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it."

Christopher Holland| 3.25.10 @ 9:19PM

Must be time to mention the bombing of the USS Liberty. Can't pass up an opportunity to dig up that old dead cat.

axbucxdu| 3.26.10 @ 10:42PM

Quite a cavalier attitude. I'm sure the memories of that incident aren't so old and dead for the 171 wounded or the families of the 34 sailors killed in that attack.

Pingback| 3.25.10 @ 10:41AM

Wonk Room » Petraeus Explains The Reality Of Middle East ‘Linkage’ links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…problems in the region is not only a myth, but espousing such ideas is quite enough to qualify one as “anti-Israel.” In New Hampshire yesterday, Philip Klein of the American Spectator asked Gen. Petraeus to clarify his views. While Petraeus disapproved of the way that some of “the blogs” had presented his statement, he ended up strongly re-affirming the substance of the linkage…

Red Phillips | 3.25.10 @ 12:10PM

Is anyone surprised that Petraeus is spinning what he said? Even if what he said was mischaracterized somewhat, it is an undeniable fact that our "special" relationship with Israel causes us problems with the Arabs. This can not be credibly denied. America should follow the advice of George Washington and practice neutrality. The Israel/Palestine issue is none of our business. We should stay out of it.

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 12:23PM

It seems very likely indeed that this spinning is a result of political pressure.

Nick| 3.25.10 @ 12:28PM

Mr. Phillips,

Did you read the article?

The point is that he didn't SAY it. The quote was from a 56 page WRITTEN report, not the general's testimony. It was taken out of context, as the general explained.

Also, you never answered my question, from another thread. As usual.

Did you support President Bush's hands-off approach to the Israeli-Arab conflict? A policy the left pilloried him for?

Red Phillips | 3.25.10 @ 1:26PM

Yes I read the article. I think the author of the original Foreign Policy article admitted he had misspoken and that the quote was from the report and not Gen. P himself. But so what, other than not tarnishing Gen. P. in the eyes of some of his interventionist supporters? The report still stands. That our special relationship with Israel harms our relationship with Muslim countries is hardly even a debatable point. It should be a given in discussion like these. The argument by your side should be that we should continue our special relationship with Israel in spite of this, not deny the undeniable. But usually the stating of the obvious leads to charges that one must be an anti-Semite and a Nazi who wants to see all the Jews die. This is absurd.

Bush II fully supported and never challenged our special relationship with Israel. Are you kidding me? If he took a more hands-off approach to the Israeli-Arab conflict it was only in being less inclined to express displeasure with any move Israel made.

I approve of a hands-off approach. We shouldn't be telling Israel or Arabs how to conduct their business. But I endorse a hands-off approach in the context of a broad non-interventionist policy which would include ending foreign aid to all sides and withdrawing our troops from the region.

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 1:31PM

"That our special relationship with Israel harms our relationship with Muslim countries is hardly even a debatable point"

Nick conceded this last week. Now he's arguing that the Central Command report does not even make that claim at all. It's "wrenched out of context", you see!

Nick| 3.25.10 @ 1:50PM

Mr. Phillips,

Mr. Toddard is misrepresenting my view.

I stated that I'm sure having Israel as an ally was making SOME Moslems hate us. I also stated that this should NOT be the basis of our foreign policy.

If that was the case, then we should stop being an ally of the U.K., because it will make Argentineans hate us.

You must have been in a coma during President Bush's administration. He refused to be like Bubba the pervert and try to force peace talks. He said that Israelis and Arabs would have to figure out their own way to peace.

I don't know how you missed it. The protests from lefties must have been in all the liberal sites you read.

Also, I have never called you a nazi, so that is a straw man.

Nick| 3.25.10 @ 2:02PM

Also, Gen. Petraeus agrees with me that, the fact that SOME Moslems will hate us, should not be the basis of our foreign policy.

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 2:32PM

"Gen. Petraeus agrees with me that, the fact that SOME Moslems will hate us, should not be the basis of our foreign policy"

That much is true. See what I just did there? You wrote something that is true, and I openly acknowledged that, even though it could possibly be used against me in a poorly formed argument. You should try that some time. I'll give you a chance: the official finding of the unit that Gen. Petraeus commands is that “perception of U.S. favoritism for Israel”… "foments anti-American sentiment", "limits the strength and depth of U.S. partnerships with governments and peoples in the AOR and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world," that "al-Qaeda and other militant groups exploit that anger to mobilize support," and that "gives Iran influence in the Arab world through its clients, Lebanese Hizballah and Hamas." General Petraeus has never repudiated these findings.

True or false?

Nick| 3.25.10 @ 2:59PM

Mr. Toddard,

From Mr. Klein's article, which you apperently never read:

In addition, he explained that the quote that bloggers attributed to his Senate testimony was [ACTUALLY PLUCKED OUT OF CONTEXT] from a report that Central Command had sent the Armed Services committee.

“There’s a 56-page document that we submitted that has a [STATEMENT] in it that describes various factors that influence the strategic context in which we operate and among those we listed the Mideast peace process,” he said. “We noted in there that there was a perception at times that America sides with Israel and so forth. And I mean, that is a perception. It is there. I don’t think that’s disputable. But I think people inferred from what that said and then repeated it a couple of times and bloggers picked it up and spun it. And I think that has been unhelpful, frankly.”

He also noted that there were plenty of other important factors that were mentioned in the report, including “a whole bunch of extremist organizations, some of which by the way deny Israel’s right to exist. There’s a country that has a nuclear program who denies that the Holocaust took place.”

Petraeus continued, “So we have all the factors in there, but this is just one, and it was pulled out of this 56-page document, which was not what I read to the Senate at all.”

The good general says there is a "statement" in the report, not "findings" as you claim. So, to answere your question, FALSE!

Gen. Petraeus also seems to think Iran's nuclear program is problem. Do you agree?

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 3:07PM

Nice day out today.

Nick| 3.25.10 @ 3:17PM

Uh-oh!

Toddard is doing the blogging equivalent of holding his breath!

"If I can't win, I'm taking my ball and going home! Whhhaaaaaaaaa! Mummy, mummy? May I have some more petite marshmellows in my coco, please?"

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 3:20PM

Yes, that's precisely it. Wah, and so forth.

Nick| 3.25.10 @ 3:29PM

Mr. Toddard,

Why don't you tell us again how there would be peace in the Holy Land, if only "Ahmed the Palestinian" could take his grandchildren for a visit to his old village and show them where his outhouse used to be! Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!!

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 3:45PM

There would be peace in the Holy Land, if only "Ahmed the Palestinian" could take his grandchildren for a visit to his old village and show them where his outhouse used to be. That is something that I obviously believe, otherwise Nick wouldn't bring it up because he debates in good faith.

Nick| 3.25.10 @ 3:51PM

Done with your cocoa, already?

How was it?

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 3:58PM

It was delicious. Wah.

Nick| 3.25.10 @ 4:53PM

Mr. Toddard,

I thought you weren't going engage with someone who doesn't believe in honest debate? Man, you are fickle, aren't you?

If I were you, I might write, "Man, you are as fickle as a woman, aren't you?"

How long have you been a misogynist?

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 6:05PM

If you consider this engaging then I feel sorry for you.

victor| 3.25.10 @ 7:56PM

SLToddard:
"consider this engaging"

Are you asking Nick to get engaged?
Why, you hardly know the man.
Shouldn't you ask him out for a latte first, perhaps?

Red Phillips | 3.25.10 @ 5:39PM

Well exactly Nick. Clinton was more inclined to use American pressure to get Israel to act the way he wanted. As is his wife. (I was tempted to mention Clinton but didn't because I thought it might distract the conversation.) Bush II was more inclined to let Israel do as they pleased. This is a sign of greater fidelity to Israel. Not less. That isn't exactly the kind of hands-off approach I'm suggesting. I'm not suggesting do as you like and we will still give you aid and a virtual security guarantee. I'm saying does as you please but no more aid and security guarantees.

I didn't mean you have called me a Nazi. Just that that is often the level of discourse. Anything less than complete fidelity to the current party line on Israel means one is "anti-Israel." It is impossible to have an intelligent conversation in that context. I submit Margie as Exhibit A.

Nick| 3.25.10 @ 7:08PM

Mr. Phillips,

"I'm saying does (sic) as you please but no more aid and security guarantees."

So, the opposite must be true, no?

If we give them aid and security guarantees, we can dictate to them? That is not very "noninterventionist", is it?

The reason Israel gets aid from the U.S., is not so we can tell them how to do things. They get aid because Jimmy Peanut-Brain bought-off Israel and Egypt to stop shooting at each other.

To be consistant, you shouldn't care what Israel or the Arabs do, no matter what. You should be neutral.

Red Phillips | 3.25.10 @ 11:48PM

"If we give them aid and security guarantees, we can dictate to them? That is not very "noninterventionist", is it?"

I didn't say that. I am entirely consistent in my position. I don't care if Israel builds the houses or not. It is not my business.

My objection regarding what Hillary said is to the idea that any criticism of Israeli policy means YOU WANT ALL THE JEWS TO DIE! As I said, it is impossible to have an intelligent conversation in that environment. Take a look at this whole thread. Toddard and I aren't, for example, naifs who believe in an unworkable policy of non-intervention. Instead we hate Israel and want to see it destroyed. Surely you can understand how this type of overheated rhetoric is a problem.

mike NZ| 3.25.10 @ 2:38PM

Red
yeah right and so ends the shield for Israel and we would have ww3 as the Islamists aren't going to stop until Israel is no more.
But then you know that don't you?

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 2:45PM

"yeah right and so ends the shield for Israel"

Israel would lose its nuclear arsenal if the U.S. were to maintain neutrality? How so?

victor| 3.25.10 @ 3:28PM

Your friends the Jihadis know full well, that without the backing of the US, they aren't going to risk full scale destruction against Israel, but with Obama standing to the side and your jihadi-friendly State department and High Command, they may just take that chance and risk millions of muslim lives lost in their quest to destroy he dreaded Jews.
Even Toddard smiles at the prospect.

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 4:04PM

How does that make sense? They won't commit themselves to nuclear destruction from the US, but they WILL submit themselves to nuclear destruction from Israel?

What a subtle mind you have.

victor| 3.25.10 @ 4:25PM

That really went over your low brow didn't it.
I'll make it as plain as day so that even you and your pauleocohorts will see it.
With a president such as GW in the White House, the jihadis won't dare take the step towards eradicating the Jews and losing million of lives in a nuclear war, but with your friend Obama in the White House giving the green light to the jihadis with a wink and a nod, they may take that chance.
After all your buddy Putin agrees.
The Jews are the only impediment to peace in our time.
Right Toddard?

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 5:43PM

Are you not aware that Israel has a nuclear arsenal?

victor| 3.25.10 @ 6:53PM

Are you a lawyer? You sure sound like one.
Unless you born obtuse.
Israel is not going to start any war, much less a nuclear one, but it will fight back.
You really need to read up on history: 1947, 1967, 1973.
Jews don't start, but they finish.
Once again if your jihadi friends throw the first punch with Obama's, Hillary's and your consent, Israel will finish it no matter what.
Got it?

Red Phillips | 3.25.10 @ 5:52PM

I said:

"Anything less than complete fidelity to the current party line on Israel means one is "anti-Israel." It is impossible to have an intelligent conversation in that context."

I submit victor's comment above as Exhibit B.

Obama is "standing to the side" and the State Department is "jihadi-friendly" because Hillary suggested that building new housing might be a tad bit provocative. Anyone who would seriously spout such hysterical hyperbole can not be reasoned with.

victor| 3.25.10 @ 6:56PM

Better Dead than Red Philips:
"building new housing might be a tad bit provocative"

Building apartments in Jerusalem is bloody provocative?
Jerusalem is the capital and it belongs to Israel, not Hamas, not PA and certainly not to your friends in the State Department.

BTW if you build onto your house is your neighbor going to fire Katyusha rockets at you?

Red Phillips | 3.25.10 @ 11:34PM

Victor it is provocative because it simply is. Wishing it away does not make it so.

Margie| 3.25.10 @ 12:31PM

Only cowards would not stand up for and defend Israel. Only Leftist cowards would make such statements as those quoted above. These: “perception of U.S. favoritism for Israel”… "foments anti-American sentiment", "limits the strength and depth of U.S. partnerships with governments and peoples in the AOR and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world," that "al-Qaeda and other militant groups exploit that anger to mobilize support," and that "gives Iran influence in the Arab world through its clients, Lebanese Hizballah and Hamas."
And if the good General says that he agrees with Hilary Clinton's stance on Israel, then I cannot stand with him. (In the video he actually SAID that).

Of course Toddard & gang would rejoice with the Leftist stance toward Israel. Is there any question?

It is the terrorists who say such things as these. (That our standing with Israel, indeed having the nerve to even speak in favor of Israel's right to exist, "foments anger," etc., etc.)

It would be a disgrace to bow to the Leftist view toward Israel, and cower to Hilary Clinton's "stance."

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 12:48PM

"Only Leftist cowards would make such statements as those quoted above. These: “perception of U.S. favoritism for Israel”… "foments anti-American sentiment", "limits the strength and depth of U.S. partnerships with governments and peoples in the AOR and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world," that "al-Qaeda and other militant groups exploit that anger to mobilize support," and that "gives Iran influence in the Arab world through its clients, Lebanese Hizballah and Hamas."

Marge, those are the official findings of U.S. Central Command, of which Gen. Petraeus is commander. U.S. Central Command is staffed with "leftist cowards"?

Margie| 3.25.10 @ 1:11PM

My comments were quite clear.

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 1:33PM

I'll say! Your comment is that the soldiers at U.S. Central Command are "Leftist cowards".

Typical for an America-hater such as yourself, slandering The Troops like that.

Margie| 3.25.10 @ 1:48PM

Only America haters would take the stance that you do, since you are the one who continually blames America for terrorism, and you are the one who agrees with the quotes that you made yourself.
Only a snake could twist my standing for Israel, and against Hilary Clinton's Leftist stance, to an America hater.
Only a snake such as yourself.

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 2:28PM

Marge wrote: Only Leftist cowards would make such statements as those quoted above. These: “perception of U.S. favoritism for Israel”… "foments anti-American sentiment", "limits the strength and depth of U.S. partnerships with governments and peoples in the AOR and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world," that "al-Qaeda and other militant groups exploit that anger to mobilize support,"

Who made those statements Marge calls "cowardly" and "Leftist"? U.S. Central Command, a Unified Combatant Command unit of the U.S. armed forces. According to Marge, these brave soldiers are "Leftist cowards".

What did those soldiers ever do to you, Marge, that you would call American soldiers "Leftist cowards"?

mike NZ| 3.25.10 @ 2:40PM

As someone from outside I'm afraid Margie is correct you Mr Toddard are the American hater and anti Jewish state person here.
You appear to be Dispicable to your own country, a nation of liars and hypocrites amongst nations of liars and hypocrites.

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 2:46PM

Hear that Marge? Your supporter here believes America is "a nation of liars and hypocrites amongst nations of liars and hypocrites." That fits right along with your characterization of U.S. Central Command as being "Leftist cowards".

Perhaps you two can burn some flags together.

victor| 3.25.10 @ 7:04PM

Petraeus and his aides have gone to such academies and Woodrow Wilson School and Georgetown.
Bastions of Conservativitism, ,eh what?

Doorgunner| 3.25.10 @ 2:50PM

Here, let me join in the agreement:

Our strong relationship/ties/alliance/friendship/buddydom -what have you- ablsoutely diminshes our ability to engage cordially with various Arab states.

No question about it.

The point is, and I'm speaking as a soldier about to re-deploy to the Mid-East, who cares? I don't; the Arabist states are, in actuality, mostly totalitarian, tyrannical, monarchist regimes that engage in varing levels of the sponsorship of terrorist groups or specific acts.

No one doubts that some of the Saudi princes sponsored the acts of 9/11. I have listened to those of Petraeous's rank discuss that. No one doubts that same group is doing all it can to spread the Wahabbist strain as far and wide as possible. I have flown over hundreds of shiny new mosques built by them... outside of Iraq and Afghanistan. No one is ignorant of Hizbollah's sponsorship, or that of Hamas. Is it all Bush lies about Iran, too?

So why in God's name would you abandon one of the few brakes we have on these nefarious efforts?

I know you're just going to aver that we should disengage entirely, but I aver with equal insistence that dis-, or non-, engagement is siding with those who would enslave whomever they can.

And it ain't the Israelis, pal.

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 3:00PM

"So why in God's name would you abandon one of the few brakes we have on these nefarious efforts?"

I do not argue that we should "abandon" Israel. I argue that we should cease foreign aid to all nations (as a matter of general policy), and remain neutral in conflicts that do not threaten the United States directly. Furthermore, I agree with Gen. Petraeus's U.S. Central Command when they find that “perception of U.S. favoritism for Israel... foments anti-American sentiment", "limits the strength and depth of U.S. partnerships with governments and peoples in the AOR and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world," that "al-Qaeda and other militant groups exploit that anger to mobilize support," and that "gives Iran influence in the Arab world through its clients, Lebanese Hizballah and Hamas" - which is to say that I believe our rather one-sided support of Israel does more harm to U.S. security than it does good, as it strengthens Al Qaeda, Hizballah and Hamas.

I do not - again - council "abandonment". I do not even urge that we drop Israel as an ally. Nor do I argue that, should Israel ever face actual destruction, we should not move to prevent it. What I argue is that we should conduct our alliances so they best serve the interests of the United States (an idea that has only recently become controversial), and strengthening Al Qaeda while magnifying Islamic hatred of the United States is clearly *not* in our interest.

Nick| 3.25.10 @ 3:41PM

Mr. Toddard,

You are not being truthful again.

You have stated numerous times, that we should not support Israel because it hurts our relationship with Arab countries, and we need their OIL!

When did you change your mind?

Admit it. It was because of the razor sharp logic of my arguments, wasn't it?

victor| 3.25.10 @ 8:08PM

Nick quoting SomethingLettuceTomato (SLT)
"You have stated numerous times, that we should not support Israel because it hurts our relationship with Arab countries, and we need their OIL!"

Aha! Yet another Leftist Tendency:
First Blame America,
And then,
Blame America for supporting the Jews,
and then,
Blame America for supporting the Jews because that restricts out Oil Supply!
We have 300 years worth of our own oil in the Rockies. If we drill our own oil then there is no need to blame the Jews.
Of course that takes the whole fun out of being a Pauleo, eh wot?

S.L. Toddard(felches)| 3.25.10 @ 4:56PM

Don't feed the troll.

Remember if this were France he would be Vichy

victor| 3.25.10 @ 5:22PM

Or if he were a cut of beef, he would be a Rump Roast.

Red Phillips | 3.25.10 @ 6:01PM

"Our strong relationship/ties/alliance/friendship/buddydom -what have you- ablsoutely diminshes our ability to engage cordially with various Arab states.

No question about it.

The point is, and I'm speaking as a soldier about to re-deploy to the Mid-East, who cares?"

Thanks for the honesty. Anyone interested in decreasing the threat of terrorism cares. If our special relationship with Israel causes Muslim anger then that special relationship is not in our best interests and we would decrease the risk of further terrorist attacks if we ended it. That, along with immigration restrictions, would go much further towards protecting us from terrorism than will any amount of bombing far off Muslim countries. I thought this was supposed to be about protecting America from terrorism, not protecting a foreign country.

C.M. Boyer| 3.26.10 @ 7:28AM

Doorgunner: Nice post. Stay safe over there.

victor| 3.25.10 @ 3:31PM

SLToddard:
"Who made those statements Marge calls "cowardly" and "Leftist"? U.S. Central Command, a Unified Combatant Command unit of the U.S. armed forces. According to Marge, these brave soldiers are "Leftist cowards"."

Who are those guys that make up the Central Command and why are they agreeing with your pal Hillary Clinton in that Israel is the impediment to peace in the Middle East.

Margie| 3.25.10 @ 7:19PM

No answer to that one. Notice how the professional game player Toddard, who is usually busy accusing America of being an "AGRESSOR" and our Military of killing millions of men, women and children, is today suddenly in love! When the good General says he agrees with Hilary Clinton's stance on Israel.
Well what do you know.

Christopher Holland| 3.25.10 @ 9:25PM

Tell him to go and live in Gaza with all his mates. Do him good to put up with the people he likes to defend.

Ken (Old Texican)| 3.25.10 @ 1:49PM

Margie,
God bless you for bringing things down to truth.

Toddard and ilk will NOT wake up until they die and meet "the judgement bar of God".

Thank you again, Margie.
Ken

Margie| 3.25.10 @ 1:51PM

Ken,
With God's help.
Thank you.
love,
Margie

randyinrocklin| 3.25.10 @ 12:41PM

Why do the Jews keep voting for Demoncrats like Chuck Shcumer, et al. They probably voted Odumbo in too. I'd like to know what percentage of Jews voted for this Muslim POS and Demoncrats that are anti Semitic in the first place. Do they even have a clue?

Quranist| 3.25.10 @ 1:35PM

Because for Jews nothing is more dangerous than European Christians. Thats what the Republic party was supposed to represent.

Jews fear Nationalism since its harder for them to advance in nationalistic societies. Therefore they always support multi-culturalism and mass immigration to make America as diverse ethnically as possible. Jewish organization played the most pivotal role in enacting the mass immigration of laws in America. To this day Jewish organization support mass immigration to the bone.

Fair enough. I am cool with that although I am not sure if most European Americans are cool with that.

But,

They want to be Nationalist themselves. In fact Jews are the most ethnic Nationalistic people on Earth. But they want the opposite for gentiles. They have an immigration policy that no non Jews can be allowed in Israel. They have restrictive laws against Christian preaching. But for America they want something else. And the Republican party is going along with that.

I am not cool with that.

Ken (Old Texican)| 3.25.10 @ 2:03PM

QUranist,
I want to congratulate you on your honesty. Your screen name says it all.

The quran is the most satanistic anti-Abrahim screed ever written.
Of course it is...a screed from the sons of Abraham's concubine and her illigitimate son.

Jesus Christ still holds His hand out to you...as "friends...not servants" or slaves.

Please, lay down slavery in your heart, and embrace "friendship" with God Himself.
Luke 12:4

mike NZ| 3.25.10 @ 2:43PM

Please don't say european christians like that, are they really christians?
I have many Christian friends in UK and they love the jews as they love all people and dispair over what their country has become.
Londonistan says it all.
delineate between the pew warmers and those who do love God please.
socialists or democratic socialist is a better term than christian.

loulou| 3.25.10 @ 6:39PM

Quaranboy, you're incorrect (in addition to being a troublemaker). Jews love European Christians.

I'm not cool with your disinformation re: what Jews fear or want.

Pingback| 3.25.10 @ 12:41PM

Twitter Trackbacks for The American Spectator : Petraeus Sets the Record Straight on links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…#teaparty #aipac2010 #palestine #fb #eritreanews Topsy Retweet Button Add Topsy Retweet Button to your Blog or Web Site. WordPress Web Sites 25 tweets TOP 5K tweet The American Spectator : Petraeus Sets the Record Straight on Israel spectator.org/archives/2010/03/25/petraeus-sets-the-record-strai – view page – cached Earlier this month, a posting on the Foreign Policy website caused a…

George F| 3.25.10 @ 12:47PM

Dems and their cohorts, the left wing media, are willing to distort the facts, tell outright lies, cheat and steal to achieve their agenda of turning this country into a socialist-communist one. And the disgusting part is that the left is actually anxious to give up their freedoms.

Quranist| 3.25.10 @ 1:28PM

This site is dominated by Trotskyist Marxist Talmud firsters revolutionaries.

Quran confirms the Torah but attacks the Talmud:

http://www.conflictingviews.co.....-3324.html

Hail Marx?

No.

How Leon Trotsky became an "American" conservative:

http://www.republicanoperative.....ative.html

victor| 3.25.10 @ 5:20PM

Nice Pauleo website there, Masked Man.

Brian H| 4.2.10 @ 11:28PM

The Quran is prima facie evidence that Allah babbles.

James| 3.25.10 @ 1:34PM

Petraeus is going to New Hampshire because he has political ambitions. He is doing damage control. Next he will apologize to Abe Foxman, and be the headline speaker at AIPAC. That doesn't hide the undeniable truth. The lack of a credible peace process leading to an independent Palestinian state is hurting U.S. interest in the region. You can blame Hamas, and other factors, but the PA has one of the most moderate governments in Abbas and Fayyad, and Israel and its expansion policy is killing the PA's popularity, and helping Hamas, Hizbollah, Iran gain influence. And hurting the so called "moderate" American allies in the region. It is also fomenting anti Americanism in the region which makes it more difficult for governments to have productive relations with the U.S. These are facts.

mike nz| 3.25.10 @ 2:45PM

there will never be peace as Israel is an affront to Islam.
As long as she exists as a nation state, Mohamed was a liar and Allah is not the supreme God.
do you honestly think anything else drives this issue?

victor| 3.25.10 @ 7:01PM

there will never be peace as Israel is an affront to Paleos.
As long as she exists as a nation state, Toddard was a liar and Ron Paul is not the supreme God.
do you honestly think anything else drives this issue?

Brian H| 4.2.10 @ 11:26PM

Wrong. As long as the West exists, Islam will hate Israel. Islam = Submission to The God Of Hate.

tdiinva| 3.25.10 @ 2:15PM

James:

Are you aware that all settlement construction has ended except in Jerusalem? Jerusalem is part of Israel and will remain so. It's not on the table for any Israeli government.

Arab governments don't care about "the plight of the Palestinians." It is an Information Operations device to influence the West to act in their favor. Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria and Lebanon want a independent Palestinian State less then Israelis do. Their behavior in Iraq, where the populous ethnically cleansed the Palestinians from their country and the Lebanese Army's attack upon the Nahr El Bared refugee camp amply demonstrates this. Only anti-Semites and their Jewish socialist lackeys believe anything different.

james| 3.25.10 @ 2:37PM

I can't speak for the military, but just understanding strategic interest you can see exactly where they are coming from. Israel is a strong democratic ally in the Middle East. They are an an asset strategically. But America is a superpower. We have broad sweeping interests. The conflict between Israel and the Palestinians is limiting those American objectives in the OAR. You can blame different factors. Iran Hamas Hizbollah Israel. Some do not accepting Israel's right to exist. Iran's nuclear program and the denial of the holocaust. But that is no credible excuse for Israel's expansion policy that is hurting moderates! Helping those who promote fighting, and playing into the hands of those same holocaust deniers, and ones who deny Israel's right to exist. It might be in Israel's interest to continue settlement expansion. They may figure they are so powerful they are not worried about playing into the hands of its enemies. I don't know? Israel may could turn itself into the dominant power in the region that needs nobody including the U.S. But then again peace would help Israel economically. Look at the trade Israel could have between countries like the UAE Dubai and others. Peace also might help reduce any brain drain coming out of the country. And increase migration for Jews from around the world to Israel because of improved security and prosperity. I don't know what Israel is thinking. But I do know the interest of the U.S. And it is peace. If Israel's goal is in total contradiction to the strategic interest of the U.S. then we in America need to make that clear through actions and deeds.

tdiinva| 3.25.10 @ 2:50PM

How is Israel currently expanding?

james | 3.25.10 @ 3:07PM

Was I supposed to say natural growth in those 121 settlements, many of which are deep into the West Bank and will have to be removed in any peace. Ariel which is deep in the West Bank will have to go. Some of the ones near the line will be be able to stay. A lot of these settlements in East Jerusalem are not in East Jerusalem. They are in the West Bank. Israel annexed East Jerusalem and a large swath of area surround Jerusalem to Jerusalem. ANOTHER POINT: Israel is still in Ze'ev Jabotinsky's Iron Wall thesis. That its enemies will never accept Israel, but be forced to live with the fact that there is nothing they can do about it. This is what Bibi thinks. But Israel already has peace with Jordan and Egypt. And all of its Arab neighbors have already accepted that there is nothing they can do to stop Israel's existence. Add on top of that a demographics problem potentially in a decade or so. Only Iran is threatening Israel but they are not Arab and Israel doesn't ever have to have peace with Iran. In fact Israel would significantly reduce Iranian influence through productive talks with Syria and the PA. Since Israel is still in the iron wall thesis, even though it has the near unconditional support of the U.S., nuclear weapons, and the strongest military in the Middle East, they see no connection between peace and Israeli interest. But the U.S. clearly does. Those differences need to be made clear and acted upon. Because the continued conflict is not helping the U.S.

tdiinva| 3.25.10 @ 3:21PM

James:

Those settlements have never been a hindrance to negotiations until the Obama administration made a point of it. Now the Palestinians are using this as an excuse not to negotiate. Israel has a history (see Gaza and the Sinai) of removing settlers when a peace agreement is signed or they decide to unilaterally appease the Palestinians and withdraw from occupied land. There has been no expansion of settlements on West Bank in the past few years and you are wrong on the Jerusalem issue. Israel proposes to building on non-negotiable territory.

The reason that Israel can sign peace treaties with some Arab countries is that they want peace. It is the reciprocal of the Palestinians position. Palestinians want to dismantle Israel and murder their people who live there so they can go on to make trouble for their neighbors.

There is one thing that all the Sunni Arabs states know and that is Israel is not an existential threat but Iran is. As the Obama administration shifts its support to Iran, Hezbollah and the Palestinians the Sunnis will move closer to Israel out of necessity. It may not be open but it will discernable. The Palestinians have always been a throw away cause and when it comes to their own survival countries like Saudi Arabia will dumb them like a cheap whore.

Nick| 3.25.10 @ 3:17PM

Uh-oh!

Toddard is doing the blogging equivalent of holding his breath!

"If I can't win, I'm taking my ball and going home! Whhhaaaaaaaaa! Mummy, mummy? May I have some more petite marshmellows in my coco, please?"

victor| 3.25.10 @ 3:43PM

Ever since someone gave Toddard a bagel when he was seven and was told it was a doughnut, he has never been the same and he has never forgiven the Jews either.

james| 3.25.10 @ 4:05PM

tdiinva A number of points. The reason Palestinians do not want to negotiate is clear and much deeper than settlements. They think that there is no way they will reach a peace deal with Bibi and his right wing coalition. Pointless negotiations will only weaken Abbas and the PA and strengthen the hand of Hamas.
Israel unilaterally withdrew from the Gaza Strip. They made no negotiations. What did they expect? Many hypothesis they did this in order to reduce the possibility of the demographic problems they will face in the future by separating Gaza from the West Bank. I don't know for sure.
I am right on the Jerusalem issue. There has been expansions in settlements in the West Bank in the last few years. And most of the entire world considers these settlements illegal under the Forth Geneva Convention. You can check it. There is a buffer of settlements surrounding East Jerusalem that are in the West Bank. A lot of these settlements attributed to East Jerusalem are in fact the West Bank.
Most Palestinians want peace. They want an independent state on the way to that peace. Most Israelis say they want peace as well. The parameters of that peace are the issue. And Jerusalem the most intractable among them. But previous peace efforts show it along the lines of 67 borders with land swaps. Refugees to be settled in the new Palestinian state not Israel, with compensation, and a few to Israel if they so choose. And Arab portions of East Jerusalem as the capital of a Palestinian state. With West Jerusalem the capital of an Israel state with Jewish settlement which are illegal in East Jerusalem being held onto by Israel. A settlement of water issues, and protection of Holy sites. Syria is even easier. The Golan Height returned, with water and resource issues worked out. Bibi keeps putting up preconditions like the Jordan valley remaining in Israeli hands and undivided Jerusalem which previous negotiations show will not happen. I can see why Israel would say well why should we give any of this up. What can they return? Well that is where the Arab states in the region play in. Normalization with most all Arab states and joining the economy of the region are a real possibility and a real benefit. Especially states like the UAE. Plus the lowering of hostilities will make life much better and safer for Jews in Israel. But the settlers seem to have a disproportionate influence on Israeli politics. I am willing to bet in 20 years we will be looking at a similar predicament but worse. The parameters of peace won't change. Because they haven't over the last twenty years. So what you will see is an Israel that has to have some sort of bi national authority or apartheid. That is what is going to happen. And there seems to be nothing anyone can do about it.

tdiinva| 3.25.10 @ 4:25PM

Jerusalem was intended to be the undivided capital of Israel in 1947. The cease fire left Jerusalem divided. King Hussain's bonehead move to attack Israel 1967 presented an opportuntiy to regain historic Jerusalem as was intended. How do I know it was a bonehead move? Because I attended a speech by King Hussain of Jordan at Northwestern University shortly after the war and he admitted that Israel had given assurances that it would leave Jordan alone if it stayed out of the war but he made the mistake of attacking Israel anyway. Despite his boneheaded move, Israel ensured his survival aftet the Palestinians attempted a coup in September 1970.

There is no evidence that Palestinians want to give Israel anything but the peace of grave. the best solution to this problem is for the region to destroy Hamas and Fatah, disarm the Palestinians, and then return the West Bank to Jordan and Gaza to Egypt.

Syria is a different problem. Assad father and son do not recognize the existance of Lebanon, Palestine, Jordan or Israel. They want to incorporate these geographic entities incorporated into greater Syria.

Nolann Ryann| 3.25.10 @ 9:48PM

They've refused to negotiate with any government of Israel in good faith. Good lord how many preemptive concessions must a nation make to induce someone to the table? The last govt of Israel sought a solution yet we have none. There is a common denominator in there but apologists for the Palestinians refuse to acknowledge that inconvenient fact. Remeber the final year of boy Clinton? Read Dennis Ross. He's no Neocon however you apologists for a terrorist state define the term today. It changes on a daily basis. The Palestinaians only want to acknowledge the existence of Israel when it is in the grave. Even the mis characterized moderates in the West Bank have refused to drop their dogma of the destruction of the state of Israel. There is no equivalence and those who want to make one have never looked at Palestinian or Jihadist in the face. I have and it doesn't portend anything good for the future of the Mid East.

Lavaux| 3.25.10 @ 4:07PM

America's security support for Israel keeps the Arab nations from each other's throats. Withdraw it, and the entire Middle East would explode.

Pingback| 3.25.10 @ 5:11PM

Petraeus Hits The White House With A Bombshell, But Not In The Way You Think « Around links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…team, he was not ‘stunned’ by it. Indeed, he found it somewhat out of date.” UPDATE #2: Joe Klein at Swampland at Time Max Boot at Commentary Spencer Ackerman here and here UPDATE #3: Philip Klein at AmSpec Noah Pollak at Commentary Possibly related posts: (automatically generated) Secret White House Powerpoint Revealed!! Obama’s God Complex…in pictures. 2 Comments Filed under GWOT,…

James| 3.25.10 @ 5:54PM

tdiinva That will never happen with Egypt getting the Gaza Strip and Jordan the West Bank. Jordan already has tons of Refugee from the British Mandate Palestine. Egypt doesn't want to have to deal with all those Palestinians in Gaza. The world community is in unison with a Palestinian state. Two states or apartheid will be the only two options. Syria has stated it will incorporate peace and relations with Israel with the return of the Golan Heights. We have the Saudi Peace Plan, the Road Map, Oslo, the Madrid Conference, and countless U.N. resolutions addressing this. The truth of the matter is that Israel is an important ally. But it is in American strategic interest to balance the Israelis and the Arabs. It gives America influence. Jewish people have a strong affinity with Israel. Arabs care deeply about Palestinians. Many Americans in general have common link to Europe and religious links from Christianity to Israel. But American interest are in balancing these two. And American interest are in bringing about a peaceful solution to this conflict. And it will never happen without strong U.S. involvement. And Israel Iron Wall thesis could backfire. Because when Israel gets to thinking it too important for the U.S. and there is key difference of outlook like I illustrated. The relationship is going to change. It will be over time. But Congress won't be able to do anything about. And Israel could be face with a crisis latter because it didn't make peace when it could have. After all they are surrounded by millions of Arabs on all sides. They need America to keep them in check and they are going to be making a big mistake by dissing us!!

Brian H| 4.2.10 @ 11:21PM

Arabs despise Palestinians as pathetic, ineffectual cannon fodder and patsies and pawns. Islam doesn't hate the West because of Israel; it hates Israel because of the West.

Pingback| 3.25.10 @ 6:30PM

Matthew Duss: Petraeus Explains The Reality Of Middle East ‘Linkage’ | Twitmerlin - N links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…problems in the region is not only a myth, but espousing such ideas is quite enough to qualify one as “anti-Israel.” In New Hampshire yesterday, Philip Klein of the American Spectator asked Gen. Petraeus to clarify his views. While Petraeus disapproved of the way that some of “the blogs” had presented his written statement, he ended up strongly re-affirming the substance of the…

Pingback| 3.25.10 @ 7:48PM

Twitter Trackbacks for The American Spectator : Petraeus Sets the Record Straight on links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

Log in with Twitter Topsy Search petraeus spectator Topsy Retweet Button Add Topsy Retweet Button to your Blog or Web Site. WordPress Web Sites 1 tweet tweet The American Spectator : Petraeus Sets the Record Straight on Israel spectator.org/archives/2010/03/25/petraeus-sets-the-record-strai – view page – cached Earlier this month, a posting on the Foreign Policy website caused a…

samuel adams| 3.25.10 @ 8:27PM

California, 1 of our 2 best states, is broke, and is going to vote to allow mary jane to be legal. White folks that made this country great, and work for a living, time to find a new country, because we are "done-done".

Pingback| 3.26.10 @ 8:18AM

Petraeus Explains the Reality of Middle East ‘Linkage’ | Blog News Web - Updated Ever links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…reasonably enough tο qualify one аѕ “anti-Israel.” Iח Nеw Hampshire yesterday, Philip Klein οf tһе American Spectator qυеѕtіοחеԁ Gen. Petraeus tο сƖаrіfу һіѕ views. WһіƖе Petraeus disapproved οf tһе way tһаt ѕοmе…

Pingback| 3.26.10 @ 11:13AM

Stand for Israel | Media twist facts on general’s Middle East comments links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…as dealing with enemies on the battlefield. Such is the case for U.S. General David Petraeus, who recently squashed reports about alleged comments on military operations in the Middle East. The American Spectator reports that Petraeus (head of the U.S. Central Command) denied specifically asking that the West Bank and Gaza be shifted from the European Command. The general allegedly said the move would…

Pingback| 3.26.10 @ 6:59PM

Yourish beißt « abseits vom mainstream – heplev links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…wir, erinnern Sie sich, dass vor ein paar Wochen General Petraeus sagte, das Fehlen eines israelisch-palästinensischen Friedens riskiere amerikanisches Leben? Es stellt sich heraus, dass er das nie gesagt hat . Welcher Blog hat das als erstes erfunden? Nun, Foreign Policy , das Zuhause von Stephen Walt, dem berüchtigten Autor der jüngsten Protokolle der Weisen von Zion –…

Pingback| 3.27.10 @ 7:20AM

Political Mavens » Gen. Petraeus “Sets the Record Straight”? links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 Gen. Petraeus “Sets the Record Straight”? By Diana West ( bio) Tell a Friend Printer Friendly Font [+] Font [–] The American Spectator reports that Gen. David Petraeus has “poured cold water” on the controversy caused by reports, later corroborated by testimony he submitted to the US Senate Armed Services Committee, that he views…

Nona| 3.27.10 @ 11:16AM

Blu ray Ripper for Mac is the latest software that allows Mac users to rip Blu ray DVD on ther Mac OS X, It’s simple to use and a lot of fun once you learn how to rip Blu ray for Mac. And powerful functions allows you to rip and convert your Blu-Ray DVD movies and general DVDs, even the protected DVDs and a part of Blu-Ray, into other popular audio and video formats like AVI, ASF, MPEG, MP4, WMV, MKV, MOV, FLV, SWF, 3GP, AAC, AC3, MP3, OGG, WAV, WMA, M4A, etc to playback on your beloved portable players such as iPod, iPhone, Apple TV, Zune, Blackberry, PSP, Creative Zen, Xbox, etc on Mac.

Richard Baker| 3.28.10 @ 10:52AM

Quranist:
Since the Koran says that lying is acceptable in reference to infidels, how can any statement from a Moslem on the subject of Israel or anything else, for that matter, be believed? Infidels DO read the Koran, you know. I see it as knowing your enemy.

Pingback| 3.28.10 @ 1:56PM

Kevin MacDonald: The Netanyahu-Obama Flap « The Occidental Observer Blog links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…in the US and elsewhere. The statement by General David Petraeus that Israeli policies oppose US vital interests in the Middle East is all over the Internet — much to the chagrin of the ADL . Petraeus himself has done his best to limit the damage by disputing this account. Joe Biden’s statement that Israeli policy is dangerous for the US is also all over the Internet, quoted, for example,…

Joe Heathen| 4.1.10 @ 2:24PM

Real simple US policy for Israel: Remember the USS Liberty and 32 US naval and civilian personnel murdered by the Israeli "Defense" Forces.
-
Nothing complicated about that, is there?
-
Screw Israel. Let 'em simmer in their own juices on high heat for eternity.

debalazo| 4.3.10 @ 6:27PM

Joe,
Please read, The Talmud Unmasked - Pranaitis. You should have used their own expression for the Christ, religious or not you may be:
"burning in a sea of excrement in Hell for all eternity." And so be it, for them.

AuntieMadder| 4.3.10 @ 7:17PM

debalazo, your Islam is showing.

Lindsey| 4.1.10 @ 3:09PM

I stand behind Patreus 100%. He has shown us how to operate in Iraq and now Iraq is on its way to being a thriving democracy in the middle of dictatorships. In fact, Obama would be smart to replace Hillary with Patreus as Secretary of State. I GUARANTEE other nations would take HIM seriously!!!!!!

Joe Heathen| 4.1.10 @ 3:30PM

Iraq is on its way to being a democracy? That's interesting. You better hope that Maliki doesn't get too bent outta shape about losing the election two weeks ago.
-
Ever hear of religious jihad in Iraq? What position do you think Muqtuda al Sadr is taking right now?
-
Try to deal in fact-based reality, Lindsey. It won't hurt too much on your first attempt.

debalazo| 4.3.10 @ 6:44PM

Lindsey,
little boy, that's for the Shazam Comics. Even, Gen. Betrayus in the Tarnished House, District of Corruption. jews need a warring un-elected (Diebold-mossad) Resident to start WWIII and avoid oblivion. No war: Prosperity. Prosperity: No usury, taxation, slavery to jews in power.
Game over, chum. The Internet is the magic wand to unwind all devious capers and secret cabals to destroy Goyland. The Prophecy 'Beast to the Abyss (the ocean?) for a thousand years...', next. So Be It!
Ah-yes! Do NOT stand behind Betrayus 100%! He may gas you! arf-arf!

Momma| 4.1.10 @ 4:25PM

Petraeus/Ryan 2010

Momma| 4.1.10 @ 4:26PM

Petraeus/Ryan 2012

debalazo| 4.3.10 @ 6:17PM

Momma,
General Betrayus is jew. oBUMa is half-jew. NO more jews in government. Or anywhere in power. They are here to destroy this country, like they have every one other they have set their usury, rapine, and proxy fodder wars through history. ENOUGH is ENOUGH!

AuntieMadder| 4.3.10 @ 7:21PM

debalazo, I can't figure you out. Are you a Muslim or a neo-Nazi? Maybe you're a white ex-con who converted to Islam while in prison. Whatever the case, your mind is diseased and your mouth is trying to spread the poison.

Momma| 4.1.10 @ 4:26PM

Petraeus/Ryan 2012

California70| 4.1.10 @ 4:35PM

Note: General Petraeus is evidently a "CFR" guy. The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is not to be confused with the Foreign Relations Council. They are two different things.

The CFR is for ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT. Therefore unless you are for One-World-Government, you might want to think twice about voting for Petraeus.

Just food-for-thought!!

Franz| 4.1.10 @ 6:01PM

Get over it, fellows. Face the truth. Israel is no friend of America. and never has been. It has an open palm and a closed mind as far as the US is concerned. Forget the spying on us (Pollard), even ignore the fact that Israel shot up the USS Liberty in international waters killing many American servicemen. The bottom line is that Israel has cost us billions of dollars for decades and cost us coutless lives in the Middle East because of our decades of blind support of this land-grabbbing, apartheid state. It has a nuclear arsenal that threatens all its neighbors and the stability of the region.It recently "slapped in the face'" the Vice President, in the words of the Israeli press (Ha'aretz, March 19).

Some friend.

What Israel needs is sanctions just as much as Iran.

Its genocidal policies toward the Palestinian people are a violation of human rights and the United Nations Charter. It consistenly ignores United Nations Resolutions and thumbs its nose at the world.

Time is overdue for an accounting.

Craig D Elderkin | 4.1.10 @ 6:41PM

My thanks to Mr. Klein, Max Boot, and Gen Petraeus for clearing the record. Keep up the good work!

Annie Ladysmith| 4.1.10 @ 6:57PM

"not worth an American life" what a load of horseshit. Is that why gulf war vets are all sick and dying (including their spouses)? Is that why the cannon fodder has been guinea pigs for tainted and probably deadly vaccines? Is that why during the entire Vietnam, undeclared, unconstutional war (yeah! just like the'war' in Iraq), only 3% of Congress had a relative of any kind in the war?

The government does not care about the welfare of the troops or anyone else.

There is no difference between the 2 parties: Bush got us into this "patriotic" war to fight "Terrorism", and Obamaniac is escalating it.

It is too late to get anything back by tea partying or the writ of law. It is all gone, lost, given up. No one is listening to the people because we are already in a totalatarian state.

The misnamed 'nation' of 'Israel' is infiltrated into every country that has fiat currency. So-called Israel calls the shots, especially for the US. The US forces were used to take out what was the 4th largest army in the world sitting on 'Israel's' doorstep.

Christian so-called evangelicals are so stupid in their undying support of so-called 'Israel' that it is no wonder we are in the shape we're in.

And, the stupidist people of all are those who have learned nothing about so-called 'civil' war history. It was another unconstitutional, unfair, dishonerable, set of atrocities by a cabal of heartless tyrants who had and have not anything to be proud of. Shame on all of you simple-minded morons, you have no clue that your enslavement started in 1865.

ps. i never reply to a moron!

Patrick Burwell | 4.2.10 @ 1:18PM

Your personal attacks are simply logical fallacies not worth responding to,
But, I will say that Israel deserves the support of the USA if for no other reason than the murderous goal of EVERY Arab nation surrounding them to MURDER ever Israeli man, woman and CHILD.
But the Middle East Conflict is a battle of worldviews as old as the conflict for the inheritance of Abraham between Isaac and Ishmael. Pull open the Bible and you will see the story played out very clearly from beginning to end.

"Resistance to Tyrants is Obedience to God"
Patrick Burwell, OnlyJesusSaves.com

debalazo| 4.3.10 @ 6:06PM

Patrick, defend 'israel'? Hate the Nazis? Christian-Zionist? Not surprised. Google:

Adolf Hitler, Founder of Israel; Crash Course in Jewish History; Debunking Genocide Myth; The International Jew; Gog, Magog, and the Kingdom of the Khazars; Imagine a World Without Jews; Israeli Thoughts On Arab Population Control; Judaism's Strange Gods; Kill the Best Gentiles;
The Golem, a World Held Hostage; The Holocaust Industry; Seventy Reasons Why The jews Cannot Be The Chosen People; The Talmud Unmasked; The 13th Tribe; Wall Street & the Bolshevik Revolution; Who Brought The Slaves To America.

Yes, only a madman, or a traitor, or a jew, could want American fodder to die for the terrorist outpost of the Rothschilds, while comfortably watching the Zionic TV play deadly jokes on dumb goys. Shame on you all.

AuntieMadder| 4.3.10 @ 7:29PM

Annie Ladysmith: i never reply to a moron!

Translation: I'm a condescending twit who hurls personal insults at strangers in comments sections of blogs and news sites. Then I run away, never to return and read any responses or rebuttals from those I've insulted because I'm a coward who can dish it out but can't take it. Besides, if I refuse to acknowledge responses and rebuttals, then I childishly believe I got the last word and that means I'm right. Nyah nyah!

Pingback| 4.3.10 @ 3:22PM

Obama snubs Netanyahu - Page 4 - U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…Israeli actions . Wrong. Petraeus never said that. Here's general Petraeus in a press conference where he set the record straight concerning this fallacious accusation. The American Spectator : Petraeus Sets the Record Straight on Israel And here's video of his statements saying that this claim is flat wrong: YouTube - Petraeus Sets Record Straight on Israel He never said US troops are endangered that is…

Pingback| 4.3.10 @ 7:43PM

Obama snubs Netanyahu - Page 4 - U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…Israeli actions . Wrong. Petraeus never said that. Here's general Petraeus in a press conference where he set the record straight concerning this fallacious accusation. The American Spectator : Petraeus Sets the Record Straight on Israel And here's a video of his statements from that press conference where he states that these claims are flat wrong: YouTube - Petraeus Sets Record Straight on Israel He…

Pingback| 4.4.10 @ 7:01PM

Political Mavens » OREN: ISRAEL SAVES AMERICAN LIVES links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…be commended for not cracking a smile. But much more important was ambassador Oren’s refutation of the most recent anti-Israeli “blood libel” attributed to General Petraeus whose repeated denials Ms. Crowley not only willfully ignored but gave a most inflammatory twist. In other words, Oren accurately pointed out that a Middle East without Israel would be a much more dangerous Middle…

Pingback| 4.16.10 @ 12:55PM

General Petraeus: “Israel made the world better” « Cubachi links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…the US. This comes days after a controversial statement by Petraeus essentially blaming America’s allegiance with Israel resulting in difficulties with the Middle East and that America’s relationship with Israel is “important, but not as important as the lives of America’s soldiers.” In fact, National Review’s Andy McCarthy took to task Petraeus’ slap to Israel. However,…

Pingback| 5.2.10 @ 2:50PM

Anti-Israel WH Officials Targeting American Jews With “Leaked” Dual Loyalty Smears | links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…Gabi Ashkenazi, chief of staff of the Israel Defense Forces, the “blog by Max Boot” which, he said, had “picked apart this whole thing, as he typically does, pretty astutely.” Petraeus: “all three items…were wrong, frankly.” Brutal. Then again no one ever really stakes their credibility on anti-Israel smears. They throw whatever sounds suitably vicious against the…

Pingback| 5.8.10 @ 5:37AM

LEE SMITH: IS THE “CONFLICT” AT THE HEART OF MIDEAST PROBLEMS? HARDLY | RUTHFULLY YOU links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…in the region. Petraeus’s comments were used by some [9] to advance the linkage-based argument that Israeli actions were endangering U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Petraeus himself has clarified [10] his remarks, and last week Defense Secretary Robert Gates jumped into the fray to explain [11] that, “Petraeus did not say that the lack of progress in the peace process is costing American lives.…

iPad to iTunes Transfer | 11.21.10 @ 12:20AM

iPad to iTunes Transfer ia an all-in-one ipad transfer tool. United four tools into one, this iPad to iTunes Transfer can be considerred as the best assistant when dealing with iPad stuffs. As an iPad uer, you can use iPad to iTunes Transfer as a iPad to Computer Transfer, Computer to iPad Transfer, iPad Converter, DVD to iPad Transfer, even it can be used as a hard drive to manage iPad files in good order.

Jamie| 11.23.10 @ 6:14PM

I read this post . it was amazing.Your thought process is wonderful.The way you tell about things is awesome.

Carpet Cleaners Melbourne

althea | 12.4.11 @ 10:43PM

Hi! I found your post very helpful. I got some important tips from it. Thanks and keep on posting. I expect to read some of your post.

Carpet Cleaning Sydney

The American Spectator

Special Report

Petraeus Sets the Record Straight on Israel

About the Author

Letter to the Editor View all comments (276) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

Michele San Pietro| 3.25.10 @ 6:43AM

Gabrielle| 3.25.10 @ 7:11AM

Christopher Holland| 3.25.10 @ 8:40PM

Alan Brooks| 3.26.10 @ 12:04AM

Herman King| 4.1.10 @ 2:22PM

Larry Tate| 7.9.10 @ 12:25PM

debalazo| 4.3.10 @ 5:27PM

mark | 3.25.10 @ 7:11AM

Jerry| 3.25.10 @ 4:56PM

Howard| 3.25.10 @ 7:22AM

crookedwren| 3.25.10 @ 8:56AM

crookedwren| 3.25.10 @ 9:02AM

thepip3r| 3.25.10 @ 12:46PM

Al| 3.25.10 @ 1:01PM

debalazo| 4.3.10 @ 4:52PM

AuntieMadder| 4.3.10 @ 7:13PM

Ken (Old Texican)| 3.25.10 @ 1:32PM

Tom in Michigan| 3.25.10 @ 5:49PM

wags101| 4.7.10 @ 12:03AM

Larry Tate| 7.9.10 @ 12:53PM

thepip3r| 3.25.10 @ 12:58PM

Al| 3.25.10 @ 1:03PM

Rob Miller | 3.25.10 @ 1:10PM

Tom in Michigan| 3.25.10 @ 6:50PM

Tom in Michigan| 3.25.10 @ 6:58PM

Irmlin Chapin| 3.25.10 @ 3:24PM

Christopher Holland| 3.25.10 @ 8:49PM

Jesus For The Jews| 3.26.10 @ 1:21AM

debalazo| 4.3.10 @ 4:29PM

Chalkdust| 3.25.10 @ 11:44AM

Boo Hoo| 3.26.10 @ 1:30AM

obamamama| 4.3.10 @ 2:49PM

Melvin| 3.25.10 @ 7:51AM

Ken (Old Texican)| 3.25.10 @ 8:05AM

KyMouse| 3.25.10 @ 9:19AM

Melvin| 3.25.10 @ 9:24AM

thepip3r| 3.25.10 @ 12:51PM

Melvin| 3.25.10 @ 1:31PM

Batman| 3.26.10 @ 1:34AM

mike NZ| 3.25.10 @ 2:20PM

mike NZ| 3.25.10 @ 2:19PM

Pingback| 3.25.10 @ 7:54AM

Ken (Old Texican)| 3.25.10 @ 7:58AM

mike NZ| 3.25.10 @ 2:22PM

tnxplant| 3.25.10 @ 8:02AM

Tim| 3.25.10 @ 8:03AM

Doorgunner| 3.25.10 @ 8:22AM

ExConServative| 3.25.10 @ 9:51AM

Ken (Old Texican)| 3.25.10 @ 10:29AM

Doorgunner| 3.25.10 @ 10:29AM

Chalkdust| 3.25.10 @ 1:21PM

M ike NZ| 3.25.10 @ 2:25PM

axbucxdu| 3.26.10 @ 10:02PM

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 12:04PM

Ken (Old Texican)| 3.25.10 @ 1:39PM

Doorgunner| 3.25.10 @ 2:30PM

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 2:44PM

Doorgunner| 3.25.10 @ 2:58PM

S.L. Toddard| 3.25.10 @ 5:58PM

Christopher Holland| 3.25.10 @ 8:56PM

Tim| 3.25.10 @ 9:41AM

mike NZ| 3.25.10 @ 2:23PM

Desotobill| 3.25.10 @ 8:25AM

NavyBrat | 3.25.10 @ 8:37AM

Lavrenty Beria| 3.26.10 @ 5:07AM

Jay| 3.25.10 @ 8:42AM

Mike NZ| 3.25.10 @ 2:28PM

Christopher Holland| 3.25.10 @ 9:02PM

tdiinva| 3.25.10 @ 8:42AM

William R| 3.25.10 @ 9:37AM

Doorgunner| 3.25.10 @ 10:56AM

William R| 3.25.10 @ 11:25AM

KyMouse| 3.25.10 @ 3:44PM

Bob Miller| 3.25.10 @ 11:12AM

mike NZ| 3.25.10 @ 2:29PM