Kathianne
01-02-2009, 02:42 PM
http://www.extrememortman.com/terrorism/obamas-hamas-details/
Yes, you'll have to go to link for the links. ;)
Obama’s Hamas Details
January 2, 2009 at 4:41 am
Time magazine asks this about Barack Obama and Israel vs. Hamas in Gaza:
How will Obama respond? As a presidential candidate, he called for a new peace process but was short on the details. “A U.S. Administration has to put its weight behind a process, recognizing that it’s not going to happen immediately,” he said during a visit to Israel last summer. “That’s why I will not wait until a few years into my term or my second term … to get the process moving.” That was meant to be a dig at the Bush Administration, which left it too late to pursue peace between Israel and the Palestinians. Now the Obama Administration risks being too late even before it has begun.
Obama short on details? Perhaps.
But what if we were to consider these statements:
“Israel cannot be expected to negotiate with a party that calls for its destruction, engages in terrorism and maintains an armed militia. Hamas must choose: bullets or ballots.”
“I would work to isolate Hamas. We should not talk to Hamas unless and until they recognize Israel, renounce terrorism and accept past agreements.”
“Hamas has to decide between bullets and ballots - either it lays down its arms and acts democratically, or it continues as a terrorist organization and is treated as such. It cannot have it both ways.”
“I would also support alternatives to Hamas.”
And to whom do these detailed statements belong?
VP-elect Joe Biden.
(source here).
Even more:
“The Hamas takeover of Gaza is deeply disturbing, increasing the danger to Israeli citizens already under attack from rockets fired indiscriminately from the Gaza territory.”
“The United States must continue to support our ally, Israel, as it defends itself against these attacks and insist that Hamas cannot be recognized until it renounces terrorism and recognizes Israel’s right to exist.”
“Israel and the international community are committed to supporting the new government of Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas, strengthening the PA and its ability to meet its responsibilities, in direct contrast to Hamas.”
“I am deeply concerned about the growing threat in Gaza. Hamas has built a military force equipped with sophisticated weapons from Iran. Hamas’ campaign of terror has claimed the lives of hundreds of innocent Israelis. Its charter calls for the destruction of Israel. It has shown no commitment to peace or to renouncing violence.”
And whose detailed statements are these?
Secretary of State-appointee Hillary Clinton.
(source here)
Looks like the real question is: Will Obama’s statements on Hamas and terrorism be as strong as those from others in his incoming Administration.
January 2, 2009 at 4:41 am
Yes, you'll have to go to link for the links. ;)
Obama’s Hamas Details
January 2, 2009 at 4:41 am
Time magazine asks this about Barack Obama and Israel vs. Hamas in Gaza:
How will Obama respond? As a presidential candidate, he called for a new peace process but was short on the details. “A U.S. Administration has to put its weight behind a process, recognizing that it’s not going to happen immediately,” he said during a visit to Israel last summer. “That’s why I will not wait until a few years into my term or my second term … to get the process moving.” That was meant to be a dig at the Bush Administration, which left it too late to pursue peace between Israel and the Palestinians. Now the Obama Administration risks being too late even before it has begun.
Obama short on details? Perhaps.
But what if we were to consider these statements:
“Israel cannot be expected to negotiate with a party that calls for its destruction, engages in terrorism and maintains an armed militia. Hamas must choose: bullets or ballots.”
“I would work to isolate Hamas. We should not talk to Hamas unless and until they recognize Israel, renounce terrorism and accept past agreements.”
“Hamas has to decide between bullets and ballots - either it lays down its arms and acts democratically, or it continues as a terrorist organization and is treated as such. It cannot have it both ways.”
“I would also support alternatives to Hamas.”
And to whom do these detailed statements belong?
VP-elect Joe Biden.
(source here).
Even more:
“The Hamas takeover of Gaza is deeply disturbing, increasing the danger to Israeli citizens already under attack from rockets fired indiscriminately from the Gaza territory.”
“The United States must continue to support our ally, Israel, as it defends itself against these attacks and insist that Hamas cannot be recognized until it renounces terrorism and recognizes Israel’s right to exist.”
“Israel and the international community are committed to supporting the new government of Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas, strengthening the PA and its ability to meet its responsibilities, in direct contrast to Hamas.”
“I am deeply concerned about the growing threat in Gaza. Hamas has built a military force equipped with sophisticated weapons from Iran. Hamas’ campaign of terror has claimed the lives of hundreds of innocent Israelis. Its charter calls for the destruction of Israel. It has shown no commitment to peace or to renouncing violence.”
And whose detailed statements are these?
Secretary of State-appointee Hillary Clinton.
(source here)
Looks like the real question is: Will Obama’s statements on Hamas and terrorism be as strong as those from others in his incoming Administration.
January 2, 2009 at 4:41 am