Next Year in Jerusalem?

Erica - Realize one thing NONE of the libs have solutions just insults and complaints. They do not care if millions of people are slaughtered.

If you put the benchmarks they gave a new goverment and put those benchmarks against this lib congress they would fail worse then the Iraq, All they have done is have unconstitutional hearings, are trying to raise taxes, oh and yes renamed a few post offices and also Insulted Our Military.

Although Obama requested the withdrawal of troops from Iraq, I have not heard what his alternative strategies were. What would happen afterwards? And I still not heard what he believes concerening the Global Poverty Act. Will he agree to pass it through?

Brzezinski says Obama has a better grasp of foreign affairs than Hillary, and that we don't need the foreign policy we had under Bill and Hillary eight years ago. Meanwhile, Obama voices support for Israel, but stands by his assertion that Palestinians have suffered the most in the Middle East. Brzezinski defends a book about the powerful Israel lobby that is called anti-semitic---mostly by Clinton supporters. Obama and Brzezinski both favor a quick pullout from Iraq. Hillary does sound more conventional--a pullout will take some time, talking to rogue nations would be a diplomatic faux pas, etc. It sounds more and more like Obama is trying to position himself as the brilliant outsider, versus the entrenched 'old guard' that supports Hillary. If Obama wins it all, we may get a return to 'Rodney King Diplomacy'---"Why can't we all just get along?" That worked for Jimmy Carter when he engineered the Camp David accord, but left him and the nation flat when he bungled the Iranian Hostage situation, with Brzezinski at his side. Brzezinski is right--we don't need what we had eight years ago--but we surely don't need what we had 28 years ago!

Smells like one part manufactured controversy (complete with out of context incendiary quote!) and one part real idealogical difference. Obama probably wouldn't be as good of a friend to Israel as Bush is and as Clinton would be. But most jews (myself included) aren't so two dimensional that we value Israel's interest to the exclusion of all else. The Israel lobby may think that way, as do many orthodox jews, but average jewish voters? We're not that parochial IMO.

Brezinsky? Isn't he the fella who sided with the Mujahadeen in their struggle to rid Afghanistan of the Soviet invader/occupiers? Yeah, he's the guy who lobbied for Stinger, shoulder-fired, anti-aircraft missiles for the Islamists.

As for the Israel Lobby, it certainly exists, Brezinsky notwithstanding.

The dual allegiance issue is moot, if one believes, as millions do, that Israel's national interests are identical or absolutely congruent with America's national interests. The Israel Lobby makes sure that no American politician questions that fundamentally flawed premise.

Anyone who publicly criticizes the powerful influence of the Israel Lobby is certain to be labeled as an "antisemite", a "terrorist sympathizer" or worse.

First of all does this surprise anyone, the Lib Dems hate the Jewish people, and Israel, did not Hilary get a Kiss from Arafat.

The only surprising thing is peoples of Jewish faith vote for them.

I still say Obama is a Islamic!

The charges concerning antisemitism almost always arise whenever Israel's influence on the US government is discussed, with everyone taking sides and hurling insults. Proclamations made by ram's horns notwithstanding, it is almost a given that Sen. Obama's opponents would attempt to use whatever position he takes to their advantage, even if it results in unpopular, unappealing, and untrue name-calling. So, I'm not surprised by the other candidates' tactics, just disappointed that they are resorting to red herrings instead of discussing what they themselves would do as president.

And as for Mr. Brzezinski, it seems his choice of candidate and his reasons for support are clearly reasoned. I would add that the interview you cite also discusses what he thinks we should do to end our involvement in Iraq, rather than prolong it under the apparent post-"surge" policies of the President. We could do a lot worse (and have) by not paying attention.

Did the hearings this week give Obama the political cover he needed to pursue this plan of withdrawal? Or do the Republicans now have the evidence they need to continue supporting Bush and the mission in Iraq? Who won Petraeus week?