wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2011 17:18:06 -0600,
wrote:

On 20/05/2011 1:58 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2011 12:49:41 -0600,
wrote:

It isn't about good will, it is about a sellout. Islam has declared
Israel an enemy of state. Reminds me of "peac in our time pre-WW II.

Maybe give Alaska back to the Russians while you are at it. And the US
Canadian border to the west should be a few degrees south.

Maybe give the Mexicans California and Texas back.

It doesn't end.
In this case it would be more like letting the Germans keep Poland but
the Texas California situation might be similar. We took that as the
spoils of war.
(We bought Alaska)
I really thought the idea of wars of conquest went out since the 40s
when we gave everything back that we took in WWII. In fact the US has
given back virtually everything it has taken in war since 1898. We
pretty much only have Puerto Rico and a small patch in Cuba today.

The only lasting peace in the middle east will have to start at the
1967 borders.
Fact is, go back far enough, Israel has claim. Islam fascism didn't get
brewing until 630AD....

So picking some arbitrary point in time between then and now...sort of
arrogant of Obama to say that. If I was Israel, I would open up talks
with the Russians and Chinese.... US is an UNRELIABLE ally.

Russia and China might want them to go back to the pre-1948 borders.
It should be noted that the Saudis are nuzzling up to the Chinese as
we speak and most of the Arab world was aligned with the Soviets until
fairly recently. The thing that changed that was Mubarak aligning
himself with the US and getting billions in US military aid about 30
years ago. Then a week into the protests we threw him under the bus.
It would not be surprising that they started looking East for a
friend.


I just *love* your "conservative" view of history. Egypt began getting
U.S. military aid *after* it came to terms with a peace treaty with
Israel. You know, the deal Jimmy Carter brokered.

On 20/05/2011 7:18 PM, L G wrote:
Canuck57 wrote:
On 19/05/2011 2:05 PM, Harryk wrote:
Gene wrote:
On Thu, 19 May 2011 12:40:06 -0600,
wrote:

On 19/05/2011 6:49 AM, Harryk wrote:
John H wrote:
...if enough people see this!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKdSc...layer_embedded

Obama made some great points here. Wonder what happened?
Have you bought that big new camper yet?
Harry, face it, Obama is a two faced LIAR.

Maybe Obama should give up his 8 mpg GM, my F150 Lariat gets 20 mpg.

My full size Chevy pickup with 4WD gets over 10% better than that....
and its gasoline powered....






Are you talking about the highly bullet resistant presidential SUVs that
we see rolling around DC? They're not your standard SUVs...

In the clip I saw on TV, Obama looks like a fish out of water with
interactive questions.

Really stepped in it when he suggested all those 8 mpg truck and SUV
owners should buy a new one.

Obama has **** for brains. Go out and spend $40K on a lemon Volt? That
is one hell of a lot of gasoline and the A/C works in the truck.

Looks like Obama's Illinois buddy democrat Rod Blagojevich is back in
court again, some now charges.
He didn't have a teleprompter for the Q&A.

Ah, puppet without his strings.
--
Take a look at ANY country, more debt is more problems. So why do we
allow our governments more debt? Selfishness, greed, denial, ignorance?

wrote:
On Sat, 21 May 2011 10:13:22 -0400,
wrote:

wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2011 17:18:06 -0600,
wrote:

On 20/05/2011 1:58 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2011 12:49:41 -0600,
wrote:

It isn't about good will, it is about a sellout. Islam has declared
Israel an enemy of state. Reminds me of "peac in our time pre-WW II.

Maybe give Alaska back to the Russians while you are at it. And the US
Canadian border to the west should be a few degrees south.

Maybe give the Mexicans California and Texas back.

It doesn't end.
In this case it would be more like letting the Germans keep Poland but
the Texas California situation might be similar. We took that as the
spoils of war.
(We bought Alaska)
I really thought the idea of wars of conquest went out since the 40s
when we gave everything back that we took in WWII. In fact the US has
given back virtually everything it has taken in war since 1898. We
pretty much only have Puerto Rico and a small patch in Cuba today.

The only lasting peace in the middle east will have to start at the
1967 borders.
Fact is, go back far enough, Israel has claim. Islam fascism didn't get
brewing until 630AD....

So picking some arbitrary point in time between then and now...sort of
arrogant of Obama to say that. If I was Israel, I would open up talks
with the Russians and Chinese.... US is an UNRELIABLE ally.
Russia and China might want them to go back to the pre-1948 borders.
It should be noted that the Saudis are nuzzling up to the Chinese as
we speak and most of the Arab world was aligned with the Soviets until
fairly recently. The thing that changed that was Mubarak aligning
himself with the US and getting billions in US military aid about 30
years ago. Then a week into the protests we threw him under the bus.
It would not be surprising that they started looking East for a
friend.

I just *love* your "conservative" view of history. Egypt began getting
U.S. military aid *after* it came to terms with a peace treaty with
Israel. You know, the deal Jimmy Carter brokered.

I didn't say what prompted the cooperation but you are right.
It is amazing what you can get if you promise to upgrade a country's
obsolete Soviet hardware with first line US hardware and a billion
dollar's worth of training to use them.
It is also significant that the guy we cut that deal with is gone. We
are still not sure who will rise up from the shambles in Egypt but we
hope it turns out better than Iran.


The peace deal was signed with Sadat, who was assassinated. It was
always a tragedy that the aftermath threw up Mubarak who, after all, was
just another right-wing dictator, the kind we always seem to support.

On Sat, 21 May 2011 12:34:00 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 21 May 2011 11:55:16 -0400, Harryk
wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 21 May 2011 10:13:22 -0400,
wrote:

wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2011 17:18:06 -0600,
wrote:

On 20/05/2011 1:58 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2011 12:49:41 -0600,
wrote:

It isn't about good will, it is about a sellout. Islam has declared
Israel an enemy of state. Reminds me of "peac in our time pre-WW II.

Maybe give Alaska back to the Russians while you are at it. And the US
Canadian border to the west should be a few degrees south.

Maybe give the Mexicans California and Texas back.

It doesn't end.
In this case it would be more like letting the Germans keep Poland but
the Texas California situation might be similar. We took that as the
spoils of war.
(We bought Alaska)
I really thought the idea of wars of conquest went out since the 40s
when we gave everything back that we took in WWII. In fact the US has
given back virtually everything it has taken in war since 1898. We
pretty much only have Puerto Rico and a small patch in Cuba today.

The only lasting peace in the middle east will have to start at the
1967 borders.
Fact is, go back far enough, Israel has claim. Islam fascism didn't get
brewing until 630AD....

So picking some arbitrary point in time between then and now...sort of
arrogant of Obama to say that. If I was Israel, I would open up talks
with the Russians and Chinese.... US is an UNRELIABLE ally.
Russia and China might want them to go back to the pre-1948 borders.
It should be noted that the Saudis are nuzzling up to the Chinese as
we speak and most of the Arab world was aligned with the Soviets until
fairly recently. The thing that changed that was Mubarak aligning
himself with the US and getting billions in US military aid about 30
years ago. Then a week into the protests we threw him under the bus.
It would not be surprising that they started looking East for a
friend.

I just *love* your "conservative" view of history. Egypt began getting
U.S. military aid *after* it came to terms with a peace treaty with
Israel. You know, the deal Jimmy Carter brokered.

I didn't say what prompted the cooperation but you are right.
It is amazing what you can get if you promise to upgrade a country's
obsolete Soviet hardware with first line US hardware and a billion
dollar's worth of training to use them.
It is also significant that the guy we cut that deal with is gone. We
are still not sure who will rise up from the shambles in Egypt but we
hope it turns out better than Iran.


The peace deal was signed with Sadat, who was assassinated. It was
always a tragedy that the aftermath threw up Mubarak who, after all, was
just another right-wing dictator, the kind we always seem to support.

Sadat and Mubarak were basically the same guy (Egyptian military
buddies) and they both signed on to the Carter deal. I imagine the
assassins wanted to kill him too. (he was slightly wounded)
The open question is what is going to happen when this gets tossed
back to the Egyptian people who may be guided by the Muslim
brotherhood (if we can't elevate another US friendly military
dictator to power) and I doubt we have that kind of influence today.

Right wing nonsense. Nobody including the MB wants violence. They're
renounced it in public more than a few times.

Of course, you're just interested in your own right-wing agenda of a
fear-based foreign policy.

In article ,
says...

wrote:
On Sat, 21 May 2011 10:13:22 -0400,
wrote:

wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2011 17:18:06 -0600,
wrote:

On 20/05/2011 1:58 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2011 12:49:41 -0600,
wrote:

It isn't about good will, it is about a sellout. Islam has declared
Israel an enemy of state. Reminds me of "peac in our time pre-WW II.

Maybe give Alaska back to the Russians while you are at it. And the US
Canadian border to the west should be a few degrees south.

Maybe give the Mexicans California and Texas back.

It doesn't end.
In this case it would be more like letting the Germans keep Poland but
the Texas California situation might be similar. We took that as the
spoils of war.
(We bought Alaska)
I really thought the idea of wars of conquest went out since the 40s
when we gave everything back that we took in WWII. In fact the US has
given back virtually everything it has taken in war since 1898. We
pretty much only have Puerto Rico and a small patch in Cuba today.

The only lasting peace in the middle east will have to start at the
1967 borders.
Fact is, go back far enough, Israel has claim. Islam fascism didn't get
brewing until 630AD....

So picking some arbitrary point in time between then and now...sort of
arrogant of Obama to say that. If I was Israel, I would open up talks
with the Russians and Chinese.... US is an UNRELIABLE ally.
Russia and China might want them to go back to the pre-1948 borders.
It should be noted that the Saudis are nuzzling up to the Chinese as
we speak and most of the Arab world was aligned with the Soviets until
fairly recently. The thing that changed that was Mubarak aligning
himself with the US and getting billions in US military aid about 30
years ago. Then a week into the protests we threw him under the bus.
It would not be surprising that they started looking East for a
friend.

I just *love* your "conservative" view of history. Egypt began getting
U.S. military aid *after* it came to terms with a peace treaty with
Israel. You know, the deal Jimmy Carter brokered.

I didn't say what prompted the cooperation but you are right.
It is amazing what you can get if you promise to upgrade a country's
obsolete Soviet hardware with first line US hardware and a billion
dollar's worth of training to use them.
It is also significant that the guy we cut that deal with is gone. We
are still not sure who will rise up from the shambles in Egypt but we
hope it turns out better than Iran.


The peace deal was signed with Sadat, who was assassinated. It was
always a tragedy that the aftermath threw up Mubarak who, after all, was
just another right-wing dictator, the kind we always seem to support.

Sadat got his ass handed to him in 1973 and knew that his Soviet
equipment was useless. As Greg said his deal with Israel got him new
equipment, training and billions of dollars. Mubarak could have been
seeing all of the money coming in and decided that he wanted to line his
pockets rather than let Sadat pad his families pockets.

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 21 May 2011 12:34:00 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 21 May 2011 11:55:16 -0400, Harryk
wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 21 May 2011 10:13:22 -0400,
wrote:

wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2011 17:18:06 -0600,
wrote:

On 20/05/2011 1:58 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2011 12:49:41 -0600,
wrote:

It isn't about good will, it is about a sellout. Islam has declared
Israel an enemy of state. Reminds me of "peac in our time pre-WW II.

Maybe give Alaska back to the Russians while you are at it. And the US
Canadian border to the west should be a few degrees south.

Maybe give the Mexicans California and Texas back.

It doesn't end.
In this case it would be more like letting the Germans keep Poland but
the Texas California situation might be similar. We took that as the
spoils of war.
(We bought Alaska)
I really thought the idea of wars of conquest went out since the 40s
when we gave everything back that we took in WWII. In fact the US has
given back virtually everything it has taken in war since 1898. We
pretty much only have Puerto Rico and a small patch in Cuba today.

The only lasting peace in the middle east will have to start at the
1967 borders.
Fact is, go back far enough, Israel has claim. Islam fascism didn't get
brewing until 630AD....

So picking some arbitrary point in time between then and now...sort of
arrogant of Obama to say that. If I was Israel, I would open up talks
with the Russians and Chinese.... US is an UNRELIABLE ally.
Russia and China might want them to go back to the pre-1948 borders.
It should be noted that the Saudis are nuzzling up to the Chinese as
we speak and most of the Arab world was aligned with the Soviets until
fairly recently. The thing that changed that was Mubarak aligning
himself with the US and getting billions in US military aid about 30
years ago. Then a week into the protests we threw him under the bus.
It would not be surprising that they started looking East for a
friend.

I just *love* your "conservative" view of history. Egypt began getting
U.S. military aid *after* it came to terms with a peace treaty with
Israel. You know, the deal Jimmy Carter brokered.

I didn't say what prompted the cooperation but you are right.
It is amazing what you can get if you promise to upgrade a country's
obsolete Soviet hardware with first line US hardware and a billion
dollar's worth of training to use them.
It is also significant that the guy we cut that deal with is gone. We
are still not sure who will rise up from the shambles in Egypt but we
hope it turns out better than Iran.


The peace deal was signed with Sadat, who was assassinated. It was
always a tragedy that the aftermath threw up Mubarak who, after all, was
just another right-wing dictator, the kind we always seem to support.

Sadat and Mubarak were basically the same guy (Egyptian military
buddies) and they both signed on to the Carter deal. I imagine the
assassins wanted to kill him too. (he was slightly wounded)
The open question is what is going to happen when this gets tossed
back to the Egyptian people who may be guided by the Muslim
brotherhood (if we can't elevate another US friendly military
dictator to power) and I doubt we have that kind of influence today.

Right wing nonsense. Nobody including the MB wants violence. They're
renounced it in public more than a few times.

You are either stupid or naieve or both. The Muslim Brotherhood wants a
country and Egypt is up for grabs right now.

Of course, you're just interested in your own right-wing agenda of a
fear-based foreign policy.

Foreign policy is rooted in national security.

On Sat, 21 May 2011 18:15:24 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 21 May 2011 12:34:00 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 21 May 2011 11:55:16 -0400, Harryk
wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 21 May 2011 10:13:22 -0400,
wrote:

wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2011 17:18:06 -0600,
wrote:

On 20/05/2011 1:58 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2011 12:49:41 -0600,
wrote:

It isn't about good will, it is about a sellout. Islam has declared
Israel an enemy of state. Reminds me of "peac in our time pre-WW II.

Maybe give Alaska back to the Russians while you are at it. And the US
Canadian border to the west should be a few degrees south.

Maybe give the Mexicans California and Texas back.

It doesn't end.
In this case it would be more like letting the Germans keep Poland but
the Texas California situation might be similar. We took that as the
spoils of war.
(We bought Alaska)
I really thought the idea of wars of conquest went out since the 40s
when we gave everything back that we took in WWII. In fact the US has
given back virtually everything it has taken in war since 1898. We
pretty much only have Puerto Rico and a small patch in Cuba today.

The only lasting peace in the middle east will have to start at the
1967 borders.
Fact is, go back far enough, Israel has claim. Islam fascism didn't get
brewing until 630AD....

So picking some arbitrary point in time between then and now...sort of
arrogant of Obama to say that. If I was Israel, I would open up talks
with the Russians and Chinese.... US is an UNRELIABLE ally.
Russia and China might want them to go back to the pre-1948 borders.
It should be noted that the Saudis are nuzzling up to the Chinese as
we speak and most of the Arab world was aligned with the Soviets until
fairly recently. The thing that changed that was Mubarak aligning
himself with the US and getting billions in US military aid about 30
years ago. Then a week into the protests we threw him under the bus.
It would not be surprising that they started looking East for a
friend.

I just *love* your "conservative" view of history. Egypt began getting
U.S. military aid *after* it came to terms with a peace treaty with
Israel. You know, the deal Jimmy Carter brokered.

I didn't say what prompted the cooperation but you are right.
It is amazing what you can get if you promise to upgrade a country's
obsolete Soviet hardware with first line US hardware and a billion
dollar's worth of training to use them.
It is also significant that the guy we cut that deal with is gone. We
are still not sure who will rise up from the shambles in Egypt but we
hope it turns out better than Iran.


The peace deal was signed with Sadat, who was assassinated. It was
always a tragedy that the aftermath threw up Mubarak who, after all, was
just another right-wing dictator, the kind we always seem to support.

Sadat and Mubarak were basically the same guy (Egyptian military
buddies) and they both signed on to the Carter deal. I imagine the
assassins wanted to kill him too. (he was slightly wounded)
The open question is what is going to happen when this gets tossed
back to the Egyptian people who may be guided by the Muslim
brotherhood (if we can't elevate another US friendly military
dictator to power) and I doubt we have that kind of influence today.

Right wing nonsense. Nobody including the MB wants violence. They're
renounced it in public more than a few times.

You are either stupid or naieve or both. The Muslim Brotherhood wants a
country and Egypt is up for grabs right now.

Of course, you're just interested in your own right-wing agenda of a
fear-based foreign policy.

Foreign policy is rooted in national security.

The MB has renounced violence. Sorry if that disturbs your distorted
view of the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Brotherhood

Foreign policy is certainly rooted in national security, but it not
rooted in right wing extremism, which is what you promote.

On Sat, 21 May 2011 18:13:13 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

wrote:
On Sat, 21 May 2011 10:13:22 -0400,
wrote:

wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2011 17:18:06 -0600,
wrote:

On 20/05/2011 1:58 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2011 12:49:41 -0600,
wrote:

It isn't about good will, it is about a sellout. Islam has declared
Israel an enemy of state. Reminds me of "peac in our time pre-WW II.

Maybe give Alaska back to the Russians while you are at it. And the US
Canadian border to the west should be a few degrees south.

Maybe give the Mexicans California and Texas back.

It doesn't end.
In this case it would be more like letting the Germans keep Poland but
the Texas California situation might be similar. We took that as the
spoils of war.
(We bought Alaska)
I really thought the idea of wars of conquest went out since the 40s
when we gave everything back that we took in WWII. In fact the US has
given back virtually everything it has taken in war since 1898. We
pretty much only have Puerto Rico and a small patch in Cuba today.

The only lasting peace in the middle east will have to start at the
1967 borders.
Fact is, go back far enough, Israel has claim. Islam fascism didn't get
brewing until 630AD....

So picking some arbitrary point in time between then and now...sort of
arrogant of Obama to say that. If I was Israel, I would open up talks
with the Russians and Chinese.... US is an UNRELIABLE ally.
Russia and China might want them to go back to the pre-1948 borders.
It should be noted that the Saudis are nuzzling up to the Chinese as
we speak and most of the Arab world was aligned with the Soviets until
fairly recently. The thing that changed that was Mubarak aligning
himself with the US and getting billions in US military aid about 30
years ago. Then a week into the protests we threw him under the bus.
It would not be surprising that they started looking East for a
friend.

I just *love* your "conservative" view of history. Egypt began getting
U.S. military aid *after* it came to terms with a peace treaty with
Israel. You know, the deal Jimmy Carter brokered.

I didn't say what prompted the cooperation but you are right.
It is amazing what you can get if you promise to upgrade a country's
obsolete Soviet hardware with first line US hardware and a billion
dollar's worth of training to use them.
It is also significant that the guy we cut that deal with is gone. We
are still not sure who will rise up from the shambles in Egypt but we
hope it turns out better than Iran.


The peace deal was signed with Sadat, who was assassinated. It was
always a tragedy that the aftermath threw up Mubarak who, after all, was
just another right-wing dictator, the kind we always seem to support.

Sadat got his ass handed to him in 1973 and knew that his Soviet
equipment was useless. As Greg said his deal with Israel got him new
equipment, training and billions of dollars. Mubarak could have been
seeing all of the money coming in and decided that he wanted to line his
pockets rather than let Sadat pad his families pockets.


It also ushered in a lasting peace between two countries at each
other's throats.

I have no idea what point you're trying to make about Mubarak. He
didn't take over in a coup d'état.

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 21 May 2011 18:15:24 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 21 May 2011 12:34:00 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 21 May 2011 11:55:16 -0400, Harryk
wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 21 May 2011 10:13:22 -0400,
wrote:

wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2011 17:18:06 -0600,
wrote:

On 20/05/2011 1:58 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2011 12:49:41 -0600,
wrote:

It isn't about good will, it is about a sellout. Islam has declared
Israel an enemy of state. Reminds me of "peac in our time pre-WW II.

Maybe give Alaska back to the Russians while you are at it. And the US
Canadian border to the west should be a few degrees south.

Maybe give the Mexicans California and Texas back.

It doesn't end.
In this case it would be more like letting the Germans keep Poland but
the Texas California situation might be similar. We took that as the
spoils of war.
(We bought Alaska)
I really thought the idea of wars of conquest went out since the 40s
when we gave everything back that we took in WWII. In fact the US has
given back virtually everything it has taken in war since 1898. We
pretty much only have Puerto Rico and a small patch in Cuba today.

The only lasting peace in the middle east will have to start at the
1967 borders.
Fact is, go back far enough, Israel has claim. Islam fascism didn't get
brewing until 630AD....

So picking some arbitrary point in time between then and now...sort of
arrogant of Obama to say that. If I was Israel, I would open up talks
with the Russians and Chinese.... US is an UNRELIABLE ally.
Russia and China might want them to go back to the pre-1948 borders.
It should be noted that the Saudis are nuzzling up to the Chinese as
we speak and most of the Arab world was aligned with the Soviets until
fairly recently. The thing that changed that was Mubarak aligning
himself with the US and getting billions in US military aid about 30
years ago. Then a week into the protests we threw him under the bus.
It would not be surprising that they started looking East for a
friend.

I just *love* your "conservative" view of history. Egypt began getting
U.S. military aid *after* it came to terms with a peace treaty with
Israel. You know, the deal Jimmy Carter brokered.

I didn't say what prompted the cooperation but you are right.
It is amazing what you can get if you promise to upgrade a country's
obsolete Soviet hardware with first line US hardware and a billion
dollar's worth of training to use them.
It is also significant that the guy we cut that deal with is gone. We
are still not sure who will rise up from the shambles in Egypt but we
hope it turns out better than Iran.


The peace deal was signed with Sadat, who was assassinated. It was
always a tragedy that the aftermath threw up Mubarak who, after all, was
just another right-wing dictator, the kind we always seem to support.

Sadat and Mubarak were basically the same guy (Egyptian military
buddies) and they both signed on to the Carter deal. I imagine the
assassins wanted to kill him too. (he was slightly wounded)
The open question is what is going to happen when this gets tossed
back to the Egyptian people who may be guided by the Muslim
brotherhood (if we can't elevate another US friendly military
dictator to power) and I doubt we have that kind of influence today.

Right wing nonsense. Nobody including the MB wants violence. They're
renounced it in public more than a few times.

You are either stupid or naieve or both. The Muslim Brotherhood wants a
country and Egypt is up for grabs right now.

Of course, you're just interested in your own right-wing agenda of a
fear-based foreign policy.

Foreign policy is rooted in national security.

The MB has renounced violence. Sorry if that disturbs your distorted
view of the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Brotherhood

If you want to believe them your are free to do so. The rest of the
world does not trust the Muslim Brotherhood.

Foreign policy is certainly rooted in national security, but it not
rooted in right wing extremism, which is what you promote.

I promote American exceptionalism. The USA is the greatest country the
Earth has ever known.

Why does every country steal from us?

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 21 May 2011 18:13:13 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

wrote:
On Sat, 21 May 2011 10:13:22 -0400,
wrote:

wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2011 17:18:06 -0600,
wrote:

On 20/05/2011 1:58 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2011 12:49:41 -0600,
wrote:

It isn't about good will, it is about a sellout. Islam has declared
Israel an enemy of state. Reminds me of "peac in our time pre-WW II.

Maybe give Alaska back to the Russians while you are at it. And the US
Canadian border to the west should be a few degrees south.

Maybe give the Mexicans California and Texas back.

It doesn't end.
In this case it would be more like letting the Germans keep Poland but
the Texas California situation might be similar. We took that as the
spoils of war.
(We bought Alaska)
I really thought the idea of wars of conquest went out since the 40s
when we gave everything back that we took in WWII. In fact the US has
given back virtually everything it has taken in war since 1898. We
pretty much only have Puerto Rico and a small patch in Cuba today.

The only lasting peace in the middle east will have to start at the
1967 borders.
Fact is, go back far enough, Israel has claim. Islam fascism didn't get
brewing until 630AD....

So picking some arbitrary point in time between then and now...sort of
arrogant of Obama to say that. If I was Israel, I would open up talks
with the Russians and Chinese.... US is an UNRELIABLE ally.
Russia and China might want them to go back to the pre-1948 borders.
It should be noted that the Saudis are nuzzling up to the Chinese as
we speak and most of the Arab world was aligned with the Soviets until
fairly recently. The thing that changed that was Mubarak aligning
himself with the US and getting billions in US military aid about 30
years ago. Then a week into the protests we threw him under the bus.
It would not be surprising that they started looking East for a
friend.

I just *love* your "conservative" view of history. Egypt began getting
U.S. military aid *after* it came to terms with a peace treaty with
Israel. You know, the deal Jimmy Carter brokered.

I didn't say what prompted the cooperation but you are right.
It is amazing what you can get if you promise to upgrade a country's
obsolete Soviet hardware with first line US hardware and a billion
dollar's worth of training to use them.
It is also significant that the guy we cut that deal with is gone. We
are still not sure who will rise up from the shambles in Egypt but we
hope it turns out better than Iran.


The peace deal was signed with Sadat, who was assassinated. It was
always a tragedy that the aftermath threw up Mubarak who, after all, was
just another right-wing dictator, the kind we always seem to support.

Sadat got his ass handed to him in 1973 and knew that his Soviet
equipment was useless. As Greg said his deal with Israel got him new
equipment, training and billions of dollars. Mubarak could have been
seeing all of the money coming in and decided that he wanted to line his
pockets rather than let Sadat pad his families pockets.


It also ushered in a lasting peace between two countries at each
other's throats.

Peace is usually what happens after you get your ass kicked by another
country.

I have no idea what point you're trying to make about Mubarak. He
didn't take over in a coup d'état.

Who lead the coup?