The Goat Pen

Well. I didn't know about this Consumer Sentiment thingy. Univ of Michigan you say. "Highest since January 2004" - dubya was killing it back then for sure. Good times.

I'm starting to get turned around on this whole Trump situation. Thanks for the heads up. toe.

Obama adds salt to wound on his way out, completing 8 years of foreign policy disgrace.

This resolution was approved by a vote of 14 to 0, and the U.S. abstained from voting. But essentially the outcome of the vote was going to be determined by Barack Obama. For decades, the U.S. veto power on the UN Security Council has shielded Israel from these types of resolutions, but this time around Obama decided to betray Israel by allowing this vote to pass.


Even the NYT...


Defying extraordinary pressure from President-elect Donald J. Trump and furious lobbying by Israel, the Obama administration on Friday allowed the United Nations Security Council to adopt a contentious resolution that condemned Israeli settlement construction.

The administration’s decision not to veto the measure broke a longstanding American tradition of serving as Israel’s sturdiest diplomatic shield.

Obama always disliked Israel. But he loves all the Muslim countries, especially Iran. So it's all even.

Have one last Barry Christmas everybody!

Merry Christmas to all.

I really do enjoy sparring with all you knuckleheads throughout the year.

Thank you.

Dick move by Obama on Israel. Either he did it out of spite, or was planning to wait until after the election because he knows most of America disagrees.

Both of the above. It was his last chance to give the middle finger to Netanyahu, and simultaneously express his solidarity with radical Islamist regimes.

Fortunately, UN resolutions aren't worth the paper they are written on. Trump is a nut, and I find the idea of him controlling nuclear weapons pretty scary. But at least he is not a feckless weakling. He will restore some sanity to our foreign policy in the Middle East. The days of punishing our allies and appeasing our enemies are coming to an end.

Well, maybe Israel will take a stand and reject the next multi-billion dollar aid package we try to send them.

Toemeesleather wrote:Obama adds salt to wound on his way out, completing 8 years of foreign policy disgrace.

This resolution was approved by a vote of 14 to 0, and the U.S. abstained from voting. But essentially the outcome of the vote was going to be determined by Barack Obama. For decades, the U.S. veto power on the UN Security Council has shielded Israel from these types of resolutions, but this time around Obama decided to betray Israel by allowing this vote to pass.

Ya know, Netanyahu wined and dined the Russians and the Chinese in the hopes of getting a veto vote - he figured rightly that he wouldn't get it from oprama, or the brits and french, so he tried to pull a rabbit out of the hat by courting with the dark side. And he bombed out gloriously and is rightly embarrassed. 14 - 0.

14 to zero. If the vote had gone out to the whole body, it probably would have been 192 -1. The whole world thinks those settlements are wrong and an impediment to peace. Naturally the whole world is wrong and Israel is right. All of Israel's allies are wrong, and all of America's allies are wrong (save one). And oprama is the disgrace.

If the resolution was about recent and future settlements in the West Bank, it would not have caused such stir. I would probably agree with it myself. But it demands that the Israelis abandon not only new settlements in the West Bank, but also East Jerusalem. That's the part with the Temple Mount, the Wailing Wall, and the Jewish Quarter where Jews have been living for centuries. Here's the text:

1. Reaffirms that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace;

2. Reiterates its demand that Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, and that it fully respect all of its legal obligations in this regard;

3. Underlines that it will not recognize any changes to the 4 June 1967 lines, including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties through negotiations;

http://www.un.org/webcast/pdfs/SRES2334-2016.pdf

It is insane for the UN to demand that the Israelis/Jewish people turn over their holiest place on earth to the very people who want to kill them the most, and have tried it several times the last 50 years.

Maybe the Muslims would be willing to give half of Mecca, including the part with the Ka'aba, to the Israelis....

Professor Tiger wrote:
It is insane for the UN to demand that the Israelis/Jewish people turn over their holiest place on earth to the very people who want to kill them the most, and have tried it several times the last 50 years.

Maybe the Muslims would be willing to give half of Mecca, including the part with the Ka'aba, to the Israelis....

Yeah, and we don't have to give America back to the injuns, either - but only because the savages didn't have a contract honored by the U.N. Whereas there was an international treaty broken in '67, whereby Israel took land at the point of a gun and didn't give it back.

Basically the whole wide world wants Israel to at least recognize that fact, and to work harder on reaching an agreement with the Arabs on those occupied areas. Maybe Israel can keep access to the holy sites...but blowing up the negotiations by cutting off East Jerusalem with a ring of new settlements is what's really insane.

14-0. 192-1

There was never a "contract" or "treaty" between Israel and the UN in 1967. Just Israel defending itself against three neighboring Arab states. Israel kicked their ass fair and square, and Arabs have been sniveling about it ever since, and the UN has been providing the Kleenex tissue. It's like the Confederates attacking Ft. Sumter, and four years later whining about all the territory they lost, and trying to get the UN to give it back to them.

If the Arabs didn't want to lose some of their territory to Israel, they shouldn't have attacked them and then lose. Sucks to be them. They should try to survive, somehow, with the 98% of the Middle East they still have.

Professor Tiger wrote:There was never a "contract" or "treaty" between Israel and the UN in 1967. Just Israel defending itself against three neighboring Arab states. Israel kicked their ass fair and square, and Arabs have been sniveling about it ever since, and the UN has been providing the Kleenex tissue. It's like the Confederates attacking Ft. Sumter, and four years later whining about all the territory they lost, and trying to get the UN to give it back to them.

If the Arabs didn't want to lose some of their territory to Israel, they shouldn't have attacked them and then lose. Sucks to be them. They should try to survive, somehow, with the 98% of the Middle East they still have.

After the 1948 Arab-Israel war Jordan and Israel made a treaty that among other things ceded East Jerusalem, Gaza, and the Golan Heights to Jordan and was ratified by The Hague.

Israel kicked ass because they were superior fighters, they were extremely better equipped thanks to us, and THEY - Israel, hello - attacked with the element of surprise. Go back and read the history of the 6 Day War. And yer confederate comparison is typically ludicrous.

Anywho. 14-0. Convince the international community why you're right and they're wrong (I didn't have a vote and don't really care all that much anyway).

After the 1948 Arab-Israel war Jordan and Israel made a treaty that among other things ceded East Jerusalem, Gaza, and the Golan Heights to Jordan and was ratified by The Hague.

I think that 1948 "treaty" meant, in return for East Jerusalem, Gaza and Golan, the Arabs were supposed to leave Israel alone. Instead, the Arab countries massed their armies on Israel's border and announced their intention to wipe Israel out:

"Our aim is the full restoration of the rights of the Palestinian people. In other words, we aim at the destruction of the State of Israel. The immediate aim: perfection of Arab military might. The national aim: the eradication of Israel." – President Nasser of Egypt, November 18, 1965

"Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight . . . The mining of Sharm el Sheikh is a confrontation with Israel. Adopting this measure obligates us to be ready to embark on a general war with Israel." – Nasser, May 27, 1967

Syria's forces are "ready not only to repulse the aggression, but to initiate the act of liberation itself, and to explode the Zionist presence in the Arab homeland. The Syrian army, with its finger on the trigger, is united.... I as a military man, believe that the time has come to enter into a battle of annihilation." – Syrian Defense Minister Hafez Assad, May 20, 1967

"The existence of Israel is an error which must be rectified. This is our opportunity to wipe out the ignominy which has been with us since 1948. Our goal is clear – to wipe Israel off the map. We shall, God willing, meet in Tel Aviv and Haifa." – President Abdel Rahman Aref of Iraq, May 31, 1967

http://www.sixdaywar.org/content/threats.asp

and THEY - Israel, hello - attacked with the element of surprise. Go back and read the history of the 6 Day War.

The above quotes are the history of the Six Day war that you never hear about. Of course the Israelis attacked first. What else were they supposed to do? Sit back and get annihilated? When somebody is armed, dangerous, and says they are coming to kill you, and is poised to do so, it's idiotic not to strike first.

Anywho. 14-0.

Is this the same UN that elected tinpot dictatorships to the security council like Rwanda during their genocide ('94-'95), Uganda during their genocides ('81-'82), Cuba under Castro ('90-''91), etc.?

I wish you had been living in Rwanda in '94-'95...

breaking news

Israel Postpones Approval of New Settlement Construction - AP Wirestory 1 hr ago

The latest move is a surprising turnabout by Netanyahu after days of attacks against Obama and threats of retaliation against UN Security Council Panel members

ta-da!

I wish Obama had a two state policy with regards to US and Mexico...

You should footnote Ann Coulter for that line.

I get sending the Mexicans back, but that still leaves the Irish.