Thread: who would be a better ally, aye?

(youngster raises his hand in the back)

Oh! Oh! Mr Pirate I know! I know!

(pirate grudgingly acknowledges the lad)

(boy turns around in indecision)

Uh Uh Rick Perry, I think?

(pirate gives the boy a stern look, redfaced he goes to the back of the crowd)

Ally, or benefactor?

Originally Posted by compote_tom

(youngster raises his hand in the back)

Oh! Oh! Mr Pirate I know! I know!

(pirate grudgingly acknowledges the lad)

(boy turns around in indecision)

Uh Uh Rick Perry, I think?

(pirate gives the boy a stern look, redfaced he goes to the back of the crowd)

ahoy Compote Tom,

i agree that Mr. Perry would be a better ally fer Isreal than either Mr. Paul or Mr. Obama.

- MeadHallPirate

Originally Posted by dblack

Ally, or benefactor?

ahoy Dblack me friend,

let me rephrase matey;

benefactor. who is more likely to please the Likud party, aye?

President Obama or Congressman Paul?

- MeadHallPirate

Rick Perry would be terrible. He would conduct foreign policy versus Iran the way Bush did with Iraq. A total blunder it would be, matey...

Ron Paul would no doubt lessen the amount of foreign aid in the amount of billions that go to Israel.

If they wish to bomb Iran, President Paul would say that Israel knows best and should go about her affairs on her own and in her own way.

President Obama came into office with low favorability numbers in Israel. In 3 years since taking office, his approval rating among Israelis has increased from the low 20's to a healthy 53% now.

He keeps the foreign aid dollars flowing to Israel, has denied Palestinians their claim for statehood in the UN, and is actively engaged in what's going on in Iran.

Many of us remember the news of the hacking job that the US performed on Iran some months back.

Now with the news of the downed spy drone, it is clear the administration is thinking long and hard about Iran.

Bush gave us a 9 yr misadventure at a cost of $1 trillion that killed over 4,000 Americans and didn't pay for it.

Obama gave us 8 months of Libya, $1 billion with all the rest being funded by our allies, no Americans killed, 1 dead American-killing dictator and a country that now has the chance to catch up to the present the way it would like to be.

Given those options, I can see why opinion is much higher on Obama within Israel now than before. The President has taken a progressive-conservative stance in that region that appeals to the many center-right people of Israel.

President Obama would benefit the Likud Party and Israel the most.

Originally Posted by MeadHallPirate

ahoy Compote Tom,

i agree that Mr. Perry would be a better ally fer Isreal than either Mr. Paul or Mr. Obama.

- MeadHallPirate

My comments were purely tongue in cheek. LOL

Well that's obviously going to be Barack Obama.

Ron Paul would want the Israeli people to take personal responsibility for their actions. Barack Obama is still beholden to AIPAC.

Regarding Israel, there isn't a worst possible presidential candidate than Ron Paul. All the rest support the status quo, or even worse.

Originally Posted by MeadHallPirate

ahoy Compote Tom,

i agree that Mr. Perry would be a better ally fer Isreal than either Mr. Paul or Mr. Obama.

- MeadHallPirate

ahoy Compote Tom,

maybe it be a jest matey, but i'd reckon the isreali folk would like to see Mr. Perry gain the captain's chair, fer he would actually increase foreign aid to Israel.

Rick Perry said Wednesday that U.S. assistance for Israel would increase under his administration, as he sought to ease Jewish concerns that he'd cut off foreign aid.

Rick Perry seeks to repair rift over foreign aid to Israel - Los Angeles Times

oddly enough, 'tis mateys who hew to the right side 'o our decks who clamor fer the end 'o all foreign aid, so i dunno what to make 'o this.

- MeadHallPirate

Originally Posted by AjaxPress

Well that's obviously going to be Barack Obama.

Ron Paul would want the Israeli people to take personal responsibility for their actions. Barack Obama is still beholden to AIPAC.

ahoy AjaxPress,

i'd agree, matey. from the Israeli perspective, a Ron Paul presidency would be catastrophic...he'd allow them jewish folk to fend fer themselves, whilst Mr. Obama hath indeed kept the monies 'a comin', and also sided with Israel in the UN vote, much to the consternation 'o the rest 'o the planet.

i happen to believe Mr. Paul be correct in his approach, but i'd imagine that conservatives that man the decks here on USPO would take a dim view 'o Mr. Paul here. i'd imagine this would be what be called a "dealbreaker".

- MeadHallPirate

Originally Posted by Jason Marcel

Rick Perry would be terrible. He would conduct foreign policy versus Iran the way Bush did with Iraq. A total blunder it would be, matey...

Ron Paul would no doubt lessen the amount of foreign aid in the amount of billions that go to Israel.

If they wish to bomb Iran, President Paul would say that Israel knows best and should go about her affairs on her own and in her own way.

President Obama came into office with low favorability numbers in Israel. In 3 years since taking office, his approval rating among Israelis has increased from the low 20's to a healthy 53% now.

He keeps the foreign aid dollars flowing to Israel, has denied Palestinians their claim for statehood in the UN, and is actively engaged in what's going on in Iran.

Many of us remember the news of the hacking job that the US performed on Iran some months back.

Now with the news of the downed spy drone, it is clear the administration is thinking long and hard about Iran.

Bush gave us a 9 yr misadventure at a cost of $1 trillion that killed over 4,000 Americans and didn't pay for it.

Obama gave us 8 months of Libya, $1 billion with all the rest being funded by our allies, no Americans killed, 1 dead American-killing dictator and a country that now has the chance to catch up to the present the way it would like to be.

Given those options, I can see why opinion is much higher on Obama within Israel now than before. The President has taken a progressive-conservative stance in that region that appeals to the many center-right people of Israel.

President Obama would benefit the Likud Party and Israel the most.

ahoy oh wise JasonMarcel,

if the choice be between Mr. Paul and President Obama, i'd hafta agree.

- MeadHallPirate

Nether. They both think the country is evil.

It isn't the country that is "evil". It is the warmongers they keep electing to be their leaders, much like the US.