Obama on Gaza: 'No Comment'

As a senator, ddint Obama vote "present" more times than he did yes or no? "present" basically means i have no position or "no comment". Why is anyone surprised then that he would say no comment now? he's just doing what he's always done.

[edit on 27-12-2008 by princeofpeace]

Originally posted by kozmo
Screw the Jewish lobby!

I'm waiting for the "Change" he promised.

I agree, screw the Jewish Lobby. America is being perceived around the world as the Jew Lap Dog. Why be so worried of what the Jews think? It's time America grew up and shrugged off the insidious Jewish manipulation of their country before they become known as the JEW.S.A.

If the Jews care that much about Israel.. then move back there and stop pulling purse strings in other countries. At the end of the day they're Jews first, Americans second. Wake up!

The fact Mr 'Yes I Can' hasn't said anything should give people a good indication that 'NO HE CAN'T'!


IRM

Originally posted by InfaRedMan

I agree, screw the Jewish Lobby. America is being perceived around the world as the Jew Lap Dog. Why be so worried of what the Jews think? It's time America grew up and shrugged off the insidious Jewish manipulation of their country before they become known as the JEW.S.A.

If the Jews care that much about Israel.. then move back there and stop pulling purse strings in other countries. At the end of the day they're Jews first, Americans second. Wake up!

The fact Mr 'Yes I Can' hasn't said anything should give people a good indication that 'NO HE CAN'T'!


IRM

Haha good luck with that. Unlike most countries Israel is playing this game for their very survival and you had better believe any US President who took a stance against Israel would not last long. Of course anyone in a position to be US President knows this and has enough common sense not to go against Israel. Anyway is the current status quo really so bad for America?

[edit on 27-12-2008 by Jacob08]

The White House issued a statement...

news.yahoo.com...
US urges Hamas to cease rocket attacks on Israel

It was "completely unacceptable" for Hamas, which controls Gaza, to launch attacks on Israel after a truce lasting several months, said Gordon Johndroe, a spokesman for the National Security Council.

BUT NOTHING WAS SAID TO ISRAEL TO STOP.

[edit on 27-12-2008 by Muundoggie]

reply to post by kozmo


HOPE is nothing more than an excuse to do nothing......

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by JanusFIN

 

You might have missed this but, possibly, he didn't respond because he is not the President, yet. It is still Dubya's job to respond for the country and the job of his administration to deal with the issues. Obama has no power and no say in anything. Why would he interfere at this point?

Thanks. I was getting concerned getting more than halfway down the 1st page of the thread and not seeing anybody mention he's NOT the President yet.

Furthermore, IIRC, he did give an opinion on a Middle Eastern country recently and President Bush had to cut him off at the knees and reminded him to STFU.

Originally posted by hvywgt250
reply to post by kozmo

 

HOPE is nothing more than an excuse to do nothing......

I hope your wrong

Obama has stated previously that there can only be one President of the United States at a time. Yes before the election we were all spoiled with the comments about the Georgia/Russia situation from each candidate. We got a peak at how each candidate would deal with the situation and at that time it was acceptable because each candidates opinion was just that and nothing more.

Now that Obama is the Presidential-elect he must careful about what he say during these situations. His words have more power today than they did a few months ago. He dose not yet have the authority to direct this nation in one way or another. If Obama was to say something now and it's not in line with what Bush dose that would lead to problems.

One thing about Obama that I have been optimistic about is he seems like a natural diplomat. Maybe he's smart enough to know any notion of a "peace process" is a joke. How many presidents have claimed to improve the situation in Gaza only to see bullets and rockets flying months later? I can't blame Obama for not wanting to touch this one with a ten foot poll

reply to post by JanusFIN


ummmm...Janus, Mr. Obama is NOT yet the President of the USA.

Could you have referenced the Bush Administration's response, in your OP? No! Of course, because your bias is obvious.

Think about it: an admittedly World event occurs, and the resident CIC is still tasked with the response....NOT the Pres-elect!

The COMMENTS are sure to fly from the pundits and the Senators and Congressmen....but the Pres-elect is wise to stay out of the fray, until AFTER Noon, EST January 20, 2009.

Because, like him or hate him, GWB (lame duck) is STILL President. UNTIL 1159 EST, January 20, 2009.

SO, right now, anything in Gaza....ANY RESPONSE, any reaction, it is still in HIS court! Not in Obama's!!!

Same holds true for any OTHER World-Wide conflict....it is still Bush's watch, and the Pres-elect can do nothing, and should do nothing impolitic, since ANYTHING he says or does NOW would tend to undermine the current CIC, and severly limit his ability to make decisions AFTER the Inauguration.

WHY THIS thread was even started is beyond my comprehension....we are less than a month away from the transition of Government. AND, we (some of us) still wonder how we got into this mess?!?

I say, 'Let this idiot-in-chief (Bush) keep digging his own grave, ever deeper.

My opinion is evident, of course....but I still will promote the fact, and the historical tradition, that newly-elected Presidents, incoming, especially if of the 'other' Party, will NOT interfere with the 'Lame Duck'....it is not only history, it is polite, and also makes poilitical sense.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
ummmm...Janus, Mr. Obama is NOT yet the President of the USA.

That is an absolute cop out.

The man makes weekly youtube addresses trying to start his own "fireside chat" tradition - and he IS NOT YET PRESIDENT OF THE USA.

The man has press conferences every few days to comment on news events and have the press fawn over him - and he IS NOT YET PRESIDENT OF THE USA.

If Obama decided to lay low, only announce cabinet appointments, and not insert himself into every news cycle since November 4th, you'd have a point. He has done the exact opposite - except when it comes time to really step up to the plate, he remains silent.

I would expect no less from 'the empty suit' that is Oh Bummer. Only a Democrap could believe the fairytales that the main stream media wove to get this clown elected. He is a one trick pony, all mouth & no action, his total lack of experience proves this but you dumb bastards elected him anyway.....I,m still waiting for him to prove he was born somewhere other than Kenya & was a valid candidate for the office of the POTUS.

reply to post by LowLevelMason


LLM....you might have a point.

I admit I haven't done the research....but I'd daresay no other recent Pres-elect has learned to utilize the Internet as well as Barack Obama has.

Is this wrong? By that, I mean to ask, is it 'wrong' of Pres-elect Obama to utilize the Internet?

Allow me to phrase this differently: Since the Internet is already a HUGE component of modern communicatons and well-established as a 'research' tool, wouldn't one expect a new 'leader' to at least have some ability, and knowledge of this techonology???

Allow me to give an example....as a retired airline pilot I know how technology made flying safer....computers in the cockpits, along with the GPS for Navigation. There is more, but you'd be bored.....

Wouldn't it be great to actually have a President that could comprehend the incredible (secret) technology that is going to be presented to him???

The old white dudes from the last several decades were so far out of touch, it is in incredible to contemplate!!!

Think about it......

Ah, what a breath of fresh air this "change" has been.

He's practically rehired the entire Clinton Administration for his cabinet.

He performs "internal investigations" on himself that determine him to be innocent of all wrongdoing.

He provides "no comment" to a serious foreign policy issue. Didn't Palin give a "no comment" reply once during an interview and got absolutely lynched by the media and Obamabots?

So far, he's doing a hell of a job with this whole "change" thing. In 6 months, we'll be wishing W was back in office. That's how bad this is looking to be.

[edit on 27-12-2008 by ChocoTaco369]

reply to post by weedwhacker


I believe it is not "wrong" to utilize the internet or anything that Barack Obama believes will get his message out. My point is that he is active in making policy statements and commenting on current events in his "youtube chats" and in his very frequent press conferences. Using the internet as a tool to spread policy statements is fine with me.

He had a choice - he could lay low and take a vacation until January 20th and not get involved or comment on global events. Some President-Elects have done so. Or, he can get actively involved as he has chosen to do - other President-Elects have done this as well.

The problem is when he chooses to insert himself into the political world as President-Elect and then picks and chooses what to comment on - and he is avoiding topics like this, which he knows are controversial. If you want to throw yourself into the job before your inauguration, then you have to fully play the part - he has instead decided to completely avoid anything controversial, like the Gaza "no comment."

[edit on 27-12-2008 by LowLevelMason]

[edit on 27-12-2008 by LowLevelMason]

Any situation where you have.....

One group of religious nutters , in the case the Zionists , sorry but anyone who really believes God promised them land so its theirs are legally nuts , don't believe me ? ( just try it in your local neighborhood and see how fast you get locked up ) .

And another group who believe its actually an honor to die and kill for a cause, and its going to get messy.

This is my prediction....

The U.S. will declare it is unable to supply Israel with conventional weapons and military parts due to the credit crisis ( a good excuse as any ) . Israel will eventually run out of the day to day arsonal it uses and be forced to realize its threat of nuclear retaliation will never be used.

The Palestinians do not have lethal rockets either so a standoff will ensue.

The "peak" of close quarters combat will happen around mid 2010 . The U.S. during this time will soften its approach to blocking the U.N. resolutions. Peacekeepers will finally be let in. With the world watching and the truth out there for all to see , the conflict will end.

WW3......?

China will have a peasant revolt due to unfilled promises and the failing economy , and with the aging leaders unable/unwilling to change their hardline stance , all hell will break lose.
Taiwan will openly side with the general population looking for its chance to become independent .
The U.S. fleet patrolling the area will be attacked. Game on.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
At the risk of being accused of "coming out of the woodwork to defend Obama"

Bush didn't comment either.

Bush, who is on vacation at his Texas ranch, was briefed on the Israeli air strikes on Gaza by his national security adviser Stephen Hadley and spoke by telephone with Rice, White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe said.

He did not provide any other details of those conversations.

But that's ok. he's just the president.

It's amazing how when the Obama bash-fest begins, "he's our President-elect and should say something!" But at other times, "he's NOT the president-elect officially and will NOT be until January 6th when it's made official". His position of importance in our government and to our country depends on whether it's convenient to have him be important or a nobody to the bashers.

You're completely missing the point. If you weren't so quick to defend Obama on every little thing, maybe you'd see what's going on a little better.

Everyone knows GWB is a lame duck. No one is expecting him to do anything, and frankly, after his performance in the last 4 years, I'm happy he didn't do anything. He tends to screw up more than he gets it right.

What GWB does is NOT the issue, here. The issue is that BHO ran on a campaign of "change," "hope" and "transparency." Instead, we have a guy that won't take a stand on an issue, just like he did time and time again in the Senate, and he gives the American people no information why. So much for hope, change and transparency. You were so quick to jump on Palin when she gave a "no comment" answer during a stupid TV interview, but when it comes to a serious issue, you give BHO a free pass. How does that work? I wish you'd be consistent.

An ignorant, BS answer is an ignorant, BS answer. It doesn't matter if you voted for the guy. The truth about BHO is that his record says he is a lying, flip-flopping, inexperienced empty suit that has avoided taking a stand more times than he has taken a stand. You cannot argue that because the record speaks for itself. Otherwise, you're arguing that the cloudless daytime sky isn't blue.

[edit on 27-12-2008 by ChocoTaco369]

reply to post by LowLevelMason


Obama can talk about programs that he is going to push through when he gets in office. He can talk about the people he is going to be working with and how they are going to do accomplish their goals.

If he puts out a statement about this issue then he would practically speaking on behalf of the US. That is something that he dose not how the authority to do at this moment, it just wouldn't be proper.

reply to post by LowLevelMason


LLM....all valid points, of course....

But, wizard me this? Why beat up on the Pres-elect?

I mean, there was PLENTY of opportunity in 2000 to try to show what a complete WANKER George W. Bush is/was when HE was Pres-elect. I mean, really....all the signs were there.....he is, after all, a supposed 'recovering' alcoholic. HE never did ANYTHING of any consequence, except havig his Family install him into the Governership of the State of Texas....a State he wasn't even BORN in, since he's part of the BUSH legacy, from the State of Maine!!!!

Why not 'beat-up' on this 'idiot'???? I mean, he's left quite A FEW clues over the last eight years (plus)....let's go for it!!

Originally posted by bodrul
reply to post by JanusFIN

 

well hes damned if he does
and damned if he doesnt.

you got the Jewish lobby group that would jump on him like wolfs if he said anything against Israels strikes.

and if Says they are justified he will get hell for siding with Israels barberic actions.

got to feel sorry for him

how do you feel sorry for a person who chose to be in that position?

even not being president people will have an opinion on what happened.

If you choose to be President, you choose the responsibility of the hard descisions, not just the easy ones,