RobertNaiman's Comments (73)

“By the way your answer was bit snippy -
Aren't you used to having your views debated.
Your opinion is worth no more or less than all who reply”

“The US gives Israel money without precondition. It doesn't say, "we'll give you this money if you do what we want". I don't see you criticizing all the other countries we give money to. If you don't want us to give money to Israel, write your congressman as is your right. But don't demand something from Israel in return. That's not how it works.”

“I happen to be a US citizen, a proud american and have served my country.
I also have the right to express my opinion as a taxpayer.
I support Israel but know they make errors in judgements and will ultimatly need to compromise as will the Palistinians

My point is simple we need a just peace for both sides.

Money aside - we give plenty to all - security and a future is needed for both.
You are entitled to your view but it is a bit myopic.”

“Israel and U.S. are allies. It is no0t a one way street. Israeli citzines make a tremendous contribution to American economy, culture, technology, science and art.
Should Israelis be paid back for that?
Yes, you are entitled to criticize whomever you want, and people who understand the situation are entitled to ignore it.”

“Thanks for summarizing the situation in clear, indisputable terms, Robert. (Well, indisputable in terms of logic and legality, anyway.) And thanks, too, for a well-considered and well-written article.”

“Those settlers have children, and you are advocating removing children from their homes. The law you are advocating is eye for an eye, and will not bring any justice to any of the people this involves.”

“What international law are the settlers violating? They are not a population transfer, so don't cite the Geneva Convention. Under international law, the West Bank is not an occupied territory, because the legal definition of occupied requires the territory belong to another sovereign state, which it does not.

"The settlers should be moved back to Israel proper, west of the Green Line."

So you're calling for the Jews living east of the Green Line to be ethnically cleansed? That's a terrible thing to say.”

“this is a fairytale for the gullible. In no way shape or form, Mr, Naiman, your commentary be described as fair, impartial or even informative,.”

“Naive.
The security fence is placed where it protects Israeli citizens. There would be NO fence if the Palestinians could accept Israel's existence. Instead, to this day the Palestinians still have a founding charter that calls for the destruction of a sovereign state and the genocide of its population.
That, is a violation of all international law, yet is never addressed.
The fence will disappear when the Palestinians change their public goal that is, per all definitions under international law, a crime against humanity.
Such profound faith in "the green line" is misplaced. The Palestinians themselves have never formally even accepted such a boundary, as evidence by the fact that they have never changed their "charter".”

“OK then. But there are Jews living east of the Green Line. Shouldn't they be protected as well?”

“I am honored to have one of my posts responded to by a blogger whom I address, thank you.

As a person who works closely with foreign policy you understand that the majority of the public does not always understand the complexities of every issue. Just because the majority of the American public think one thing doesn't mean it's right (WMD's anyone?).

I agree with you that Afghanistan is more like Vietnam than WWII (yet ironically South Vietnam was conquered by WWII style tactics), however comparing the failed aspects of a failed endeavor to every low-intensity we have been involved since is not a strong argument. You state that Obama must remain resilient against Pentagon pressure to increase more troops and expand the war. Then you draw the assumption that this will have the same result as Vietnam. You need to expand on this. Actually all critics of increased deployment need to expand on this. Never mind Vietnam is one of the very few examples of increased deployment failed compared to the many other examples of where it succeeded (Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Tibet, Philippines, Iraq, etc.). The idea of increased troops does not revolve around of a bigger hammer, it is part of a greater strategy of keeping territory from falling to the Taliban thus denying them footholds which cost more lives to take back.”

“I think trying to compare Iraqi insurgents and the Taliban as equal commodities is a little foolish. Each inhabits it's own sphere of reality. Each comes replete with its own set of political, social, and economic concerns. The best you have here is that they are both, largely, of Sunni backgrounds.”

“By the way, despite the fact that I think you're utterly wrong on this, I do appreciate that you have actually responded to the criticism.”

“Naiman replies:

"That could come in the form of jobs or projects. And it could well be the case that it would involve more political flexibility than the U.S. has demonstrated so far."

Whether it's cash in hand or an in-kind bribe, you are still alleging that militant Islamic fundamentalists will accept some kind of kick back from the US and put down their weapons. Seems a little too cute for me. It works in DC but not in AfPak.”

“Do you actually read what you write? No matter what you may think you wrote, you are suggesting that we buy them off.”

“Thanks for the reply. I beleive you are totally right. The committee is proactive, consideing Rabin-vs-N­etaniyahu, El-Baradai­-vs-Cheney­, Ebadi-vs-Clergy, etc., there is a definite pattern.”

“The problem with your post and your position is that things have changed since the election. Iran has fixed an election and is currently brutalizing people for protesting its government's corruption.

First, Obama threw the Iranian people under the bus by refusing condemn the Iranian governments actions. Now he's engaging in "talks" with an arguably illegitimate governement. Its pure weakness. Frankly, it makes him a world Joker.”

“Well said.”

“LOL, how interesting that you dismiss hundreds of others that say He is not the President.

Did you vote for Bush??”

“Yes, except for the fact that Obama won the election fair and square.”

“Robert Naiman: Why do you think Ahmadinejad and his military Junta IRGC, respect international laws?? Do you even know what kind of ideolgoical paradigm drives them to do what they are doing?? Have you ever read any of Ahmadinejad or Khameni's speeches recently in Persian. Have you studied the history of Islamic Republic and the Mahdaviat??

Are you aware that Khamenie is no longer running the show??

Once you've done your homework, you would know that the Islamic Republic will never stop trying to enrich uranium or trying to get nuclear weapons. If they already don't have it that is.

It's great that the Obama is willing to talk to Iran. He needs to rely on his own judgement after careful research of this entity (the Islamic Republic) instead of getting second hand advice from iran-experts with their own ideological agenda. Obama needs to talk to Ahmadinejad face-to-face to get a visceral feeling of what kind of man this monster is like.”

“My point is there are millions of people in Iran who say he's not their "head of state."”

“Yankee, keep hands off South America...­.. ehhhh, except when it fits one political preoccupation and not the other. Bravo!”

“Robert, Well, not just from my mouth. Thanks to thousands of US citizens who pressured their representatives and the State Department to do the right thing here. We still don´t have the elusive legal declaration and need to know what exactly is canceled but the statement is certainly a step forward. Thanks for the link.”

“A key to democratic progress in Honduras is the rejection of a General Amnesty as expressed in the San Jose Proposal. Hondurans demand that Zelaya, and anybody else for that matter, face the crimes they have been charged with. Some of Zelaya’s crimes imply that he cease immediately in his office.

Ironically, Manuel Zelaya would not be the first, but the second generation of Zelayas to be pardoned with a General Amnesty. Manuel Zelaya Senior, his father, served 7 years of a prison term for murdering leftist protestors in the 70s, amongst them, one priest. Still more ironically, Zelaya Senior was released with the Amnesty that was a part of Arias’s peace proposals in the 90s and earned him his Nobel Prize.
Mr. Zelaya has 18 counts against him, three with outstanding arrest warrants. The people have seen the pictures of duffle bags filled with 40 Million Lempiras, led out from the Central Bank's vault and later, sequence numbers were found in Ms Rixi Moncada's last known Hotel room and the pockets of the boy, Obed Murillo, shot in the OAS Airport Fiasco. His Cabinet members have their own counts and arrest warrants

Why do foreign countries want to force us to forget about these crimes? Why do they want us to accept a treaty that disregards our laws and our Constitution? Why do they want to brush away Zelaya’s criminal behaviour?

You cannot commit to a POLITICAL “solution” that disregards the LEGAL issues.”