Obama defends war as he accepts Nobel Peace Prize
Associated Press
Published: 10.12.09, 14:54
Comment Comment
Print comment Print comment
Back to article
19 Talkbacks for this article
1. Glad to see ....
Sarah B ,   U.S.A. / Israel   (12.10.09)
... that the American president asserts the right to act unilaterally to defend the United States. (All the way to Afghanistan, no less!) Israel, too, is a sovereign state, and Israel's leadership reserves the right to act unilaterally to defend the State of Israel. And we will not travel nearly as far away as American troops to do so. Sounds like a great big green light to me.
2. Green Light #2
Shlomo Kamra   (12.10.09)
Yes Sarah, it is time for the developed nations to hold hands, and go in and free Gaza. Next will be to create final borders on the Green Line, making Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem part of the New Palestine. This International Peacekeeping Force would then secure the borders with Lebanon, Syria, and Egypt, as well as opening up Israel's nuclear weapons and capabilities to the AEIA, and making Israel sign the NPT. If necessary, and dirty big ugly wall could be built around the New Israel, to keep others out, and Israelis in. Sounds the ideal Christmas present to me........................
3. :: Sarah B - #1
Matty Groves ,   Fairport   (12.10.09)
The fact that you need confirmation “a great big green light” only underscores the fact that Israel cannot act unilaterally. As has been the custom for decades Israel needs American permission to act in relation to foreign policy. For example America decides who Israel cannot sell military tech to or whether or not Israel can attack Iran etc. Sarah B how many times now has Israel gone to America looking for the “big green light” to attack Iran? I will remind you again that Israel is a client state of America and as such must follow what America/Obama decides. If Israel was a ‘sovereign state’ it could sell military tech/arms to whatever country it wants to but it can’t ie: China. In fact I recall that America (under Clinton) at the time ordered Israel not to sell military tech (Harpy missiles) to China and Israel complied. Then later in 2005 under Bush Israel went ahead and sold the missiles to China (Israel thought Bush was a push over). However the Pentagon played hardball and *America insisted that Israel pass legislation* to stop any further sales to China and also insisted that Israel *write a letter of apology to America*. Writing a letter of apology to America is hardly an act of a ‘sovereign state’!!
4. to #2 first you will have to free Gilad Shalit
ghostq   (12.10.09)
Gaza is in 67 border, y would Israel let to her own teritory people who can harm her civilians, and the arabs will have to recognize Israel as home to the jewish people, and ever since Israel built the wall there r no sucide bombings. the reality speak for it self.
5. To: No. 2
Sarah B ,   U.S.A. / Israel   (12.10.09)
"Shlomo," in view of the fact that better than 99 percent of the inhabitants of Gaza are Moslem (fundamentalists at that), a Christmas present is scarcely in order. That said -- having had a taste of Hamas so-called "leadership," I do believe that the civilian Gaza population is more than ready to try something different. Perhaps the best thing to do is for responsible, developed nations to get rid of the terrorists that have brought so much agony to Gaza, and give them the tools with which to build a better society, one which is not given over to terror, and one with a responsible leadership that would actually denounce terror and unrealistic "goals" concerning the destruction of the "Zionist entity" and the extermination of the Jewish people. A leadership that would use the billions in foreign aid which has poured into Gaza for peaceful and constructive purposes. Were that to happen, you would be surprised at just how quickly the border restrictions will ease, with respect to both Israel's border with Gaza and Egypt's (which is, as you are no doubt aware, hermetically sealed). I remind you that Israel is a sovereign state with an absolute affirmative duty to protect her citizens and her security. Unless and until things change in Gaza, Israel will continue to view Gaza as an implacable terrorist foe. The ball is in Gaza's court. Let the civilian population who is so heartily sick of Hamas (recent polls have shown that better than 50% of Gaza's residents want to leave Gaza) give some indication to the West that they do not wish to be governed by terrorists and thieves, and the responsible nations in the West will come to Gaza's aid. Why should Israel sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty? Has China? No. Has North Korea? No. Has Pakistan? No. Has India? No. Israel has not conducted nuclear tests in four decades, and has not introduced a nuclear solution in any of its wars. So your suggestion is unfounded. International peace-keeping forces are not a reasonable solution. Just look at all the places throughout the world where they have not been effective, in fact, often siding with the terrorist elements they are supposed to keep in check. Such a force would serve at the behest of the United Nations, which can withdraw them at a moment's notice (witness U Thant in 1967). Sorry, that suggestion is a non-starter. Finally - there will NEVER be a divided Jerusalem. It just won't happen. That said, Amman serves as the capital to Jordan's over 75% percent Palestinian population. Arabs living in Judea and Samaria are Jordanian citizens, who are free to relocate their and claim Amman as their capital. That's just how it goes.
6. If War Is Justified To Protect The United States...
Reuven Brauner ,   Raanana, Israel   (12.10.09)
then war should be justified to protect Israel? We are at war with those who wish to destroy us. Why should we compromise that? And the way we are fighting that war, Mr. President, is to build Jewish settlements throughout the Land of Israel.
Atilla Karagözoğlu   (12.10.09)
what would happen if he said ; thanks but I feel I dont deserve it TODAY. keep it for me when I finish my time in WHITE HOUSE than you again to think that if I DESERVE IT
Arn-Orao. ,   Sweden-Orao.   (12.10.09)
9. To: No. 3
Sarah B ,   U.S.A. / Israel   (12.10.09)
"As has been the custom for decades Israel needs American permission to act in relation to foreign policy." Really? News to me. Israel did not consult with the United States prior to extracting Adolf Eichmann (may his name be cursed throughout eternity) to stand trial for war crimes. Israel did not consult with the United States prior to its raid in Entebbe to free hostages, sixty-five of whom were United States citizens. Nor did Israel consult with the United States prior to destroying Iraq's Osirac nuclear reactor. Israel did not consult with the United States prior to destroying a convoy in the Sudan bearing arms destined for Iran's terrorist proxies in Gaza and in Lebanon. There are many more examples, but I trust I have refuted your ridiculous claim sufficiently. "For example America decides who Israel cannot sell military tech to or whether or not Israel can attack Iran etc." Wrong again. Israel has a large military manufacturing base which does not draw upon American technology and over which the United States can impose no controls. We do know that the U.S. vehemently protested Israel's sale of weapons to the People's Republic of China, but geopolitical considerations had nothing to do with it. China wanted superior weaponry and opted to purchase from Israel, not the United States. If Israel chooses to comply with a United States request on a voluntary basis, that is one thing. But make no mistake: it is a FAVOR to a supposed ally. The United States has no control over military systems developed in Israel. t Face it -- the current United States administration is made up of rank amateurs who practice curbside international diplomacy. The undersecretary positions at Foggy Bottom can now boast a lot of cronies and toadies of the neighborhood organizer from the great State of Illinois. Not smart. "Sarah B how many times now has Israel gone to America looking for the “big green light” to attack Iran?" Again, your knowledge is seriously deficient. Israel does not need America's permission to undertake measures guarding Israel’s security, and an air corridor over U.S.-occupied Iraq is no longer necessary, in view of the fact that the Arab Emirates and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia have offered air corridors and refueling to Israel. The rest of your post is, as usual, given over to wild inaccuracies and pure drivel. I would ask you to substantiate your claims, but I know you cannot. Check your facts. This is YNet, not Al Jazeera, and the responsible posters on this forum will challenge your deliberate lies and misstatements. Count on it.
10. #2 'Shlomo'
Mark ,   Lodz, Poland   (12.10.09)
Your scenario wouldn't end there if that's your absurd recipe for peace. Hamas and Hezbollah leaders would only become emboldened and proclaim Allah forced the mighty Jews to retreat (just like they did when Israel withdrew from Lebanon and Gaza) in order to rally more lemmings for further onslaughts against us.
11. :: Sarah B gets more facts wrong
Matty Groves ,   Fairport   (12.10.09)
In fact China is party to this the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. China signed up in 1992. Actually N Korea did sign up to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty but withdrew in 2003. The *only* countries that have refused to sign up are: Israel, India and Pakistan.
12. #11 Matty
Mark ,   Lodz, Poland   (12.10.09)
I was intending to respond to points in your post #3 however having read Sarah's formidable refutation of your eloquent tosh, there's no further need. Please supply link to Israeli apology for selling arms to China. Thank you in advance
13. # 3
Birdi ,   Israel   (12.10.09)
Nope America does not decide who Israel can or cannot sell arms to, as you will see at this link. Matty I have proved you to be wrong !!
14. # 9
Birdi ,   Israel   (12.10.09)
Thanks for your very astute post. As we say in Israel, "GADOL"
15. :: Mark - #12
Matty Groves ,   Fairport   (12.10.09)
"Israel will next week submit a letter of apology to the U.S. regarding the affair, officials said, while the United States will arrange supervision on sales of weapons and advanced technology overseas, which it sees as harmful to American national security.",7340,L-3100923,00.html
16. :: Birdi - #13
Matty Groves ,   Fairport   (12.10.09)
Birdi you do understand that you are pulling articles from a website that is, as you would say, 'anti-Semitic'? Go to the homepage of and have a look! Regard of the hate sites you frequent that article in question is from 2002, long before Israel got slapped down by America and was *forced* to pass legislation to stop any further sales to China and also write a letter of apology to America. America decided this, not Israel. Like I said, hardly the actions of a sovereign country. No tell me dear what exactly did you prove wrong?
17. #15 Matty, Thanks for the link
Mark ,   Lodz, Poland   (12.11.09)
Matty, I think one can interpret this either way....for example, as you, Hamas, Hezbollah, Al Qaeda, Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Gadaffi et alumni see it - Israel as a client state of the USA or one can see it simply as common sense on the part Israel. The powers moulding world politics are in a constant state of shift, allegiances being made and broken and even then, not everything's black or white. Israel has to do what's in the best interest for Israel which means... if our major ally deems it necessary to curb arms sales to be it.
18. Obama
Marilyn ,   USA   (12.11.09)
"A nonviolent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies." It's hard to say exactly how things would have played out if things were radically different in the US from early on. Also as someone once said the pen is mightier than the sword. Anyways by moving one piece, all the others would also move in reaction to this. Another thing is that no matter what, war is viewed as a sin and an indication that something went wrong earlier on. How things could have been changed must be investigated and also to pray for the forgiveness of sins for the nation.
19. War and Obama
Marilyn ,   USA   (12.11.09)
In short, I think that Obama has blind spots. It is almost as if he hasn't thought about issues of life and death-such as war or abortion-as much as other Americans have. It's almost like he's not seeing the suffering of the nation in this regard. I'd rather him take these things more seriously and take a stand that life is valuable and not cheap, rather than him saying something like "some will kill, some will be killed".
Back to article