Lieberman Questions Dean on Middle East

[Nambe]

Associated Press

Presidential candidate Joe Lieberman lashed out against Democratic front-runner Howard Dean on Sunday over the former Vermont governor's recent statement that the United States should not take sides in the Middle East conflict.

"It's hard to say if this is a well thought out position," Lieberman said. "If it is, it is a major break in a half a century of American foreign policy. If it's not (well thought out), as a candidate for president, you've really got to think before you talk." ---

Dean's comments came last Wednesday when he was speaking to a crowd of people at a Santa Fe coffee shop. He said it is not America's place "to take sides" in the conflict. And he added that there are an "enormous number" of Israeli settlements that must go. ---

To those who question his foreign policy credentials, Dean has said he would not shy from going to war to protect America's interests but he said Saddam Hussein could have been contained in Iraq without force. Dean's opposition to the Iraq war helped ignite his campaign.

Ride Don’t Drive It’s Global Cool

[jos]

1. Likudnick Joe show his true colors

Dean is right. The U.S. has not been an honest broker. That's why Sharon rightly believes he can do what he wants.

[Flying_Pig]

12. The I/P issue is the only one that has

kept me from the Dean camp. If he really said this, and means it (as opposed to his earlier promise to double Israeli aid to 8-billion!) then he might get my vote...

[saskatoon]

55. Why

are we giving Israel money?

[IndianaGreen]

22. Lieberman is not the Senator from Likud!

That's a smear on the Likud, which is a coalition anyway with many members to the left of Holy Joe.

[FauxNewsBlues]

2. Sigh

I support Israel, over the fundies in the islamic world, but only to a certain point. Lieberman though seems to think that the US military should be an extension of the Knisset. I am tiring of him trying to out chickenhawk Bush on Iraq, Iran. Funny, I never hear him mention Saudi Arabia much though.

If Israel does right, I praise them. If they do bad, I rebuke them. I do get pissed off at the Arafat fan crowd on the left. Israel does do bad things, but it doesn't make Yasser a nice guy. Lieberman, like many of the palestinian crowd has no balance whatsoever. It is disturbing, and I think it makes him unfit to be president. It's not a jewish thing, it's a jewish hawk thing. If Feingold wanted to be President, I would be very cool with that idea. Lieberman is a neo-con who forgot to change party registration.

[wtmusic]

3. good take FNB

I called Lieberman a Dem in name only and got flamed--but on critical issues I stand by that assessment.

[cprise]

29. "It's not a jewish thing, it's a jewish hawk thing."

You talk about the "fundies" in the Islamic world, and make apologies and distinctions for the Jewish world. But the Jewish world (particularly Israel) has a growing fundamentalist problem of its own.

There is little evidence in such a post that you are looking for the good amoung Arabs and Muslims.

[The Stranger]

49. My sentiments exactly.

I was cringing at this bizarre concoction of having to apologize for standing up for what's right with Israel and these unabashedly global attacks on the Palestinians, because "Yasser" isn't a "nice guy."

:puke:

[saskatoon]

54. Can't stand that man

Anyway why Sharon wont use some common sense and give the Palestinians a Homeland, he is just too god damned bullheaded.

[IndianaGreen]

4. Lieberman just shit on Presidents Carter and Clinton

and he has endorsed views so extreme that not even the State of Israel endorses.

If Lieberman does not understand or cares what the role of Middle East peace broker entails, he is not qualified for President.

Lieberman has suddenly placed himself to the right of Bush!

[Atlant]

10. Hey, it worked once.

> Lieberman has suddenly placed himself to the right of Bush!

Hey, it worked once. It's what he did when he was running against
Lowell Weicker, a decent and honorable man.

Atlant

[tsipple]

11. I Take Pleasure In Saying...

I voted for Weicker. Unfortunately Lieberman got more votes. :-(

[schultzee]

17. I loved and still love president Carter; he was not perfect but he was

honest and meant well and loved all Ameridans not just the greedy anti working and middle class citizens. He meant well, but was a bad administrator.

[bahrbearian]

21. Hey how can you give Iraq 87 billion and Isreal only 8 bill

Sharon can use the money too funnel back to Joe

[Sean Reynolds]

5. Good for Dean!

I agree - the US shouldn't take sides. Taking sides only creates more hostility between either countries. Lieberman has his HEAD so far up Israel’s butt I'm sure he wont be seeing the light of day for a good 4 years.

[joeybee12]

6. Every time Holy Joe opens his word hole...

...more people line up behind Dean. Don't you think that the Kerry and Clark supporters (among others) would tell this sanctimonious sack of crap to shut up!

[RaRa]

13. Maybe, but what do we get out of supporting Isreal?

Honestly. How does the U.S. as a nation benefit by supporting Isreal? I should, but have never asked a good Israeli friend that. I know Israel does alot in the technology business, but if we flooded some other country with our money for such endeavors (say, some former communist bloc nation), wouldn't they be able to provide the same innovations? I'm seriously not being facetious here, just have always wondered what the hell we get out of helping one country (who loves to stick it to us when they can) that's surrounded by a bunch of other countries that hate it (and would perhaps not hate us as much if we sided with them instead).

Really wondering...

[ozone_man]

65. The destabilization and control of the middle east.

I think Israel is there for that purpose. Once the value of oil was understood and that the Arabs had it, a movement for the creation of Israel was started (Rothschilds). I think the U.S. took over where Rothschilds and Britain left off. Who really knows? Bush for sure.

[schultzee]

19. Yea, his head in in a place that is not in our best interest but

he can't seem to get byhond that.

[ScotTissue]

7. Tentative support for Israel here

I definitely believe in choosing sides, though. Israel can be a good actor or a bad actor, depending on the outcome of its elections. There is no reciprocal statement to be made on the other side.

[CWebster]

36. "...no reciprocal statement to be made on the other side."

because as we all understand it--they are not human on the other side?

The depth and breadth of the ignorance on the subject is breath-taking.

[madrchsod]

8. the main reason the

government backed the israeli state was to stop the russians after ww2. the policy became so ingrained into the us policy that no one really questions why should we back them now. now it seems the if you don`t agree with the policy of the sharon government you`re un-american.

[truthseeker1]

9. Good to know where Dean stands on Israel

I was just talking with a fellow Dean supporter yesterday that I wanted to know where Dean stands on Israel (so did the guy I was talking to). So it's good to see that he's neutral, even if that *is* a depature from previous administrations for the past 50 years. I think it's about time somebody stood up and demanded that Israel fight their own damned war with Palestine. They already are anyway, with acts of terrorism that equal those of the PLO's - while the U.S. govt. looks the other way. Israel and Palestine (the leadership anyway) are both terrorists and it's time for us to stop spending taxpayer dollars to fund them. It's also time for the U.S. to stop overlooking Israel's refusal to abide by UN resolutions. Time to stop the double standards!

I hope Dean makes this stance public (on a broader scale) soon.

[w4rma]

18. I think Lieberman's position is out of sync. IMHO, Dean = Clinton on I/P.

Statement of Principles on the Middle East Peace Process

Howard Dean is committed to achieving a negotiated, comprehensive, and just peace between Palestinians and Israelis and remains optimistic about the chances for peace. The greatest asset in that effort is that majorities of both Palestinians and Israelis accept a two-state solution which would guarantee security, sovereignty and dignity.

Recent developments in the region have created a new sense of opportunity. Any steps that lead away from violence and toward peace need to be encouraged and assisted. Continuing this progress will require the full engagement of the United States at the highest level. US disengagement from the process during much of the Bush Administration has been unacceptable. No other country but the United States has the credibility necessary to facilitate negotiations and to mediate between the parties. Yet, in the end, only the Palestinians and the Israelis themselves can make and keep the peace and work out the specifics of a lasting agreement. Peace cannot be imposed by outside parties.

The basic framework for peace between the Israelis and Palestinians is a two state solution - a Jewish state of Israel living side by side in peace and security with an independent, demilitarized Palestinian state. The best approach to achieving lasting peace is a comprehensive one, providing for fully normalized relations, peace, and security as part of an overall negotiated settlement between Israel and the Arab states.

To get there, the Palestinian Authority will have to fight terrorism and violence on a consistent basis to create the conditions necessary for a viable peace process. The Israeli government will have to work to improve the living conditions of the Palestinian people and ultimately will have to remove a number of existing settlements. These issues and others will all be elements of a final agreement negotiated by the parties.

Through it all, the United States will maintain its historic special relationship with the state of Israel, providing a guarantee of its long-term defense and security. And the United States will have to take responsibility with its international partners for helping the Palestinians establish a middle-class democratic society in which women fully participate in economic and political decision-making. The international community must support these economic reconstruction efforts which are essential to the long-term success of any agreement between the parties.
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_policy_foreign_mideast

[StandWatie]

42. Clinton said he would pick up a gun and die for Israel

Bush had to redesignate the West Bank and Gaza as Occupied Territories (after Clinton ignoring a half century of Middle East policy redesignated them "disputed zones"). Bush is actually more fair than Clinton when it comes to these questions and that is a damning indictment of the role the Clinton administration played.

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[The Stranger]

50. Holy Shit.

Am I reading this on the DU?

The UN has already recognized the state of Israel, but the Palenstinians hasn't. Why? Because Israel was formerly Palestine, but there are surrounding countries such as Lebanon, Egypt, Jordan, Syria that was also part of Palestine, that they can go live and claim as Palestine.

The first sentence is absolutlely wrong. The Palestinians have recognized Israel so many times -- and re-recognized Israel when they didn't use the right wording or do it in the right language -- that denying this is living in denial.

The second sentence smacks of something you would expect to see on the Freeper boards. Would you tell the South Africans that they should "go live and claim" Botswana or other African countries because they were living there when the Europeans arrived?

:puke:

[saskatoon]

56. Hawkeye

is really one totally screwed up dude---or nuts, take your pick!

[Hawkeye-X]

66. Actually

I'm not saying anything.

It's my conservative father who said that. I am 100% neutral on this I/P issue.

Hawkeye-X

[StandWatie]

62. even Afrikanner's made "Transkei"

That's what any "peace deal" is going to offer Palestinians. If the US had brokered a "peace deal" between South Africa and the "terrorist" ANC Transkei would have been called a peace deal and any resistance from "terrorists" or White "radicals" would have been viewed in a dim light.

[arcos]

14. Where are all the DUers who claim Dean is as pro-Israel as Lieberman?

I wonder... there have been so many threads with people saying how Dean is as pro-Israel or more so than Lieberman, and now none of them say anything.

[schultzee]

15. Get out Joe! You don't represent real Americans anymore join

the republican party and kiss the parthy platform.

[PartyPooper]

16. This is anti-climactic for me.

When JL said, "A Bush recession would be followed by a Dean depression...", well, that did it for me.

I have absolutely no use for Lieberman or Biden...both are DINO's!

And, the sooner JL drops out of the race, the better it is for the remaining Dems! I'm for Dean, but, I believe that JL is a loose cannon-who is shooting off indiscriminately at fellow Dems WAY too much! He is hurting the party...and, he should go! Now!

:hi: Bye, bye Joe!

:dem:

[IndianaGreen]

20. Lieberman has adopted the ME views of Gingrich and DeLay

Not only is Lieberman past the conservative wing of the Democratic Party, all four of them, but he has placed himself in the ideological camp of Newt Gingrich and Tom deLay, as far as his views on the Middle East are concerned.

Lieberman no longer deserves the DINO label, he is a neocon like Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz!

[TheYellowDog]

67. Whatever

Continue to spout your stuff if you wish, but Lieberman is not even a DINO on the scales of political ideology. Granted, his stance on Israel is pretty far right, but his overall ideology is center-left, a MODERATE democrat. IG, your center is so far left tha everyone to the right of Trotsky is a DINO, according to you.

[LiberalFighter]

32. I have been anti-Biden since Clarence Thomas's nomination

I get the impression that he thinks he is better than the people he represents/actually everyone.

[schultzee]

23. Kuccinich really says what needs to be done to SAVE America,

but I fear because of bad planning and the buSh media, he may not have a chance, though we could turn this around, if we fought!
If you as an middle class person relly listen and you know that health care increased 25% in cost since HMO's developed middle men.Yu would realize Kuccinich's plan would actually decearse medical costs.
The Republican pigs have used their propaganda machine to brains wash us, when the real statistics prove that Dennis's plan will save us all, yes all, money. Medical care as cost 25% since HMO's and the creation of executives makeing mega bucks.

Before there was a middle class that paid wages to a single payer plan. The middle men who earn millions of dollars were eleminatied and middled type wages were paid. Unilke the privitization system CEOs did not receive 20 million dollars compensation, thus many more people were hired and the cost were kept down. The privitization has resulted in a hiearchy making millions of dollars, instead of having many middle class paid employees. Its a rip off, and its a republican rip off. The rich get richer , the consumer gets less for more, and middle clas and working class make more so the rocj get richer.

How many more middle class and woring class, and middle class people could supprot their families if these corporate privitzed pigs were not taking over the common goods. Wake up, they are screwing all of us.

Kuccinich is right. The capitilist are looking more like the Old Soviety Union and NaZi Germany.
L

"this president is a misserale failure"

Dick Gephardt

[schultzee]

24. Excuse typos....I type too fast .

linda

[Starpass]

25. I'm a Kerry or Clark supporter and I'd like to smash this asshole

in the mouth. Perhaps Joe is wanting a position in Bush's cabinet if he is re-elected. Don't count on it Joe.......for all the shit dished out by this WH, when it comes down to it, Bush's ultra right Christian born-agains absolutley detest people like you who don't dig Christ. He wouldn't let you be the guy who wipes his ass after a dump. And you, Joe, need to be dumped by the Dems. Get out of the race....you would be on the debate stage with Bush performing a "Monica" on him. Dean has a very good chance of being the nominee, and we have to be real, real careful regarding the several top boys that we don't give fucking Bush/Rove any ammo.

[dolstein]

26. I for one side with Israel over Hamas

i don't see how you can remain neutral between Israel, the only Democracy in the Middle East, and the Palestinian Authority, which still refuses to sever its ties with terrorist groups. If the Palestinian Authority wants US support, it must renounce terrorism once and for all, and dismantle the terrorist wing of Hamas. The fact is, the Palestinians will never get a state as long as these terrorist groups are around. The sooner they realize this, the better.

[Forkboy]

30. Nice strawman

expected of course.

[dolstein]

33. Since when is terrorism a straw man?

Tell that to families of Israeli civilians who have been murdered by Palestinian.

Honestly, I don't know why so many DU'ers refuse to deal with the fact that the Palestinian Authority refuses to break with terrorist groups like Hamas.

[IndianaGreen]

34. Since you chose to ignore the thrust of this article

Lieberman is flaying away like a madman desperate to strike at Dean, but in doing so, he has turned his back on decades of efforts by Presidents from both parties to broker a peace between the two parties in the Middle East conflict.

Quoting from the news story:

The Israeli settlements — which stretch into the West Bank — are a key point of contention that has hung up the roadmap for peace.

Responding to Lieberman's criticism, Dean spokeswoman Tricia Enright, said: "The United States will always maintain its commitment to Israel's long-term defense and security. But peace will only come to the region through negotiations between the parties facilitated by a president of the United States who is personally engaged in the process and willing to treat both sides fairly."

Jeremy Ben-Ami, Dean's policy director, said Dean believes "when you try to negotiate peace, you have to negotiate with both sides, you have to recognize legitimate claims on both sides."

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=694&ncid=696&e=9&u=/ap/20030907/ap_on_el_pr/lieberman_israel

[dolstein]

44. Bullshit -- we treated both sides fairly in the Ireland conflict

but we still insisted that the IRA end its terrorist activities.

Renouncing terrorism isn't a chip to be bargained away at the negotating table -- it's a precondition to negotiations. If Howard Dean doesn't realize this, then he's in serious trouble.

[StandWatie]

45. Northern Ireland or Ireland?

Which peace deal? I would say you are about 90% wrong as the only administration that said anything of the kind was Reagan's dealing with the Thatcher government and nothing was accomplished whatsoever.

[dolstein]

52. Northern Ireland

<<Which peace deal? I would say you are about 90% wrong as the only administration that said anything of the kind was Reagan's dealing with the Thatcher government and nothing was accomplished whatsoever.>>

Well, I suppose I should congratulate you for waking from your decades long coma.

Still, I think George Mitchell, John Hume, David Trimble and many others (not to mention the Nobel Prize committee) will be amused to learn that all of their efforts to achieve peace were a complete waste of time.

[StandWatie]

61. no coma

Mitchel never made any sort of the demand you suggest he did. Disarmament talks were part of a larger framework to be ran parallel to peace talks which should be the case here as well.

[The Stranger]

51. Honestly,

Honestly, I don't know why so many DU'ers refuse to deal with the fact that the Palestinian Authority refuses to break with terrorist groups like Hamas.

I don't know why so many DU'ers refuse to deal with the fact that Israel has been using its military to occupy a native population's land for decades.

Occupation is Terrorism.

[jos]

60. It's a strawman argument because

the issue is not Israel vs. Hamas, but Israel v. the Palestinian people. If the U.S. wants to bring about a settlement, then it has to be an honest broker. It has to require that Israel actually freeze, if not dismantle settlements, and stop all land confiscation. As long as the demands are only made on the Palestinians, the process will go nowhere.

[tinnypriv]

35. Actually, the fact is

The Palestinians will never get a state as long of Israel continues to colonially occupy the West Bank and Gaza. They're not only maintaining the settlements, but expanding them as well.

All with U.S. taxpayer $$$. That is 160-2 BS, whatever way you slice it - terror or no terror.

As long as the United States and Israel refuse to make peace, the worse it is going to be in the long-run for both countries (never mind the Pals).

Unless Israel and the United States make the strategic decision that Israel = 1967 borders Israel, it is going to be very, very hard for any Palestinian leadership to control its own population. You can demand "severing ties" or "cracking down" or whatever you like. Those are the facts.

[Isere]

37. And I, for two, will join you

It beats me how any sentient person could ask why the US supports Israel.

Support for Israel doesn't mean loving every single thing it does. I am pro-Israel, but anti-Sharon and anti-settlements. Some of the posters here sound as though they would like to see Israel engulfed by its neigbors and erased from the map.

The more I look in on these vitriolic threads, the more uncomfortable I am at DU.

[StandWatie]

43. I don't care anymore one way or another

Israel can turn the Palestinians into lampshades or the Palestinians can recreate '48 and massacre until they turn all the Israeli's into refugees but I don't know what the hell it's worth pissing off a billion or so Muslim's by backing one side or another in a screwed up religio-race war.

[dutchdemocrat]

38. Democracy in Mideast

Eygpt has committed to democracy and Turkey is - (oh but you are saying they are Europe... I know) And why is Pakistan an ally when they are not even close to being one? Your arguement doesn't work. It's like trying to get a four fingered glove on a five fingered hand.

[Larkspur]

40. Iran had a democracy in 1953, but the USA pushed for a monarchy

there because it was convenient to our oil companies.

Arabs and Muslims can establish democracies, but when foreign powers, like us, meddle in there internal affairs, we end up aborting democracy. We have the same mentality of a rapist, who after being caught by the police, blame the victim for being a victim.

[saskatoon]

57. One phrase that you used is correct

"Palestinians will never get a state" but the ending should have been AS long as there is a Sharon and a Leiberman.

[saskatoon]

59. Turn it around

If the Palestinians were given their own Territory, they wouldn't be killing Israelis, isn't that what it's all about.

[dolstein]

27. Duplicate post, please delete

NT

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[WheresWaldo]

31. JL can funk off...

Dean is the man. His take on the I/P conflict was one of the few reservations I had about Dean, but with this statement, I feel more comfortable coming on board 100%. I hope he can get this "more balanced" approach to the I/P conflict message out there more because I know a lot more people in the left will take him a lot more seriously, especially liberal american jews. Peace, shalom and salam.

[Larkspur]

39. I agree with Dean, not Lieberman

Dean's position
Responding to Lieberman's criticism, Dean spokeswoman Tricia Enright, said: ``The United States will always maintain its commitment to Israel's long-term defense and security. But peace will only come to the region through negotiations between the parties facilitated by a president of the United States who is personally engaged in the process and willing to treat both sides fairly.''

Jeremy Ben-Ami, Dean's policy director, said Dean believes ``when you try to negotiate peace, you have to negotiate with both sides, you have to recognize legitimate claims on both sides.''

Lieberman's
Lieberman, a Connecticut senator, said the first thing that has to happen on the road to peace is the Palestinian leadership has to stop the terrorist attacks against Israel. Then the two sides, during peace talks, should decide the border and settlement issues.

Lieberman will be waiting for eternity for terrorism to stop. Of course that is what Ariel Sharon wants. Dean is at least pragmatic enough that negotiations can happen in spite of terrorist attacks, and if those negotiations can bring benefits to both sides, the terrorists will lose popular support and their attacks will decrease due to them being turned in by their own people.

[janx]

41. First he was bashed by some Greens for some quote out of

context that they interpreted as being pro-Isreal. Now he's being bashed for some other comment for being the opposite.

Can't his opponents do better than this?

[Sagan]

46. I tend to be neutral in the I/P debates...

Personally, I think both sides are controlled by their fringe elements, for the most part. They're both nuts.

However, in this instance, I have to wonder what Lieberman is thinking. Has this policy of America's been especially successful over the last half century? Has it been SO successful that it merits continuation with no debate?

[JaneQPublic]

47. Why couldn't Joe have been this feisty in the 2000 VP debate?

Holy Joe was all sweetness and light when he should have been tearing the Big Dick to shreds in the debate. But he has no trouble lashing out against a fellow Democrat.

Which team is he playing on again?

[dolstein]

53. Anyone who followed the 2000 election knows the answer to that one

I suppose I'll provide the answer for the DU'ers who were either too young or too busy to follow that election.

The vice presidential debate was preceded by the first of three presidential debate. Although Al Gore arguably won that first debate on points, he was raked over the coals by the press for being overly agressive and downright obnoxious at times. One may fairly conclude that Lieberman was told by the campaign to be on his best behavior and avoid overly partisan attacks. After all, Gore himself turned in a very sedate performance in the second of the presidential debates.

The only way to understand Lieberman's performance in the VP debate is to look at Gore's performance in the first two presidential debates. Lieberman is obviously capable of being aggressive, as anyone who followed his campaign against Weicker would know. But for reasons having mainly to do with Gore's performance during the initial debate, as well as the format of the VP debate (which wasn't conducive to confrontation), Lieberman was operating under significant constraints.

[MisterP]

64. um, not everyone who comes to a different conclusion than you

wasn't paying attention...
(just sayin')

[Mari333]

58. EVERYONE should read this , especially LIEberman

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20030922&c=1&s=mcalister

a Long Read but well worth it. The DEEP hatred of Jewish people comes right out when you scratch the surface of christian fundamentalists who say they "support" Zionist Israel...any Jew who trusts these right wing fanatical christian end timers should watch their backs.....................!

[Porcupine]

63. How did this guy (Israeli Joe) get to vote in the U.S. Senate?

When virtually every statement he makes is in the interests of Israel?

Hey Joe, move your tail to the "Holy Land" if you can't represent New Jersey.