Powered by WebAds

Friday, October 03, 2008

Palin-Biden debate on Israel

Let's start with a video of the part of the Palin-Biden debate that deals with Israel. Let's go to the videotape and then I'll have more analysis and comments.

I thought Palin was great on dealing with Ahmadinejad. But Biden is way wrong. First, he said that Obama didn't say that he'd meet with Iran. That's a lie. Let's go to the videotape.

Second, he said that Ahmadinejad doesn't control the security apparatus in Iran - the theocracy does. Does Biden think they are any better?

On the Israeli-Palestinian question, Palin backs Condi Clueless, which is not good news, but on the other hand, she has a clear notion of where Israel stands in the array of US allies. I don't buy the moving the embassy to Jerusalem - we've heard that too many times before. Israel's 'success' in making peace depends on the other side too and the other side has no interest in Israeli 'peace' with the 'Palestinians.'

Biden claims that Barack Obama said that the US shouldn't back 'Palestinian' elections with Hamas participating? He's got to be kidding.

The biggest gaffe is the claim Biden made that the US and France kicked Hezbullah out of Lebanon. He's dead wrong on that (Hat Tip: Hot Air). Hezbullah is unfortunately alive and well and part of the Lebanese government.

Biden is also trying to set Pakistan up as being as dangerous as Iran. While I'm not thrilled that Pakistan has nuclear weapons, their regime is not apocalyptic like Iran's. Pakistan has had nuclear weapons for many years and has not used them. Might they use them? Sure. Might they sell them to others? Absolutely, they have. But we don't hear Pakistan's leaders threatening to destroy Israel like we hear from Iran. Let's go to the videotape.

And here's a bit of the transcript that didn't show up in that excerpt:
Earlier on Iran, PBS moderator Gwen Ifill asked which constituted the bigger threat, a nuclear Iran or an unstable Pakistan. Biden answered that both would be "dangerous" and "game-changers." Pakistan, he said, has deployed nuclear weapons, which "can already hit Israel and the Mediterranean," while "Iran getting a nuclear weapon would be very, very destabilizing," but added that "they are not close to getting a nuclear weapon that's able to be deployed."

Palin also said both would be "extremely dangerous." Referring to Iran, she added, "They cannot be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons, period.

"Israel is in jeopardy, of course, when we're dealing with Ahmadinejad as a leader of Iran, Iran claiming that Israel, as he termed it, [is] a stinking corpse, a country that should be wiped off the face of the earth," she continued, echoing McCain's words at his first debate with Obama last week. "Now a leader like Ahmadinejad who is not sane or stable when he says things like that is not one whom we can allow to acquire nuclear energy, nuclear weapons."
Sorry, but Pakistan is not Iran.

Is it my imagination or does Palin say 'nucular' like Bush does?

More later.


At 11:36 AM, Blogger Brian Smaller said...

Possibly, but as they say - You say "tom-ay-to" and I say "to-mah-to".

Brian Smaller
New Zealand

At 12:07 PM, Blogger Naftali2 said...

It's partly your imagination, partly that, I'll bet, you've never come across a northern US accent. She pronounces the word correctly, given her accent. But I'll make a sacrifice and listen to her regional dialect for four to eight years, Gd willing.

At 5:55 PM, Blogger Gershon said...

I thought that it was Jimmeh who pronounced it that way.


Post a Comment

<< Home