The Strength of our Bucks

Submitted by Jay1 (United States), Aug 16, 2011 at 21:39

If ever there was a time when this President or State Department thinking should be moved, it is this year, this spring of the Arab uprisings. Iran,though Persian, has been accused of lending a helping hand into the deaths of American soldiers in Iraq and Aftghanastan.And,they have benn shown kill their children and their democracy.Syria has been accused of funneling arms to Hezbollahs southern Lebanon,having involvement in the killing their ex President Hareri,and slaughtering thousands of their own citizens .Qaddaffi bears great similarities to Assad, Pakistan is anyones guess,and the Palestinians are cheerleaders when the world trade center fell,yet seemingly mum on the killings of Americans and Arab brothers.

Dr Pipes points out failed Middle East and Islamic policys as Ramallah with a wink from Gazas Iranian Hamas, ropes in UN votes for an upcomming statehood bid. This article of Dr Pipes discusses the tip toes of Jerusalem wording. My opinion will suggest a foot in the cans of this administration and our feckless State Department. Assad should go, Qaddaffi should go,Tehrans leadership should go, Mubarak should be largely forgiven, and a large chunk of the territories should be recognized as Israel, along with all of the Golan Heights.As for Jerusalem, the United States should be proud to call Jerusalem West Israels capital, and Jerusalems all under Israels eyes.Dr Pipes is looking for a statesman and a State Department with courage. Not staged courage, real courage.The unique Harry Truman once said, with me, the buck stops here. Standard and Poors has had something to say about the current strength.of our bucks. And they're not all wrong.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".