An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right
Pelosi Takes “Israeli Peace Message to Syria”
U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, on a visit to Syria opposed by the White House, said on Wednesday she conveyed an Israeli message to President Bashar al-Assad that the Jewish state was ready to resume peace talks, says a news report.
” ‘(Our) meeting with the president enabled us to communicate a message from Prime Minister (Ehud) Olmert that Israel was ready to engage in peace talks as well,’ Pelosi told reporters in Damascus after talks with Assad.
” ‘We were very pleased with the reassurances we received from the president (of Syria) that he was ready to resume the peace process. He was ready to engage in negotiations (for) peace with Israel,’ she added.”
Read more…
opinions powered by SendLove.to
14 Responses to “Pelosi Takes “Israeli Peace Message to Syria””
Good grief. Possible peace between Syria and Israel and the Bush administration is against it?? Or is it that Speaker Pelosi has effectively cut republicans out of the picture as peace makers between the Israelis and their enemies? Well that’s the way it has always been has it not? The republican party have always been terrible peace makers. Very good at setting up or starting war though. I may be partisan, but there is a reason.
As far as I’m concerned, Pelosi can talk to whomever she wants.
Although, she isn’t receiving rave reviews from the reform movement in Syria.
http://www.reformsyria.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=282&Itemid=66
Lol, she’s trying to broker peace and they’re concerned about the statement it makes on the women’s rights within their borders. Equal rights is really important, but don’t look to foreign diplomats to help you out until people have stopped shooting eachother. Until then, the women of Syria will have to take a stand on it themselves or not.
It really is funny how some folks prioritize.
I’ll lay aside the superficiiality of belief in coming “peace” for Israel while its enemies continue to commit crimes against it and the USA and the rest of the West is too often selling Israel out. Anyone believing that Pelosi or anyone else can easily reach peace Just By Talking To Israel’s Poor, Badly Misunderstood and Mistreated Genocide-Minded Enemies is naive (or made insane by hatred of Bush).
Pelosi’s trip is nothing but a cheap Democratic Party political ploy, primarily intended to harm Bush politically, to discredit him and weaken him (and the USA, if they realized it) abroad. Depending on how much thought actually went into this trip, the Dims may also be trying to position themselves on stage in order to be taken seriously prior to the 2008 elections.
What’s laughable about this (and the aniti-Bush and “peace at Israel’s expense or destruction” attitude) is that the antagonism and negativity inherent in this trip, and in protests here in the USA and elsewhere in the West, are ironic; for serious opposition to the government in Syria and in Iran for many years simply is not permitted to exist.
As an Arab friend of mine long ago said, as a rule, if you criticize the Syrian government, you disappear.
casualobserver- We don’t need rave reviews anymore, Bush does.
DLS- What “crimes”? “Position ourselves on stage”…hell we own the stage!
IMO we need to normalize relations and trade with Syria as soon as possible. In fact, we need to side with the sunni over the shia rather quickly.
DLS: Pelosi’s trip is nothing but a cheap Democratic Party political ploy, primarily intended to harm Bush politically, to discredit him and weaken him (and the USA, if they realized it) abroad. [Emphasis mine-CK]
That last thought strikes me as the key to understanding the continuing and apparently unwavering support Bush continues to enjoy from about 30% of the population, the authoritarian identification of the leader with the state.
To such folk an attack on Bush is indeed an attack on America.
DLS, do you stand by that statement?
It was said:
> DLS- What “crimes�?
Terrorism, murder, mayhem, kidnapping, illegitimate acts of warfare routinely committed
> “Position ourselves on stage�…hell we own the stage!
The Democrats gaining control of Washington (and elsewhere) due to disenchantment with the Bush adminiistration here at home, but you aren’t strong overseas, and in fact still to aware voters in the USA as well as to others elsewhere, the Democrats are seen as weak on terrorism. (2006 was thumbs down for Bush and the GOP, not thumbs up for the Dimmies.)
> That last thought strikes me as the key to
> understanding the continuing and apparently
> unwavering support Bush continues to enjoy
> from about 30% of the population, the
>authoritarian identification of the leader with
> the state.
Too bad I’m as frequent critic of Bush as are other normal people. You can leave out the mental-lightweight-leftist illogical inference about fascism or simple personality cults, too.
DLS, easy there. Just wondering where you stand.
And I’m fairly sure it’s no mental-lightweight-leftist illusion that a certain portion of the public feels exactly as I described.
I was just wondering if you were one of them.
DLS- I’m very sorry, but in my opinion you are one lost soul. You simply cannot see the forest for the trees. Delusion is not loyalty. Have you learned nothing from these Islamic wars? Certainly you could rise above the name calling and hate rhetoric, at least for the sake of credibility.
If Nancy Pelosi is going to go on a peace finding mission, she should at least get the message correct.
She is way out of her realm.
> And I’m fairly sure it’s no mental-lightweight-leftist
> illusion that a certain portion of the public feels
>exactly as I described.
Not at all. We’ve seen how “Saint Hillary” was adored after 1992 by the Left.
> I was just wondering if you were one of them.
Rest easy.
> I’m very sorry, but in my opinion you are one lost soul.
You should be sorry. Your opinion is badly mistaken.
1. Pelosi apparently misstated the Olmert position
2. The real issue here is the Hariri investigation, which Assad is desperately trying to change the topic from.
I thought the moderate voice was distinctive in having, you know, a mix of different voices, esp on for policy. When did it shift to one side?
The problem with Pelosi going to Syria is that Israel’s own Prime Minister said she spoke without authority in terms of Israel’s “message”. There was no such message from Israel. So my question is, why did she say that? Thats not a very professional way to run diplomatic missions. She is way in over her head in this matter.