A Fox News focus group gave John McCain the highest marks for Wednesday’s GOP debate, but the fireworks between Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee provided the most compelling moment. After Paul argued that our military presence in the Middle East is hurting America and that we need to withdraw our troops, Huckabee said we have an obligation to fix what we broke in Iraq. Paul then responded that a few people advising President Bush "hijacked our foreign policy," and that the American people shouldn’t be punished for that. Huckabee countered that Paul shouldn’t divide the country and, "if we make a mistake, we make it as a single country." Here’s a transcript of what followed:
PAUL: No. When we make a mistake — (interrupted by applause) — when we make a mistake, it is the obligation of the people through their representatives to correct the mistake, not to continue the mistake! (Cheers, applause.)
HUCKABEE: And that’s what we do on the floor of the –
PAUL: No! We’ve dug a hole for ourselves and we dug a hole for our party! We’re losing elections and we’re going down next year if we don’t change it, and it has all to do with foreign policy, and we have to wake up to this fact.
HUCKABEE: Even if we lose elections, we should not lose our honor, and that is more important to the Republican Party.
PAUL: We’re losing — we’ve lost over — (cheers, applause) — we have lost — we have lost 5,000 Americans killed in — we’ve lost over 5,000 Americans over there in Afghanistan and Iraq, and plus the civilians killed. How many more do you want to lose? How long are we going to be there? How long — what do we have to pay to save face? That’s all we’re doing is saving face. It’s time we came home!
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
- Daniel on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/24
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/24
- dtrabert on Too many exemptions
- gster on Goldman Sachs ‘apology’ hollow
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
59 Comments
I don’t think there is much to add to that.
Amen. Good for Huckabee to stand up for what he believes in. I think he was speaking from the heart. Maybe next time he wil understand he is outmatched by Ron Paul and raise that issue with one of the bobble heads wanting to stay in Iraq and nuke Iran.
Whoa! No wonder Faux News doesn’t like him!
The Right Wing establishment hates Dr. Paul because he refuses to follow the Reagan Doctrine of never criticizing a fellow Republican.
That may work in the primaries – I hope it doesn’t – but in the general election – all of the more macho than Bush crap will come back to roost.
I think Huckabee was sincere, too. That exchange was pretty interesting – probably the high light of the debate.
I am pretty sure that Ron Paul is convinced that there are some things more important than winning. Otherwise, he wouldn’t tell the truth as he sees it.
RP -
Unelectable. ‘Nuff said.
RP has stated that his main concern with running is airing the issues. I pray that he does win the primaries. How refreshing to have a president that follows the constitution and tells the truth.
He has some radical ideas that, if president, I’m sure would not get past congress, but it would open American’s eyes and change will happen. Make change down the middle. Not too far left, not too far right, and stay in line with the constitution.
RP -
Unelectable. ‘Nuff said.
Posted by: GMC70 | September 06, 2007 at 01:16 PM
Why?
Because (IMO) he’s a RINO.
“Unelectable. ‘Nuff said.Posted by: GMC70 | September 06, 2007 at 01:16 PM
Why?Posted by: SolDevVB | September 06, 2007 at 01:19 PM”
“The Right Wing establishment hates Dr. Paul because he refuses to follow the Reagan Doctrine of never criticizing a fellow Republican.”
“Because (IMO) he’s a RINO.Posted by: ??? | September 06, 2007 at 01:21 PM”
He fits the Current ideals of the Republican party in name only.
Agreed. Subtle difference.
subtle but important :)
WHy?
1) his name recognition is hopeless; aside from the political junkies (like us), no one’s heard of him
2) he’s seen, at times rightly, as a nut, on the par with Ross Perot.
3) As a libertarian, many of his ideas are the “common sense” simple answer type; the problem with them, of course, is that as has been said many times: “There’s a simple answer to nearly any complex problem. And it’s wrong.”
If there were simple answers, they’d have been done already.Libertarianism is a quaint 18th century philosophy; useful as a utopian ideal, but not very workable in the real, complex, interconnected industrial real world.
“Libertarianism is a quaint 18th century philosophy; useful as a utopian ideal, but not very workable in the real, complex, interconnected industrial real world.
Posted by: GMC70 | September 06, 2007 at 01:29 PM ”
Very true.Like pure capitalism, pure democracy, and pure communism
To be honest while watching the debates last night if I closed my eyes it was as if Perot was on TV. I wonder when the fantasies of secret service men and foreign agents following him will kick in? Does he have a daughter who will be getting married this summer?
Dadadadadadada daaa!
“After Paul argued that our military presence in the Middle East is hurting America and that we need to withdraw our troops”
This was Philips summation. Paul went on to say that AlQuaeda wanted us out of Saudi and we should have left. If we cave to this where will they want us gone from next?
We have evidence that they planned an attack in Germany this week. I hope we are packing up our presence to be out of ‘that’ country by nightfall.
Ron Paul is best left with the “blame America first” crowd.
When he gets on his 911 was America’s fault, lunatic talk, he turns off eight percent of the audience immediately on both sides.
With Paul’s logic, Germany has the right to attack the U.S. because we have bases in Germany.
eight percent = eighty percent
Actually Kansas it is even crazier that that. BinLaden attacked us from Afghanstan because we had troops in Saudi at the behest of the Saudi gov.
By that logic BL could recruit some young German muslims and attack us because we have troops in Germany.
We wouldn’t be safe from anyone. What twisted logic.
Bush said we would be in Saudi for no longer than necessary. We only recently, and very quietly, withdrew.
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand historical proof that Americans are not well tolerated in the mid-east. Yet we have been there and messed with their governments for decades.
Only a complete moron would use the ‘blame America first’ mantra. Only an idiot would relate Germany to the mid-east.
And we continue to risk American lives for honor and because RP won’t stand up for what is wrong?
Give me a break. This has nothing to do with backing down and retreating, this has to do with RIGHTING A WRONG. I don’t agree to pull out of Afghanistan, that’s where RP and I disagree. But he was DEAD ON over what Huckabee said.
My understanding was that right after 9/11 we drew down our military presence in Saudi Arabia. We are still there, but not in as great a numbers.
Terrorism is exercised, because, especially against democratic countries, terrorism works. The preceding is the thesis of the book _Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism_ by Robert A. Pape; Random House: New York, 2005.
So, if the above is true, short of killing every last one of the radical Islam adherents, what is the answer?
I am all ears on that question.
And not to mention, Ron Paul has more military supporters (financially) than any other candidate.
What a great line. These bozos fought tooth and nail against 48% of the country insisting they were right and we were wrong. Now that it is painfully obvious that they were wrong, they jump on this “We made the mistake together” line.
BS. I think supporters of the war should get a tax hike to pay for it. Opponents should get an apology.
And if the war had gone as well as the neocons predicted (weeks not months, greeted as liberators, oil would pay for reconstruction), do you think for a second that Republicans would be saying “We did this together as a nation?” No, they would be beating up their domestic political opponents with it.
Steve and Sol would we then draw all of our troops home. Only exist withing our own borders. Radical muslims have thousands of members in countries all over the globe. Look at where they have attacked, Australia, The Phillipines, Spain, I could go on and on.
Do we step back and let them have it all? If so how long before we can expected to be asking if we can leave small crosses on our own places of worship and every airport and public place will have a place to wash your feet, if as women we have to wear a full face burka or would a half face one do, if as women could we go the grocery store alone or will we be beat for not being with a male, would we have to be up at the crack of dawn when the sirens blow to say our first prayers..
How many women are prepared to back up many years in their struggle to be equal?
These are hard questions but very real. If all you know is how to retreat you will eventually end up with your back to the wall.
They want to rule the world. You are the enemy if not a muslim. You will either be under submission or dead. That is what is happening now. They don’t respect the lifes of their own innocent do you think yours is any more valuable?
Ksgrm,
HAHAHAHHA
Over the top much? If we don’t have a military presence in the Mid East then the Muslims will rule the world. HAHAHAHAH
Unreal.
And for all the decades when we DIDN’T have a military presence in the Mid East, why are we not now arising at 5 AM to say our prayers.
HAHAHAHAHHA
Holy cow what a mentality. Hey, lets go nuke Iran. I heard they outlawed the Whopper. We’ll show THEM !!!!
Grm,Is there an estimate of the number of radical Islamists like you describe? Do we have to kill every last one of them and all of their children to make an impact on this threat? Or are there other alternatives? Asked in all sincerity.
ksgrm, all the attacks you mention happened AFTER we invaded Iraq.
I want you to think very hard about the scenario you mention. Try to visualize radical muslims forcing Wichita women to wear an abaya and stay home unless they have a male escort.
Picture it. Visualize it happening. Now explain to the rest of us exactly how such an absurd scenario could come about.
Seriously, ksgrm, if we can’t impose democracy on them with all our military hardware and $100 billion a year, how are they going to impose Islamic law on us with a few box cutters and a Saudi-funded ATM card?
Grm is right on the point that there is not usually a seperation of church and state in Islamic countries. Overlooking that fact helped lead to the stalemate in Iraq over political reconciliation. Ironically, Saddam may have been an Islamic leader who was somewhat successful while being secular. And we would have to define “successful” in the preceding sentence as there not being the anarchy that there is in Iraq now.
I suppose we could be successful too, if we simply killed anyone who didn’t agree with us or refused to help…
“HUCKABEE: Even if we lose elections, we should not lose our honor . . . ”
Oh, yeah, baby. That unimpeachable Republican “honor.”
Republican honor.
Larry “Bathroom break” Craig.
Republican honor.
Senator David “Diapers” Vitter.
Republican honor.
Donald We-Know-Where-The-WMD’s-Are Rumsfeld.
Republican honor.
Michael Heckovajob Brown.
Republican honor.
Jack “Indians = monkeys, morons, and troglodites” Abramoff.
Republican honor.
Lewis “Liar” Libby.
Republican honor.
Tom “Indicted” De Lay
And on and on and on it goes . . .
brian:
I’ll agree, in part. Ideological purity is almost never workable.
But most systems are based primarily on one part of that ideal. While “pure” capitalism (i.e. laissez-faire capitalism) may be unworkable, communism in any substantive form(i.e. command economies) has proven to be an economic disaster. I’ll happily lean HEAVILY on the capitalism side of the axis, regulated to a degree and with limits, but capitalism nonetheless.
On the democracy/authoritarianism axis, likewise, while “pure” democracy is unworkable, I’ll lean heavily on the representative democracy/republic side of the coin and, thank you, reject the socialist/communist or fascist authoritarian alternative.
And I think 95%+ of our posters here would join me. We may disagree (loudly!) about the details and where the limits or edges are, but we have very little disagreement on substantive foundational principles.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/2007/09/06/2007-09-06_iraq_government_near_collapse_secret_rep.html
Exclusive
Iraq government near collapse, secret report says
BY JAMES GORDON MEEKDAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU
Thursday, September 6th 2007, 4:00 AM
WASHINGTON – Lawmakers returning here this week got hit with more bad news about Iraq in a confidential report that says the fragile democracy is “collapsing,” the Daily News has learned.
The boycott of the government by certain Shiite and Kurdish political blocs has left Iraq’s leadership hanging by a thread, according to a report by the Congressional Research Service.
The report by CRS, Congress’ research and analysis arm, was completed Aug. 15 for the House and Senate.
“My assessment is that because of the number and breadth of parties boycotting the cabinet, the Iraqi government is in essential collapse,” Kenneth Katzman, the author of the report, said. “That argues against any real prospects for political reconciliation.”
Without a political infrastructure in Iraq, any military progress would be short-lived, he added.
And I think 95%+ of our posters here would join me. We may disagree (loudly!) about the details and where the limits or edges are, but we have very little disagreement on substantive foundational principles.
Posted by: GMC70 | September 06, 2007 at 04:00 PM
It’s rare, but I disagree with you on this GMC70.
The Democratic party has taken/will take America deep into Socialist territory.
**Raising taxes again on the “rich”. (Likely to define rich as $40,000 or more)
**Massive increases in welfare programs in the past and in the future. (Where has that taken the poverty rate?)
**Massive increases in education and other spending without accoutability for results built in. (True – Bush did back Kennedy on this)
**Public education only, no school vouchers for private education.
**Social Security will be Means Tested so the ‘rich’ receive reduced or no benefits.
**Medicare is a bigger train wreck waiting to happen yet-
**National Healthcare will be far far worse!
I could go on, and on, but the Socialist programs on Federal, State, and Local level only continue to grow.
The Republicans under Bush have even tried to take the Socialist approach and have outspent even previous Democrats, which is why I am still Independent!
Groucho Marx was talking about Max when he said, “he may look like an idiot and sound like an idiot, but don’t let that fool you . . . he really IS an idiot.”
**Raising taxes again on the “rich”. (Likely to define rich as $40,000 or more)
That didn’t happen under Clinton. It didn’t happen under Democratic Congresses.
**Massive increases in welfare programs in the past and in the future. (Where has that taken the poverty rate?)
Clinton signed into law limits on how long welfare can be collected. He was a prime mover in welfare to work programs.
**Massive increases in education and other spending without accoutability for results built in.
“Accountability” in the form of NCLB has been a dismal failure. Also, why is there no accountability for private schools?
**Public education only, no school vouchers for private education.
School vouchers are a great idea. I want vouchers for the military so I can hire my own soldiers . . .
**Social Security will be Means Tested so the ‘rich’ receive reduced or no benefits.
That’s exactly what progressives DON’T WANT. We know full well that you cut the benefits to the rich, and they’ll cut the benefits for everybody else . . .
**Medicare is a bigger train wreck waiting to happen yet-
Note the future tense. It’s been operating for decades . . .
**National Healthcare will be far far worse!
Far worse than 45 million Americans that have NO healthcare?
Max, you’re letting your mind wander and now it’s gotten totally lost . . .
You’ve lost your mind. Get a grip.
**Raising taxes again on the “rich”. (Likely to define rich as $40,000 or more)
That didn’t happen under Clinton. It didn’t happen under Democratic Congresses.
—-In 1993 Clinton had the largest tax increase in history – retroactive to 1/1/93. I made $38,000 that year, married with 3 kids, and my taxes went up!
**Massive increases in welfare programs in the past and in the future. (Where has that taken the poverty rate?)
Clinton signed into law limits on how long welfare can be collected. He was a prime mover in welfare to work programs.
—-Look at the bottom line, welfare spending has never gone down.
**Massive increases in education and other spending without accoutability for results built in.
“Accountability” in the form of NCLB has been a dismal failure. Also, why is there no accountability for private schools?
—- Agreed!
**Public education only, no school vouchers for private education.
School vouchers are a great idea. I want vouchers for the military so I can hire my own soldiers . . .
—– Get real Capn.
**Social Security will be Means Tested so the ‘rich’ receive reduced or no benefits.
That’s exactly what progressives DON’T WANT. We know full well that you cut the benefits to the rich, and they’ll cut the benefits for everybody else . . .
—–The rich will be those making $30,000 per year (top 50%)
**Medicare is a bigger train wreck waiting to happen yet-
Note the future tense. It’s been operating for decades . . .
—- The writing is on the wall and in several government reports. We’ve covered this ground Capn.
**National Healthcare will be far far worse!
Far worse than 45 million Americans that have NO healthcare?
—- Half of those 45 million are illegal aliens. How you gonna pay for your multi-Trillion $$$ plan?
Half of the 45 million that the Health Scare tactician Michael “The Whale” Moore used are foreigners.
That’s right, most likely illegal aliens.
It’s right there in the 2006 census for all to read. Even breaks it down by age and income. :)
Libs are so gullible.
Believe in movies made by fanatics…
Great post Kansas!
(Perfect timing!)
“”"HUCKABEE: Even if we lose elections, we should not lose our honor, and that is more important to the Republican Party.”"”
Good line! And I will follow that as a Democrat in saying I will be glad to let the Republicans stay at home for the next several years and nurse their honour- or what little of it they have left- while the rest of the country moves on.
http://www.cbpp.org/8-30-05health.htm
August 30, 2005
THE NUMBER OF UNINSURED AMERICANS CONTINUED TO RISE IN 2004
Data released today by the Census Bureau show that the number of uninsured Americans stood at 45.8 million in 2004, an increase of 800,000 people over the number uninsured in 2003 (45.0 million). The percentage of people without health insurance, 15.7 percent in 2004, was not significantly different from the 15.6 percent rate in 2003.
HEY, JEENYOUSES, if they are “foreigners,” why does the census bureau call them “Americans”?
Duh.
Like shooting fish in a damn barrel . . .
“I suppose we could be successful too, if we simply killed anyone who didn’t agree with us or refused to help…”
I was counting on you to miss the point Nathan. Would you call the virtual anarchy that is Iraq today a political success? Surely, not even you would make that reach. You will note that I defined success as a lack of anarchy – that is obvioulsy not much to aspire to. But it is more than the current Iraqi government can manage.
I have to wonder how the Republicans can even believe the stuff they spew about.
Afterall, it’s been proven TIME AND AGAIN these things they believe in don’t work. Is stupid making the same mistakes over and over again expecting a different result? I believe it is.
Steven,
I don’t think Iraq is in anarchy.
I was merely pointing out that Saddams “success” came at the price of freedom or liberty under the hand of a cruel and brutal dictator.
Joseph Antos, American Enterprise Institute, looks inside the Cenus numbers, because they are very misleading.
uninsured who are NOT U.S. CITIZENS IS 45% of the 47 million.
Broken down by age, 18 – 24 years old – 29.3% of the 47 million.
25 – 35 years old – 26.9% of the 47 million.
Broken down by salary, $75,000 or more per year – 8.5% of the 47 million.
Did you get that? Almost half of the uninsured in America are not U.S. citizens.
Like shooting fish in a barrel. :)
Afterall, it’s been proven TIME AND AGAIN these things they believe in don’t work. Is stupid making the same mistakes over and over again expecting a different result? I believe it is.
Posted by: political_mom | September 06, 2007 at 06:54
Pmom being one of those dense repubs I need you to tell me what ‘things they believe in don’t work’ you are talking about. It wouldn’t be the tax cut because tax revenues are above budget projections.
” Total federal revenues grew by about $625 billion, or 35 percent, between fiscal year 2003 and fiscal year 2006.”
Maybe it is job growth. But the unemployment rate has held steady and is running at a comparable rate to the Clinton administration.
Maybe it is the terrorists attacks. We took a hit on 9/11/01 and haven’t had an attack on our home soil since. Certainly comparable to Clinton era – or better depending in how you define it.
Now that brings us to the war. We do disagree on that. But to my knowledge history hasn’t written the final page on that one.
So tell me what were you talking about?
PMom can’t even answer questions about her girl Hillary’s positions on the issues.
You think she can explain in detail what approaches the Republicans have been taking that have failed over and over again?
Remember, before the Bush tax cuts that boosted the economy, there was the Reagan tax cuts that boosted the economy, and before that there was the -
JOHN F. KENNEDY tax cuts that boosted the economy.
“The percentage of native citizens who were uninsured rose in 2004, while the percentage of non-citizen immigrants who lacked coverage fell. Nonetheless, non-citizen immigrants (44.1 percent uninsured) were much more likely to be uninsured than native-born citizens (13.3 percent).”
http://www.cbpp.org/8-30-05health.htm
“Non-citizen immigrants” does not necessarily mean ILLEGAL immigrants.
Of those non-citizen immigrants, 44.1% of THEM are uninsured. Not 44.1% of the 45.8 million total uninsured.
Max, do we seriously have to go through this all again? Do I have to pull out the same tactics I do with Kansas and actually bookmark my responses?
I answered your question in detail the last time you asked about Hillary’s platform. You even responded, so I know you read it.
Reagan had the largest poverty in a long time. Bush put his foot in his mouth when he actually had to repeal some of those tax cuts.
Or did you forget?
Do you have Alzheimers?
“Did you get that? Almost half of the uninsured in America are not U.S. citizens.
Like shooting fish in a barrel. :)”
Posted by whatever.
And who is paying for the uninsured, both citizen and non, as if being either makes a difference?
Thank you SoldeVB, I have been looking for a sag way to ask that question of my fellow republicans.I thought it was another symptom of the divide within the party between the big Government warhawks and the Grand ole party conservatives. Paul often comes off more an isolationist in a party that is currently following the thought of we are the last super power we should act like the biggest kid on the block now.
GMc70, thank you for answering the question though I will disagree some with your conclusions.Sen. Paul name it is true is more a ground swell then a news item, but everyday it is growing I had no idea whom he was till the first debate I watched him in. Since then his name recognition has grown daily and every time people hear him speak the ground swell grows even higher. Many republicans who have become totally disenchanted with the party and the direction it has went to the point of deciding to declare Independent. Are now wanting to stay and try to bring back the once great party. If nothing else that is a good thing and perhaps may save the party from becoming thought of as nothing more then a party thought of like Fed Phelps is often thought of by others.
LOL yeah the thought of shades of Ross seem to cover over Paul, his ideas are so out of the norm for the current talking points of the party. But the ideas speak more to common sense then to current ideology of those pushing the big Government/ last super power Meme’s. Besides, it is us “political junkies whom are more likely to vote and think about whom we vote for. Paul is dangerous in a real sense to the status quo, simple easy to understand answers to the problems and takes little thought to understand the positions he has. That appeals to the once every four year voters.
A simple answer is often over looked when one looks at how complex the problem is. That said it is not always the case that the answer is wrong or has already been tried. The thought comes to mind of the truck stuck under the railroad bridge on I think it was second street downtown. The city, railroad officials and structural engineers all were tossing around ideas of dismantling the truck, cutting out part of the bridge.
When a bystander made the suggestion of just letting out some of the air in the truck tires. All these “experts” at first dismissed the idea, but once they gave up on all the complex answers and finally took a look at the flatting the tires idea…. It worked!
Though I do not always agree with some of the libertarian ideas, there are some of them are the right way to go. If nothing more his idea of totally scraping the current welfare system would cause a needed rebuild since there is a real need for a welfare system. With the inner depended needs of business, workers, consumers and the economy of this country. There is a real need for focus on America first in the thought process. Our current thought process is leading to China growing in power and the United States becoming a depended state. I have no delusions that China is concerned with the welfare of the U.S. being a strong Communist country and they do not see things in the same light of a capitalist. They are not Russia nor are the people of the same mindset as a European mindset. It would be better to be a strong economy in a world wide commerce then a depended state among other depended states.
Ksgrm, he was right about Saudi-Arabia, our presents there was a conditional agreement with the ruling family there. It was to end with the end of the first Gulf war and that was the assurance the King give to those opposed to his decision to allow U.S. troops to be in country. Our failure to withdraw from S.A. caused many problems that were already brewing in S.A. It aggravated a already festering movement within S.A. The house of Saudi is doomed in time, our presents there has quicken it.
As to Al-Qaeda and their wants, it is true that once they would get this much they would be embolden to expect more. But it would also deflate some of their talking points that they use to engender support and recruits. our presents in S.A. has been a rallying point as much as the actions of Israel in dealing with the Palestinians in the Arab world.
Well I am running out of time and few will read this so I will stop answering points… Good night all.BTW Kansas fault logic there!
Ron Paul was the only true American on that stage.
The rest should all be indicted for treason.
Didn’t see the debate, but I’ve been familiar with Ron since he was the Libertarian candidate for President in ‘88.
As it’s been said, if I was Republican, I would be supporting Paul.
The Wall Street Journal is starting to sweat.
“The debate was full of fireworks about Iraq, about its essentials–the rightness of the endeavor, and what should rightly be done now. From the libertarian Ron Paul a blunt argument against the war: We never should have gone in and we should get out. “The people who say there’ll be a blood bath are the same ones who said it would be a cakewalk. . . . Why believe them?” His foreign policy: “Mind our own business, bring our troops home, defend our country, defend our borders.” After Mr. Paul spoke, it seemed half the room booed, but the other applauded. When a thousand Republicans are in a room and one man of the eight on the stage takes a sharply minority viewpoint on a dramatic issue and half the room seems to cheer him, some thing’s going on.
Ron Paul’s support isn’t based on his persona, history or perceived power. What support he has comes because of his views. As he spoke, you could hear other candidates laughing in the background. They should stop giggling, and engage in a serious way.”
{ Notice the WSJ left out the part about “Israel should defend itself” meaning that without the US, Israel would have to make the concessions for peace }
Israel would have to make the concessions for peace
If werent so anti Jewish, Israel has made plenty of concessions to the Palestinians and still gets abused by the world. They agreed to 98% of what they have been asked for by Palestine and Palestine has refused to give an inch. Palestinians want all Israelis dead, kind of like you.
If you stopped visiting those Nazi sites, maybe you would realize the Jews and Zionists are not trying to rule the world. Or maybe it’s the KKK sites you visit? How can such a small group rule the world?