He's the first black president of the most powerful nation in the world. Regardless of *anything* he does in office he's going in history books.
Well true that but looking at him as a normal President of America, he is definitely going to do either one of the things that I said. But what I do really hope is that he at least bring an end to the Israel-Palestine conflict, and to the Middle East every part of it. The most troubled region in the world right now is the Middle East and it requires some action, not another so-called 'war-on-terror'.
I am against going to other countries for any reason other than to protect our own country personally. The israeli / palestine conflict should be resolved by them, not a mediator. I also don't feel our nation should get involved in religious wars, especially considering religion shouldn't even be a factor in our government decisions in the least bit. Our government doesn't even fight for its own countries religion, what makes you think were going to run to the middle east to solve your religious war?
Who says you aren't? Well this will turn out to be a long debate and neither one of us is going to agree to the others opinion so lets leave it here but you must admit that America is responsible NOT for the Palestine/Israel conflict but for whatever happened in Afghanistan and Iraq and what is yet to happen in the rest of the places of the World.
The whole 'war on terror' is a load of crap in the first place. I figured you meant religious war, I mis-read region for religion. While I agree on removing a dictator from a country, Iraq posed no threat to the US, which is why they came up with some bogus expalantion as weapons of mass destruction... which we never found. On the other hand, we removed a ruthless dictator from office and have established a base form of stable democracy, which I think is a good thing, considering all well run countries perform on the basis of a form of democracy. It is a step in the right direction for Iraq. Regarding Afghanistan, there is still proof (or so they say) of Bin Laden's presence in Afghanistan. It is a matter of our countries security that we won't let be compromised again. If they want the US out of Afghanistan, then the Afghanistan citizens need to stop harboring terrorists and hand over Bin Laden. Until we have him in our grasp we aren't going to stop with the invasions all throughout the middle east. It's, once again, a very logical decision. The terrorism of our country over in Afghanistan (which is exactly what it is, the US are just as much terrorists over there as Bin Laden was over here) was triggered by an act of terrorism which resides within that country to the best of the general publics knowledge. As I said, the Israeli-Palestine conflict has been going on for literally centuries. They don't need a mediator, they need one of their own to handle their own business. When the war between the two countries gets large enough to provoke the big boys to come into play (and it likely won't anytime soon, if it were to inspire big boys to play we would have had a full fledged war already going on) where our countries national security becomes a concern, then I am sure the US will butt in and tell both countries to STFU.
That's the only sentence I want to correct. It's been going on for less then one century. Other then that I don't really want to get into a debate on this cause I might possibly be very biased about it.
Meant decades, however in either case the point stands true, they need to take care of their own issues.
The modern-day conflict (as in the one where Israel was actually a state) has only been going on for just over 60 years. The roots of the conflict, however, go back centuries. The Jews were removed from the Roman province of Palestine in AD70, I believe, something called a diaspora, or removal of a nation from its homeland. They were scattered from Europe to China because the Jews continued to create problems within the Empire. The Zionist movement comes along in the late 1800s and the Jews, who have a very strong sense of their history, felt that they would be able to return to what they saw as their homeland (they believe they were promised the land by God). When they returned to the land, they took land from Arabs who had been living there for hundreds of years; they had filled the gap the Jews left and, with Islam, now had a connection to the area. Neither side will compromise because of their respective religions. There lies the problem. Moderates on both sides are willing to compromise. However, the fundamentalists on either side will not. My main problem with US involvement with Israel is that Israel is the only case in history where we have used a religious text (the Bible/Torah) to justify a state's existence. If we were the Christian States of America, maybe I wouldn't have a problem with it (though I probably wouldn't live here, either). However, our Constitution guarantees something called the separation of church and state. In short, I don't believe we need to be using religion as an influence on our foreign policy. Unfortunately, I don't believe Obama will change this policy. The ----Israel lobby in America is very strong; more Jews live in the US than in all of Israel, and that's not even counting Christian fundamentalists who are ----Israel for their own reasons. Without a major f*ck you to lobbyists (and with that, the loss of any hope at re-election - what the vast majority of politicians, including Obama, have as their main goal in life), this policy will not change. Obama cannot successfully gain bipartisan support (which he needs) and drop our unwavering support of Israel at the same time (which is the right thing to do). The Founding Fathers are probably rolling in their graves over what politics has become. People like Ron Paul are trying to go back to the Constitution; the trend towards a welfare state will probably never allow this, unfortunately. I have absolutely no problem supporting Israel as a successful, stable democratic state (probably the only one in the region). I do have a problem with supporting it because religious lobbies force us to do so.
It's actually sometime between the 8 and 6th century BC that the Jewish Diaspora began. And considering that they were kicked out by Romans I can't see how that conflict has to do with the conflict they have today. Not saying that it has absolutely nothing to do with it, but it's not the beginnings of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. As for a successful, stable democratic state, Egypt is prolly as close to that as an Arab nation will get. Simply because of the fact that religion will always play a major factor in their governments. .:Edit:. For those that might think this is off-topic, this conflict is prolly the third biggest issue Obama will face as president, the first two being the Economy and Health-Care in that respective order.
I agree to the first and last paragraph, although I have a question for the middle one (Afghanistan). Do you even think Osama Bin Laden is still there? Why hasn't he appeared in the news for so long? Man it's just that no one even know is Osama is dead or alive, he could possibly be sitting in a CIA office right now either interrogating or being interrogated. Simple as that, the reason I believe America has laid its forces in Afghanistan until now is maybe for the Taleban. But all said and done, we don't know what really is going on over there.
The Middle East is the same war of power-faiths that comes back again and again. Its going to happen the inevitability of history to repeat itself is too great.
i think that he is going to be a good president even when he is AA the people didnt take care aobut it and now the frist president AA is coming up
I am assuming, and this is a stretch after digging through your ocean of butchered English and horrible grammar, that AA = African American. Honestly, I don't see the point of him being black as an issue in any way. It may have been part of the reason he was elected for some people, but it's not a major flaw in his ability to be president, nor is it an advantage. I just don't agree with a lot of his views on the way things should be run. He is an amazing speaker, that is a given, but; honestly, so was Hitler.
