If Obama "could" speak out on the Gaza bloodbath...questions I can't ignore...

If Obama "could" speak out now on the Gaza situation, what would he say? Could it make a difference?

Could it save lives?

This is what I wonder when I read the threads about him being bound to silence on the issue - where there are mass killings on a daily basis - out of a sense of tradition and protocol. I know he becomes president on Jan. 20, but, the question to me it seems, is: is there something he could say or do now to slow or stop the killing? The next question must be: if so, then how could he not be compelled to do so?

So would it? Could it? Could anything he were to say now affect the situation. Could it make a difference? What kind of difference?

And what would he say?

And if there's nothing he can say now, then what plan does he have for dealing with this on Jan. 21?

What will he say, or do, then?








I have no answers for these questions, yet they are pretty clear and consistent. And I hope I'm not labeled for this last statement, but I must say, it does seem hard to remain silent while people die. And I'm referring to many of our leaders, going many years back.

but let's say Obama were to come out and condemn the extensive bombing and the lack of any talks, exactly what power does he have behind him as the "President Elect"?

One thing is guaranteed *, the media and everyone would say that Obama has no right to make political statements on behalf of the US until Jan 20th.

It is a good question: Could he save lives by speaking out now?

I'm sure he considers that question, carefully.

OTOH, could it cost lives were he to speak out now?

I figure he knows he has been caught in a box by bushco. As soon as he is free of that box, come Jan. 20, then he can speak with the ultimate authority and also take actions that will control the consequences of his words.

As it is now, he can't control any of the consequences of his words as it pertains to this matter.

When Obama becomes president, then he'll show Israel a thing or two!

Ask me after Jan 21.

Absent the flippant attitudes, especially when innocents are dying horrible deaths, we are all just working out the details.

I am sure Obama is doing the same.

He couldn't be more tolerant of Israel and harsher toward the Palestinians than Bush is. But he must not be that far from Bush with regard to the current Israeli action. Obama is under no compulsion to hold his tongue. If he was vastly different from Bush, he would say so. If he's a bit different, then he may as well just let Bush take the heat. When Obama becomes president, after 2 more weeks of this, there will be a ceasefire, and he'll move on to trying to do what makes sense in the future. But if you look at Obama's team and his previous statements, you could guess that he'll be fairly close to how Bill Clinton was with respect to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He's not going to be like Cynthia McKinney.

Clinton was on the verge of getting real peace there. But Bush, in the 2000 campaign, told Israel to hold off until he was elected, and Israel listened. They held off. Pissed me off, bigtime.

I think you're pretty much on the right track here. If nothing else, I think he can be depended on to at least DEAL with it somewhat, unlike the absolute and pathetic neglect the Bush Administration displayed at its onset.

Sigh.

why are we not asking for Obamas statement about the Nigerian massacres in December. Or the 400 people killed in Congo last week?

I cannot understand why Palestinian deaths are more important than any other deaths.

But to your point, there is nothing he could say that would stop whats going on now. If anything, him speaking could have the reverse effect.

of course and apparently few care if every soul in Africa is murdered, dies of thirst, starves, or falls off from disease.

It's way cooler to get behind the protest population that has terrorism as state policy.

Don't forget, the Israel Lobby and their sycophants in the US, share the blame with Bush in selling the Iraq War to the public.

supports our ally Israel. I'm not sure where anyone has gotten the idea that he will do anything else. Really. Read his statements over the past year or so. There will be no deviation from our policies as they have been. I'm sure he will attempt diplomacy to help calm the situation as it is now and may even begin a peace process, but the new President is a supporter of Israel. As he should be..

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

This is not World War Two we're talking about here.

This is, quite simply, the most dangerous thing happening to the human race at this moment. Minding his manners and respecting the Constitution and the spirit of the law by not speaking out and muddying the waters is the right thing to do, whether it's being done for this reason or not.

A few moments of celebration and ceremony are also in order, but he and they need to speak out immediately and move decisively on this or they're the field-playing wafflers I've repeatedly accused them of being. It must be made perfectly clear just what their position is or they don't understand the concept of leadership and responsibility. For real.

They've been dealt a truly shitty hand with the state of the world today, but they wanted the gig, and it's not like it isn't amply advertised as difficult.

It is quite obvious how people project their opinions and prejudices upon this group in this temporary vacuum, but the page is turning and the quality of leadership and the true allegiances at play will be pretty obvious come sundown on day 2 or so of the administration.

project that I've been advocating for the past few years. Surely it will be an expensive project, but I think the world will be better off for it.

Obama will continue the great tradition of the Democratic Party and join all Democratic presidents since Harry Truman in expressing his full support for the State of Israel. I can't wait to see the reaction at DU when that happens.