I've admired Obama sticking to the "one president at a time" mantra, but now I think he needs to speak out on the Israel/Gaza situation.
The problem is that nobody really seems to know what his position might be or how sympathetic he will be toward Israel, one of our own allies. There is one school of thought that suggests that Israel went ahead and retaliated against Hamas now because George Bush is still in office and they KNOW where he stands. In his Saturday radio address, President Bush said, "Since Hamas' violent takeover in the summer of 2007, living conditions have worsened for Palestinians in Gaza. By spending its resources on rocket launchers instead of roads and schools, Hamas has demonstrated that it has no intention of serving the Palestinian people."
He also said, "America's objectives in the Middle East will remain clear: We seek security and peace for our allies, the free people of Israel. For the Palestinian people, we seek a peaceful and democratic Palestinian state that serves its citizens and respects its neighbors. For all in the region, we seek an end to terror."
The blathering fools on HuffPo make me crazy in their criticism of Israel. Do they think that the people of Israel should just accept the 6400 rockets that have been launched at them over the past three years and do nothing? Diana West, author of The Death of the Grown-Up: How America's Arrested Development is Bringing Down Western Civilization, has an excellent analysis of the situation, the most poignant point being that the only grievance Hamas has is the very existence of Israel.
The Middle East situation has been screwed up forever, but right now, at this point in time, it seems to me that Mr. Obama would do well to make his position known; something beyond the soft platitudes he has issued so far. "One president at a time" has been the proper stance until now; now the world is actually looking to Obama to offer America's vision of "hope and change" for the Middle East.
(Image credit: weblogcartoons.com)