(07-28-2024 08:21 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-28-2024 03:09 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-28-2024 03:03 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-28-2024 02:41 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-28-2024 12:58 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  It takes two to tango. No one knows what Israel is doing in the same vein. I’m more apt to believe Harris’ statement because the Israeli government’s support at home and abroad is plummeting and they view the US Republican Party as the group most likely to support them without conditions. At least, that’s my take on the situation.

It doesn’t make much sense for Harris to either flub or to intentionally deviate.

What does that even mean? If she flubbed, she flubbed. Maybe she isn’t being sensible. Surely she’s capable of error in your mind?

Of course she might have flubbed. Totally possible.

OTOH perhaps this was a calculated move endorsed by her foreign policy team and was in no way going off-script.

Some here seem to believe that second scenario is impossible.

Oh, I certainly believe that is possible. Is it also possible that their calculated move is a miscalculation? Is that an excuse for her - blame whoever wrote the script?

It’s also possible that the Israeli spokesman is the one going off script.

All we have are two competing narratives, yet some are declaring this a flub (OO in his initial post).

We have two competing narratives in every situation. I imagine the Japanese narrative about Pearl Harbor was a little different from FDR's.

Your competing narratives make it OK for Hamas to attack Israel. It makes the Russian viewpoint as good as the Ukrainian one. And worst for you, it makes Trump's viewpoint of the 2020 election as valid as the Democrats. Stolen elections - just two competing narratives.

(07-28-2024 10:20 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-28-2024 08:21 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-28-2024 03:09 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-28-2024 03:03 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-28-2024 02:41 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  What does that even mean? If she flubbed, she flubbed. Maybe she isn’t being sensible. Surely she’s capable of error in your mind?

Of course she might have flubbed. Totally possible.

OTOH perhaps this was a calculated move endorsed by her foreign policy team and was in no way going off-script.

Some here seem to believe that second scenario is impossible.

Oh, I certainly believe that is possible. Is it also possible that their calculated move is a miscalculation? Is that an excuse for her - blame whoever wrote the script?

It’s also possible that the Israeli spokesman is the one going off script.

All we have are two competing narratives, yet some are declaring this a flub (OO in his initial post).

We have two competing narratives in every situation. I imagine the Japanese narrative about Pearl Harbor was a little different from FDR's.

Your competing narratives make it OK for Hamas to attack Israel. It makes the Russian viewpoint as good as the Ukrainian one. And worst for you, it makes Trump's viewpoint of the 2020 election as valid as the Democrats. Stolen elections - just two competing narratives.

What is this gobbly goop? Absolutely astounding lack of understanding of these situations to compare a literal situation of he said-she said with a barbaric terrorist attack, an invasion, and a fraudulent election narrative.

Yes, to the simpletons every situation has two sides that are equally valid.

(07-28-2024 08:21 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-28-2024 03:09 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-28-2024 03:03 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-28-2024 02:41 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-28-2024 12:58 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  It takes two to tango. No one knows what Israel is doing in the same vein. I’m more apt to believe Harris’ statement because the Israeli government’s support at home and abroad is plummeting and they view the US Republican Party as the group most likely to support them without conditions. At least, that’s my take on the situation.

It doesn’t make much sense for Harris to either flub or to intentionally deviate.

What does that even mean? If she flubbed, she flubbed. Maybe she isn’t being sensible. Surely she’s capable of error in your mind?

Of course she might have flubbed. Totally possible.

OTOH perhaps this was a calculated move endorsed by her foreign policy team and was in no way going off-script.

Some here seem to believe that second scenario is impossible.

Oh, I certainly believe that is possible. Is it also possible that their calculated move is a miscalculation? Is that an excuse for her - blame whoever wrote the script?

It’s also possible that the Israeli spokesman is the one going off script.

All we have are two competing narratives, yet some are declaring this a flub (OO in his initial post).

My narrative: I find it very difficult to believe that Netanyahu agreed to have his policies and positions publicly criticized by the Vice-President, and that he and his staff are so disconnected on the issue that they wouldn't know what he agreed to. I do not believe they would accuse the Vice-President of being a liar and backstabber as part of an agreement with her - they would not have done that unless genuinely offended.

Your narrative: Blue Team can do no wrong and must be defended. Harris has her stuff together and she and her advisors operate smoothly and without error - despite four years of evidence to the contrary.

(07-29-2024 07:17 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-28-2024 08:21 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-28-2024 03:09 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-28-2024 03:03 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-28-2024 02:41 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  What does that even mean? If she flubbed, she flubbed. Maybe she isn’t being sensible. Surely she’s capable of error in your mind?

Of course she might have flubbed. Totally possible.

OTOH perhaps this was a calculated move endorsed by her foreign policy team and was in no way going off-script.

Some here seem to believe that second scenario is impossible.

Oh, I certainly believe that is possible. Is it also possible that their calculated move is a miscalculation? Is that an excuse for her - blame whoever wrote the script?

It’s also possible that the Israeli spokesman is the one going off script.

All we have are two competing narratives, yet some are declaring this a flub (OO in his initial post).

My narrative: I find it very difficult to believe that Netanyahu agreed to have his policies and positions publicly criticized by the Vice-President, and that he and his staff are so disconnected on the issue that they wouldn't know what he agreed to. I do not believe they would accuse the Vice-President of being a liar and backstabber as part of an agreement with her - they would not have done that unless genuinely offended.

Your narrative: Blue Team can do no wrong and must be defended. Harris has her stuff together and she and her advisors operate smoothly and without error - despite four years of evidence to the contrary.

Your narrative: Blue Team can do no right.

Good job using half your brain in this conversation, ya dingus. Shoulda known you had no desire to actually discuss this without stopping to that tired and overused fall back.

(07-29-2024 08:12 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-29-2024 07:17 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-28-2024 08:21 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-28-2024 03:09 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-28-2024 03:03 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  Of course she might have flubbed. Totally possible.

OTOH perhaps this was a calculated move endorsed by her foreign policy team and was in no way going off-script.

Some here seem to believe that second scenario is impossible.

Oh, I certainly believe that is possible. Is it also possible that their calculated move is a miscalculation? Is that an excuse for her - blame whoever wrote the script?

It’s also possible that the Israeli spokesman is the one going off script.

All we have are two competing narratives, yet some are declaring this a flub (OO in his initial post).

My narrative: I find it very difficult to believe that Netanyahu agreed to have his policies and positions publicly criticized by the Vice-President, and that he and his staff are so disconnected on the issue that they wouldn't know what he agreed to. I do not believe they would accuse the Vice-President of being a liar and backstabber as part of an agreement with her - they would not have done that unless genuinely offended.

Your narrative: Blue Team can do no wrong and must be defended. Harris has her stuff together and she and her advisors operate smoothly and without error - despite four years of evidence to the contrary.

Your narrative: Blue Team can do no right.

Good job using half your brain in this conversation, ya dingus. Shoulda known you had no desire to actually discuss this without stopping to that tired and overused fall back.

Your narrative: Resort to ad-hominum

My narrative: Blue team does a few things right, but does most things wrong due to short-sighted goals.

One good example of a short-sighted goal was Harris's need to placate the far left of her party by backstabbing Netanyahu. Any short term political gain from the Squad et al is more than offset by the long term loss of confidence our allies have in the USA.

another opinion

Coughlin, who currently serves as the Daily Telegraph’s Defense and Foreign Affairs Editor, pointed to Harris’ “less-than-impressive treatment this week of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his visit to Washington”

(07-29-2024 09:14 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  another opinion

Coughlin, who currently serves as the Daily Telegraph’s Defense and Foreign Affairs Editor, pointed to Harris’ “less-than-impressive treatment this week of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his visit to Washington”

Like you and I, Coughlin just doesn't understand. Harris only seems to be clumsy and inept - she's actually a master of diplomacy. Who but a diplomatic genius could have convinced another world leader to allow himself to be insulted in public as part of a greater plan?

(07-29-2024 08:48 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-29-2024 08:12 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-29-2024 07:17 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-28-2024 08:21 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-28-2024 03:09 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  Oh, I certainly believe that is possible. Is it also possible that their calculated move is a miscalculation? Is that an excuse for her - blame whoever wrote the script?

It’s also possible that the Israeli spokesman is the one going off script.

All we have are two competing narratives, yet some are declaring this a flub (OO in his initial post).

My narrative: I find it very difficult to believe that Netanyahu agreed to have his policies and positions publicly criticized by the Vice-President, and that he and his staff are so disconnected on the issue that they wouldn't know what he agreed to. I do not believe they would accuse the Vice-President of being a liar and backstabber as part of an agreement with her - they would not have done that unless genuinely offended.

Your narrative: Blue Team can do no wrong and must be defended. Harris has her stuff together and she and her advisors operate smoothly and without error - despite four years of evidence to the contrary.

Your narrative: Blue Team can do no right.

Good job using half your brain in this conversation, ya dingus. Shoulda known you had no desire to actually discuss this without stopping to that tired and overused fall back.

Your narrative: Resort to ad-hominum

You threw the first stone by your insulting interpretation of my posts.

Like I said in an earlier post about this topic, it takes two to tango.

(07-29-2024 09:49 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-29-2024 08:48 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-29-2024 08:12 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-29-2024 07:17 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-28-2024 08:21 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  It’s also possible that the Israeli spokesman is the one going off script.

All we have are two competing narratives, yet some are declaring this a flub (OO in his initial post).

My narrative: I find it very difficult to believe that Netanyahu agreed to have his policies and positions publicly criticized by the Vice-President, and that he and his staff are so disconnected on the issue that they wouldn't know what he agreed to. I do not believe they would accuse the Vice-President of being a liar and backstabber as part of an agreement with her - they would not have done that unless genuinely offended.

Your narrative: Blue Team can do no wrong and must be defended. Harris has her stuff together and she and her advisors operate smoothly and without error - despite four years of evidence to the contrary.

Your narrative: Blue Team can do no right.

Good job using half your brain in this conversation, ya dingus. Shoulda known you had no desire to actually discuss this without stopping to that tired and overused fall back.

Your narrative: Resort to ad-hominum

You threw the first stone by your insulting interpretation of my posts.

Like I said in an earlier post about this topic, it takes two to tango.

I've been reading your posts for a few years now. You invariably defend every word and action of Blue Team politicians. I don't recall ever reading a post from you in which you acknowledge, in any way, any failure or shortcoming of theirs. For that matter I have never once read an admission from you that you were mistaken.

It's not ad-hominem if it's a correct description of the individual. And, I have never called you "dingus". On the contrary, I believe you are very intelligent and very well-informed, which is why I deem it worthwhile to call you on your fanaticism and inflexibility as not becoming you or the level of discourse on this discussion board. If I actually thought you a dingus, I would not bother.

(07-29-2024 09:49 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-29-2024 08:48 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-29-2024 08:12 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-29-2024 07:17 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-28-2024 08:21 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  It’s also possible that the Israeli spokesman is the one going off script.

All we have are two competing narratives, yet some are declaring this a flub (OO in his initial post).

My narrative: I find it very difficult to believe that Netanyahu agreed to have his policies and positions publicly criticized by the Vice-President, and that he and his staff are so disconnected on the issue that they wouldn't know what he agreed to. I do not believe they would accuse the Vice-President of being a liar and backstabber as part of an agreement with her - they would not have done that unless genuinely offended.

Your narrative: Blue Team can do no wrong and must be defended. Harris has her stuff together and she and her advisors operate smoothly and without error - despite four years of evidence to the contrary.

Your narrative: Blue Team can do no right.

Good job using half your brain in this conversation, ya dingus. Shoulda known you had no desire to actually discuss this without stopping to that tired and overused fall back.

Your narrative: Resort to ad-hominum

You threw the first stone by your insulting interpretation of my posts.

Like I said in an earlier post about this topic, it takes two to tango.

One leads, one follows. Which are you?

war crimes?

Four days after Biden stepped aside as the nominee, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivered an address to Congress, which Harris did not attend due to scheduling conflicts. Instead, the vice president met separately with Netanyahu at the White House later in the week.

After meeting with the Israeli leader, Harris vowed not "to be silent" about suffering in Gaza, saying she expressed "serious concerns" to Netanyahu during their meeting.


But her tone, which Republicans have seized on as being anti-Israel, has also not gone far enough for pro-Palestinian demonstrators, who have turned their focus to the vice president, and argue that she was just as complicit in Israel's military actions as Biden is.

I guess her attempt to cover both sides didn't work.

(07-29-2024 09:14 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  another opinion

Coughlin, who currently serves as the Daily Telegraph’s Defense and Foreign Affairs Editor, pointed to Harris’ “less-than-impressive treatment this week of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his visit to Washington”

Another opinion:

https://www.indiatoday.in/world/europe/s...2012-12-08

"Dealing with the controversial issues of Middle East peace, Coughlin has attracted criticism. He maintains that his critics are politically motivated, while his critics allege that Coughlin places political agenda above accuracy."

Lots of opinions on the internet from which to pick and choose...

(07-29-2024 11:33 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-29-2024 09:14 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  another opinion

Coughlin, who currently serves as the Daily Telegraph’s Defense and Foreign Affairs Editor, pointed to Harris’ “less-than-impressive treatment this week of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his visit to Washington”

Another opinion:

https://www.indiatoday.in/world/europe/s...2012-12-08

"Dealing with the controversial issues of Middle East peace, Coughlin has attracted criticism. He maintains that his critics are politically motivated, while his critics allege that Coughlin places political agenda above accuracy."

Lots of opinions on the internet from which to pick and choose...

I don't for one moment believe that you give them all equal weight and consider them all to be equally credible. I, for one, do not hesitate to find Coughlin much more believable than an anonymous article in India Today. How about you?

(07-29-2024 09:22 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-29-2024 09:14 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  another opinion

Coughlin, who currently serves as the Daily Telegraph’s Defense and Foreign Affairs Editor, pointed to Harris’ “less-than-impressive treatment this week of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his visit to Washington”

Like you and I, Coughlin just doesn't understand. Harris only seems to be clumsy and inept - she's actually a master of diplomacy. Who but a diplomatic genius could have convinced another world leader to allow himself to be insulted in public as part of a greater plan?

Insult?

What was the insult?
1) I have concerns about the civilian casualties taking place and I won't stay silent about them?

or

2) A cease-fire needs to happen.

Which of those is an insult?

Or perhaps the idea that Harris was stronger with her words in the press conference that she was in the closed-door meetings? Was that the "insult"?" If so, you have to be convinced that the Israeli spokesman's words were completely accurate and was not an attempt to save face when their hopes of getting a rubber-stamp on the war was not provided? Who knows?

(07-29-2024 11:36 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-29-2024 11:33 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-29-2024 09:14 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  another opinion

Coughlin, who currently serves as the Daily Telegraph’s Defense and Foreign Affairs Editor, pointed to Harris’ “less-than-impressive treatment this week of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his visit to Washington”

Another opinion:

https://www.indiatoday.in/world/europe/s...2012-12-08

"Dealing with the controversial issues of Middle East peace, Coughlin has attracted criticism. He maintains that his critics are politically motivated, while his critics allege that Coughlin places political agenda above accuracy."

Lots of opinions on the internet from which to pick and choose...

I don't for one moment believe that you give them all equal weight and consider them all to be equally credible.

Sure... but I'm positive if I cared enough I could find plenty of left-leaning journalists who were supportive of her comments re: the Netanyahu meeting. Just like a right-leaning journalist was critical of her comments.

(07-29-2024 11:11 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  war crimes?

Four days after Biden stepped aside as the nominee, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivered an address to Congress, which Harris did not attend due to scheduling conflicts. Instead, the vice president met separately with Netanyahu at the White House later in the week.

After meeting with the Israeli leader, Harris vowed not "to be silent" about suffering in Gaza, saying she expressed "serious concerns" to Netanyahu during their meeting.


But her tone, which Republicans have seized on as being anti-Israel, has also not gone far enough for pro-Palestinian demonstrators, who have turned their focus to the vice president, and argue that she was just as complicit in Israel's military actions as Biden is.

I guess her attempt to cover both sides didn't work.

Hahahaha. I guess there is no winning when it comes to this issue. What would Trump do in this situation which would make both sides happy?

(07-29-2024 11:40 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-29-2024 11:11 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  war crimes?

Four days after Biden stepped aside as the nominee, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivered an address to Congress, which Harris did not attend due to scheduling conflicts. Instead, the vice president met separately with Netanyahu at the White House later in the week.

After meeting with the Israeli leader, Harris vowed not "to be silent" about suffering in Gaza, saying she expressed "serious concerns" to Netanyahu during their meeting.


But her tone, which Republicans have seized on as being anti-Israel, has also not gone far enough for pro-Palestinian demonstrators, who have turned their focus to the vice president, and argue that she was just as complicit in Israel's military actions as Biden is.

I guess her attempt to cover both sides didn't work.

Hahahaha. I guess there is no winning when it comes to this issue. What would Trump do in this situation which would make both sides happy?

Yes, WADABOUT Trump?

(07-29-2024 11:50 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-29-2024 11:40 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-29-2024 11:11 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  war crimes?

Four days after Biden stepped aside as the nominee, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivered an address to Congress, which Harris did not attend due to scheduling conflicts. Instead, the vice president met separately with Netanyahu at the White House later in the week.

After meeting with the Israeli leader, Harris vowed not "to be silent" about suffering in Gaza, saying she expressed "serious concerns" to Netanyahu during their meeting.


But her tone, which Republicans have seized on as being anti-Israel, has also not gone far enough for pro-Palestinian demonstrators, who have turned their focus to the vice president, and argue that she was just as complicit in Israel's military actions as Biden is.

I guess her attempt to cover both sides didn't work.

Hahahaha. I guess there is no winning when it comes to this issue. What would Trump do in this situation which would make both sides happy?

Yes, WADABOUT Trump?

Not a WADABOUT as typically used on this forum. That usually means "OK, but look at this bad thing that YOUR person did!"

That's not what I did. I implied that taking a position on the Middle East was an unwinnable situation and wondered what he thought Trump would do in this situation that would be better. You know... like having a discussion as to what the better options were for an issue that we are discussing.

(07-29-2024 11:37 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-29-2024 09:22 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-29-2024 09:14 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  another opinion

Coughlin, who currently serves as the Daily Telegraph’s Defense and Foreign Affairs Editor, pointed to Harris’ “less-than-impressive treatment this week of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his visit to Washington”

Like you and I, Coughlin just doesn't understand. Harris only seems to be clumsy and inept - she's actually a master of diplomacy. Who but a diplomatic genius could have convinced another world leader to allow himself to be insulted in public as part of a greater plan?

Insult?

What was the insult?
1) I have concerns about the civilian casualties taking place and I won't stay silent about them?

or

2) A cease-fire needs to happen.

Which of those is an insult?

Or perhaps the idea that Harris was stronger with her words in the press conference that she was in the closed-door meetings? Was that the "insult"?" If so, you have to be convinced that the Israeli spokesman's words were completely accurate and was not an attempt to save face when their hopes of getting a rubber-stamp on the war was not provided? Who knows?

Yes, Netanyahu is insulted that he's not getting the possible future President's backing. Maybe that's his tough luck if Harris is in the right... only, it goes a little beyond that. She leaves a private meeting to do some grandstanding in front of the media at Netanyahu's expense, and don't forget that's after she snubbed him at his appearance before Congress to score points with anti-Israel voters.