現在地 HOME > 掲示板
> 戦争57 > 1318.html
★阿修羅♪
|
現在地 HOME > 掲示板
> 戦争57 > 1318.html
★阿修羅♪
|
|
| Tweet |
Bush or Kerry: Who's better on the Middle East?
ブッシュまたはケリー:誰が中東でよりよいですか。 （ロボット翻訳）
With the U.S. presidential election less than 100 days away and polls showing many key states too close to call, the major parties are courting the Jewish vote as never before.
多くのキー状態をあまりにも接近して示?ｷので、呼ぶことができない米国の大統領選挙、および投票が100日未満離れたまま、大政党はユダヤ人の投票を求めています、として、決してない、の前に。
George W. Bush and John Kerry have spared no opportunity to voice support for the Jewish state, even at the risk of alienating Muslim voters.
ジョージ・W.ブッシュとジョン・ケリーは、イスラム教の投票者の疎外の危険を冒してさえ、ユダヤ人の状態の音声支援への機会を節約していません。
For its part, Israel is formally neutral. But some officials have hinted otherwise, notably Deputy Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, quoted as telling the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations that he didn't know who would win, but that he preferred Bush.
自分としては、イスラエルが形式的に中立です。しかし、何人かの職員はそうでなければ顕著に暗示しました、Ehud Olmert副首相、主なアメリカのユダヤ人の構成の社長の会議で述べることとして引用された、彼は、誰が勝つだろうか知りませんでした、しかし、彼がブッシュを好んだ。
The Kerry camp fears Bush’s relationship with Ariel Sharon could cut deeply into solidly Democratic voting patterns in crucial states.
ケリー・キャンプはBush’を心配します;エールエル・シャロンとのs関係は、重大な状態の徹底的に民主党の投票形式へ深く切断することができました。
Would John Kerry do a better job of breathing life into Middle East peacemaking? Would a victorious Bush adopt different policies on Israel and the Palestinians if he no longer had to worry about re-election? How much of a factor should Israel be, when American Jews go to the polls?
ジョン・ケリーは、中東和解に生気を吹きこむよりよい仕事を行うでしょうか。もし彼が再選についてもはや心配する必要がなければ、勝利のブッシュは、イスラエルおよびパレスチナ人に関する異なる政策を採用するでしょうか。ユダヤ系アメリカ人が投票へ行く場合、イスラエルは要因のいくらでなければなりませんか。
What you think
あなたが思うこと
The question is: Who's better on the Middle East? The question is not: Who's better for Israel? But reading the many responses you've received so far, one would think that it is, in fact, that latter. Confusing Israel for the totality of Middle East is a reflection of the narrow-minded and bigoted mentality to which Bush appeals. To answer the question: Kerry is better for the Middle East. Kerry is better for America. Kerry is better for the world. Just look at what Bush and Sharon have given the world.
その質問は次のとおりです:誰が中東でよりよいですか。その質問は次のとおりではありません:誰がイスラエルにとってよりよいですか。しかし、これまで受け取った多くのレスポンスを読んで、人は、それが実際それほど後であると考えるでしょう。中東の全体性のための混乱させるイスラエルはブッシュが訴える偏狭で頑固な知能の現れです。質問に答えること:ケリーは中東にはよりよい。ケリーはアメリカにはよりよい。ケリーは世界にはよりよい。ブッシュとシャロンが世界を与えたものをただ見てください。
Lawrence Guerra, Brooklyn, United States of America
ローレンスGuerra、 ブルックリン、 アメリカ合衆国
Bush made a courageous and unpopular first step to change the Middle East. Iraq is no longer under a totalitarian who killed thousands of his own citizens.
ブッシュは、中東を変更する勇敢で不人気な最初の一歩を踏み出しました。イラクは、何千もの自分の市民を殺した全体主義者の下にもはやありません。
Uri Kelman, Houston, United States of America
Uri Kelman、 ヒューストン、 アメリカ合衆国
Bush is the first American president who made a courageous and unpopular first step to create an historical change in the Middle East. Iraq is no longer under a totalitarian who killed thousands of his own citizens.
ブッシュは中東で歴史的変化を作成する勇敢で不人気な最初の一歩を踏み出した初代のAmerican大統領です。イラクは、何千もの自分の市民を殺した全体主義者の下にもはやありません。
Peace in the Middle East is a long process and not an overnight miracle as people (mostly in Europe) may expect. Kerry does not have the will and the foresight to risk American lives for the sake of global peace. He would let the biased UN make the crucial decisions.
中東の平和は長いプロセスです、そしてない、人々(ほとんどヨーロッパ中の)としての一夜の奇跡は予期するかもしれません。ケリーは意志を持っていません。また、Americanを危くする先見は世界平和のために生きています。彼はよく偏見的である国連に重大な決定を下させました。
Uri Kelman, Houston, United States of America
Uri Kelman、 ヒューストン、 アメリカ合衆国
When American Jews and supporters of Israel go to the polls in November, they have to consider one issue essential to Israel. Who will support the defensive barrier that Israel is building? Sadly, the barrier is Israel's future.
イスラエルのユダヤ系アメリカ人および支持者が11月に投票へ行く場合、それらはイスラエルにとって不可欠な1つの問題について熟慮しなければなりません。誰がイスラエルが構築している防衛の障壁を支援するでしょうか。悲しんで、障壁はイスラエルの将来です。
Bush has a proven record of supporting the barrier. He has vetoed every UN Security Counsel resolution condemning it. Kerry appears to be an appeaser of Europe and the UN. Remember, Kerry was against the fence until it became the progressive liberal Democratic stance to be against the ROUTE of the fence. Now that we are closer to the elections Kerry says that he unconditionally supports the fence.
ブッシュは、障壁を支援する、証明されたレコードを持っています。彼は、それを非難するすべての国連セキュリティ相談解決を拒否しました。ケリーは、ヨーロッパおよび国連のなだめる人であるように見えます。フェンスのROUTEに反対するために進歩的な自由主義者の民主党のスタンスになるまで、ケリーがフェンスに反対したことを覚えておいてください。私たちが今選挙に接近しているので、ケリーは、彼が無条件にフェンスを支援すると言います。
We need unwavering support for Israel and Bush has proven that he is willing to go against the odds and support Israel unconditionally.
私たちは、イスラエルの確固たる支援を必要とします。また、ブッシュは、彼が喜んで強い抵抗にもかかわらず行きイスラエルを無条件に支援することを証明しました。
Morgan Edelboim, Aventura, United States of America
モーガンEdelboim、 Aventura、 アメリカ合衆国
As leaders change in the USA or Israel, no matter what they promise to their constituents, the reality of the situation makes them do what is needed. Sharon is an example.
それらが有権者に何を約束しても、リーダーはアメリカかイスラエルが変化するとともに、状況の現実はそれらに必要なことを行わせます。シャロンは例です。
Why should America change leaders and why should Israel have to wait for a new president to learn what needs to be done? Bush needs to stay where he is.
なぜアメリカはリーダーを変更しなければなりませんか。また、なぜイスラエルは、新大統領が何が終わる必要があるか知るのを待たなければならなくなければなりませんか。彼がそうである場合、ブッシュはとどまる必要があります。
Paul Sherbow, Kiryat Yam, Israel
ポールSherbow、 Kiryatヤムイモ、 イスラエル
It seems the question has been changed into: who's better for Israel?
質問が次のものに変更されたように見えます:誰がイスラエルにとってよりよいですか。
Margit Samawi, Amman, Jordan
Margit Samawi、 アンマン、 ヨルダン
It seems the question has been changed into: who's better for Israel? There are other people living in the Middle East, whose concerns should also be addressed.
質問が次のものに変更されたように見えます:誰がイスラエルにとってよりよいですか。他の人々(その関係はアドレスされるべきである)が中東で暮らしています。
The Zionist movement sprung from the realization that the Jewish people needed an independent state with defined borders to solve the "Jewish problem" in the diaspora. By attempting to solve the Jewish problem, the Palestinian problem was created.
シオン主義の移動は、伝播中の「ユダヤ人の問題」を解決するために、ユダヤ人の人々が定義された境界を持った独立国を必要としたという認識から生じていました。ユダヤ人の問題を解決することを試みることによって、パレスチナの問題は引き起こされました。
The US has never been a "fair" mediator here. Its policies are always heavily biased in favor of Israel, and I do not see any difference between Bush and Kerry in this respect.
米国はここで「公平な」仲裁人ではありませんでした。その政策は、常に極度にイスラエルに対して好意を抱きます。また、Iは、この点でブッシュとケリーの間の差を見い出しません。
The conflict can only be solved by Israel and the Palestinians themselves. Israel has to recognize that the Palestinians have the same rights that Israelis claim for themselves: to live in freedom and dignity in a viable state with defined borders. And just as Israel recognized after the establishment of the Jewish state that it needed to dismantle its terror organizations once that goal was reached, so will the Palestinians.
イスラエルおよびパレスチナ人彼ら自身は矛盾を単に解決することができます。イスラエルは、パレスチナ人が、イスラエル人が自分に対して要求するのと同じ権利を持っていることを認識しなければなりません:自由、および定義された境界を持った実行可能な状態の尊厳に住んでいること。またちょうど一旦そのゴールが到達したならばそれがその恐怖組織を分解する必要があることをイスラエルがユダヤ人の状態の設立の後に認識したとともに、したがって、するだろう、パレスチナ人。
Margit Samawi, Amman, Jordan
Margit Samawi、 アンマン、 ヨルダン
I hope that when my Arab and Jewish friends, neighbors and fellow citizens go to the polls, their first concern will be which candidate will be better for America, not the Middle East. What Israeli voter would go to the polls thinking, "Which candidate would be better for America?" It is up to the nations of the Middle East to shape and implement a lasting peace plan, not us. While I would be proud for my nation to take part in supporting such a historic process, our first concern as Americans must be to preserve and defend peace and prosperity in this amazing nation of our own, where Arabs and Jews live side by side in peace, with equal rights and equal treatment under the law.
私は、私のアラビア人とユダヤ人の友達、隣人および同胞が投票へ行く時、彼らの最初の関係が、どの候補が中東ではなくアメリカにはよりよいだろうかであることを望みます。投票思考に行くどんなイスラエルの有権者、「どの候補はアメリカにはよりよいでしょうか。」永続する和平案を形作りインプリメントするために、それは、私たちではなく中東の国家の責任です。一方、私、そのような歴史的なプロセスを支援する際に参加する私の国家にとって誇れるだろう、アメリカ人としての私たちの最初の関係、私達のもののこの驚くべき国家の中の平和および繁栄を保ち防御するためにあるに違いない、どこで、アラビア人およびユダヤ人、並んで平和に住んでいる、法則の下の平等な権利および等しい処理で。
Brian Corliss, Portland, United States of America
ブライアンCorliss、 ポートランド、 アメリカ合衆国
To me, this is a no-brainer. Kerry has stated that he wants the aid of Europe and the UN. All of these organizations are against Israel and for the Arabs, Hamas, the PA, and all the other anti-Semitic factions. They constantly condemn Israel and act as if Israel is the aggressor. By doing so, they encourage these groups to commit more violence. President Bush supports Israel and understands that old Europe is on the side of the Islamo-fascists currently at war with not only the Christians, Jews, and Western civilization, but every bit of progress past the 800s.
私にとって、これは簡単な話です。Kerryは、彼がヨーロッパの援助および国連を望むと述べました。これらの組織はすべてイスラエルおよびアラビア人、ハマス、PAおよび他のすべての反ユダヤの党派のためにに反対します。あたかもイスラエルが侵略者かのように、それらは絶えずイスラエルと行為を非難します。そうすることによって、それらは、より多くの暴力を犯すようにこれらのグループを促進します。ブッシュ大統領はイスラエルを支援し、古いヨーロッパが戦争中にIslamoファシストの側に現在あると理解します、で、だけでなく、クリスチャン、ユダヤ人および西洋文明、しかし800年代を過ぎた進行のすべてのビット。
Darryl Brown, Shreveport, United States of America
ダリル・ブラウン、 シュリーヴポート、 アメリカ合衆国
Once [Kerry] sits in the oval office, the realities of global terrorism will oblige him to pick up from where Bush left off in foreign policy even at the cost of leaving the liberals who voted for him feeling betrayed.
一旦[ケリー]が楕円形のオフィスで座れば、グローバルテロリズムの現実は彼に取ることを強いるでしょう、から上昇して、どこで、彼のために裏切られた感覚を決定した自由主義者を残すことを犠牲にしてさえ外交政策の中にやめられたブッシュ。
Mike Psylakis, Athens, Greece
マイクPsylakis、 アテネ、 ギリシア
The current situation in the Middle East does not leave room for much creativity. There's one approach to global terrorism, and that's dealing with it. If Kerry seems weaker and more anti-war, it's probably because he wants the voting power of the liberal left. But once he sits in the oval office, the realities of global terrorism will oblige him to pick up from where Bush left off in foreign policy even at the cost of leaving the liberals who voted for him feeling betrayed. Therefore, I believe the outcome of the election will have little effect on Middle East and Israel.
中東の現在の状況は多くの創造性に余地を残しません。グローバルテロリズムへの1つのアプローチがあります。また、それはそれに対処しています。ケリーがより弱く見えて、より多くの物が反戦う場合、彼が豊富な左の投票権を望むので、それは恐らくあります。しかし、一旦彼が楕円形のオフィスで座れば、グローバルテロリズムの現実は彼に取ることを強いるでしょう、から上昇して、どこで、彼のために裏切られた感覚を決定した自由主義者を残すことを犠牲にしてさえ外交政策の中にやめられたブッシュ。したがって、私は、選挙の結果が中東とイスラエルに効果がほとんどないだろうと信じます。
Mike Psylakis, Athens, Greece
マイクPsylakis、 アテネ、 ギリシア
The Story of Purim may shed some light on this question: Do we say that Achasverosh was a "good King for the Jews"? No! He was a fool and an opportunist. He came to power in an underhanded and forceful way and tried to gain legitimacy on the merit of others. Sound familiar? Achasverosh was easily swayed by personal gain. It did not matter to him what the consequences of any actions were. He didn't do anything for the Jews. He acted passively and allowed them to do "according to their desires of the day". He had no moral compass, expressed no regrets or had any creative programs to promote world peace. The parallels between Bush and the king are eerily similar. One last thing .. Laura Bush is no Esther!
プリム祭の話はこの質問をあるに明確にするかもしれません:私たちは、Achasveroshがユダヤ人にとって「よいキング」だったと言いますか。いいえ!彼は馬鹿および日和見主義者でした。彼は秘密で強力な方法で政権を握り、他のものの長所上の合法性を獲得しようとしました。音親友?Achasveroshは、個人の利得によって容易に動かされました。任意のアクションの結果は何だったかということは彼にとって重要ではありませんでした。彼はユダヤ人のために何もしませんでした。彼は受け身で行動し、「その日というそれらの望みによって」それらが行うことを認めました。彼はモラルコンパスを持っておらず、遺憾の意を表しなかったか、世界平和を促進するどんな創造的なプログラムもありました。ブッシュと王の間の平行は不気味に類似しています。最後の1つのもの..ローラ・ブッシュはエスターではありません!
Donn Gross, Cladwell, United States of America
Donnグロ、 Cladwell、 アメリカ合衆国
"Bush and the Christian fundamentalists are not real friends of the Jewish people." Delores Dee. This is perverted and terribly wrong. Christian's believe that G-d is protecting Israel and would not subvert G-d's authority over Israel. As to the old "Bush- Arab oil tie" , again perverted. The Arabs will find themselves wanting if Bush cuts off oil supplies from the Middle East due to Arab failures to combat terrorism. It would cost the U.S. more, but it would eliminate money flowing to terrorists making the U.S. and Israel safer.
「ブッシュおよびキリスト教の根本主義者はユダヤ人の人々の真の友人ではありません。」Deloresディー。これは曲解され、恐ろしく間違っています。クリスチャンは、G-dがイスラエルを保護しておりG-dのイスラエルに対する権威を破壊しないだろう、と信じます。再び正道を外れた古い「潅木-アラビア人の油タイ-」に関して。アラビア人は、ブッシュがテロリズムとの格闘のアラビア人の失敗に?謔?aによりから石油供給を離れてカットすれば、それら自身が不足しているのを見つけるでしょう。それは米国をもっと要するでしょう。しかし、それは、米国およびイスラエルをより安全にするテロリストに流れる金銭を除去するでしょう。
Wesley Jaeger, United States of America
ウェズレー・イエーガー、 アメリカ合衆国
Bush and the Christian fundamentalists are not real friends of the Jewish people.
ブッシュおよびキリスト教の根本主義者はユダヤ人の人々の真の友人ではありません。
Delores Dee, Austin, United States of America
Deloresディー、 オースティン、 アメリカ合衆国
Anyone who supports a lasting peace for the region is a true friend of Israel. Bush represents the born again Christians who believe Jewish people should temporarily hold Israel until Jesus comes back. Then Jews should convert to Christianity or die. Bush and these Christian fundamentalists are not real friends of the Jewish people.
地域用の永続する平和を支援する誰でもイスラエルの真実の友人です。ブッシュは言います、その、イエスが戻るまでユダヤ人の人々が一時的にイスラエルを保持するべきであると信じるクリスチャンを再び運びます。その後、ユダヤ人はキリスト教またはさいに切り替えるべきです。ブッシュおよびこれらのキリスト教の根本主義者はユダヤ人の人々の真の友人ではありません。
Delores Dee, Austin, United States of America
Deloresディー、 オースティン、 アメリカ合衆国
It is difficult to look into the future, so let's look to the past.
将来を調査することは困難です。したがって、過去に面していよう。
Was Clinton better or worse than both Bushes for Israel? I don't think it made a difference.
クリントンは、イスラエルのための両方の潅木よりよいでしたか。それとも、より悪いでしたか。私は、それは違いを生じなかったと思います。
Jos Theelen, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
ジョスTheelen、 アイントホーヴェン、 オランダ
Bush is not ashamed to acknowledge faith. He is a strong supporter of Israel and opposed to terrorists. He is willing to fight terrorists and regimes that support them without EU and UN permission.
ブッシュは信頼を認めて恥じていません。彼はイスラエルの強い支持者で、テロリストに反対しました。彼は、喜んでEUおよび国連の許可なしでそれらを支援するテロリストおよび政権と戦います。
Kerry is a liberal who might sacrifice too much for 'peace' in the Middle East, as Chamberlain did in Europe. He could lean too much to the UN and the EU, and that might subordinate our sovereignty.
チェンバレンがヨーロッパでだったように、Kerryは中東で「平和」のためにあまりに犠牲にするかもしれない自由主義者です。彼は、国連およびEUにあまりに傾くことができました。また、それは私たちの主権を従属させるかもしれません。
I think Bush is better for Israel and a force to bring those opposed to peace in the Middle East to the negotiations table.
私は、ブッシュがイスラエルにとってよりよく、それらをもたらす力が交渉テーブルへの中東で平和に反対した、と思います。
Shirley Christian, Evansville, United States of America
シャーリー・クリスチャン、 エヴァンズヴィル、 アメリカ合衆国
The real question is not who will be better for Israel but who will be more effective in fighting the war on radical Islamist terrorist organizations.
実際の質問は、誰がイスラエルにとってよりよいだろ?､かではありません、しかしこの人は急進的なイスラム教徒テロリスト組織との戦いをするのに、より有効でしょう。
Stephen Kogan, Chicago, United States of America
スティーヴンKogan、 シカゴ、 アメリカ合衆国
The real question is not who will be better for Israel but who will be more effective in fighting the war on the radical Islamist terrorist organizations throughout the world. Kerry's record as a senator shows us he is too closely tied to the far-left anti-war wing of the Democratic Party to have the strength to be an effective world leader in this fight.
実際の質問は、誰がイスラエルにとってよりよいだろうかではありません、しかしこの人は世界の至る所での急進的なイスラム教徒テロリスト組織との戦いをするのに、より有効でしょう。ケリーの上院議員としてのレコードは、この戦いでの有効な世界のリーダーである力を持つために、民主党の遠い残された反戦争翼に彼が緊密に結び付けられすぎることを私たちに示します。
Israel and the world need someone who will be decisive and strong and will not wilt under the fervor of the anti-war surrendering attitude that has gripped Europe. Kerry does not have the backbone to stand up to the French and the Germans and lead the world to defeating the terrorists.
イスラエルおよび世界は、決定的で強くヨーロッパをつかんだ反戦争降参する姿勢の炎熱の下でしぼまない人を必要とします。ケリーは、フランス人およびドイツ人に抵抗し、かつ世界をテロリストを破ることヘ導くためには背骨を持っていません。
Stephen Kogan, Chicago, United States of America
スティーヴンKogan、 シカゴ、 アメリカ合衆国
I think we as Americans and those of us who pray for Israel want Bush to win. He isn't perfect and has views about what Israel can and can't do that upsets many of us, but he is far better than Kerry concerning the defense of Israel and the world. Kerry is someone we have no idea about what he might do, and he is a "peacenik" with very narrow views on what is required to keep peace, and what to do when peace is shattered. I vote for Bush because of his continued support of Israel. Israel is the key to everything in my opinion, and we cannot allow terror and the PA to destroy the freedom of Israel and its democratic system.
Iは、イスラエルのために祈る私たちのアメリカ人およびそれらとして私たちが、ブッシュが勝つことを望むと考えます。彼は完全でなく、私たちのうちの多数の気を動転させるどこのイスラエルができて、できないかに関する見解を持っています。しかし、彼は、イスラエルの防御および世界に関するケリーよりはるかによい。ケリーは私たちにはいる人です、彼が何を行ってもよいかに関する考えはない、また、彼は治安を守るために必要とされるものに関する非常に狭い見解を備えた「反戦運動家」および平和が粉砕される場合に、行うべきものです。Iは、イスラエルの彼の継続的な支援のために潅木を支持します。イスラエルは私の見解中のすべての鍵です。また、私たちは、恐怖およびPAがイスラエルおよびその民主主義のシステムの自由を破壊することを認めることができません。
Gerald Butler, Sweetwater, Texas, United States of America
ジェラルド・バトラー、 Sweetwater、テキサス、 アメリカ合衆国
I am sorry to say that the U.S. is not a super power any more and China is going to take over the scene fast. It would be appropriate for the Jewish lobby to move its organization to China. It is not relevant which of these two candidates is going to be elected.
米国がもはや最高の力でなく、中国が場面を速く占領するつもりである、と言って、私はすまなく思います。ユダヤ人のロビーが中国にその構成を移動させることは適切でしょう。これらの2つの候補のどれが選ばれるだろうかは適切ではありません。
Ali Hosseinzadeh, Sweden
アリHosseinzadeh、 スウェーデン
Bush has constantly supported Israel's tactic of "Politicide" (Baruch Kimmerling) against the Palestinians, and so have his predecessors. There's no evidence whatsoever that Kerry is willing to fight the war against terror in the Middle East -- at least not by stopping the U.S.-backed terrorism of Israel.
ブッシュは、パレスチナ人に対してイスラエルの「Politicide」(バルクKimmerling)の方策を絶えず支援しました。また、彼の前任者もそうである。証拠は少しもありません、ケリーは、喜んで中東で恐怖との戦いをします――イスラエルの米国支持のテロリズムを止めることにより少なくとも。
Dennis Ott, Goch, Germany
デニスOtt、 Goch、 ドイツ
As long as Kerry persists in supporting the disengagement plan and George Bush's endorsement of Sharon's free hand in the West Bank, there is little to choose between the two. On the day that Kerry realizes his obligation to seek a real solution to the conflict instead of kowtowing to right-wing Jewish voters, there may be hope. One thing however is clear: Kerry seems to have what Bush lacks -- a brain!
ケリーが、ヨルダン川西岸地区でシャロンの自由行動の婚約解消計画およびジョージ・ブッシュの支持を支援することを続ける限り、2つの間で選ぶほとんどはありません。ケリーが右翼のユダヤ人の投票者におもねる代わりに矛盾の実際の解決策を求める彼の義務を実現する日に、希望があるかもしれません。しかしながら、1つのものは明らかです:ケリーは、ブッシュが欠くものを持つように見えます--脳!
Louis Williams, Tel Aviv-Jaffa, Israel
ルイス・ウィリアムズ、 テルアビブ・ヤッファ、 イスラエル
The American State Department has concluded that a two-state solution is the quickest way to "end the conflict" (which started long before Jews or Arabs dreamed of independent states) and that this is in America's best interest. Both candidates will perpetuate such a notion. Jews who are concerned about negotiations on a two state solution should not look to the U.S. Rather, they should come home to Israel and vote in the Israeli elections, where our fate will actually be decided.
アメリカン国務省は、2-状態解決が「矛盾を終える」(ユダヤ人またはアラビア人が独立国を夢見るかなり前にそれは始めた)最も迅?ｬな方法で、これがアメリカの最大の利益にある、と結論を下しました。両方の候補はそのような概念を永続させるでしょう。2つの州解決についての交渉について関心を持っているユダヤ人は米国に目を向けてはなりません、もっと正確に言えば、私たちの運命が現実に決定される場合、彼らはイスラエルの選挙でイスラエルと投票へ帰宅するべきです。
Daniel Hershtal, Haifa, Israel
ダニエルHershtal、 ハイファ、 イスラエル
I cannot forget hearing the words of Rabin: 'The Democrats promise, the Republicans deliver'
私はラビンの単語を聞いたことを忘れることができません:「民主党員は約束します、共和党員は伝えます。」
Nattane Ben-Menachim, Jerusalem, Israel
Nattaneベン=Menachim、 エルサレム、 イスラエル
While I think that Kerry will win, I cannot forget hearing the words of Rabin some decades ago (regarding needed aerial arms deliveries): "The Democrats promise, the Republicans deliver."
ケリーが勝つだろうとIが考えている一方、Iは数十?N前に(必要とされる空気の腕配達に関して)ラビンの単語を聞いたことを忘れることができません:「民主党員は約束します。共和党員は伝えます。」
Nattane Ben-Menachim, Jerusalem, Israel
Nattaneベン=Menachim、 エルサレム、 イスラエル
Take a look at the anti-Bush posts and you'll notice something - their posts have nothing to do with Israel; they just hate Bush, period. Even the Bush haters know that Bush is better for Israel!
反ブッシュポストを見てください(それらのポストは全くイスラエルと関係?ｪありません;)。そうすれば、何かに気づくでしょう。それらはブッシュ、期間をちょうど嫌います。ブッシュの憎悪者さえ、ブッシュがイスラエルにとってよりよいことを知っています!
Hershel Brand, Jerusalem, Israel
Hershel商標、 エルサレム、 イスラエル
As an American, I don't feel that Israel should be the deciding factor when voting for a candidate. Bush has done a decent job with Israel, but there is more to foreign policy than Israel and there is more to the presidency than foreign policy. In the last three years, Bush has turned away from domestic issues such as social security, health care, and education which I feel are still important to America's prosperity. I think we need a change in November.
Americanとして、私は、候補に投票する場合イスラエルが決定的要因であるべきであると思いません。ブッシュは、イスラエルでの適正な仕事を行いました。しかし、イスラエルより外交政策に多くの意味があります。また、外交政策より大統領職に多くの意味があります。過去3年で、ブッシュは社会保障、ヘルスケア、および私が感じる教育のような国内の問題から遠ざかって振り向きました、アメリカの繁栄にとってまだ重要です。私は、私たちが11月に変更を必要とすると思います。
Craig Oppenheim, Maitland, Florida, United States of America
クレイグOppenheim、 メートランド、フロリダ、 アメリカ合衆国
Israelis need to think more globally before supporting a government that damaged international relations as badly as the Bush administration
イスラエル人は、国際関係をブッシュ政権と同じくらいひどく破損した政府を支援する前に、より全体的に考える必要があります。
Eduardo Penaloza, New York, United States of America
エドアードPenaloza、 ニューヨーク、 アメリカ合衆国
If, for reasons left to the irony of politics, Bush is - or seems - better than Kerry for Israel, then Israel should worry about the legitimacy of its political standing. Israelis, just as my compatriots the Mexicans, need to think a bit more globally before supporting a government that has damaged international relations as badly as the Bush administration has.
場合、政治の反語に残された理由のために、潅木はイスラエル、次にイスラエルのためのケリーがその政治的な立場の合法性について心配するべきであるよりよい(あるいは見える)。イスラエル人、ちょうど私の同国人として、メキシコ人は、国際関係をブッシュ政権が持っているのと同じくらいひどく破損した政府を支援する前に少しより全体的に考える必要があります。
Eduardo Penaloza, New York, United States of America
エドアードPenaloza、 ニューヨーク、 アメリカ合衆国
I have been voting for 30 years, always for democrats. Voting otherwise as a Jew was like denying my faith. And for seven presidents, I never figured out that presidents from the democratic party have all either turned against Israel or harmed Israel!
私は、民主主義者に30年間常に投票していました。ユダヤ人としてそうでなければ投票することは私の信頼を否定することに似ていました。そして7人の大統領のために、私、模様がない、外に、民主主義のパーティーからのその大統領もすべてを持っています、イスラエルあるいは傷つけられたイスラエルに敵対した!
I saw first-hand how Nixon, for his own reasons, saved Israel from imminent destruction. I finally figured it out. And President Bush has shown me the way.
私は見ました、直接、ニクソンは、どのように自分の理由のために、切迫した破壊からイスラエルを救いましたか。私は最後にそれを解きました。また、ブッシュ大統領は私にその方法を示しました。
Dennis Wolf, United States of America
デニス・オオカミ、 アメリカ合衆国
Europe completely lacks the moral authority of the United States. Kerry would like the United States to get approval of its foreign policy from the UN and the European Union. This would be a disaster for all concerned. Bush has the right view; an independent U.S. foreign policy is the correct way to go.
ヨーロッパは、完全にアメリカまでモラル権威だけ足りません。Kerryは、アメリカに国連および欧州連合からその外交政策の承認を得て欲しかった。これはすべてにとって災難になるでしょう、関係していました。ブッシュは正しい視界を持っています;独立した米国の外交政策は行く正確な方法です。
Allen Moses, New York, United States of America
アラン・モーゼズ、 ニューヨーク、 アメリカ合衆国
Bush has given us the road-map and the goal of a Palestinian Arab state as fundamentals of American policy. He has also supported Israel in its war against terror. Kerry promises to talk with Iran, the world 's major terror state, supporter of Hezbollah, and self-declared enemy of Israel. Given this choice it seems to me that Bush probably would be better for Israel than Kerry. Probably.
ブッシュはアメリカの政策のファンダメンタルズとして私たちに道路地図およびパレスチナのアラビア人の状態のゴールを与えました。さらに、彼は、恐怖とのイスラエルの戦いを支持しました。Kerryは、イラン、世界's少佐恐怖状態、ヒズボラの支持者およびイスラエルの自己申告の敵と話すと約束します。それが私に見えるこの選択を与えられた、ブッシュは、Kerryよりイスラエルにとってよく恐らくよりよかった。恐らく。
Shalom Freedman, Jerusalem, Israel
シャローム、自由民、 エルサレム、 イスラエル
Kerry has made it clear that he intends to "mend" U.S relations with European nations. The only way he can do this is to reduce U.S support for Israel as the important European nations are viciously anti-Israel. He cannot afford to pull out of Iraq, so pressuring Israel to make more concessions is the only way he can ingratiate himself with Europeans. He will be not be a true friend of Israel. He will rehabilitate Arafat - so here we go again.
ケリーは、彼がヨーロッパの国家とのU.S関係を「修復するつもりの」ことを明らかにしました。彼がこれをすることができるただ一つの方法は重要なヨーロッパの国家が邪険に反イスラエルであるとともに、イスラエルのU.S支援を縮小することです。彼は、イラクから立ち直る余裕がありません。したがって、より多くの譲歩を行なうようにイスラエルを圧迫することは彼がヨーロッパ人に取り入ることができるただ一つの方法です。彼はそうではないでしょう、イスラエルの真実の友人です。彼はアラファトを修復するでしょう。したがって、ここに、私たちは再び行きます。
Batya Dagan, Los Angeles, United States of America
Batyaダガン、 ロサンジェルス、 アメリカ合衆国
Those Jews who believe that George Bush is the strong and lone leader that has stood with Israel and will deliver a democratic Middle East, as well as a friendly Palestinian government, is ignoring the history of the Republican party. This group, whose leaders are James Baker and the zealot Christian Right, pray for their messiah to come to kill us Jews off. John Kerry is a million times smarter,a real friend of Israel without any ulterior motives. He will work 3000 percent with any Israeli government and will accomplish as much as conditions will allow. To deceive yourselves into believing otherwise is a mistake.
それらのユダヤ人、彼らはジョージ・ブッシュが親しみのあるパレスチナの政府と同様にイスラエルと立っており、民主主義の中東を伝える、強く孤独のリーダーであると信じる、共和党の歴史を無視しています。このグループ(そのリーダーはジェームズ・ベーカーおよび熱狂者クリスチャン権である)は、私たちを殺すために来るためにそれらの救済者のために祈ります、ユダヤ人、から。ジョン・ケリーは100万倍利口です(背後に秘めた動機のないイスラエルの真の友人)。彼は、任意のイスラエル政府と3000パーセント仕事をし、条件が許可するのと同じ?ﾊを遂行するでしょう。そうでなければ信じることへ考え違いをすることは誤りです。
Hyman Katz, Aventura, United States of America
ハイマンKatz、 Aventura、 アメリカ合衆国
A true friend would use their influence to prevent the overreaching Israeli leadership from choosing the path to ruin, like taking the keys from an obviously drunk friend before he can drive his car.
真実の友達は、やり過ぎるイスラエルのリーダーシップが破滅するためにパスを選ぶのを防ぐために、彼が自動車を運転することができる前に、明白に飲まれた友達からキーを受け取ることのように、よく彼らの影響力を行使しました。
Mike Watkins, New York, United States of America
マイク・ワトキンズ、 ニューヨーク、 アメリカ合衆国
Bush and his ilk will continue to give Sharon, or whatever leader the Israelis next elect, enough rope to hang himself (and all of Israel). He will do this for selfish reasons: it will help him domestically. A true friend would use their influence to prevent the overreaching Israeli leadership from choosing the path to ruin, like taking the keys from an obviously drunk friend before he can drive his car. In the long run, Israel must make peace with its neighbors. The current level of US support is not guaranteed in the long run. It would be wise for Israel to make peace from its present position of strength, instead of in the future that is uncertain. As far as being a true friend, I'm not sure that a Kerry administration would do much better, but it couldn't do much worse.
ブッシュおよび彼の家族はシャロン、あるいはイスラエル人が次に選ぶリーダーを与え続けるでしょう、首つり自殺する(またイスラエルのすべて)十分なロープ。彼は利己的な理由のためにこれをするでしょう:それは彼を国内的に助けるでしょう。真実の友達は、やり過ぎるイスラエルのリーダーシップが破滅するためにパスを選ぶのを防ぐために、彼が自動車を運転することができる前に、明白に飲まれた友達からキーを受け取ることのように、よく彼らの影響力を行使しました。結局、イスラエルはその隣人と和解しなければなりません。米国支援の現在のレベルは結局保証されません。不確かな将来にの代わりに、強さのその現在の位置からイスラエルが和解することは賢明でしょう。真実の友達である限り、私はケリー管理が多くをより上手にするかどうか確かではありません。しかし、それはあまりより悪く行うことができませんでした。
Mike Watkins, New York, United States of America
マイク・ワトキンズ、 ニューヨーク、 アメリカ合衆国
Listen up folks, This is an easy one. Kerry's policy is to rely on the rest of the world's lead. He claims to be strong on Israel now but the trouble is this: His "coalition" of nations that he keeps harping about building are almost all nation that are anti-Israel. He believes that the UN is the solution, and also France, Germany, et al. He is blown by the winds of perceived advantage and not by principle. Bush's administration, with all its flaws, is built on principle and will stand 1 against 100 at the UN.
人々を上へ聞く、これは容易なこれです。ケリーの政策は世界のリードの残りに依存することです。彼は、今イスラエルで強いことを要求します。しかし、問題はこれです:彼が建物についてくどくど話させておく国家の彼の「連合」は、反イスラエルである国家ほとんどすべてです。彼は、国連が解決であると信じます、またさらにフランス、ドイツら 彼は、知覚された利点の風によって、そして原理によってではΑ;笋蓮△△覆燭忙笋?△覆燭歴笋燭舛?匹里茲Δ某覆爐海箸?任?襪?K吹かれます。ブッシュの管理はその欠点にもかかわらず、主義として構築され、国連で100に1をもたせかけるでしょう。
We know this because we see it. If he is reelected I predict he will move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem!!
私たちは、それを見るので、これを知ります。彼が再選されれば、Iは、彼がエルサレムに米国の大使館を移動させるだろうと予言します!!
Randy Sprinkle, Rockport - Texas, United States of America
ランディー少量、 Rockport-テキサス、 アメリカ合衆国
From the time of Jeremiah to those who supported Mussolini in his early days, the Jewish leadership has been misled into thinking pledges of support by so-called strong leaders will improve the situation. George W. Bush, by his actions, has increased anti-Americanism to its highest level ever. Ariel Sharon has done the same for anti-Semitism. The sooner both of these "strong leaders" are gone from the scene the better.
エレミヤの時間から彼の若い頃でムッソリーニを支援した人々まで、ユダヤ人のリーダーシップは、いわゆる強いリーダーによる支援の誓約が状況を改善するだろうと思うことへ誤解しました。ジョージ・W.ブッシュは彼のアクションによって、反米主義をその今までで最も高いレベルに増加させました。エールエル・シャロンは反ユダヤ主義のために同じことをしました。その、よりすぐに、これらの「強いリーダー」は両方とも場面から去りました、よりよい方。
Eric Mendelsohn, Toronto, Canada
エリックMendelsohn、 トロント、 カナダ
Israel is a huge factor for American Jews, and it should be. Part of the worries about Kerry being elected as president is that he will turn out to be another Carter who ,in his fight for "human rights" managed to help start the Islamic revolution in Iran, became a friend of Arafat and was lethal to the state of Israel. But, in all fairness, who knows? Until a man is in the oval office one cannot tell what kind of president he will be. Bush is generally good for Israel and I doubt that I will take a chance on the unknown.
イスラエルはユダヤ系アメリカ人のための大きな要因です。また、それはそうであるべきです。大統領に選ばれているKerryに関する心配の一部は、彼がもう一人のカーターであると判明するだろうということです、誰、イランでイスラム教の革命を始めることを支援するために管理された「人権」のための彼の戦いで、アラファトの友人になり、イスラエルの状態に致死だった。しかし、すべての公平の中で、誰が知っていますか。人が楕円形の会社に出ているまで、人は、彼がどんな種類の社長になるか分かりません。ブッシュは、イスラエルに一般に適しています。また、Iは、Iが未知のものに賭けをするかどうか疑います。
Batya Dagan, Los Angeles, United States of America
Batyaダガン、 ロサンジェルス、 アメリカ合衆国
I believe that the biggest problem within the whole Middle East is that neither Bush nor Kerry really care about the issues. All they want is political points. Let's let Israel do what is best for the people of Israel, then and only then will there be peace in the region.
Iは、全体の中東内の最も大きな問題が、ブッシュもKerryもが実際に問題に関心がないということであると信じます。彼らが望むすべては政治的なポイントです。イスラエルにイスラエルの人々にとって最良のことをその後行わせ、単に次に、そこで地域の平和になるでしょう。
Stephen Westman , Clinton, United States of America
スティーヴンWestman、 クリントン、 アメリカ合衆国
Thea Van Den Berg wrote: "Israel keeps acting like this spoilt brat that America has made it." Well, until you live in Israel fearing for your life all of the time, I'd say you don't know what you are talking about. It amazes me how you have the gall to sit in judgment on a nation doing nothing but trying to survive day by day. Do you know what it is like for the Israeli's to see their own people blown to pieces? How many pregnant women have you known been shot at and killed along with her children?
テイアー・ヴァン穴ベルクは以下の宛て先に書きました:「イスラエルは、アメリカがそれを作ったこの甘やかされた小僧のように作用し続けます。」さて、あなたが、時間をあなたの生活をす?ﾗて気遣うイスラエルで暮らすまで、私はあなたが何について話しているか知らないと言いましょう。日ごとに残存しようとただするばかりで行う国家をあなたがどのように厚かましくも批判するかは私を驚かします。それがどのようなものか知っていますか、イスラエル人は自分の人々に部分に膨れているように会うために何人の妊娠している女性はあなたを知りますか、放たれる、また彼女の子供と共に殺された?
The attitudes towards the U.S. from some people on this board are down right pathetic. Perhaps you should be taking a closer look at your own government and a closer look at the UN. Especially the oil-for-food program that made a whole lot of people rich.
このボード上の何人かの人々からの米国に対する姿勢は、感傷的な権利を下ってあります。恐らく、自分の政府をより詳細に見ることおよび国連をより詳細に見ることをとっているべきです。特に非常に多くの人々を豊富にした食物のための油のプログラム。
Michelle Nenni, Newburgh, United States of America
ミッシェルNenni、 Newburgh、 アメリカ合衆国
I think it would be better if America got a president who was a little bit more critical and tougher against Israel.
私は、もしアメリカがイスラエルに対して少しビット批判的でより頑丈だった大統領を得れば、それがよりよいだろうと思います。
Thea Van Den Berg, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
テイアー・ヴァン穴ベルク、 アムステルダム、 オランダ
Kerry wants to be voted president so he needs the support of as many people as possible. He can't afford to alienate the Jewish lobby. That's why he's totally pro-Israel at the moment. I think it would be better if America got a president who was a little bit more critical and tougher against Israel. Israel keeps acting like the spoilt brat that America has made it.
彼ができるだけ多くの人々の支援を必要とするように、ケリーは大統領と認められたい。彼は、ユダヤ人のロビーを疎外する余裕がありません。そのため、彼は全くちょうど今イスラエル支持です。私は、もしアメリカがイスラエルに対して少しビット批判的でより頑丈だった大統領を得れば、それがよりよいだろうと思います。イスラエルは、アメリカがそれを作った甘やかされた小僧のように作用し続けます。
Thea Van Den Berg, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
テイアー・ヴァン穴ベルク、 アムステルダム、 オランダ
Bush was the first president to call the Palestinians and their future country "Palestine,"; he helped initiate the Road Map; he insisted against the Congress that Jerusalem is not Israel's capital ; he demands withdrawals from settlements; his careful wordings make no concessions on the right of return; his war on Saddam was not for Israel's sake but for the sake of his father's administration. By contrast, every Democratic president has been obsessed with helping make a secure peace in the Middle East, which Israel needs much more than the Arab countries do - and so the Democratic Presidents do it because of their deep background in American Judaism and affection for Israel.
ブッシュはパレスチナ人および彼らの将来の国に電話する初代大統領でした「パレスチナ」;彼は、道路地図を始めることを支援しました;彼は、エルサレムがイスラエルの首都であってはならないと議会に対して主張しました;彼は居留地から撤回を要求します;彼の注意深い言葉遣いは、リターンの右側上の譲歩を行ないません;サダムとの彼の戦いは、イスラエルのためにではなく彼の父親の管理のためにありました。対照的に、すべての民主党の大統領は、中東(非常にアラビア人の国々がそうする以上にイスラエルはそれを必要とする)で安全な平和を作ることを支援することに取りつかれました。それで、民主大統領はイスラエルのために、アメリカン・ユダヤ教および愛情中の彼らの深い背景のためにそれを行います。
Aaron Stone, Watertown, United States of America
アーロン石、 ウォータータウン、 アメリカ合衆国
I do not agree with Bush on many issues, but once he has made a decision he does not sway or retreat from it. Bush says that he supports Israel and all of his actions back up this claim. Just recently, both the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States congress voted overwhelmingly to support the Bush administration's policy towards Israel. Democrats and Republicans agreed that refusing to negotiate with Arafat and his gang of terrorists is the right thing to do. John Kerry, on the other hand, makes a decision, than makes another decision, than reconsiders, and pretty soon it is hard to tell what he thinks. John Kerry may support a hard stance towards terrorism today, but will he be negotiating with Arafat tomorrow?
私は多くの問題についての潅木に賛成しません。しかし、以前、彼は、それから動かさない決定あるいは退却を下したことがあります。ブッシュは、彼がイスラエルを支援し、彼のアクションがすべてこのクレームをバックアップする、と言います。ちょうど最近、上院およびアメリカの会議の下院の両方は、ブッシュ政権のイスラエルに対する政策を支援することを圧倒的に票決しました。民主主義者と共和党員は、アラファトおよびテロリストの彼の一群と交渉することを拒絶することが行う正しいことであることに合意しました。再考するより、別の決定を下すより、ジョン・ケリーは他方では、決定します。また、かなり、すぐに、彼がどう思うか伝えることは困難です。ジョン・ケリーは、今日テロリズムへの困難なスタンスを支援してもよい、しかし、彼?ﾍ明日アラファトと交渉するでしょうか。
Peter Reitzes, Brooklyn, United States of America
This page is too long to be completely translated. The remainder of this page will not be translated.
Bush is a man who says what he means and follows through, regardless of whether it is popular with the rest of the world.
Jerry K. Konefsly, Philadelphia, United States of America
Bush is committed to changing the Middle East. He has already made great inroads towards marginalizing some Arab countries. He is a man who says what he means and follows through, regardless of whether it is popular with the rest of the world. Europe has conceded Israel because Europe wants and needs oil. The U.S. has taken the moral high ground regarding Israel instead of capitulation to Arab dictators and weak European leaders.
Jerry K. Konefsly, Philadelphia, United States of America
I take offense with the inference that Europe has abandoned the moral high ground in its relations with Israel. Kerry and Bush will pander to a domestic audience, not just the Jewish lobby. To portray himself as strong against terror Kerry will support Israel. Bush panders to the Christian fundamentalists in his support for Israel. Consequently the search for peace in this troubled region will never be taken seriously by the Americans of whatever political slant. Therefore Europe is trying to take a lead in getting all the major parties around the negotiating table. Most Europeans are neither anti or pro Israel we just want to see peace on our common European South Eastern border.
Christopher Linthwaite, Beverley, United Kingdom
As a Vietnam veteran I find John Kerry unfit and untrustworthy to be president. He is not a war hero as he says. In fact he lied about his four months of service in Vietnam, made claims that he had witnessed war crimes, but did not report them. He returned from Vietnam and joined the anti-war movement. I fear that he will sell Israel out at first chance, he has a history of not telling the truth and being a political opportunist. The same anti-war crowd he was a member of is part of the International Solidarity Movement which opposes Israel and supports Palestinian terrorists. At least Bush has come out in support of Israel and supports building the fence.
Josef Jesmore, Tene, Israel
Without a doubt Israel has absolutely nothing to fear. The Jewish lobby dictates the foreign policy of both Bush and Kerry with a firm, clear voice. Of course the U.S. eventually pays for its scandalously pro-Israel policy, but that's nothing for Israel to be concerned about, is it?
George Develkos, Athens, Greece
Kerry will do the same as Clinton, that is make Israelis to sign a piece of paper and hinder their war efforts. Bush did not tie Israel's hands as much as Clinton, and he tried to put a lot of pressure on the Palestinians, and the Arabs in general, to change their attitude. So far, the results are insignificant, but to a large extent the blame of the 'world' shifted to Palestinians. Peace 'talks' are not productive, a permanent cease-fire is the best reality, and it will come when Palestinians will get tired and no longer receive money from Europe. So far, Bush is better than Kerry could have been. Israel will withdraw from some territories and retain others (Jerusalem) regardless of what the American administration says.
Nahum Kipnis, Minneapolis, United States of America
Contrary to my parents, who voted a straight ticket, I try to look at who I think is the best candidate. Not having all the facts, it's difficult to make a decision. Bush has a record and personality, Kerry has his past military record, and his statements to the press which I must use in my comparrison.
Bush is tied to OIL which is a minus for him. It is unlikely that he would make a decision that would be detrimental to the oil industry. My friends in the USA seem to be for Kerry. I just don't know, and the pity is that I will vote, and I don't know who for.
Gerald Zang, Kfar Sava, Israel
Kerry has not even made his viewpoint clear yet regarding the Middle East let alone Israel, and I think this is a very dangerous thing.
Aharon Ben-Eytan, London, Canada
Put Israel aside for a moment and look at the greater picture. Kerry has not even made his viewpoint clear yet regarding the Middle East let alone Israel, and I think this is a very dangerous thing. We know Bush supports Israel and a peace accord that will, above all, take our security into account as being paramount. Kerry will go down the same road as Clinton especially with Jimmy Carter starting to come out of the woodwork. While Colin Powell was toasting tea with Arafat, Bush never questioned our accurate assesment of him -a terrorist. Why should this democrat be anything different from the last Democrat?
Aharon Ben-Eytan, London, Canada
Bush does not change horses and stands by what he says and believes in. What Israel will get from Kerry, is what Israel gets from France! The Bush position springs from his beliefs, and is not a re-election ploy.
Harold Rosen, Pismo Beach, United States of America
Unlike some, I am proud to be an American and I'm proud of the job President Bush is doing. He's been a good friend to Israel....even when it isn't popular. Kerry is no friend to anyone but himself and will say and do anything to get elected. That makes me nervous. Kerry was for this war until it began to hurt his chances to become President. That's not leadership quality.
Michelle Nenni, Newburgh, United States of America
Reaching a peace agreement is a job for the Israelis and Palestinians. Peace cannot be forced by any U.S. political party. This is why all U.S. presidents have been smart enough to let the two peoples figure out their fate. I believe that Kerry and Bush will continue with the general U.S. policy toward Israel. Best to vote for the candidate based on domestic issues, fight on terror etc.
Yehuda Sehayek, Seattle, United States of America
I agree with Senator Joseph Lieberman, who called Kerry a "waffler." President Bush has truly been the greatest friend that Israel has ever had in the White House. The winner of the election will be tested immediately, as the incontrovertible Iranian nuclear program is now becoming a crisis. President Bush has a great track record in this regard; Kerry has no track record at all. Notice how Kerry tends to gloss over his poor performance in the Senate.
Brian Null, United States of America
We Americans should be casting our votes for the person who can do the best job for our country and not for a foreign country. I reject the idea that we should stand by and see our Constitution trashed just so that Sharon can have a president he can push around.
Marjorie Mccarthy, San Jose, United States of America
On the surface Bush might come across as a closer friend of Israel. But in the long run his policies will hurt Israel.
Sue Stockton , United States of America
On the surface Bush might come across as a closer friend of Israel. But in the long run his policies will hurt Israel. The world is focused on the mess in Iraq while Iran is building its nuclear arsenal. There is absolutely nothing EU and the U.S. can do about it. We no longer can afford another front between the west and the Muslim world and Iran knows it. Iran is a much bigger threat to Israel than Iraq and it will fill the power vacuum created by weakening Iraq. Secondly Bush's go-it-alone policy has weakened U.S. political clout. This policy is absolutely not helpful to Israel. Israel needs more friends than the U.S. and the Marshall Islands.
Sue Stockton , United States of America
I am shocked that there are those who don't see through John Kerry's flimsy facade. His reckless and irresponsible need to subjugate American policy to the "international community" will leave both America and Israel at the mercy of Kofi Annan and Jacques Chirac. Any candidate who has the endorsement of Muhathir Muhommed, former prime minister of Malaysia and renown anti-Semite, must be looked at with a healthy dose of skepticism.
Dan Geisler, Chicago, United States of America
It depends who looks at it! Israelis can be quite sure that they are with both good off. It is not about the president or the ruling party, but rather about American political and economic interests in the Middle East. For Palestinians, it can be better in the long run if George W. Bush does win. The fact that he is so stupid and offensive could lead him and his Administration to make a mistake that might eventually lead the Arab masses to a real revolt against Imperialism and colonialism which would automatically be in the interest of the Palestinians.
Samieh Jabbarin, Stuttgart, Germany
I continue to believe that Bush is better for Israel (and the U.S.) than Kerry. Kerry has says what he thinks depending upon who he is talking to, as in speaking to Muslims and calling Arafat a statesman. As for his idea of using Carter, Clinton, et al to help with the peace process, I believe that would create more serious problems for Israel. Bush has repeatedly refused to deal with Arafat. We need to continue with one of the best friends Israel has had.
Marion Shelman, Aliso Viejo, United States of America
While we must certainly respond to terrorist threats militarily, in the long run, the elimination of the hatred focused on Israel and the United States can only result from a commitment and a demonstration of the highest ideals and values of our tradition. Those ideals were clearly enunciated by Senator Kerry in his acceptance speech and have been severely tarnished by the actions of President Bush. We must show the world that we are great and noble societies if we are to live in peace.
Yedidyah Blanton, Los Angeles, United States of America
Bush has proven himself a stalwart friend (regardless of motivations) to Israel culminating in the letters he sent to Sharon earlier this year. There isn't a Jew with a strong association with Israel that didn't breathe a sigh of relief upon reading those letters.
Those who long for the Clinton days baffle me. Having lived in Israel throughout Clinton's entire tenure, I watched first hand as America betrayed time and time again her supposed closest ally in the Middle East.
Bush may have some relationship with Saudi Arabia which is cause for concern, but Clinton, if he's any indicator, was not nearly as good a friend. If Kerry is a throwback to the 1990's, then, thank you, I'll vote Bush.
Joel Freimuth, Chicago, United States of America
The concern of all who love Israel should be Kerry's contention to start a new Middle East policy group with Jimmy Carter. Carter tried to sell out Israel at Camp David (please read Moshe Dayan's "Story of My Life") and he has consistantly sided with Arafat and the Palestinian cause.
President George W. Bush is one of the finest friends we have ever had in the White House.
Richard Krieger, Boynton Beach, Florida, United States of America
Bush's refusal to do anything to lessen American demand for oil imports guarantees instability in the region.
Jerry Spiegler, Charleston, United States of America
Bush uses Israel to garner votes from American Jews. His real interest is more likely based on fundamentalist evangelical Christian doctrine.
Bush's refusal to do anything to lessen American demand for oil imports guarantees instability in the region. So much of that oil comes from countries ruled by tyrants who divert attention from themselves by encouraging terrorists to focus on Israel and America.
Bush has shown no leadership in the war on terrorism. It literally took an act of Congress to get him to pay attention to Syria and Iran. He still looks the other way as the Saudis fund Hamas. He originally condemned Israel's security barrier, then did a flip flop. Bush has also flipped flopped on issues such as the settlements, the targeting of terrorist leaders, and pre-emptive strikes by Israel. Bush continues to try to play both sides of the issue.
Jerry Spiegler, Charleston, United States of America
I was glad to hear Senator Kerry make a clear acceptance speech reference to our problematic dependence on the Saudi royal family. The Saudi relationship has been has been the one glaring contradiction of the Bush anti-terror policy stated so well after 9/11: "either you are with us or you are against us". It is high time mainstream America realizes that we must wean ourselves off of this destructive and hypocritical partnership.
Steven Karmel, Cincinnati, United States of America
While I am by no means a Bush supporter, in this case I would say: better the devil you know the devil you don't. Kerry is an unprincipled political prostitute, willing to do whatever it takes to get elected, even if that means compromising what you believe in (in Kerry's case, it hard to tell even that). I am not Bush fan, but at least he knows what he wants and goes after it, no matter how wrong the goal is.
Laila el-Haddad, Gaza City, Gaza Strip
Kerry has stated that he wants to assemble a committe on the Middle East/Arab-Israeli conflict headed by Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and Dennis Ross. If he can create such a team then there is no question in mind that his tenure as president would be better for the region. Such a committe would dwarf, both in prestige and expertise, anything that Bush has thus far put together. I vote Kerry!
Roi Ben-Yehuda, Palo Alto, United States of America
For the first time in my life I am ashamed to be an American thanks to George Bush. He will say and do anything to stay in office. Our relations with other nations are in shambles due to his "mistakes". He is petty and arrogant. He has done nothing but lip service where the Middle East is concerned.
I will vote for the Kerry/Edwards ticket. I feel I can trust John Kerry in what he says and does. Bush would go to the Western Wall for the Jewish vote. Fortunately, I have two Rabbis who see through Bush.
Jim Courtney, United States of America
John Kerry has repeatedly denounced the President for his decision to go to war in Iraq. He doesn't believe that the removal of Saddam Hussein was necessary or important. I wonder how he would have reacted had FDR decided to preemptively strike Nazi Germany in order to remove Adolf Hitler and prevent the massacre which would ensue thereafter? He'd probably be angry and call for FDR's immediate removal from office.
George W. Bush has done nothing but prove himself the best friend Israel has ever had in the White House. There is no question in my mind that after the November elections, with Bush emerging victorious, he will continue to strike down the enemies of Israel (Syria and Iran).
David Schottenstein, Columbus, United States of America
The minute Arafat sees a new "naive" President who wants to bring peace he will reentrench.
Yosef Leibowitz, Kfar Sava, Israel
The phrasing of your question already indicates your bias. "Would John Kerry do a better job of breathing life into Middle East peacemaking" assumes that new life is what is missing. What might be missing is to allow Israel to do what it is doing: build a protective fence, kill the leaders of the terrorist groups and put pressure on the Palestinians to see that without the cessation of terror there is nothing to talk about. The last thing Israel needs now is a President who is going to force upon us a settlement based on the situation now.
Most Israelis correctly believe that Oslo was a mistake and that Clinton's attempt to get Arafat and Barak to agree was in vain. Arafat will take whatever he gets and continue to do what he wants. It is only now that the Palestinian population is beginning to rebel against this and the world is beginning to see this.
What we need now is time for this process to work itself out. The minute Arafat sees a new "naive" President who wants to bring peace he will reentrench.
Yosef Leibowitz, Kfar Sava, Israel
John Kerry is unfortunately from the party of 'moral equivalence', the party which all too often equates Israel's attempts to protect itself with the heinous acts of Islamic terrorism from which it suffers. The American liberal says, there is error on both sides in this conflict, so therefore both sides are equally at fault.
George Bush on the other hand is unafraid to point out that there is a lot more "error" on one side than on the other! The Cold War was won only when Ronald Reagan had the moral clarity to recognize the Soviet Union for what it was 'an evil empire' and to treat it as such. In the same way, Islamic terrorism can only be defeated by a President with the moral clarity to recognize it for what it is sheer, unadulterated evil.
Stewart Griffith, San Jose, United States of America
There's no difference between the two. Neither seems to realize that Israel has to facilitate a viable Palestinian State or else face the loss of its independence and the emergence of a binational state with equal rights for all. Israel can't afford another 20 years of the status quo.
Cathal Rabbitte, Galway, Ireland
[Bush] has destroyed alliances between the U.S. and most significant countries in the world, and isn't a credible agent for demanding anything substantive of either the Israelis or Palestinians.
Jack Chomsky, Columbus, United States of America
Many people mistakenly think that Bush is better, because he has seemed to be 100% supportive of Prime Minister Sharon. The truth of the matter is that Bush has made the entire world more dangerous. He has destroyed alliances between the U.S. and most significant countries in the world, and isn't a credible agent for demanding anything substantive of either the Israelis or Palestinians. As Kerry demonstrated in his acceptance speech, he is a man of experience and vision. I don't really believe that peace is on the horizon in Israel, but rebuilding America's stature in the world and its alliances will ultimately be in Israel's best interests.
Jack Chomsky, Columbus, United States of America
I am afraid that Kerry would sell out our friends in the middle east, if that was what it took to get on the good side of the Europeans, France in particular.
Robert Sherrill, Tulsa, United States of America
Bush is the better leader when it comes to the Middle East as well as the entire war on terror. He's tough. The President calls a spade a spade. He doesn't mince words. He takes a hard line, which is needed in this battle. President Bush doesn't dilly-dally, he means business. And he has been more successful for it. Unlike President Clinton. Who God bless him, he meant well, but meaning well can't cut it. You have to willing to put muscle behind your words. And the problem with most Democrats is that they still think this is the cold war. Where you can take your time making your next move. Well you can't.
Amanda McKenna, Toronto, Canada
Neither Bush nor Kerry is good for the Middle East because neither puts U.S. interests first. Neither will deal with the origin of terror: The illegal occupation of the West Bank and Gaza by Israel and the removal of U.S. insistence through conquest in Iraq and Afghanistan. Until these issues are resolved justly - the U.S. stops conquering and forcing its ideas of "democracy" on other nations and until Israel returns behind the Green line and ceases to breach its contract with the world created in May of 1948 by allowing the Palestinians to receive either their own contiguous state or full citizenship, nothing is going to change.
Laura Null, United States of America
Bush has
1) spread the military thin and thus weakened the United States' deterrent ability in the Mideast and all over the world
2) strengenthed the hand of Iran by turning Iraq into a void that will be filled by Iran.
Saddam was Israel's enemy but Iran was a bigger threat, which has now been given a boost by the United States. When will the United States' new Shah fall? Bush's "toughness" is a type of folly and Israel may well pay part of the price.
Avi Steinberg, Boston, United States of America
The idea of Arabs joining Bush in a peace agreement with Israel is ludicrous. Nobody really knows how Kerry would handle the Middle East
Paul Mann, Chicago, United States of America
Bush has been supportive of Israel during a very difficult time (security barrier, targeted killings, continuing operations in Gaza), and this cannot be ignored. However, given Bush's track record, the idea of Arabs joining Bush in a legitimate permanent peace agreement with Israel is ludicrous. Because he has yet to articulate a formal position on any controversial issue at all, nobody really knows how Kerry would handle the Middle East. He claims to support Israel, but there is no way to accurately prove this. Bush has a proven track record, at least. For the short term, Bush would be better. For the long term, nobody really knows.
Paul Mann, Chicago, United States of America
Without accusing Bush of micro-management, Bush tended to keep decisions, actions and reactions limited to the core team. That means the team is limited in its issue focus and is vulnerable to successive flare-ups and fires challenging policy.
Kerry, like many other American leaders, is more able to deligate issues to trusted underlings. This will enable him to monitor and guide a broader range of issues. There should be less "fires" this way.
Ernie Giramonti, San Francisco, United States of America
President Bush would continue to be the best president in supporting Israel in a generation, and the most innovative president in Middle Eastern foreign policy in a generation. John Kerry is a mediocre, unimaginative politician who promises mediocre, unimaginative foreign policy. President Bush's policies are the greatest opportunity for peace in the Middle East since 1949, the Camp David Accords notwithstanding. President Bush has delegitimized terrorism, whether Palestinian or other extremist Islamist. He was provided opportunity for emergence of moderate Arabic states. Israel is and should be a large factor when American Jews go to the polls. Muslims want a Jewish genocide; extremist Islamists add non-Jewish Americans to that goal. When we stand with Israel, we stand for ourselves.
Ronald Tobey, Riverside, United States of America
This is the first time since Reagan's first run for office that I will be voting for a Republican presidential candidate. The issues most important to me seem irrelevant because of the events of 9/11. George Bush's approach may not look good now, but short of the Syrian and Egyptian approaches to dealing with their Islamic Fundamentalists there is no as of yet proven way to overcome this threat that would be acceptable to the citizens of a western democracy.
The democrats seem to favor appeasement and I don't think it will work against this type of enemy. All this brings to mind Jimmy Carter's worthless intervention in North Korea and both his and Bill Clinton's intervention in the Arab-Israeli conflict, which in the end appear to have done nothing and in the case of Clinton resulted in several thousand deaths.
Robert Spezzano, Los Angeles, United States of America
Kerry is better for the Middle East. Bush may seem better to some, but is much worse on the long run. Kerry is less beligerant, and that is better for peace on the long run.
Daniel Weiss, Buenos Aires, Argentina
Bush has never cared for Israel and has only "helped", or been involved at all, when his and Israel's interests coincided. In the process his actions and words have promoted much more anti-U.S. and anti-Israel sentiment worldwide. Bush's primary interest from now on is success in Iraq, and he will gladly sacrifice Israel if that will help him succeed there.
Bruce Willner, Lawrenceville, United States of America
I am not so sure whether Kerry would be better than Bush for the U.S. foreign policy. His Vietnam background makes me hesitant. Anyway, it's clear that Bush has failed to bring peace to the Middle East, so in my opinion it can only be better for the whole world if Kerry wins this race.
What the Middle East needs urgently is a realistic plan so that fundamental Islamic groups are not powerful anymore. I hope peace will return to the Middle East as soon as possible, as the current situation has even here in Europe bad consequences (battles between Islamic and Jewish youth in the streets....) We need new good realistic peaceful leaders in this world. We are loosing time.
Bart De Lannoye, Hoeilaart, Belgium
題名には必ず「阿修羅さんへ」と記述してください。