Nikki Haley Is Running For President By Trying To Stoke Anti-Arab and Anti-Muslim Hysteria Within The United States
The last couple days Nikki Haley is warmongering her ass off. This appears to be what she thinks is her path to the presidency.
She told Fox News that Israel should wipe out Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran. Which means wiping out Gaza.
Yesterday Meet The Press asked her why, when she was UN ambassador, she didnt do more to promote a "two state" solution in Israel. She answered by talking about the terrorists. The host asked her the same question again and Haley for the second time did not answer the direct question, but rather talked about terrorists.
She has no interest whatsoever in a two state solution. Her interest is in stoking anti Arab and anti Muslim hate. She says America is in danger of attacks because of what is happening in Israel. Hamas is going to attack the US ? Sounds very far fetched if not delusional. Haley knows she cant compete with Trump in any MAGA related domestic way, so she is going to try and gain a foothold by warmongering.
Tags
Who is online
85 visitors
Nikki Haley should never be president of the United States.
She said nothing about Arabs or Muslims.
Do you think these groups are Irish catholics. ?
If she had left her comments confined to the middle east you could possibly have a point. But she said that America is under threat from attacks by these groups. That is a major dogwhistle to anti-Arab and anti-Muslim bigotry. I'm sure you remember what occurred after the last time the American population concentrated on this particular brand of threat.
What is happening in Israel has nothing to do with the US territory. She said the threat exists because Hamas etc "hate Americans".
Do you think Hamas is going bomb American cities?
Don’t be silly.
A candidate’s hyperbole. Iran clearly threatens US interests in the ME. I think reports are that Hamas has killed at least 10 Americans yesterday.
That’s true.
Not tomorrow.
I don't think you can rule out some type of terrorism in the US given how porous the southern border is. No telling if any or how many hamas terrorists might already be here...
It would be impossible for a foreign group to bomb any American city.
No. (And neither did I think a bunch of Middle Eastern religious fanatics would be crazy enough to bomb the World Trade Center!)
And not once but twice!
Isn't saying that what we though before 9/11?
It depends on what type of bombing you are talking about. Terrorist bombings like the two in NY or bombs from planes like Pearl Harbor and Dutch Harbor Alaska or of course there are the ballistic missiles that can reach the US.
I found it hard to believe there are comments above that the USA can't be bombed. As Frank Zappa and his band The Mothers of Invention sang (and I watched them do it live in Detroit more than half a century ago) "It can't happen here", well, as Kavika pointed out, Pearl Harbor was bombed, and there are nations with the capability of sending nuclear-armed missiles to hit American cities. So it is naive to think "It can't happen here." As Michael points out the WTC was bombed - the first attempt to topple the WTC was with a bomb.
This may be off topic, but why does the computer's spell-check underline the word "naive" in red? It is a genuine English word correctly spelled. Does this happen to anyone else or is it a quirk of my computer?
You’d prefer maybe Trump? DeSantis? Voters are going to have to choose from among these people, you know.
People often forget-- you don't need to win one election to become President. You need to win two!
Yes, that's right-- first you need to win the nomination of your party-- and then win the regular presidential election.
So let's start with the latest polls re: the Republican primary. What %age of the vote is she projected to get? 90%? Maybe only 55%? What are the relative odds of her winning then Republican primary?
(P.S: Agree-- or disagree: "Mick Jagger should never be president of the United States").
How about Mick Jagger can't be POTUS because he's not an American citizen?
How many times do you need to be told that Hamas and other Islamic terrorists couldn't care less about some stupid "two-state solution"? Their whole purpose in life is killing Jews. You remain willfully ignorant or in denial as to what's driving all this.
Just curious, is there any Republican you feel should be president of the United States?
Well she will get my vote.
In this case it is a real shame that you are among a tiny minority of the GOP.
Why didn't she pursue a 2 state solution? because the Palestinians are animals that will never accept Israels right to exist. Liberals in the press and the democrats in Congress need to pull their collective heads out of their asses.
Would calling all Palestinians animals be like calling all white people racist?
No just democrats, they aren't necessarily white, but definitely fit the racist category.
Which Palestinians ever seriously tried for a 2 state solution following the Oslo Accords?
It would literally be in contradiction with the Hamas charter.
Well the Palestinians already have total self rule in one place (Gaza)-- but I'd be willing to give them another state--Jordan. (Fact: The majority of Jordan's population is Palestinian.
In an ideal world there would be a 4 State solution.
First of all, IMO Israel should hsave a right to exist. So that's one.
Then the Palis should get 3: 1-Hamastan (AKA "Gaza"). 2-Then end the occupation of Jordan by the Hashemites (who are not "Palestinians"). And thirdly they should get part of the West Bank-- (and part going to Israel).
But hey-- what do I know?
That’s an idea. Jordon occupied the West Bank and East Jerusalem after the 48 War and held it until losing it in 67. It offered Jordanian citizenship to those living there.
In 72, Jordan’s advocated a federation between the West Bank and Jordan which would have granted Palestinians autonomy. The PLO put an end to that idea.
Alternatively, I hear that there is a lot of empty land in Syria.
The Israeli Defense Minister is saying that he will cut off food and water, and electricity , to Gaza. How can Gaza have "total self rule" when they depend on what is essentially a hostile neighboring "country" for food water and electricity ?
Exactly, Gaza needed an Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act more than we did. It's like the entire region has long turned there back on Palestinians except for Iran and Hezbollah. And they don't do infrastructure.
Does Gaza have "total self-rule" ?
They voted for total Hamas rule, not self-rule.
Whatever the the Palestinian civilians have coming, they basically deserve it coming because they voted to be ruled by these sadistic animals. That's going to amount to going without power, fuel, food, and water.
Shame.
What is the basis of your thinking? If this was a neighborhood that hid gangsters because they profited from the crime, would you think they don't deserve when crime visits them?....
You might want to read up about the suggestion of a Jordan solution. LINK ->
If they did that they would be neither liberals nor Democrats.
Sure, let's attack Niki Haley for saying Israel should finish Hamas. The horror!
Ignore the democratic socialists of America, who boosts numerous Democratic Congressmen among their members, cheerleading for Hamas. Or Ilhan Omar tweeting justifications for the weekend's butchery, or the Biden admin calling for Isreal to cease fire within hours of the worst terrorist attack in decades, or a Chicago government official chanting to liquidate Jews at a rally in support of Hamas. Attack Haley!
You sure are carrying a lot of water for Hamas these days.
I dont give a shit about Hamas . Israel can kill all their leaders for all I care.
Nikki Haley is desperate to get some attention for her weakling presidential campaign, so she is selling herself as a mega hard liner on the middle east, on China, and other foreign policy topics.
So you are proving once again democrats want trump to be the nominee, and if he wins they will blame everyone but themselves as they clutch their pearls and wring their hands
Whatever that means, which clearly isnt much.
have someone explain it to you.
Hamas is currently sharing video of a screaming teenaged girl being doused in gasoline, lit on fire and burned to death. Maybe, just maybe, taking a hardline against such acts Is appropriate.
the ‘words are violence’ crowd sure don’t seem that angry about actual violence. Maybe If hamas used the wrong pronouns to describe someone progressives would support taking a hard line against such barbaric tactics too.
But don't you dare refer to them as animals
Normally I'd be quick to jump in & explain it-- but I'd probably cause a tremendous brouhaha, maybe even get a suspension.
I hope Israel does catch up with all the people who did this. Shoot them in the head on the street, I dont care. Meanwhile here on Newstalkers we have some calling Palestinians "animals" .
This is all going to happen again 5 years from now or 10 years from now, as long as the status quo exists. Everyone knows this but nothing is ever done about it. Israel is an ethocentric (based also on religion) state. Whether that is objectively right or wrong is not really the point. In such a state Palestinians CANNOT be treated as equals, by law. The violence will never stop.
The civilians are pretty much treated as equals, the problem is with their sadistic animalistic rulers.
And another example of a profile of courage and standing behind your beliefs......until the poll results come in.
Blinken deletes social media post calling for Israel-Hamas 'cease-fire'
At this point, the Biden administration is grasping at straws and only finding air
It would be interesting to know how most American Citizens view Arabs and Muslims, I don't think much stoking is needed
College students are celebrating Hamas on both coasts.
Most college students don’t know what they don’t know yet.
Comfortably tucked away in their safe spaces with mommy, daddy or Uncle Sam paying their way through college.
Joint Statement by Harvard Palestine Solidarity Groups on the Situation in Palestine
We, the undersigned student organizations, hold the Israeli regime entirely responsible for all unfolding violence.
That’s a shocker …
You expect a group named Palestine Solidarity to say something else ?
So you agree that Americans hate Arabs and Muslims.
It seems that Arabs and Muslims hate Palestinians.
why should Americans like them?
Why should Americans hate them? Or do you think every Palestinian is a terrorist?
Its always interesting to hear people say that the Palestinians bring their woes on themselves by voting for Hamas. There are a lot of Palestinians , over 2 million, that live in the West Bank and do not vote for Hamas.
And im sure that many people in Gaza that do vote for Hamas think "what have I got to lose?" Our life is a hell hole either way.
I generally don't like those who cause trouble that affects me
Apparently a good place to raise a family though. Their population growth rate is among the highest in the world: 3.4% in the West Bank and 4% in Gaza. Or maybe there just isn't much else to do.
I can't think of much they have done to cause us to like them
And I am sure that they never consider the real reason they are in such poor conditions is because of Hamas.
Nikki Haley would make a much better POTUS than the dimbulb holding the office today.
Much better and Dems know it. Which is why she must be attacked.
I agree that Nikki Haley is a substantially better choice than Biden and almost any rational politician would be a better choice than Trump.
But Trump is blocking the door to the nomination and the GOP is clearly unable to get its act together to allow a decent candidate like Haley to secure the nomination.
Yep, just like when the DNC/Clinton torpedoed Jim Webb’s candidacy in 2016.
I would have voted for him in a heartbeat that year but se la vie.
lol
OK I admit my ignorance-- who the fuck is Jim, Webb? An Athlete? Rock star? Or...worse yet-- a big "Influencer" on Instagram?
Hey we agree on something for a change. I am even considering voting for her in the primary. The only problem is by the time my state has its primary, the candidate is already decided.
A little prediction. In situations where I agree with Rs, I suspect we will be in agreement. And on those situations where I disagree with the Rs, I suspect we will be in disagreement.
Well then gird your loins, John, because if the race is between Haley and Biden, I am voting for Haley.
It Trump is the R nominee and has a chance to win, I am voting for whoever is the D nominee.
That was funny..
I think the opposite is true also. Oh well that's kinda how life works.
A smart strategy for GOP voters is to vote for one of the most promising non-Trump candidates in the primaries. And in every poll, do likewise. That is, at this point in time, the best chance for GOP voters to open the door a crack for someone other than Trump.
Its a free country, you can vote for anyone you want.
If Haley is eliminated from the race and Trump asks her to be his vice president what do you think she will say? Yes ! And then rationalize her caving in. She has been flip flopping on Trump for years. That is not a leader.
I do think she's better than most of the other Republicans, and would be light years better than Trump, but she's not better than any of the Democrats who could conceivably run, including Biden. .
What, exactly, is the opposite of what I wrote?
This is now cliché, but Biden's major problem is his age. He is waaaaay too old to be PotUS.
Now, that said, if Biden were to recruit a new V.P. such as Gov Tim Walz then I would vote for Biden/Walz.
I suspect that I am not all that unique in seeing the oldest PotUS ever in US history and being highly interested in who is next in line. To wit, the choice of V.P. could, IMO, substantially enhance Biden's chances.
Conceivably?... pretty sure she beats Biden in the polls.
Why?
My post explained why.
I am convinced that if Haley was offered the vice presidency under Trump, she would take it. That is disqualifying in my book.
So you think he's too old to run but would vote for his ticket if it had a younger person you felt was competent? Does that mean you identify with Democrat policy more?
So you disqualified someone who hasn’t done what your imagination says she might. That’s hilarious.
Here I am comparing Tim Walz to the extant R candidates who have the best chance at the nomination.
Haley has had plenty of experience working for Trump. I doubt that she would do so again. Further, I doubt she would want to politically and historically soil herself that way.
But, this is politics, so I cannot eliminate your hypothesis.
Haley would be higher in my personal opinion if she would definitively distance herself from Trump. Her wishy-washy position (although I understand why politically) is a negative IMO.
if you say so,.. You seem to me to be saying you would vote for a candidate that you feel is too old to be PotUS if he only had a younger, more competent, iyo, VP candidate. Which would suggest that you prefer Democrat policies to Republican ones. Nothing wrong with that btw....
She raised her hand at the first debate and said she will vote for him if he is the nominee. I have very little doubt she would join a second Trump administration , although not in a position so lowly as UN ambassador.
You are greatly oversimplifying this. We are talking about the Executive branch alone. So note that. Second, my two picks for nominees are Tim Walz for D and Chris Sununu for R. If Tim Walz is on the ticket that is a major plus for me. If the two nominees were Walz vs. Sununu, I would vote for Sununu.
As for policies, I (like most everyone else) never get what I want. My top desire is to seriously stop wasteful spending. Neither of the main parties actually act to curb spending and we all know there is serious systemic waste in government and that our politicians just keep layering on spending initiatives.
Probably missed something, but this gives you an idea why, for me, political choices are not simply D or R. And for PotUS, I do care about statesmanship, competence, experience, etc. Although I wish no harm for Biden, I do not see him continuing in the extremely demanding, stressful job of PotUS. So to me, if I vote for Biden, I am really voting for his V.P.
Finally, as a whole, I find the GOP to be dysfunctional. I trust the GOP less now than I have ever in my lifetime. That is a monster negative on the party. Thus, currently, I find the Ds to be more rational than the Rs. I do not like this situation since I am not enamored with the Ds either, but the Rs seem to have lost their collective minds.
I consider that to be a survival lie. She had to do that to survive before she establishes momentum.
If you say so...
I do.
What is clearly NOT funny is that the GOP is likely to stupidly nominate Trump instead of Haley.
Funny. Joe Biden ran for PotUS in 2008 and then became VP under Obama. Same disqualification or blatant fucking hypocrisy?
It’s called TDS driven denial.
How is a comparison of Nikki Haley to Joe Biden an indication of "TDS driven denial"?
Do you actually expect to get an answer to a question like that from any of these people? Good luck.
No. I do not ask questions like that with the expectation of a direct answer. My question illustrates the absurdity of the comment.
On Newstalkers it is an eternal question, a hamster wheel activity.
The comparison is obvious.
Haley worked for and has supported Trump. Therefore, the TDS ridden are in denial that she would be a better choice than Biden.
I have never run from a reasonable question from you or anyone else here and I never will. People here with an axe to grind or narrative to push might disagree but they would be wrong.
Good answer. but probably not acceptable
Your TDS fantasy has a very broad scope.
Question asked and answered.
That you don’t like the answer, is not my problem.
Bingo …. Give that man a cigar!
Yeah, and I gave you my response. You toss around TDS so often that it has no significance.
I use it when appropriate and it’s most always spot on.
I don’t waste my energy expecting the afflicted to agree
Accusing either Haley or Israel of pursuing genocide is obnoxious. When Israel attacks in Gaza, they designate targets because they believe Hamas is operating from that specific location. They don’t just randomly fire hundreds of missiles into the general area like Hamas did on Saturday.
Before they fire, Israel drops flyers, warning civilians to flee the area. They do what can reasonably be done to have targeted attacks that minimize civilian casualties.
If it were up to Israel, they would just exist where they are, in peace. If it were up to Hamas - or several other nearby Arab powers/countries, Israel and it’s people would be exterminated or removed entirely (but preferably, killed).
Any negative feeling against Hamas is not Nikki Haley’s fault. They do just fine with that by themselves.
I had seen that a while back and always wondered-- how can so many (non-Muslim) people (in the U.S. and Europe) be so against the rights of the Jews to their ancient homeland? And then claim that they're not anti-Semitic? (i.e. hating Jews?)
They're so called "Anti-Zionism" is a feeble attempt to disguise their bigotry.
The Jewish people should have been placed somewhere else after the Holocaust, away from an area where they would be surrounded by enemies. But because they were "promised" that land by God it had to be where it is now. That decision has led to endless conflict with no end in sight.
I think that Jews were about on third of the population there before WW II ended.
Not much value in looking back JR, look forward.
It's their ancient homeland, preceding any Arabs or Muslims. They Arabs and Muslims will have to learn to live in peace with the Israelis.
Should the Palestinian people just "shut up" and accept second class citizenship within Israel ? That is all else that is offered to them.
Explain specifically what you mean and how it justifies violence.
That's generally how it works,...
You can't help but feel sorry for these people.
Since ancient Israel, the region has been conquered or rule the Assyrians, then the Babylonians followed by the Persians, then Alexander the Great and then Rome and several Muslim Caliphates. In more modern times, they we ruled by the Ottoman Empire then the UK and Israel and now Hamas. Centuries of subjugation and ruled by others. It's no wonder that they don't know how to rule themselves.
I don’t understand how you can equate this:
with this:
Do you not see a qualitative difference in these tactics?
Huh?
Of course they are not the same. One is barbarism and the other is state sponsored collective punishment. It is incredible that anyone would think that starving Gaza is going to put an end to the problem . The ten year olds starved in Gaza will be the terrorists in 2033.
It’s not even that. It’s not punishment. Israel has signed deal after deal with Palestinians, but Hamas is not interested. Hamas, as an organization, was formed because they didn’t like the PLO negotiating with Israel. They oppose the very idea of peace with Israel. They are sworn to kill every Jew. Building a thriving Palestinian state is not even on their agenda.
Israel blockades Gaza because Hamas keeps bringing in weapons and attacking from there. It has nothing to do with “punishing” the Palestinian people.
You can call it anything you want. Cutting off food water and electricity to 2 million people, and destroying their housing, qualifies as "collective punishment". International law says so.
Don’t lecture me about electricity and international law when this is happening:
Children found ‘butchered’ in Israeli kibbutz, IDF says, as horror of Hamas’ attacks near border begins to emerge
Your campaign to assign some kind of moral equivalency to these actions is bizarre and willfully ignorant.
I am not Jewish, and I am not Arab. I have no dog in this fight other than wishing well to anyone who wants a just peace. This whole thing has gone on for many decades, with Israel having very justifiable concerns about terrorism within their borders. So they lock up the Palestinians in sub prime living conditions and pretend the locking up doesnt exist. How has that worked out?
How can you justify withholding food and water from 2 million people? Revenge?
The Israeli military says that leveling Gaza will put an end to terror attacks once and for all. Does any sane person believe this?
Not revenge. Self defense.
Israel has control of those things and can shut them off
No shit?
Then how is Gaza an independent entity as so many of the Palestinian haters always claim?
Gaza has shown it does not deserve to be independent.
Why did Hamas attack, and why now? What does it hope to gain?
In hindsight, the drivers of Hamas’s startlingly well-planned, land-sea-air attack on Israel on Saturday were in plain sight.
The operation reflects a pattern of four wars and regular outbreaks of violence between Israel and Hamas militants in Gaza since 2005, when Israel withdrew its military posts and forcibly removed 9,000 Israeli settlers from the territory.
Each time Hamas has launched rockets at Israel or engaged in similar provocations, it has drawn heavy retaliation from Israel in the form of major bombings on the Gaza Strip. Hamas, however, seems to regard this as a cost of doing business.
An important factor motivating Hamas towards violence is that it has to watch its flanks. Other smaller, but increasingly extremist groups, are contesting its authority in Gaza, notably Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
These groups have, at times, independently launched rocket attacks on Israel, which bring retribution on the whole territory.
On top of this, the Israeli government formed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu last December is the most right wing in Israeli history. This government has made no secret of its desire to annex the West Bank and has permitted significant expansion of Jewish settlements in the territory, which are illegal under international law .
That has led to conflict between settlers and young West Bank Palestinians, who in the past year have formed a loose grouping known as the “ Lions’ Den ”.
This grouping, comprising independent militants with apparently no central control, has scant regard for the Palestinian Authority, which governs the West Bank and is led by the octogenarian Mahmoud Abbas. The Palestinian Authority has little real administrative, security or moral authority in the territory.
The “Lions’ Den” also vies with Gaza militant groups for influence among Palestinian youth – both in Gaza and the West Bank.
Added to this, a minister in Netanyahu’s coalition, Itamar Ben-Gvir , has visited the Temple Mount, the site of the Al-Aqsa Mosque, one of the holiest shrines in Islam. This was considered a provocation by all Palestinians – both in the West Bank and Gaza. Further angering Palestinians, Israeli tourists also travelled to the site over the recent Sukkot holiday.
A visit to the Temple Mount by Ariel Sharon in 2000, then the leader of the opposition in Israel’s government, is generally regarded as the spark that ignited the Second Intifada from 2000-2005.
Under an agreement predating Israel’s foundation, Jordan has custodianship of the Al-Aqsa religious complex. Israel aimed to respect Jordan’s role when it signed the Israeli-Jordanian peace treaty in 1994. But Palestinians see the visits by Israeli ministers and non-Muslim tourists as disrespectful of the sanctity of the site and counter to this undertaking.
Hamas has also claimed these visits have led to the desecration of the Al-Aqsa site, an argument obviously aimed at winning support from Muslims throughout the Arab and wider Islamic world.
Why attack now?
Significantly, Hamas has named its action “ Operation Al-Aqsa Flood ”. This provides some clues to the primary reason for striking at this time, which emphasises what Hamas sees as Israeli acts of desecration of a holy Islamic site.
However, an additional motivating factor was likely the increasing tendency of Arab states to make peace agreements with Israel, as evidenced by the 2020 Abraham Accords , involving the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Sudan and Morocco.
There has recently been strong speculation that Saudi Arabia is about to make its own agreement with Israel.
This is of great concern to all Palestinians, not just those in the West Bank, as it further reduces pressure on Israel to reach a settlement with them. Netanyahu has made clear in his public statements that he prioritises peace with Arab states over eventual peace with the Palestinians.
Hamas does not recognise Israel, but has said it would observe a truce if Israel withdrew to its 1967 borders. Israel would be unlikely to take Hamas’s word on this and withdraw as demanded. But there would be even less chance of that condition ever being realised if Saudi Arabia were to conclude its own deal with Israel.
Another aspect of the timing is that it coincides almost precisely with the 50th anniversary of the start of the Yom Kippur or Ramadan War in October 1973, when Egypt and Syria attacked Israel together. The significance of a Palestinian entity being able to surprise Israel in the same way would not be lost on Hamas.
So there were several objectives for Hamas to launch an attack at this time – and possibly a combination of them.
Hamas is likely to gain much sympathy from the wider Arab world, but little in the way of material assistance. Hamas’s military operation will likely cause Saudi Arabia to hold back from normalising relations with Israel for now. That said, it’s unlikely any of the Arab states that have signed the Abraham Accords will withdraw from them now in protest over Israeli retaliation against Gaza.
Where the conflict is headed?
Where the conflict is headed is unclear. The Hezbollah militant group in Lebanon has already fired on positions in Israel’s north. But the extent to which it will become seriously involved will depend on its sponsor, Iran.
Tehran has generally been seen to want to keep Hezbollah’s considerable rocket and missile strength in reserve in case of an Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear facilities.
There is also the question of whether “Lions’ Den” militants in the West Bank will launch their own attacks, effectively creating a third front against Israel. And a possible fourth front could come from attacks on Jewish Israelis by Arab Israelis living in Israel.
US President Joe Biden has already promised support for Israel, so there can be little doubt Israel will eventually get on top of these challenges. Netanyahu has warned of a long war, but it may prove reasonably short if Israel goes all out in its retaliation.
The main constraint on Israeli action against Gaza will be the fact that an unknown number of Israeli citizens have been kidnapped by Hamas militants and taken to the strip. Indiscriminate Israeli bombing would certainly put those lives at risk.
Israel will also be reluctant to put its defence forces in Gaza because of the risk of heavy casualties. However, it may send special forces if it gains intelligence on the whereabouts of its kidnapped citizens.
A further risk for Israel in its retaliation is that too brutal an assault on Gaza could turn Western opinion against it. So far, however, Western governments are strongly supportive of Israel and unsympathetic towards Hamas.
The overall lesson for Israel is that it has to develop a policy for managing the Palestinians living in the areas it controls.
The current situation, in which hardline militants are contained in Gaza, while Israeli forces curtail the actions of Palestinians living in Israel and the West Bank, has suited the Israeli government for many years. It has been able to ignore Arab and international pressure to negotiate a two-state solution or to acquiesce in a one-state solution .
The real significance of Hamas’s operation is that such a non-policy can no longer continue.
I completely agree, nor do I think it will..
Meanwhile in Manhattan yesterday, a celebration:
Perhaps the Squad joined the celebration.