I certainly don't think condemning israel will mitigate the suffering of the Palestinias on it's own, so yes it must be accompanied by action. But the reason i am focusing on a condemnation is because historically the US had accorded this murderous entity such deference, that a condemnation has always been defined as concerned. So, for example, an american president's condemnation of israel's actions in Gaza would be, "i am concerned about the situation in Gaza". That is the level of absurdity we are dealing with here.
So obviously, from such a historical viewpoint,i wouldn't expect even a pontificating, apparently angelic Obama to terminate weapons supplies to the zionists. But the least, the very least he could have done was condemned stridently, and purposefully these savage acts against an innocent population. If ever i had even a residual doubt in my mind tha obama would turn out to be just another craven zionist-sympathiser, it's now been firmly cast away.
So called sustained patient diplomacy does not work with barbarians.
So obviously, from such a historical viewpoint,i wouldn't expect even a pontificating, apparently angelic Obama to terminate weapons supplies to the zionists. But the least, the very least he could have done was condemned stridently, and purposefully these savage acts against an innocent population. If ever i had even a residual doubt in my mind tha obama would turn out to be just another craven zionist-sympathiser, it's now been firmly cast away.
So called sustained patient diplomacy does not work with barbarians.