[b]The lessons of Netanyahu's triumph [/b]

Discussion in 'Politics' started by M.D. Rawlings, May 28, 2011.

  1. M.D. Rawlings
    Offline

    M.D. Rawlings Classical Liberal

    Joined:
    May 26, 2011
    Messages:
    4,123
    Thanks Received:
    927
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    Heavenly Places
    Ratings:
    +1,717
    By Caroline B. Glick
    Jewish World Review
    May 27, 2011


    [​IMG]

    Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was hoping to avoid his clash with US President Barack Obama this past week in Washington. Four days before his showdown at the White House with the American leader, Netanyahu addressed the Knesset. His speech was the most dovish he had ever given. In it, he set out the parameters of the land concessions he is willing to make to the Palestinians, in the event they ever decide that they are interested in negotiating a final peace.

    The Rest

    RELATED STORY
    "An Enemy We Dare Not Name", Canada Free Press
     
    Last edited: May 28, 2011
  2. M.D. Rawlings
    Offline

    M.D. Rawlings Classical Liberal

    Joined:
    May 26, 2011
    Messages:
    4,123
    Thanks Received:
    927
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    Heavenly Places
    Ratings:
    +1,717
    Glick writes:

    Instead of welcoming Netanyahu's unprecedented concessions, Obama dismissed them as insufficient as he blindsided Netanyahu on Thursday with his speech at the State Department. There, just hours before Netanyahu was scheduled to fly off to meet him in the Oval Office, Obama adopted the Palestinian negotiating position by calling for Israel to accept that future negotiations will be based on the indefensible — indeed suicidal — 1949 armistice lines.

    So, just as he was about to board his plane, Netanyahu realized that his mission in the US capital had changed. His job wasn't to go along to get along. His job was to stop Obama from driving Israel's relations with the US off a cliff.​

    This is exactly right. Either Obama does not know his history or grasp the strategic territorial concerns of Israeli survival in the region, or his administration sides with the Palestinians. Which is it?

    Or does Obama really believe that if Israel were to make the sort of territorial concessions he expects, the Palestinians would finally make peace? In that case he's delusional.
     
    Last edited: May 28, 2011
  3. onecut39
    Offline

    onecut39 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2008
    Messages:
    1,524
    Thanks Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +152
    Netanyahu would seem to be far more popular with the US congress than he is with the Israeli people.

    This is what Israel's oldest, and possibly most influential paper had to say.

    http://www.haaretz.com/print-editio...-s-president-to-tell-aipac-the-truth-1.363403
     
  4. M.D. Rawlings
    Offline

    M.D. Rawlings Classical Liberal

    Joined:
    May 26, 2011
    Messages:
    4,123
    Thanks Received:
    927
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    Heavenly Places
    Ratings:
    +1,717
    Also, one of the nation's most liberal papers. . . .

    A larger sample of opinion: BICOM

    Israel and the United States have always agreed in principle to the terms of U.N. Resolution 242 of the 1947 Armistice (the pre-1967 boundaries) to which the non-existent Palestinian state was not a signatory. However, the historical caveat has always been predicated on a defensible posture for Israel regardless of the Resolution's formal terms. Obama's pronouncement is a dramatic departure from that understanding.
     
    Last edited: May 28, 2011
  5. Truthmatters
    Offline

    Truthmatters BANNED

    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    Messages:
    80,182
    Thanks Received:
    2,224
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +2,242
  6. The T
    Offline

    The T George S. Patton Party Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Messages:
    48,072
    Thanks Received:
    5,472
    Trophy Points:
    1,773
    Location:
    What USED TO BE A REPUBLIC RUN BY TYRANTS
    Ratings:
    +5,504
    IF they've always agreed? WHY hasn't it come to fruition?

    Kinda flawed don't you think?
     
  7. M.D. Rawlings
    Offline

    M.D. Rawlings Classical Liberal

    Joined:
    May 26, 2011
    Messages:
    4,123
    Thanks Received:
    927
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    Heavenly Places
    Ratings:
    +1,717
    What's flawed? The historic caveat of the United States and Israel, or the realization of a lasting peace? Remember, Egypt and Jordan have kept the peace with Israel based on the post-1967 boundaries for decades. Palestinian state? What Palestinian state?
     
    Last edited: May 28, 2011
  8. Truthmatters
    Offline

    Truthmatters BANNED

    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    Messages:
    80,182
    Thanks Received:
    2,224
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +2,242
    Are you people Americans?
     
  9. M.D. Rawlings
    Offline

    M.D. Rawlings Classical Liberal

    Joined:
    May 26, 2011
    Messages:
    4,123
    Thanks Received:
    927
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    Heavenly Places
    Ratings:
    +1,717
    I am. Why?
     

Share This Page