Democrats and Republicans Drafting a Resolution to Rebuke Obama's Israel Comments.

Publius1787

Gold Member
Jan 11, 2011
6,211
676
190
Democrats and Republicans Drafting a Resolution to Rebuke Obama's Israel Comments

Thats gotta sting! Obama is so radical on foreign policy that even the dems wont support him. It will read something like this.

"Draft language of the resolution states “it is contrary to the U.S. policy and national security to have the borders of Israel return to the boundaries of 1949 or 1967.” http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/163105-dems-may-join-rebuff-of-obama

And who can blame the Democrats for jumping on this resolution? It would be political suicide not to.

Senate Dems might join rebuff of Obama on Israeli border issue - TheHill.com

Senate Democrats are expected to support a resolution intended as a rebuff to President Obama’s call for basing Middle East peace talks on the 1967 Israeli-Palestinian borders.

It would be a rare rebuke of the president by the upper chamber and a sign that Democrats are worried about the impact of last week’s speech on the U.S.-Israel relationship and pro-Israel constituents.

Democrats in both chambers are scrambling to fix the damage caused when Obama called for the 1967 borders and land swaps as a basis for peace.

Some Democrats have tried to downplay the rift, but Israel’s strongest supporters in Congress say there’s no denying that Obama made a tactical mistake in handling the relationship.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
"We believe the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states."

President Obama

This has been the basic idea for at least 12 years. This is what Bill Clinton, Ehud Barak and Yasser Arafat were talking about at Camp David, and later, at Taba. This is what George W. Bush was talking about with Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert. (Emphasis added.)

So what’s the huge deal here?

Faux Outrage!
 
"We believe the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states."

President Obama

This has been the basic idea for at least 12 years. This is what Bill Clinton, Ehud Barak and Yasser Arafat were talking about at Camp David, and later, at Taba. This is what George W. Bush was talking about with Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert. (Emphasis added.)

So what’s the huge deal here?

Faux Outrage!

Once this resolution is finished it will read “it is contrary to the U.S. policy and national security to have the borders of Israel return to the boundaries of 1949 or 1967.” Senate Dems might join rebuff of Obama on Israeli border issue - TheHill.com . So whatever it may be or may have been its about to either change or become official. Oh, and make Obama look about three inches tall in the process.
 
Last edited:
I hope each and every one of them that support the resolution gets defeated in their next campaign.
 
I hope each and every one of them that support the resolution gets defeated in their next campaign.

I think thats what theyre trying to avoid. Check out this reception!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crl88knc4eA&feature=related]YouTube - ‪Benjamin Netanyahu Address To Joint Session Of Congress pt.1‬‏[/ame]
 
Democrats and Republicans Drafting a Resolution to Rebuke Obama's Israel Comments

Thats gotta sting! Obama is so radical on foreign policy that even the dems wont support him. It will read something like this.

"Draft language of the resolution states “it is contrary to the U.S. policy and national security to have the borders of Israel return to the boundaries of 1949 or 1967.” Senate Dems might join rebuff of Obama on Israeli border issue - TheHill.com

And who can blame the Democrats for jumping on this resolution? It would be political suicide not to.

Senate Dems might join rebuff of Obama on Israeli border issue - TheHill.com

Senate Democrats are expected to support a resolution intended as a rebuff to President Obama’s call for basing Middle East peace talks on the 1967 Israeli-Palestinian borders.

It would be a rare rebuke of the president by the upper chamber and a sign that Democrats are worried about the impact of last week’s speech on the U.S.-Israel relationship and pro-Israel constituents.

Democrats in both chambers are scrambling to fix the damage caused when Obama called for the 1967 borders and land swaps as a basis for peace.

Some Democrats have tried to downplay the rift, but Israel’s strongest supporters in Congress say there’s no denying that Obama made a tactical mistake in handling the relationship.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HelIHTveKQw]YouTube - ‪The History of the Middle East...‬‏[/ame]

How is that a rebuff of President Obama since he didn't say that Israel should return to the exact same borders as in 1967 or 1949.

These are the questions: Is the general public really so stupid to believe that's what Obama said? Or do Reps just have so little respect for the intelligence of the general public that they feel a need to do something like this.

Of course it's a given that the conservative opposition to Obama will try to foster the belief that he didn't qualify his remarks.
 
"We believe the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states."

President Obama

This has been the basic idea for at least 12 years. This is what Bill Clinton, Ehud Barak and Yasser Arafat were talking about at Camp David, and later, at Taba. This is what George W. Bush was talking about with Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert. (Emphasis added.)

So what’s the huge deal here?

Faux Outrage!

Once this resolution is finished it will read “it is contrary to the U.S. policy and national security to have the borders of Israel return to the boundaries of 1949 or 1967.” Senate Dems might join rebuff of Obama on Israeli border issue - TheHill.com . So whatever it may be or may have been its about to either change or become official. Oh, and make Obama look about three inches tall in the process.

Good thing the President didn't state that Israel must return to those borders without some kind of land swap for security purposes huh?

Just because Congress passes a resolution doesn't make it true or untrue what the President said does it?
 
"We believe the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states."

President Obama

This has been the basic idea for at least 12 years. This is what Bill Clinton, Ehud Barak and Yasser Arafat were talking about at Camp David, and later, at Taba. This is what George W. Bush was talking about with Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert. (Emphasis added.)

So what’s the huge deal here?

Faux Outrage!

President Obama should have first said that Israel will only be called on to negotiate with the Palestinian Authority when Hamas now an equal partner with Fatah in the Palestinian governing authority agrees to three conditions, which the U.S. and the European Union have already stated on prior occasions, is required for them to recognize Hamas. They are, one, that Hamas accepts the existence and legitimacy of the state of Israel; two, that Hamas renounce the use of violence against Israel, and, three, that Hamas accepts all prior agreements between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. The U.S. policy has been that it will not recognize Hamas as a legitimate force unless it performs all three conditions. (Bush 41, Clinton, Bush 42)

Further, President Obama should have required of the Palestinian Authority a public commitment stated in English, Arabic and Hebrew that upon conclusion of peace negotiations and the signing of a peace agreement, the Palestinian Authority will state it recognizes Israel as a Jewish state, which it has continually refused to do.

It isn't so much what Obama said but what he didn't say.
 
Why is it so hard to see that the rest of the ME hate the Palestinians almost as much as the Jews. They have never raised a hand to do anything for them ever and they are not going to. They just hope the war continues and the Palestinians win them the will wipe them out.
 
Democrats and Republicans Drafting a Resolution to Rebuke Obama's Israel Comments

Thats gotta sting! Obama is so radical on foreign policy that even the dems wont support him. It will read something like this.

"Draft language of the resolution states “it is contrary to the U.S. policy and national security to have the borders of Israel return to the boundaries of 1949 or 1967.” Senate Dems might join rebuff of Obama on Israeli border issue - TheHill.com

And who can blame the Democrats for jumping on this resolution? It would be political suicide not to.

Senate Dems might join rebuff of Obama on Israeli border issue - TheHill.com

Senate Democrats are expected to support a resolution intended as a rebuff to President Obama’s call for basing Middle East peace talks on the 1967 Israeli-Palestinian borders.

It would be a rare rebuke of the president by the upper chamber and a sign that Democrats are worried about the impact of last week’s speech on the U.S.-Israel relationship and pro-Israel constituents.

Democrats in both chambers are scrambling to fix the damage caused when Obama called for the 1967 borders and land swaps as a basis for peace.

Some Democrats have tried to downplay the rift, but Israel’s strongest supporters in Congress say there’s no denying that Obama made a tactical mistake in handling the relationship.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HelIHTveKQw]YouTube - ‪The History of the Middle East...‬‏[/ame]

How is that a rebuff of President Obama since he didn't say that Israel should return to the exact same borders as in 1967 or 1949.

These are the questions: Is the general public really so stupid to believe that's what Obama said? Or do Reps just have so little respect for the intelligence of the general public that they feel a need to do something like this.

Of course it's a given that the conservative opposition to Obama will try to foster the belief that he didn't qualify his remarks.

Read the link in the op. Democrats and Republicans are both slamming Obama.
 
Democrats and Republicans Drafting a Resolution to Rebuke Obama's Israel Comments

Thats gotta sting! Obama is so radical on foreign policy that even the dems wont support him. It will read something like this.

"Draft language of the resolution states “it is contrary to the U.S. policy and national security to have the borders of Israel return to the boundaries of 1949 or 1967.” Senate Dems might join rebuff of Obama on Israeli border issue - TheHill.com

And who can blame the Democrats for jumping on this resolution? It would be political suicide not to.



YouTube - ‪The History of the Middle East...‬‏

How is that a rebuff of President Obama since he didn't say that Israel should return to the exact same borders as in 1967 or 1949.

These are the questions: Is the general public really so stupid to believe that's what Obama said? Or do Reps just have so little respect for the intelligence of the general public that they feel a need to do something like this.

Of course it's a given that the conservative opposition to Obama will try to foster the belief that he didn't qualify his remarks.

Read the link in the op. Democrats and Republicans are both slamming Obama.

I read it. Yeah, they're slamming Obama for something he didn't even propose. Hence my questions.

You do realize, don't you, that some people (on BOTH sides) don't want peace? It actually serves some peoples interest to keep the Palestinians and the Israelis in a perpetual state of conflict.
 
How is that a rebuff of President Obama since he didn't say that Israel should return to the exact same borders as in 1967 or 1949.

These are the questions: Is the general public really so stupid to believe that's what Obama said? Or do Reps just have so little respect for the intelligence of the general public that they feel a need to do something like this.

Of course it's a given that the conservative opposition to Obama will try to foster the belief that he didn't qualify his remarks.

Read the link in the op. Democrats and Republicans are both slamming Obama.

I read it. Yeah, they're slamming Obama for something he didn't even propose. Hence my questions.

You do realize, don't you, that some people (on BOTH sides) don't want peace? It actually serves some peoples interest to keep the Palestinians and the Israelis in a perpetual state of conflict.

Yeahhh .... Israel has proved that its been commited to peace for years. Radical islam is the only deterrant preventing a Palestinian state.
 
Read the link in the op. Democrats and Republicans are both slamming Obama.

I read it. Yeah, they're slamming Obama for something he didn't even propose. Hence my questions.

You do realize, don't you, that some people (on BOTH sides) don't want peace? It actually serves some peoples interest to keep the Palestinians and the Israelis in a perpetual state of conflict.

Yeahhh .... Israel has proved that its been commited to peace for years. Radical islam is the only deterrant preventing a Palestinian state.

You know what the problem is with seeing things in black and white terms? It's that it is too often simplistic AND untrue.

Let's take the whole canard that land for peace can't work. The 30 plus years of Israel peace with Egypt proves that isn't true.

As for who doesn't want peace, don't kid yourself about it only being one-sided. There are powerful forces in both Israel and America who don't want peace. Many religious Jews want settlements in the West Bank specifically because in impedes the peace process. They want a greater Israel. Then, of course, there's the fact that there are great sums of money to be made by arms manufacturers and others who sell Israel arms and other supplies. Peace could very well put an end to their revenue streams.
 
I read it. Yeah, they're slamming Obama for something he didn't even propose. Hence my questions.

You do realize, don't you, that some people (on BOTH sides) don't want peace? It actually serves some peoples interest to keep the Palestinians and the Israelis in a perpetual state of conflict.

Yeahhh .... Israel has proved that its been commited to peace for years. Radical islam is the only deterrant preventing a Palestinian state.

You know what the problem is with seeing things in black and white terms? It's that it is too often simplistic AND untrue.

Let's take the whole canard that land for peace can't work. The 30 plus years of Israel peace with Egypt proves that isn't true.

As for who doesn't want peace, don't kid yourself about it only being one-sided. There are powerful forces in both Israel and America who don't want peace. Many religious Jews want settlements in the West Bank specifically because in impedes the peace process. They want a greater Israel. Then, of course, there's the fact that there are great sums of money to be made by arms manufacturers and others who sell Israel arms and other supplies. Peace could very well put an end to their revenue streams.

Israel makes plenty from its exports and doesent exactly need perpetual war to prop up its economy. Especially since they found that huge oil reserve off of their coast. Remember what happened when Israel forced its people out of those settlement a while back? how did the palestinians react? More rockets and more violence. But thankfully Israel has a motto. You kill we build. I dont exactly think you make much of a point with egypt considering that egypt is not palestine and thats the important issue.
 
"We believe the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states."

President Obama

This has been the basic idea for at least 12 years. This is what Bill Clinton, Ehud Barak and Yasser Arafat were talking about at Camp David, and later, at Taba. This is what George W. Bush was talking about with Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert. (Emphasis added.)

So what’s the huge deal here?

Faux Outrage!

Bipartisan faux outrage? Or, perhaps, faux outrage from the blind partisans who support Obama no matter what.
 
Last edited:
"We believe the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states."

President Obama

This has been the basic idea for at least 12 years. This is what Bill Clinton, Ehud Barak and Yasser Arafat were talking about at Camp David, and later, at Taba. This is what George W. Bush was talking about with Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert. (Emphasis added.)

So what’s the huge deal here?

Faux Outrage!

Bipartisan faux outrage? Or, perhaps, faux outrage from the blind partisans who support Obama no matter what.

One things for sure. If this thing makes it to the floor there are only going to be a few "no" votes.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top