Obama does not state the 1967 border should be returned...

[JimH52]

Obama does not state the 1967 border should be returned...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

He said the 1967 border should be used as a basis. Read this from CNN.


Quote:
"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," Obama continued.
The key it "mutually agreed swaps." The far right wants everyone to believe he is throwing his support to the Palestinians. That is totally untrue. He is actually stating something that every President in recnet history has believed. That is that the 1967 boundary should be the first consideration for negotiations.

But I am certain the far right will call this a huge concession, when it is not. He is just the first President to have the fortitude to say it.

 

[Avatar4321]

Talk about Spin. Obama is pretty clear that the current borders should be based on the 67 borders.

He didn't say this was a starting off point. Quite lying.

 

[Charles_Main]

Obama does not state the 1967 border should be returned...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

He said the 1967 border should be used as a basis. Read this from CNN.


Quote:
"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," Obama continued.
The key it "mutually agreed swaps." The far right wants everyone to believe he is throwing his support to the Palestinians. That is totally untrue. He is actually stating something that every President in recnet history has believed. That is that the 1967 boundary should be the first consideration for negotiations.

But I am certain the far right will call this a huge concession, when it is not. He is just the first President to have the fortitude to say it.

Spin it all you want. What Israel and the Palestinians heard was return to 1967 Borders. I challenge you to show evidence of any Former US President suggesting we use the 1967 borders.

 

[DiamondDave]

If I were Israel... I'd go all '300' on them...

Obama and the Palestine whiners: "we want your borders and we want that land"

Israel: "Come and take them"

It's Israel's land... point blank... and unless the ones in that region want their little asses kicked in 6 days again... I'd let it be

 

[WillowTree]

Obama does not state the 1967 border should be returned...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

He said the 1967 border should be used as a basis. Read this from CNN.


Quote:
"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," Obama continued.
The key it "mutually agreed swaps." The far right wants everyone to believe he is throwing his support to the Palestinians. That is totally untrue. He is actually stating something that every President in recnet history has believed. That is that the 1967 boundary should be the first consideration for negotiations.

But I am certain the far right will call this a huge concession, when it is not. He is just the first President to have the fortitude to say it.

Now what makes you and the pea brained obie doodle think the palestinians are going to "mutually agree" with anything? DUmmie.

 

[DiamondDave]

Land for peace has always worked SO well in the past

 

[Avatar4321]

Land for peace has always worked SO well in the past

Other than Egypt has it ever worked? And now that Egypt is getting a new government and the peace is likely over, what did they gain for the peace? Perhaps if Egypt ends the peace accords, their land should resort back to Israel. I mean if they are going to break the agreement, then shouldnt it revert?

 

[Charles_Main]

Land for peace has always worked SO well in the past

Other than Egypt has it ever worked? And now that Egypt is getting a new government and the peace is likely over, what did they gain for the peace? Perhaps if Egypt ends the peace accords, their land should resort back to Israel. I mean if they are going to break the agreement, then shouldnt it revert?

Just let any new government in Egypt try and deny Israel or the West access to the Canal, and see just how fast it "reverts" back to Israel.


lol

 

[JimH52]

Land for peace has always worked SO well in the past

Then conflicts will continue, and that is okay with you. The settlements will not stop as long as BN is in charge. Let's throw some more money at it, that we don't have. That is also okay.

 

[Avatar4321]

Land for peace has always worked SO well in the past

Then conflicts will continue, and that is okay with you. The settlements will not stop as long as BN is in charge. Let's throw some more money at it, that we don't have. That is also okay.

Why should they stop settling their land?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Obama does not state the 1967 border should be returned...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

He said the 1967 border should be used as a basis. Read this from CNN.


Quote:
"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," Obama continued.
The key it "mutually agreed swaps." The far right wants everyone to believe he is throwing his support to the Palestinians. That is totally untrue. He is actually stating something that every President in recnet history has believed. That is that the 1967 boundary should be the first consideration for negotiations.

But I am certain the far right will call this a huge concession, when it is not. He is just the first President to have the fortitude to say it.

proof positive neither you nor Obamush knows anything about sucurity and peace in the region.
This is the map of Israel 1967

Explain how a country with a death warrant can defened itself with reduced borders?

 

[DiamondDave]

Land for peace has always worked SO well in the past

Then conflicts will continue, and that is okay with you. The settlements will not stop as long as BN is in charge. Let's throw some more money at it, that we don't have. That is also okay.

Conflicts will continue anyway.. land for peace does not work

And no.. don't throw money at it.. have you ever seen me supporting such a thing??

Get a new schtick

 

[Rozman]

"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," Obama continued.

Sounds to me like he wants the borders put back to where they were in 1967......

 

[bigrebnc1775]

"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," Obama continued.

Sounds to me like he wants the borders put back to where they were in 1967......

Who are the WE he's talking about? I know he's not speaking for the majority of America.

 

[JimH52]

"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," Obama continued.

Sounds to me like he wants the borders put back to where they were in 1967......

Yeah, and you are pretty slow aren't you?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

"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," Obama continued.

Sounds to me like he wants the borders put back to where they were in 1967......

Yeah, and you are pretty slow aren't you?

The only slow people I know are people with the name Jim.

 

[JimH52]

Israeli PM: 'No going back' to 1967 borders - Politics - White House - msnbc.com

Against that backdrop, Obama was aiming "to try to convince Netanyahu and the Israelis that there's a greater urgency in reaching agreement with the Palestinians because of the dramatic changes under way in the region and greater diplomatic pressures and efforts to isolate Israel and delegitimize its existence," said Haim Malka, deputy director of the Middle East program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

"So he was speaking to both the Israelis and the Palestinians and trying to urge them to move forward and conveying a sense of urgency and risk in the status quo," Malka said.
Obama's stance on the 1967 borders was not a major policy change, since the U.S. — along with the international community and even past Israeli governments — previously endorsed an agreement building on the 1967 lines.Story: Republicans blast Obama's Mideast speech

But it was the first time he'd explicitly endorsed those borders as a starting point, a position Netanyahu rejects. Obama said Israel can never be a truly peaceful Jewish state if it insists on "permanent occupation." But he did say the 1967 borders should be accompanied by land swaps agreed to by both sides, which could accommodate existing Jewish settlements.

 

[edthecynic]

Obama does not state the 1967 border should be returned...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

He said the 1967 border should be used as a basis. Read this from CNN.


Quote:
"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," Obama continued.
The key it "mutually agreed swaps." The far right wants everyone to believe he is throwing his support to the Palestinians. That is totally untrue. He is actually stating something that every President in recnet history has believed. That is that the 1967 boundary should be the first consideration for negotiations.

But I am certain the far right will call this a huge concession, when it is not. He is just the first President to have the fortitude to say it.

You got it exactly Right!!!
It's also the Israeli position, they call it the "principle of 1967" in Israel.

Netanyahu must move forward and accept 1967 borders - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

Netanyahu must move forward and accept 1967 borders

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech to Congress must be crafted carefully; just as his Bar-Ilan speech is remembered for seven words, his Washington speech will rise or fall on some 30 words.

By Ari Shavit
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Knesset speech on Monday was a good one. He told the truth. He described the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as it is. He set down six principles for Israel as it seeks peace: recognition of Israel as the Jewish national home, a demilitarized Palestine that does not control the Jordan Valley, a solution outside Israel to the refugee problem, retention of settlement blocs, a united Jerusalem and a declaration of an end to the conflict with no further demands.

These six principles are completely loyal to the Rabin legacy, the Sharon legacy and the Kadima party's platform. They are principles that can be legitimately presented to the Palestinians. They are principles that can be explained to the world. They are principles that the sane Israeli majority accepts. Regarding Jerusalem, Israel will have to make another painful concession, but basically there's no two-state solution that is not founded on these six principles.

If we deserve peace, these are the principles it will be based on. If war is imposed on us, these are the principles that will be worth fighting for. This is the Israeli core.

But Netanyahu's speech to Congress next week will have to be even better than Monday's; it will have to be excellent. To achieve this, he will have to include another principle of peace that he didn't mention in the Knesset - the principle of 1967.

Israel's prime minister doesn't have to agree to withdraw to the 1967 borders. Such a withdrawal is impossible. But he will have to agree to give the Palestinians land equivalent to the territory captured in 1967. Such an agreement is vital. Without accepting the principle of 1967, Netanyahu's other principles will remain full of holes.

 

[JBeukema]

Why are we involved? What, other than putting a target on our backs, is achieved by meddling in the matter?

 

[TheBrain]

Why are we involved? What, other than putting a target on our backs, is achieved by meddling in the matter?

Absolutely. Why don't we just pack up all our shit and tell the rest of the world that we're tired of being the world police and they can do whatever they want as long as it doesn't hurt us?