Wow, Benny Netanyahu puts it to Barry

[Contessa_Sharra]

So you think what we're doing in Libya is free? Partisan idiots are so easy to knockdown.

Great diversion!!! Very good!!! You learned the game well.

Diversion???

You said "He hasn't done anything so wrong that it has hurt the country. Something like........starting a war in someplace like Iraq, where it wasn't necessary."

Libya is a war he started....is just as unnecessary...wasting a ton of money.

Hack.

Wasn't that Reagan in Libya, way back when...

Targeting Gaddafi - TIME

 

[Steve Hanson]

No what Americans are angry about is those are his thoughts. Not that he said them but he thought to say it.

Those thoughts are the long-standing negotiation position of several US administrations (both Democrat AND Republican) and have been clearly stated by previous presidents INCLUDING one George W. Bush who actually referred to going back to the borders of 1948 or 1949 in reference to Israel/Palestinian negotiations. I actually saw a clip of Bush saying that very thing.

This "outrage" is little more than the latest childish conservative tantrum built on the sand pebbles of conservative disinformation.

This is the response from the folks you and Obama support. Read the last sentence first if you want the bottom line.

Hamas to Obama: We Won't Recognize Israel

Monday, May 23, 2011
By Patrick Goodenough

(CNSNews.com) – “The U.S. administration will fail, just as all others have in the past, in forcing Hamas to recognize [Israel],” a Hamas spokesman declared Sunday after President Obama once again pressed the terrorist group to relinquish violence and recognize Israel’s right to exist.

Sami Abu Zuhri, spokesman for the group that controls the Gaza Strip, reiterated a stand which, in Obama’s own words, should make it impossible for Israel to negotiate with a Palestinian government that includes Hamas.

Hamas and its rival, Fatah – Palestinian Authority (P.A.) chairman Mahmoud Abbas’ movement – early this month signed a reconciliation agreement and agreed to establish a “unity” government.

Addressing an American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) conference in Washington on Sunday, Obama said the Fatah-Hamas agreement “poses an enormous obstacle to peace,” adding that “no country can be expected to negotiate with a terrorist organization sworn to its destruction.”

His answer to that dilemma was not to call on Abbas, Israel’s professed “peace partner,” to shun Hamas and crack down on its terror activities – as he is committed to do under signed agreements – but rather to urge Hamas to change. Obama also did not say what Israel should do if Hamas does not.

“We will continue to demand that Hamas accept the basic responsibilities of peace: recognizing Israel’s right to exist, rejecting violence, and adhering to all existing agreements,” Obama said.

Abu Zuhri’s statement made clear Hamas has no intention of following the advice.

More here:

Hamas to Obama: We Won't Recognize Israel | CNSnews.com

That's what makes these peace talks so futile. It's not about the borders. It's about the elimination of Israel. The rest is smoke, mirrors and posturing. All the old borders do is give terrorists a strategic advantage. But it isn't their goal.

 

[Steve Hanson]

Great diversion!!! Very good!!! You learned the game well.

Diversion???

You said "He hasn't done anything so wrong that it has hurt the country. Something like........starting a war in someplace like Iraq, where it wasn't necessary."

Libya is a war he started....is just as unnecessary...wasting a ton of money.

Hack.

Wasn't that Reagan in Libya, way back when...

Targeting Gaddafi - TIME

Yep, but he hit a specific target. One shot and done. He wasn't dropping bombs on Libyan cities.

 

[Mustang]

No what Americans are angry about is those are his thoughts. Not that he said them but he thought to say it.

Those thoughts are the long-standing negotiation position of several US administrations (both Democrat AND Republican) and have been clearly stated by previous presidents INCLUDING one George W. Bush who actually referred to going back to the borders of 1948 or 1949 in reference to Israel/Palestinian negotiations. I actually saw a clip of Bush saying that very thing.

This "outrage" is little more than the latest childish conservative tantrum built on the sand pebbles of conservative disinformation.

This is the response from the folks you and Obama support. Read the last sentence first if you want the bottom line.

Hamas to Obama: We Won't Recognize Israel

Monday, May 23, 2011
By Patrick Goodenough

(CNSNews.com) – “The U.S. administration will fail, just as all others have in the past, in forcing Hamas to recognize [Israel],” a Hamas spokesman declared Sunday after President Obama once again pressed the terrorist group to relinquish violence and recognize Israel’s right to exist.

Sami Abu Zuhri, spokesman for the group that controls the Gaza Strip, reiterated a stand which, in Obama’s own words, should make it impossible for Israel to negotiate with a Palestinian government that includes Hamas.

Hamas and its rival, Fatah – Palestinian Authority (P.A.) chairman Mahmoud Abbas’ movement – early this month signed a reconciliation agreement and agreed to establish a “unity” government.

Addressing an American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) conference in Washington on Sunday, Obama said the Fatah-Hamas agreement “poses an enormous obstacle to peace,” adding that “no country can be expected to negotiate with a terrorist organization sworn to its destruction.”

His answer to that dilemma was not to call on Abbas, Israel’s professed “peace partner,” to shun Hamas and crack down on its terror activities – as he is committed to do under signed agreements – but rather to urge Hamas to change. Obama also did not say what Israel should do if Hamas does not.

“We will continue to demand that Hamas accept the basic responsibilities of peace: recognizing Israel’s right to exist, rejecting violence, and adhering to all existing agreements,” Obama said.

Abu Zuhri’s statement made clear Hamas has no intention of following the advice.

More here:

Hamas to Obama: We Won't Recognize Israel | CNSnews.com

Highlighted statements like the above one may please conservatives' love of hyperbolic rhetorical spin, but it does absolutely nothing to sway independent voters who are sick of nonsensical posturing for little else than the intention of muddying the waters.

 

[Shogun]

Those thoughts are the long-standing negotiation position of several US administrations (both Democrat AND Republican) and have been clearly stated by previous presidents INCLUDING one George W. Bush who actually referred to going back to the borders of 1948 or 1949 in reference to Israel/Palestinian negotiations. I actually saw a clip of Bush saying that very thing.

This "outrage" is little more than the latest childish conservative tantrum built on the sand pebbles of conservative disinformation.

This is the response from the folks you and Obama support. Read the last sentence first if you want the bottom line.

Hamas to Obama: We Won't Recognize Israel

Monday, May 23, 2011
By Patrick Goodenough

(CNSNews.com) – “The U.S. administration will fail, just as all others have in the past, in forcing Hamas to recognize [Israel],” a Hamas spokesman declared Sunday after President Obama once again pressed the terrorist group to relinquish violence and recognize Israel’s right to exist.

Sami Abu Zuhri, spokesman for the group that controls the Gaza Strip, reiterated a stand which, in Obama’s own words, should make it impossible for Israel to negotiate with a Palestinian government that includes Hamas.

Hamas and its rival, Fatah – Palestinian Authority (P.A.) chairman Mahmoud Abbas’ movement – early this month signed a reconciliation agreement and agreed to establish a “unity” government.

Addressing an American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) conference in Washington on Sunday, Obama said the Fatah-Hamas agreement “poses an enormous obstacle to peace,” adding that “no country can be expected to negotiate with a terrorist organization sworn to its destruction.”

His answer to that dilemma was not to call on Abbas, Israel’s professed “peace partner,” to shun Hamas and crack down on its terror activities – as he is committed to do under signed agreements – but rather to urge Hamas to change. Obama also did not say what Israel should do if Hamas does not.

“We will continue to demand that Hamas accept the basic responsibilities of peace: recognizing Israel’s right to exist, rejecting violence, and adhering to all existing agreements,” Obama said.

Abu Zuhri’s statement made clear Hamas has no intention of following the advice.

More here:

Hamas to Obama: We Won't Recognize Israel | CNSnews.com

That's what makes these peace talks so futile. It's not about the borders. It's about the elimination of Israel. The rest is smoke, mirrors and posturing. All the old borders do is give terrorists a strategic advantage. But it isn't their goal.

White people in Mississippi during the 1950s would have loved you.

 

[Synthaholic]

Robert Gates Says Israel Is an Ungrateful Ally: Jeffrey Goldberg
By Jeffrey Goldberg
September 05, 2011 20:00 EDT




It was an extraordinary scene: President Barack Obama, sitting impassively in the Oval Office in May as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu lectured him, at considerable length and at times condescendingly, on Jewish history, Arab perfidy and the existential challenges facing his country.



What was extraordinary wasn’t the message -- it was not an untypical Netanyahu sermon. What was notable was that Netanyahu was lecturing the president live on television, during a photo opportunity staged so that the two leaders could issue platitudes about the enduring bonds between their nations.


That display of impudence left the president and his team feeling unusually angry. Shortly afterward, Obama’s chief of staff, William Daley, called the Israeli ambassador in Washington, Michael Oren, to communicate the displeasure of the White House in a reportedly heated way. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who watched her husband battle Netanyahu in the late 1990s, also expressed anger and frustration about the prime minister within the administration.

Nothing in Return


But it was Robert M. Gates, the now-retired secretary of defense, who seemed most upset with Netanyahu. In a meeting of the National Security Council Principals Committee held not long before his retirement this summer, Gates coldly laid out the many steps the administration has taken to guarantee Israel’s security -- access to top- quality weapons, assistance developing missile-defense systems, high-level intelligence sharing -- and then stated bluntly that the U.S. has received nothing in return, particularly with regard to the peace process.


Senior administration officials told me that Gates argued to the president directly that Netanyahu is not only ungrateful, but also endangering his country by refusing to grapple with Israel’s growing isolation and with the demographic challenges it faces if it keeps control of the West Bank. According to these sources, Gates’s analysis met with no resistance from other members of the committee.


Frustration and Resentment


Gates has expressed his frustration with Netanyahu’s government before. Last year, when Vice President Joe Biden’s visit to Israel was marred by an announcement of plans to build new housing units for Jews in East Jerusalem, Gates told several people that if he had been Biden, he would have returned to Washington immediately and told the prime minister to call Obama when he was serious about negotiations.


Gates’s frustration also stems from squabbling with Netanyahu over U.S. arms sales to Saudi Arabia and other Arab allies. In an encounter in Israel in March, according to U.S. and Israeli sources, Netanyahu lectured Gates at length on the possible dangers posed to Israel by such sales, as well as by Turkey and other regional U.S. allies. Gates, a veteran intelligence officer, resented Netanyahu’s tone, and reminded him that the sales were organized in consultation with Israel and pro-Israel members of Congress.
Palestinian State


The reason the administration’s hard feelings toward Netanyahu matter now -- and the reason several officials spoke to me on this subject last week -- is that the U.S. is once again going to the mat for Israel at the United Nations, where Palestinians intend to seek recognition of an independent state in September.


The White House plans to contest this resolution in the General Assembly (where the move already has majority support), and the U.S. would most likely veto it in the Security Council. The Obama administration is right to oppose this ploy, which would undermine the chances of reconciliation and could lead to an explosion of violence on the West Bank. But they’ll oppose it in spite of Netanyahu, not to help him.


Dislike of Netanyahu has deepened in a way that could ultimately be dangerous for Israel. Time after time, the White House has taken Israel’s side in international disputes -- over the UN’s Goldstone Report, which accused Israel of committing war crimes in Gaza; over Israel’s confrontation with the pro-Hamas Turkish “flotilla,” in which nine people were killed; and on many other issues.


Yet the Netanyahu government does little to dispel the notion among its right-wing supporters that the Obama administration is at best a wavering friend. This is self- evidently foolish, especially at a time when Israel faces an existential threat from its menacing neighbor Iran.







*snip*

 

[Contumacious]

In a stunning straightforward speech Netanyahu laid it on the line to B. Hussein. "It ain't gonna happen Mr. President, we cannot go back to the 1967 boundries". "Hamas must recognize Israel's right to exist". I wonder if Benny Netanyahu was born in the USA or maybe it doesn't matter anymore. It would be refreshing to listen to a straight speaking politician for a change.

Hamas need not recognize Israhell's right to exist.

I like the Iranian Plan, they will re-establish the 1917 borders.

Yep, that's the ticket.

.

 

[Warrior102]

Right on Ben !

 

[Rocko]

Obama hasn't even been diplomatic in his stance on Israel...He clearly views Isreal as the problem, which is one reason why we mustn't elect him to another term, because if he does get re-elected there is no doubt he will take the gloves off and really go after Isreal...He is a dangerous man.