Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Benny B on May 29, 2009, 08:07:14 AM
-
Obama Takes Toughest Stance With Israel In A Generation
by Stuart Whatley
Beginning in the weeks leading up to President Obama's meetings with Middle Eastern leaders, the administration laid the groundwork for its strong position against Israeli settlements, marking a break from the soft-gloved approach of years past. And this week, tensions have increased between Obama and the new Israeli government under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, following their meeting last week when Obama said, "there is a clear understanding that we have to make progress on settlements; that settlements have to be stopped in order for us to move forward," the AP reports.
Netanyahu's frustration with the Obama administration's demands was made apparent Wednesday when, according to Foreign Policy, he vented to a confidante the question: "What the hell do they want from me?"
According to the Woodrow Wilson Center's Aaron David Miller, speaking to McClatchy, Obama's intransigence and direct rhetoric on the contentious settlements issue is risky policy. From McClatchy:
"What we're seeing from the Obama administration is an uncharacteristically tough policy on settlements without a corresponding detailed strategy to justify it. It looks like a significant fight with the Israelis,"
"They've essentially issued an ultimatum to Israel . It's a game of chicken, an Obama-Netanyahu game of chicken."
The Washington Post's Jackson Diehl, in his Friday column, discusses the intractability of the Israeli-Arab peace process as a "waiting game" where both sides refuse to budge until the other makes the first concessionary move. As Diehl points out, Obama's unprecedentedly tough approach to Israel -- which Miller describes as risky and incomplete -- is an attempt to break this impasse. From Diehl:
Obama, in contrast, has repeatedly and publicly stressed the need for a West Bank settlement freeze, with no exceptions. In so doing he has shifted the focus to Israel. He has revived a long-dormant Palestinian fantasy: that the United States will simply force Israel to make critical concessions, whether or not its democratic government agrees, while Arabs passively watch and applaud. "The Americans are the leaders of the world," Abbas told me and Post Editorial Page Editor Fred Hiatt. "They can use their weight with anyone around the world. Two years ago they used their weight on us. Now they should tell the Israelis, 'You have to comply with the conditions.'"
-
Good! It's about time we dismantled the Zionist apartheid state, sent the settlers back to their countries of origin, and returned the land to the owners.
-
Not really a lot of land left for them to take. Why bother now?
-
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=282349.0
-
Don't leave out sending the israelis back to Germany so the Germans can finish the job..
No, how about we send them to kick you out of YOUR land and home and see how you like it then ::)
-
I missed who the owners were..do u mean the worthless palestinians who sort just ended up there because nobody else wanted em....or maybe its the Romans who kicked the jews out in the first place.....
-
I missed who the owners were..do u mean the worthless palestinians who sort just ended up there because nobody else wanted em....or maybe its the Romans who kicked the jews out in the first place.....
I mean the Palestinians who were living in their land and villages until 1948, most of whom were expelled by the usurping Zionist entity.
-
Yeah...there were jews there as well. My heart bleeds for em... ::)
-
I missed who the owners were..do u mean the worthless palestinians who sort just ended up there because nobody else wanted em....or maybe its the Romans who kicked the jews out in the first place.....
Hmmmm... that's odd... I thought it was the Jews who ended up there because no one else wanted them? :-\
-
Yeah...there were jews there as well. My heart bleeds for em... ::)
Your heart is of no concern whatsoever. The usurping Zionist entity will be dismantled, the apartheid regime and its settlers repatriated, and the rightful owners will retake their land.
-
All this means is they are ready to stop building settlements for now. The US economy is bad and unless it looks like they're making an effort people might realize how much money we're pissing away over there.
-
Your heart is of no concern whatsoever. The usurping Zionist entity will be dismantled, the apartheid regime and its settlers repatriated, and the rightful owners will retake their land.
Yeah...the IDF will have a say..arabs are horrible soldiers, and nobody in the Middle East wants the palestinians. Nobody is invading Israel and surviving.
-
Your heart is of no concern whatsoever. The usurping Zionist entity will be dismantled, the apartheid regime and its settlers repatriated, and the rightful owners will retake their land.
You mean it will go back to the Jews that were there a few thousand years ago? ???
It's war. They lost. Israeli land now. They got in bed with the right people. The Muslims didn't.
I assume that you'll be giving the land you're living on back to the Native Americans, though?
Yeah...the IDF will have a say..arabs are horrible soldiers, and nobody in the Middle East wants the palestinians. Nobody is invading Israel and surviving.
The Jordanians should have wiped them out when they wanted to back in the 70s after all the Black September shit.
-
You mean it will go back to the Jews that were there a few thousand years ago? ???
It's war. They lost. Israeli land now. They got in bed with the right people. The Muslims didn't.
I assume that you'll be giving the land you're living on back to the Native Americans, though?
Native Americans owned London? ???
-
Native Americans owned London? ???
Ahh, a European gimmick this time. Was directed more towards the Americans like "Doctor" Kaje that have no qualms about living on Native American land that was taken through force but want to tell others that they can't stay on land that they took through force.
-
U Brits have enough problems with ur wacky immigration/political correctness issues to worry about Israel.
-
Ahh, a European gimmick this time. Was directed more towards the Americans like "Doctor" Kaje that have no qualms about living on Native American land that was taken through force but want to tell others that they can't stay on land that they took through force.
I will forgive you just this time, but only on account of your avatar :P
-
Shay Laren's her name if you want to dig up more of her. HugoChavez has apparently photographed her or some shit.
-
Good! It's about time we dismantled the Zionist apartheid state, sent the settlers back to their countries of origin, and returned the land to the owners.
So when are all the Palestinians going to go, since they were not there 2,000+ years ago.
-
damn censorship >:(
-
So when are all the Palestinians going to go, since they were not there 2,000+ years ago.
Ron,firstly the unbelievably racist comment by SAMSON should get him banned, it's not the first time he spouse such racism.
Secondly, most of these morons have no knowledge of how Israel was formed, they think that before the Jews came there it was a prosperous area, it was filled by a couple of nomadic tribes with no nationality or relation.
The Palestinians were created WITH Israel, when the British mandate was dismantled , the problem was that the Arabs started a war and that the neighboring countries took the lands that the UN gave the "Palestinians".
People should understand that there is no such thing as a the Palestinian people before Israel was formed, they have nothing to do with the biblical Palestinians.
-
Ron,firstly the unbelievably racist comment by SAMSON should get him banned, it's not the first time he spouse such racism.
Secondly, most of these morons have no knowledge of how Israel was formed, they think that before the Jews came there it was a prosperous area, it was filled by a couple of nomadic tribes with no nationality or relation.
The Palestinians were created WITH Israel, when the British mandate was dismantled , the problem was that the Arabs started a war and that the neighboring countries took the lands that the UN gave the "Palestinians".
People should understand that there is no such thing as a the Palestinian people before Israel was formed, they have nothing to do with the biblical Palestinians.
I find that funny considering most Jews today, ...Israeli or otherwise have nothing to do with the biblical Jews. ;D
-
Ron,firstly the unbelievably racist comment by SAMSON should get him banned, it's not the first time he spouse such racism.
you post more racist hateful shit than anyone.
-
thank god finally an american president has at least some balls to stand up to the Zionist terrorists.
Conservative, christian politicians do nothing but lick their balls no matter what while the israelis just laugh at how easily the american christian gentile pigs are like putty in their hands.
-
Ron,firstly the unbelievably racist comment by SAMSON should get him banned, it's not the first time he spouse such racism.
Secondly, most of these morons have no knowledge of how Israel was formed, they think that before the Jews came there it was a prosperous area, it was filled by a couple of nomadic tribes with no nationality or relation.
The Palestinians were created WITH Israel, when the British mandate was dismantled , the problem was that the Arabs started a war and that the neighboring countries took the lands that the UN gave the "Palestinians".
People should understand that there is no such thing as a the Palestinian people before Israel was formed, they have nothing to do with the biblical Palestinians.
Thats actually not true...Palestinian intellectuals as early as 1910 were talking about a Palestinian People, theres various newspapers and archive documents that show it. By 1920's there was a definite Palestinian national consciousness, the Jewish intellectuals noticed it and didnt really know how to deal with it, since most had not anticipated the rise of an Arab nationalism to counter the Jewish nationalism...The best warning is given by Ahad Ha'am who visited Palestine in 1892 who stated that the Arabs would become nationalist if the Jewish settlements continued to grow
-
Secondly, most of these morons have no knowledge of how Israel was formed, they think that before the Jews came there it was a prosperous area, it was filled by a couple of nomadic tribes with no nationality or relation. The Palestinians were created WITH Israel, when the British mandate was dismantled , the problem was that the Arabs started a war and that the neighboring countries took the lands that the UN gave the "Palestinians". People should understand that there is no such thing as a the Palestinian people before Israel was formed, they have nothing to do with the biblical Palestinians.
Of course they dont understand. Obama says stop building the settlements, Israel will oblige by dismantling 20 or so that are small, while making sure that the ones that have been there will stay there.
It is so funny that people forget that before 1967, there was no call for a Palestinian state. Jordon took the West bank, Egypt took Gaza, and that was that - end of story. No one said anything, no one cared.
But when Israel won the six day war, taking over all of these areas and a lot more, all of a sudden, this comes.
Really funny...
Most smart Christian and Democratics leaders understand that Israel is a democracy, and if you have ever gone there, you would understand.
Why dont you go to Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Syria, or even Gaza. Try doing anything, like even writing something they dont like, and don't expect to come home. You will be killed.
Palestinian intellectuals as early as 1910 were talking about a Palestinian People, theres various newspapers and archive documents that show it. By 1920's there was a definite Palestinian national consciousness
And the same arguement can go with the Jewish people, except that the Kingdom of Israel was there thousands of years before.
-
Of course they dont understand. Obama says stop building the settlements, Israel will oblige by dismantling 20 or so that are small, while making sure that the ones that have been there will stay there.
It is so funny that people forget that before 1967, there was no call for a Palestinian state. Jordon took the West bank, Egypt took Gaza, and that was that - end of story. No one said anything, no one cared.
But when Israel won the six day war, taking over all of these areas and a lot more, all of a sudden, this comes.
Really funny...
Most smart Christian and Democratics leaders understand that Israel is a democracy, and if you have ever gone there, you would understand.
Why dont you go to Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Syria, or even Gaza. Try doing anything, like even writing something they dont like, and don't expect to come home. You will be killed.
And the same arguement can go with the Jewish people, except that the Kingdom of Israel was there thousands of years before.
The first explicitly nationalist Jewish document that I read was from 1867...one thing to remember though, was that most Jewish nationalists were in a vast minority in Europe until the early 20 century, most jews favoured assimilation into their host countries, the jewish nationalists that did exist were 99% secular, and didnt actually mind if they created a country in Israel or not, just as long as they created one. The idea that Israel would be the goal for mass settlement was only reached in about 1904, even then the assumption was most jews wouldnt want to go since they would not want to give up the standard of living they had in their host countries...the whole kingdom of Israel thing was a nice thought but only really important for the religiously minded zionists
-
Of course they dont understand. Obama says stop building the settlements, Israel will oblige by dismantling 20 or so that are small, while making sure that the ones that have been there will stay there.
It is so funny that people forget that before 1967, there was no call for a Palestinian state. Jordon took the West bank, Egypt took Gaza, and that was that - end of story. No one said anything, no one cared.
But when Israel won the six day war, taking over all of these areas and a lot more, all of a sudden, this comes.
Really funny...
Most smart Christian and Democratics leaders understand that Israel is a democracy, and if you have ever gone there, you would understand.
Why dont you go to Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Syria, or even Gaza. Try doing anything, like even writing something they dont like, and don't expect to come home. You will be killed.
And the same argument can go with the Jewish people, except that the Kingdom of Israel was there thousands of years before.
Yep, I love it how they make Israel the big bad enemy while in reality it's their fellow Arabs that took the land the UN gave them, Israel conquered those land while DEFENDING itself!
Why no one here speak of Black September? Why no one knows about the equal rights the Israeli Arabs get?
These ignorant fucks rather support Hamas because their antisemitic feelings cloud their already loose judgment.
Hard choice...supporting Hamas or a Democratic nation with quite a few Arabs in the parliament.BTW...those members of the Israeli parliament would have been hung for treason in most countries, some of them are calling for the destruction of Israel, supports terrorists organizations and give them money and intelligence reports....all of that...yet they seem to be fine with getting money from Israel and all the other benefits that come with being a member of the Israeli parlament ::)
-
Yep, I love it how they make Israel the big bad enemy while in reality it's their fellow Arabs that took the land the UN gave them, Israel conquered those land while DEFENDING itself!
Why no one here speak of Black September? Why no one knows about the equal rights the Israeli Arabs get?
These ignorant fucks rather support Hamas because their antisemitic feelings cloud their already loose judgment.
Hard choice...supporting Hamas or a Democratic nation with quite a few Arabs in the parliament.BTW...those members of the Israeli parliament would have been hung for treason in most countries, some of them are calling for the destruction of Israel, supports terrorists organizations and give them money and intelligence reports....all of that...yet they seem to be fine with getting money from Israel and all the other benefits that come with being a member of the Israeli parlament ::)
This part cracks me up. Oh the irony of such a statement, ...especially considering the title of the thread.
Israel doesn't seem to have the least bit of problem accepting money & weapons from the US,
...but goes ballistic when the US President asks them to chill out a bit on the settlements.
-
This part cracks me up. Oh the irony of such a statement, ...especially considering the title of the thread.
Israel doesn't seem to have the least bit of problem accepting money & weapons from the US,
...but goes ballistic when the US President asks them to chill out a bit on the settlements.
Please remind me when was the last time that Israel called for the destruction of the US?
When was the last time Israel sent terrorists to the US?
When was the last time Israel helped terrorists with intel against the US?
When Israel start doing such things then you would be right, until then a traitor that receives money from the government that he betrays and calls for it's destruction deserves nothing but the chair.
-
Of course they dont understand. Obama says stop building the settlements, Israel will oblige by dismantling 20 or so that are small, while making sure that the ones that have been there will stay there.
It is so funny that people forget that before 1967, there was no call for a Palestinian state. Jordon took the West bank, Egypt took Gaza, and that was that - end of story. No one said anything, no one cared.
But when Israel won the six day war, taking over all of these areas and a lot more, all of a sudden, this comes.
Really funny...
Most smart Christian and Democratics leaders understand that Israel is a democracy, and if you have ever gone there, you would understand.
Why dont you go to Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Syria, or even Gaza. Try doing anything, like even writing something they dont like, and don't expect to come home. You will be killed.
And the same arguement can go with the Jewish people, except that the Kingdom of Israel was there thousands of years before.
Are you a Zionist Ron? ???
-
So when are all the Palestinians going to go, since they were not there 2,000+ years ago.
Who said they weren't? Most of them are probably descended from people who lived in the area then, as opposed to the Jews, who do not ALL know for a FACT (i.e. with evidence) that their ancestors once lived there.
In contrast, the Palestinians who were expelled in 1948 have evidence (i.e. titles deeds from the Brits, keys to their homes that are still standing, etc)
If you want to be generous to your fellow Zionists, by all means give them your own home and land, don't be generous at someone else's expense.
-
Well since Palestinians are so beloved by their fellow muslim brothers, maybe they should give em a chunk of land. After all its all about muslim brotherhood. Surely Egypt or Jordan could work something out. And don't tell me that they find em as worthless as we do. Don't tell me the bleeding heart Egyptians can't find it in their hearts to open their borders to them...come on. Oh and don't for one minute try and tell me that the rest of the WORTHLESS douchbag arab states don't use the palestinians as a reason not to recognize Israel or conduct efforts to undermine the ONLY WORKING DEMOCRACY in the region...come on.
-
I am a big time supporter of Israel which is the only democracy in the region but I am glad Obama is getting tough on them about settlements..you can;t keep stealing land and claiming to be a victim all the time
-
I am a big time supporter of Israel which is the only democracy in the region but I am glad Obama is getting tough on them about settlements..you can;t keep stealing land and claiming to be a victim all the time
100% agreement
-
Well since Palestinians are so beloved by their fellow muslim brothers, maybe they should give em a chunk of land. After all its all about muslim brotherhood. Surely Egypt or Jordan could work something out. And don't tell me that they find em as worthless as we do. Don't tell me the bleeding heart Egyptians can't find it in their hearts to open their borders to them...come on. Oh and don't for one minute try and tell me that the rest of the WORTHLESS douchbag arab states don't use the palestinians as a reason not to recognize Israel or conduct efforts to undermine the ONLY WORKING DEMOCRACY in the region...come on.
Who cares if it is a democracy? Since when does the US care about things like that?
-
anyone blowing off all Israel's negatives is just not being honest.
sure they are a 'democracy'...just like aparteid South Africa was a 'democracy' ::)
Israel is the jewish version of a Nazi state. Zionism is to jews what Nazism was to germans. same exact thing
-
I am a big time supporter of Israel which is the only democracy in the region but I am glad Obama is getting tough on them about settlements..you can;t keep stealing land and claiming to be a victim all the time
Can you be any less informed about the situation?
-
Can you be any less informed about the situation?
To be fair Ive lived in Israel a long time and i think his assessment is mostly accurate...I could spend all night giving you examples of how Israel acquires land and the vast majority of it is so clouded by smokescreens that no objective analysis would ever claim it was anything but stealing by other means.
Having said that there was no excuse for what Hezbollah did in 2006, and the Rocket fire from Gaza, the only motivation was to kill innocent civilians. Its hard to fight against people like that and come out looking good, and there should be no hesitation in resisting it.
-
anyone blowing off all Israel's negatives is just not being honest.
sure they are a 'democracy'...just like aparteid South Africa was a 'democracy' ::)
Israel is the jewish version of a Nazi state. Zionism is to jews what Nazism was to germans. same exact thing
not true.....the palestinians segregate themselves by openly espousing the destruction of Israel.....thats why they aren't treated well as citizens.....If you invited me to your family reunion and I started espousing the destruction of your family you would try to marginalize me as quickly as possible....either make me leave, kick my ass, or make me stay in a corner away from the rest of your family..agreed?
-
Can you be any less informed about the situation?
excuse me..I have been following this situation since I was a kid....I am well informed about whats going on..I support Israel big time but I am not an apologist for them
-
To be fair Ive lived in Israel a long time and i think his assessment is mostly accurate...I could spend all night giving you examples of how Israel acquires land and the vast majority of it is so clouded by smokescreens that no objective analysis would ever claim it was anything but stealing by other means.
Having said that there was no excuse for what Hezbollah did in 2006, and the Rocket fire from Gaza, the only motivation was to kill innocent civilians. Its hard to fight against people like that and come out looking good, and there should be no hesitation in resisting it.
exactly..I agree with you.....you and I are definitely on the same page...keep up the good work
-
not true.....the palestinians segregate themselves by openly espousing the destruction of Israel.....thats why they aren't treated well as citizens.....If you invited me to your family reunion and I started espousing the destruction of your family you would try to marginalize me as quickly as possible....either make me leave, kick my ass, or make me stay in a corner away from the rest of your family..agreed?
oh yes, the israelis just LOVE the palis, they try so hard to bring peace and love but those darn palis, is just in their nature to shoot rockets at people! ::)
good god i almost threw up reading that. can the israel defenders at least TRY to pretend to be somewhat objective?
-
I say leave them both be and let them kill each other. Either they get tired of the violence or they wipe each other out. Better for the rest of the world.
-
-
excuse me..I have been following this situation since I was a kid....I am well informed about whats going on..I support Israel big time but I am not an apologist for them
Than you should know that those land that they "steal" is under Israel control thus they are entitled to do whatever they like with it. Whenever Israel and Jordan/Egypt/Gaza/Lebanon came to an agreement Israel pulled out everyone who was in those areas whatever it was civilian or military forces, so stealing is the wrong wrong since those areas are under Israel control thus they can't steal them from anyone.
Furthermore, those areas got to be under Israel control because :
1.Neighboring Arab countries stole those lands from Palestinians.
2.Those neighboring countries started a war and lost those areas.
Got the huge difference ? Stealing areas would be putting settlements in Gaza or Jordan, not in Israeli territory.
BTW in case you don't know, the Israeli Arabs have this tiny habit of stealing lands in Israel, they build houses on governments lands like crazy and take advantage of the fact that if someone would come to evict them than the terrorists that infiltrate the Israeli parliament would make it into a political issue while it have nothing to do with it.
-
Please remind me when was the last time that Israel called for the destruction of the US?
Some may argue that convincing the US to do things for Israel's benefit to the detriment of itself is the same thing
When was the last time Israel sent terrorists to the US?
Off the top of my head, ...I'd say the Mossad agents in 2001, ...but I'm sure there have been more since.
When was the last time Israel helped terrorists with intel against the US?
How about when Israel was aware of terrorist plans to blow up the embassy in Lebanon, ...but didn't tell the US?
When Israel start doing such things then you would be right, until then a traitor that receives money from the government that he betrays and calls for it's destruction deserves nothing but the chair.
Taking money from the SS, and sitting back while their military & civilians are blown to bits isn't exactly the height of loyalty, ...but then again, the Israelis weren't the only ones who sat around doing nothing, ...Bush read 'My Pet Goat'
-
Obama can't say "Build more settlements and we'll stop sending money". We don't have the kind of security necessary to protect him.
-
I hate the New York accent. :-\
-
Virtually defenseless people...yeah more bullshit. Maybe the IDF ought to kill every last one of them huh...That would stop busloads of kids getting blown up.
-
oh yes, the israelis just LOVE the palis, they try so hard to bring peace and love but those darn palis, is just in their nature to shoot rockets at people! ::)
good god i almost threw up reading that. can the israel defenders at least TRY to pretend to be somewhat objective?
first of all the problem is that the Palestinians are delusional...they think they are going to bully Israel into giving them back all the land that Israel won in their various wars and they think they are going to force Israel to do so by constantly waging war against Israel, blowing up Israelis with suicide bombers and reigning rockets down on the Israeli civilian population....
They do this despite the fact that they are severely outgunned by the Israelis....and they do this because they have a delusional and suicidal leadership which is willing to use the palestinian people as unending cannon fodder...
In the United States, blacks were repressed much more than the palestinians but they worked within the system with Martin luther King as their leader and they were able to work with the white government to enact laws protecting the rights of blacks and to make the lives of black people better.....blacks did not resort to suicide bombings and violence against the white civilian population because this would have been suicide to take on the government who has much more money and weapons and would have alienated the white population..the very same people that blacks needed to help them
resorting to violence was the worse thing the palestinians ever did....they lost the moral high ground....but they had poor leadership like Yassir Arafat who used the palestinians to get money from the world to enrich himself and the palestinian leadership..just as Hamas is doing today....being in a constant state of war with Israel means more donations to Hamas....it is profitable.....and the palestinian public suffers because of them
meanwhile, black people in the U.S. are much better off now than they were in the past and are in the political process and now even have a black president....thus vindicating Martin Luther King's methods..unfortunately there is no Martin Luther King in the palestinian world..because they would be shot dead by Hamas in a second..
-
first of all the problem is that the Palestinians are delusional...they think they are going to bully Israel into giving them back all the land that Israel won in their various wars and they think they are going to force Israel to do so by constantly waging war against Israel, blowing up Israelis with suicide bombers and reigning rockets down on the Israeli civilian population....
They do this despite the fact that they are severely outgunned by the Israelis....and they do this because they have a delusional and suicidal leadership which is willing to use the palestinian people as unending cannon fodder...
In the United States, blacks were repressed much more than the palestinians but they worked within the system with Martin luther King as their leader and they were able to work with the white government to enact laws protecting the rights of blacks and to make the lives of black people better.....blacks did not resort to suicide bombings and violence against the white civilian population because this would have been suicide to take on the government who has much more money and weapons and would have alienated the white population..the very same people that blacks needed to help them
resorting to violence was the worse thing the palestinians ever did....they lost the moral high ground....but they had poor leadership like Yassir Arafat who used the palestinians to get money from the world to enrich himself and the palestinian leadership..just as Hamas is doing today....being in a constant state of war with Israel means more donations to Hamas....it is profitable.....and the palestinian public suffers because of them
meanwhile, black people in the U.S. are much better off now than they were in the past and are in the political process and now even have a black president....thus vindicating Martin Luther King's methods..unfortunately there is no Martin Luther King in the palestinian world..because they would be shot dead by Hamas in a second..
Good post.
-
first of all the problem is that the Palestinians are delusional...they think they are going to bully Israel into giving them back all the land that Israel won in their various wars and they think they are going to force Israel to do so by constantly waging war against Israel, blowing up Israelis with suicide bombers and reigning rockets down on the Israeli civilian population....
They do this despite the fact that they are severely outgunned by the Israelis....and they do this because they have a delusional and suicidal leadership which is willing to use the palestinian people as unending cannon fodder...
In the United States, blacks were repressed much more than the palestinians but they worked within the system with Martin luther King as their leader and they were able to work with the white government to enact laws protecting the rights of blacks and to make the lives of black people better.....blacks did not resort to suicide bombings and violence against the white civilian population because this would have been suicide to take on the government who has much more money and weapons and would have alienated the white population..the very same people that blacks needed to help them
resorting to violence was the worse thing the palestinians ever did....they lost the moral high ground....but they had poor leadership like Yassir Arafat who used the palestinians to get money from the world to enrich himself and the palestinian leadership..just as Hamas is doing today....being in a constant state of war with Israel means more donations to Hamas....it is profitable.....and the palestinian public suffers because of them
meanwhile, black people in the U.S. are much better off now than they were in the past and are in the political process and now even have a black president....thus vindicating Martin Luther King's methods..unfortunately there is no Martin Luther King in the palestinian world..because they would be shot dead by Hamas in a second..
Good post André, but you forget one thing... Malcolm X and the Nation of Islam.
Don't get it twisted. They may have appeared to be opposing camps, ...but there is no way Martin Luther King could have accomplished what he did without the threat represented by the Nation of Islam. Both were fighting for the same thing, except NOI's motto was "By Any Means Necessary". NOI simply made MLK much more appealing to deal with. MLK may get the credit, ...but it was a collective effort.
-
Virtually defenseless people...yeah more bullshit. Maybe the IDF ought to kill every last one of them huh...That would stop busloads of kids getting blown up.
It would be more humane and they wouldn't lose any US money or be attacked.
-
It would be more humane and they wouldn't lose any US money or be attacked.
Like you tell me, why don't you stop acting like you care about the Palestinians? It's amusing that you play this double standard, though. Humanity? LOL. ;)
-
Like you tell me, why don't you stop acting like you care about the Palestinians? It's amusing that you play this double standard, though. Humanity? LOL. ;)
Hamas is huge on humanity, everytime they execute someone for reading a book that didn't like they start the beheading ceremony by reading one of UN policies regarding human rights. ::)
-
Like you tell me, why don't you stop acting like you care about the Palestinians? It's amusing that you play this double standard, though. Humanity? LOL. ;)
Re-read that post and there's no implication, hint or verbiage saying I care.
Killing them all is the final solution. Doing so would save time, money and allow the US to focus on domestic matters.
We all know they're going to end up landless and displaced to the surrounding countries living in refugee camps anyways. Just kill them all and be done with it. The US would also save whatever money is being pissed away trying to help them.
As long as Israel doesn't occupy, steal, grab, buffer zone, come up with some new historic map, etc... that touches one square inch of the surrounding countries let them have the land and stop bleeding the US dry.
-
There was no racism in the post.
The truly disgusting part is, I get the feeling his biggest issue with your post had to deal with precluding Israel from taking any more land. I don't think he seemed to mind your call for genocide against the Palestinian people. :'(
You people can be really vile sometimes. :'(
-
The truly disgusting part is, I get the feeling his biggest issue with your post had to deal with precluding Israel from taking any more land. I don't think he seemed to mind your call for genocide against the Palestinian people. :'(
You people can be really vile sometimes. :'(
It would save a lot of time and money.
-
They could also bomb Iran. This would save us billions and prevent any occupation or humanitarian efforts.
I'm liking doc's middle-east doctrine more and more.....got get em !!!!
-
Good post.
Thanks! :D
-
Good post André, but you forget one thing... Malcolm X and the Nation of Islam.
Don't get it twisted. They may have appeared to be opposing camps, ...but there is no way Martin Luther King could have accomplished what he did without the threat represented by the Nation of Islam. Both were fighting for the same thing, except NOI's motto was "By Any Means Necessary". NOI simply made MLK much more appealing to deal with. MLK may get the credit, ...but it was a collective effort.
thanks....but let me ask you.....I'm not sure that the Nation of Islam played such a vital role nationally in terms of helping people turn to MLK.....I feel that maybe they were more of a New York type of organization...strong in NY but weak nationally....do you think thats true or do you think I am downplaying their importance overall?
-
thanks....but let me ask you.....I'm not sure that the Nation of Islam played such a vital role nationally in terms of helping people turn to MLK.....I feel that maybe they were more of a New York type of organization...strong in NY but weak nationally....do you think thats true or do you think I am downplaying their importance overall?
They don't get a lot of press or media accolades, however I think you're downplaying their importance.
I thought they were based out of Chicago. ???
-
yes they were based out of chicago, but they were strong in NY based on the presence of Malcolm X in Harlem...I just don't think they had the national reach of MLK
but getting back on the subject, I just hope that Israel and the arab world will get it together and stop the wasteful and senseless killing.....and I especially hope the palestinians will move forward and away from Hamas...but it's hard to do because Hamas does not want peace and the arabs have no experience with letting people have opposing views...it's either agree with Hamas and die for them or you are a traitor and you get shot...
I just don't understand a culture that brainwashes their own kids to worship death so that they will die for a cause....and then when these same kids become suicide bombers and blow themselves up the parents of these same children are actually proud of them...wow....talk about delusional..until the parents stand up and tell Hamas that they will not allow their children to be brainwashed into killing themselves then this nightmare will go on for them and things will never get better for them
-
yes they were based out of chicago, but they were strong in NY based on the presence of Malcolm X in Harlem...I just don't think they had the national reach of MLK
but getting back on the subject, I just hope that Israel and the arab world will get it together and stop the wasteful and senseless killing.....and I especially hope the palestinians will move forward and away from Hamas...but it's hard to do because Hamas does not want peace and the arabs have no experience with letting people have opposing views...it's either agree with Hamas and die for them or you are a traitor and you get shot...
I just don't understand a culture that brainwashes their own kids to worship death so that they will die for a cause....and then when these same kids become suicide bombers and blow themselves up the parents of these same children are actually proud of them...wow....talk about delusional..until the parents stand up and tell Hamas that they will not allow their children to be brainwashed into killing themselves then this nightmare will go on for them and things will never get better for them
We can forgive you for killing our sons. But we will never forgive you for making us kill yours.
Golda Meir, to Anwar Saddat just before the peace talks.
Israeli (Russian-born) politician (1898 - 1978)
-
We can forgive you for killing our sons. But we will never forgive you for making us kill yours.
Golda Meir, to Anwar Saddat just before the peace talks.
Israeli (Russian-born) politician (1898 - 1978)
I kind of like that, ...I think I'll adapt it somewhat. {ahem}
I can forgive you for the stupid shit you write.
but I will never forgive you for making me have to read it!
Jaguar to Tonymctones
Canadian (Jamaican-born) visionary entrepreneur extraordinaire (1988 - 20??)
Ya... I wrote 1988! What of it?! >:( I'm 21! That's my story ...and I'm sticking to it! :-X
-
I kind of like that, ...I think I'll adapt it somewhat. {ahem}
I can forgive you for the stupid shit you write.
but I will never forgive you for making me have to read it!
Jaguar to Tonymctones
Canadian (Jamaican-born) visionary entrepreneur extraordinaire (1988 - 20??)
Ya... I wrote 1988! What of it?! >:( I'm 21! That's my story ...and I'm sticking to it! :-X
You're ignorant and not funny.
-
The truly disgusting part is, I get the feeling his biggest issue with your post had to deal with precluding Israel from taking any more land. I don't think he seemed to mind your call for genocide against the Palestinian people. :'(
You people can be really vile sometimes. :'(
Thanks for putting words in my mouth, lazy eyes. But no, that wasn't my biggest issue. My biggest issue is Doc jumping all over my shit every time I make a post about Muslims and then he turns around and acts like he cares about the Palestinians.
But hey, what's a 160 IQ for if you can't try to tell people what they're thinking, right Ms. former C-movie extra? Feel free not to speak for me anymore. I like people speaking for me to have GEDs.
-
Obama Takes Toughest Stance With Israel In A Generation
by Stuart Whatley
Beginning in the weeks leading up to President Obama's meetings with Middle Eastern leaders, the administration laid the groundwork for its strong position against Israeli settlements, marking a break from the soft-gloved approach of years past. And this week, tensions have increased between Obama and the new Israeli government under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, following their meeting last week when Obama said, "there is a clear understanding that we have to make progress on settlements; that settlements have to be stopped in order for us to move forward," the AP reports.
Netanyahu's frustration with the Obama administration's demands was made apparent Wednesday when, according to Foreign Policy, he vented to a confidante the question: "What the hell do they want from me?"
According to the Woodrow Wilson Center's Aaron David Miller, speaking to McClatchy, Obama's intransigence and direct rhetoric on the contentious settlements issue is risky policy. From McClatchy:
"What we're seeing from the Obama administration is an uncharacteristically tough policy on settlements without a corresponding detailed strategy to justify it. It looks like a significant fight with the Israelis,"
"They've essentially issued an ultimatum to Israel . It's a game of chicken, an Obama-Netanyahu game of chicken."
The Washington Post's Jackson Diehl, in his Friday column, discusses the intractability of the Israeli-Arab peace process as a "waiting game" where both sides refuse to budge until the other makes the first concessionary move. As Diehl points out, Obama's unprecedentedly tough approach to Israel -- which Miller describes as risky and incomplete -- is an attempt to break this impasse. From Diehl:
Obama, in contrast, has repeatedly and publicly stressed the need for a West Bank settlement freeze, with no exceptions. In so doing he has shifted the focus to Israel. He has revived a long-dormant Palestinian fantasy: that the United States will simply force Israel to make critical concessions, whether or not its democratic government agrees, while Arabs passively watch and applaud. "The Americans are the leaders of the world," Abbas told me and Post Editorial Page Editor Fred Hiatt. "They can use their weight with anyone around the world. Two years ago they used their weight on us. Now they should tell the Israelis, 'You have to comply with the conditions.'"
FFFFAAAAAIIIIIILLLLLL
________________________ _____________
View from Mideast: Obama's a problem
By: Ben Smith
November 22, 2010 04:32 AM EST
WWW.POLITICO.COM
JERUSALEM — Vowing to change a region that has resisted the best efforts of presidents and prime ministers past, Barack Obama dove head first into the Middle East peace process on his second day in office.
He was supposed to be different. His personal identity, his momentum, his charisma and his promise of a fresh start would fundamentally alter America’s relations with the Muslim world and settle one of its bitterest grievances.
Two years later, he has managed to forge surprising unanimity on at least one topic: Barack Obama. A visit here finds both Israelis and Palestinians blame him forthe current stalemate – just as they blame one another.
Instead of becoming a heady triumph of his diplomatic skill and special insight, Obama’s peace process is viewed almost universally in Israel as a mistake-riddled fantasy. And far from becoming the transcendent figure in a centuries-old drama, Obama has become just another frustrated player on a hardened Mideast landscape.
The current state of play sums up the problem. Obama’s demand that the Israelis stop building settlements on the West Bank was met, at long last, by a temporary and partial freeze, but its brief renewal is now the subject of intensive negotiations.
Meanwhile, Palestinian leaders have refused American demands to hold peace talks with the Israelis before the freeze is extended. Talks with Arab states over gestures intended to build Israeli confidence – a key part of Obama’s early plan — have long since been scrapped.
The political peace process to which Obama committed so much energy is considered a failure so far. And in the world’s most pro-American state, the public and its leaders have lost any faith in Obama and – increasingly — even in the notion of a politically negotiated peace.
Even those who still believe in the process that Obama has championed view his conduct as a deeply unfunny comedy of errors.
“He’s like rain,” said a top Israeli official involved in diplomacy with the U.S., speaking of Obama’s role in negotiations. “You can do all kinds of things to cope with it.”
Some fret that not only has Obama failed to move the process forward, but that he and his Israeli and Palestinian counterparts may have dealt it a setback that will leave it worse off than when they began.
“Each of them has exacerbated the mistakes of the other,” said Michael Herzog, a retired general who still plays an informal role advising Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s negotiators. He worries that the result of the bumbling could be “disastrous: people will lose hope in the possibility of a two-state solution.”
The White House declined to comment for this story. But in general, the Americans point fingers back at the region. They’re unsure whether Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, known as Abu Mazen, has the will to make peace. They’ve been surprised and disappointed by Arab leaders’ unwillingness to bolster Israel’s confidence in the process with diplomatic concessions or financial support for the Palestinian Authority. And they are dissatisfied with the domestic political excuses of an Israeli Prime Minister they see as having chosen his own intractable coalition, and who is now – in the view of one American official – “running out the clock.”
Peel back any corner of the current negotiations, and the problems quickly become evident.
In August, the Obama administration announced that it would sell 84 F-15 fighter jets to Saudi Arabia, part of the largest arms deal in American history.
The plan drew some grumbles from pro-Israel members of the Congress, who worried that the sale would tip the balance of power in the region. But Israel’s government remained publicly silent. Privately, in August – a top Israeli official told POLITICO -- they asked the Obama administration to match the Saudi sale with 20 F-35 jets for the Israeli Air Force, a move that would maintain the “qualitative military advantage” that has long been a principle of American policy toward Israel.
Those F-35s are now at the heart of a proposed deal between the U.S. and Israel over the renewed 90-day freeze.
The notion that Israel would get $2 billion worth of military hardware for a three-month delay in the construction of a few houses appears incomprehensible, and has drawn criticism for two reasons: Netanyahu’s conservative coalition partners worry that the Americans are selling them yesterday’s carpet, making a condition of something that was already in the works. His American critics, meanwhile, expressed astonishment that Obama would pay so much for so little.
The reality is more complicated, and emblematic of the stilted relationship between the United States and its ally, and of the Israeli angst over American support, its mistrust of Obama, and its assumption that peace talks will fail. The Israelis are using the talks – viewed by most of the government as a fantasy – as a bridge to their more immediate security needs.
“It’s not connected to the 90 days – it’s connected to the Saudi deal,” said a senior aide to Netanyahu. “It’s not something [Netanyahu] had in his pocket.”
Still, a visitor finds no shortage of good news on the ground. Israel’s tech sector is booming, Tel Aviv’s cafes bustle and Israel has enjoyed a period largely free of suicide bombings and rocket attacks. In the Palestinian territories, there is also a positive tale to tell: The robust economic growth in West Bank cities patrolled by a functioning Palestinian police force.
But the American president has been diminished, even in an era without active hostilities between Israelis and Palestinians. His demands on the parties appear to shrink each month, with the path to a grand peace settlement narrowing to the vanishing point. The lack of Israeli faith in him and his process has them using the talks to extract more tangible security assurances – the jets. And though America remains beloved, Obama is about as popular here as he is in Oklahoma. A Jerusalem Post poll in May found 9 percent of Israelis consider Obama “pro-Israel,” while 48 percent say he’s “pro-Palestinian.”
Other polling in Israel shows a growing gap between aspirations for peace and the faith that it can happen. One survey last month found that 72 percent of Israelis favor negotiations, while only 33 percent think they can bear fruit. (Palestinians show a smaller gap, primarily because a smaller majority favors negotiations.)
Obama has resisted advisers’ suggestions that he travel to Israel or speak directly to Israelis as he has to Muslims in Egypt, Turkey, and Indonesia.
“Israelis really hate Obama’s guts,” said Shmuel Rosner, a columnist for two leading Israeli newspapers. “We used to trust Americans to act like Americans, and this guy is like a European leader.”
Many senior Israeli leaders have concluded that Hillary Clinton and John McCain were right about Obama’s naivete and inexperience.
“The naďve liberals who are at the heart of the administration really believe in all the misconceptions the Palestinians and all their friends all over the world are trying to place,” said Yossi Kuperwasser, a former high-ranking military intelligence officer who is now deputy director general of the Ministry of Strategic Affairs.
Kuperwasser, like other Israelis, bridled at the suggestion that the country’s dislike of Obama draws from the Muslim influences of his heritage – or even his name.
“It drives me crazy. Who cares that his middle name is Hussein? It’s the last thing we care about. [To suggest that] is just anti-Semitism,” he said. “There is one reason why we are hesitant about this guy: he doesn’t understand us.”
The deal on 90 more days of freeze currently hangs in the balance. Netanyahu is also trying to sell his coalition partners on an administration promise that there won’t be a demand for a third freeze, and on another promise – which has provoked the same claims that it’s too much, or too little – to veto a threatened attempt to advance Palestinian statehood through the United Nations.
The demand for a 90-day freeze in new construction has, all sides agree, a real internal logic: American leaders have said they hope the Israelis and Palestinians will resolve the question of the border of a Palestinian state. And once that’s resolved, the issue of settlements – which Obama raised at his Cairo speech last June, and which has emerged as a prime impediment to talks -- will, the theory goes, be resolved with it. The scenario: Most of the “settlements” will be put within mutually agreed borders of Israel, the rest will be clearly out of bounds, and the residents of far-flung Jewish communities on West Bank hilltops will be on notice that Israeli soldiers will soon be knocking on their doors to drag them out of the state of Palestine.
The problem is that virtually nobody in Israel who isn’t required by the logic of politics to express public faith in the political process of peace talks has much faith that the talks will lead anywhere. Netanyahu’s coalition is dominated by people with a profound skepticism about not just these talks, but of any negotiated peace.
“The only positive policy is to operate under the realistic assumption that as long as the PLO do not change fundamentally their thinking, no government of Israel can sign an agreement with them,” said Beni Begin, a cabinet minister from Netanyahu’s own Likud party and – like most of the Israeli government – a firm skeptic of the prospects for a Palestinian state any time soon.
The extremist group Hamas’s control of the Gaza Strip, meanwhile, “is not a ‘real problem’,” Begin says, mocking the diplomatic conversation on the topic. “It’s an insurmountable problem. Everyone knows it.”
Netanyahu’s close staff and his government share some of that skepticism.
“It might be that the reason you haven't had peace with the Palestinians is not because you haven’t had changes in policies, not because you haven’t had changes with the American approach, but because the Palestinians haven’t brought themselves to real reconciliation with Israel,” Netanyahu’s closest adviser, Ron Dermer, told POLITICO.
Netanyahu, oddly enough, given his perception around the world (and particularly in Washington) as an unyielding hawk, sounds like a virtual peacenik compared with many of his advisers. Almost alone on the right, the prime minister “thinks (Palestinian president) Abu Mazen may rise to the occasion,” Dermer said.
“The prime minister is not only more optimistic than his staff. The prime minister is more optimistic than his ministers,” he said, adding that unlike Begin, Netanyahu “does not believe that the status quo is sustainable.”
Netanyahu is almost alone in his party in suggesting that the peace process could go somewhere; one of the few others in Israeli public life who insists on that point is his chief rival and critic, opposition leader Tzipi Livni. Peace talks really could advance, she argues, if Israel had a leader whom the Americans and Palestinians could trust, as they did when she served as Foreign Minister when her party, Kadima, ran the government before the rightward correction that occurred just weeks after Obama’s own election.
“I believe it’s feasible, but I don’t have a 100 percent guarantee. What I don’t do is try to undermine the willingness of the other side,” Livni told POLITICO. “When we negotiated there was trust – there’s no trust now.... It depends on the way you negotiate.”
Livni scrupulously avoids criticizing Obama’s conduct of the peace talks, but those around her are blunter.
“If Obama wanted to be a transformational figure, he would never have led with the settlements,” said Eyal Arad, the architect of Livni’s campaign for prime minister. He argues – like most Israelis – that Obama inadvertently got talks hung up on a matter of irrelevant principle, rather than engaging the reality that some settlements can stay while others must go.
“The settlements were pushed by a bunch of left-wingers who were out of sync with the realities and were out of government too long,” he said. “The irony is that Obama went directly back to the place where George Bush the father left off.”
Another of Livni’s top lieutenants, her former party chairman and Knesset ally Yohanan Plessner, is among a surprising spectrum of Israeli leaders who have begun to imagine radically different alternatives to the negotiated, political peace that American and Palestinian officials insist must be the main road to a settlement.
“The whole focus on final status isn’t compatible with the political reality on the Israel side and the Palestinian side,” he said, arguing that a better option is a regime under which Israeli and Palestinian leaders would build the Palestinian economy, remove far-flung settlements and strengthen a de facto Palestinian state “as a tunnel to final status.”
To him, the endless talks about talks are a distraction. As for Obama, he said, “You have to create a crisis that serves an end. This crisis today – I don’t know what it’s serving.” Palestinian leaders say they, too – for different reasons -- are losing faith in the political talks.
“[Netanyahu] has a chance and he’s wasting it,” said the chief Palestinian negotiator, Saeb Erakat. “Given the chance between settlements and peace he’s always chosen settlements.”
The advocacy director of the American Task Force on Palestine, Ghaith al-Omari, said the frustration in Ramallah isn’t only with Netanyahu.
Abbas and other Palestinian leaders are “personally fed up with the whole thing,” he said, and “losing faith in the process, both with the Israeli willingness to deliver and the Americans’ ability to deliver the Israelis.”
But Plessner’s suggestion of an interim process reflects Israeli disillusion with the notion of a negotiated peace process, one that some of its veterans fear is already on its last legs. It’s echoed by a surprising range of voices: Former Israeli U.N Ambassador Dore Gold, a hawkish Netanyahu ally, has cited the skepticism about the political process outlined by the left-leaning Rob Malley and Hussein Agha in the New York Review of Books.
Livni dismisses this alternative.
“For any deal you need two sides. The Palestinians are not going to accept that. It’s not going to happen, and it doesn't serve the Israeli interest to end the conflict,” she said.
She also says Obama’s unpopularity – now a fact of life – doesn’t matter.
“It’s not important: People in Israel can love him, admire him, hate him, dislike him – people can oppose everything he says – he is the United States ... we have the umbilical cord with the United States. We cannot cut this.”
Others aren’t so sure. If Netanyahu comes close to a deal, they expect Obama will have to play a key role in closing it.
“In the money time, the popularity of the president will matter a great deal,” said the senior official with a key role between the countries.
George Mitchell, Obama’s special envoy, often compares the stalled peace process here to his famous role in settling Northern Ireland’s Troubles, where he had “700 days of failure and one day of success.”
The 700th day since Mitchell began work will pass next month without, it appears safe to say, anything resembling political progress toward a Palestinian state. In Israel, indeed, the debate focuses largely on whether the American-led process has left negotiations at a standstill – or pushed them backwards.
“What will happen after 90 days if we haven’t decided the border?” asks Kuperwasser. “And we won’t settle the borders.”
Meanwhile the president who hoped to dramatically remake the regional landscape has, in the end, simply become part of it.
“Obama’s biggest problem is that we don’t buy what he’s selling, and that is hope,” said one Israeli veteran of past negotiations. “There’s this sincerity about the American approach that is heartbreaking to watch.”
Correction: An earlier version of this story misstated the number and value of F-35 fighter jets a top Israeli official said were requested by Israel. The official said 20 F-35 jets, worth $2 billion, were requested from the Obama administration.
© 2010 Capitol News Company, LLC
-
Erekat: ‘Obama has no credibility in the Middle East'
By HERB KEINON
27/01/2011
http://www.jpost.com/LandedPages/PrintArticle.aspx?id=205392
At least Mideast leaders ‘feared Bush,’ PLO negotiator says; Mitchell urges him not to let opportunities slip away.
US President Barack Obama has lost all credibility in the Middle East, PA negotiator Saeb Erekat told US envoy George Mitchell in October 2009, according to leaked Palestinian documents released by Al-Jazeera and the Guardian Wednesday night.
In an apparently heated exchange with Mitchell about a settlement freeze, Erekat said he would not be able to convince the Palestinians to negotiate without a full settlement freeze.
“It’s not up to me to decide your credibility in the Middle East,” Erekat said. “He [Obama] has lost it throughout the region.
When he got the Nobel Peace Prize, I was asked about it in the media and publicly congratulated him. I was attacked for it in the Arab media – just for congratulating like I would congratulate anyone who wins a prize... Believe me, there is no president in the Middle East who wants to help Obama as much as AM [PA President Mahmoud Abbas].”
Mitchell argued with Erekat that the Palestinians negotiated without a full freeze in the past.
“Now with the first president who wants to make an effort – he’s being penalized by you,” Mitchell said.
To which Erekat replied, “Not me. He has [Prime Minister Binyamin] Netanyahu. He came to Cairo and said, ‘full freeze.’ We will not convert to Judaism, so if Netanyahu’s charade of two states is followed, it’s going to be one state.”
Later in the meeting, Erekat said that “people in the Middle East are not taking Barack Obama seriously. They feared Bush, despite everything. This is important. BO [Obama] has lost it with the decision-makers, although not the street.”
In another meeting that month, Mitchell said Obama was “completely committed to achieving the objective you want.”
“President Obama is not like previous administrations. In US politics, there never was and there never will be a president as determined to resolve this conflict,” Mitchell said. “So you can argue over words and delay indefinitely, so you lose the most important thing – this opportunity: the presence of a US president completely committed to achieving the objective you want.”
After Erekat warned that this was a final opportunity for a two-state solution and that the best alternative to a negotiated settlement is a binational state, Mitchell replied, “That is your decision. But the fact is that you have a president committed to this issue. All that points to the need to begin negotiations as fast as possible.”
“We won’t have a perfect ToR [terms of reference], or perfect negotiations, or a perfect outcome. That’s life. I understand the frustration and the burden of history, but please, don’t let this opportunity slip by,” Mitchell said.
-
100% agreement
+2
-
Erekat: ‘Obama has no credibility in the Middle East'
By HERB KEINON
27/01/2011
http://www.jpost.com/LandedPages/PrintArticle.aspx?id=205392
At least Mideast leaders ‘feared Bush,’ PLO negotiator says; Mitchell urges him not to let opportunities slip away.
US President Barack Obama has lost all credibility in the Middle East, PA negotiator Saeb Erekat told US envoy George Mitchell in October 2009, according to leaked Palestinian documents released by Al-Jazeera and the Guardian Wednesday night.
In an apparently heated exchange with Mitchell about a settlement freeze, Erekat said he would not be able to convince the Palestinians to negotiate without a full settlement freeze.
“It’s not up to me to decide your credibility in the Middle East,” Erekat said. “He [Obama] has lost it throughout the region.
When he got the Nobel Peace Prize, I was asked about it in the media and publicly congratulated him. I was attacked for it in the Arab media – just for congratulating like I would congratulate anyone who wins a prize... Believe me, there is no president in the Middle East who wants to help Obama as much as AM [PA President Mahmoud Abbas].”
Mitchell argued with Erekat that the Palestinians negotiated without a full freeze in the past.
“Now with the first president who wants to make an effort – he’s being penalized by you,” Mitchell said.
To which Erekat replied, “Not me. He has [Prime Minister Binyamin] Netanyahu. He came to Cairo and said, ‘full freeze.’ We will not convert to Judaism, so if Netanyahu’s charade of two states is followed, it’s going to be one state.”
Later in the meeting, Erekat said that “people in the Middle East are not taking Barack Obama seriously. They feared Bush, despite everything. This is important. BO [Obama] has lost it with the decision-makers, although not the street.”
In another meeting that month, Mitchell said Obama was “completely committed to achieving the objective you want.”
“President Obama is not like previous administrations. In US politics, there never was and there never will be a president as determined to resolve this conflict,” Mitchell said. “So you can argue over words and delay indefinitely, so you lose the most important thing – this opportunity: the presence of a US president completely committed to achieving the objective you want.”
After Erekat warned that this was a final opportunity for a two-state solution and that the best alternative to a negotiated settlement is a binational state, Mitchell replied, “That is your decision. But the fact is that you have a president committed to this issue. All that points to the need to begin negotiations as fast as possible.”
“We won’t have a perfect ToR [terms of reference], or perfect negotiations, or a perfect outcome. That’s life. I understand the frustration and the burden of history, but please, don’t let this opportunity slip by,” Mitchell said.
I am realy starting to believe you are not even an American....you constantly bash your own president for no reason....this thread is about the israelis v.s palestinians.....what does Obama really have to do with that???...Someone must get tough with Israel and push them towards peace....we can't keep giving them endless aid forever so they can be on a war footing forever.....they have to make peaceat some sort of way.....you can't keep building on the palestinian land and then expect them to negotiate.....and Israel cannot psychologically continue in a state of war forever
-
Sorry, I'm not a cheerleader for politicians and maddoffs like obama.
I never cheerleaded bush and certainly will never cheerlead this piece of trash in office.
-
Israel shocked by Obama's "betrayal" of Mubarak
Reuters ^
Israel shocked by Obama's "betrayal" of Mubarak
By Douglas Hamilton
JERUSALEM | Mon Jan 31, 2011 12:54pm EST
JERUSALEM (Reuters) - If Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak is toppled, Israel will lose one of its very few friends in a hostile neighborhood and President Barack Obama will bear a large share of the blame, Israeli pundits said on Monday.
Political commentators expressed shock at how the United States as well as its major European allies appeared to be ready to dump a staunch strategic ally of three decades, simply to conform to the current ideology of political correctness.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has told ministers of the Jewish state to make no comment on the political cliffhanger in Cairo, to avoid inflaming an already explosive situation. But Israel's President Shimon Peres is not a minister.
"We always have had and still have great respect for President Mubarak," he said on Monday. He then switched to the past tense. "I don't say everything that he did was right, but he did one thing which all of us are thankful to him for: he kept the peace in the Middle East."
Newspaper columnists were far more blunt.
One comment by Aviad Pohoryles in the daily Maariv was entitled "A Bullet in the Back from Uncle Sam." It accused Obama and his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of pursuing a naive, smug, and insular diplomacy heedless of the risks.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Obama accepts resignation of US Mideast envoy
.. AP – FILE - In this Sept. 2, 2010 file photo, Special Envoy for Middle East Peace George Mitchell briefs reporters …
By MATTHEW LEE, Associated Press Matthew Lee, Associated Press – 14 mins ago
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama says he's accepted the resignation of his special Middle East envoy, former Sen. George Mitchell, who's leaving as peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians are at a standstill.
But Obama said in a statement Friday that the veteran mediator "has contributed immeasurably to the goal of two states living side by side in peace and security."
Mitchell said in his resignation letter that he'd signed on for two years and more than that has now passed. His resignation will be effective May 20 — the same day Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visits the White House.
Mitchell's departure comes with the Middle East embroiled in turmoil and the Israeli-Palestinian peace process deadlocked.
THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.
The Obama administration's special Mideast envoy, former Sen. George Mitchell, is resigning after more than two largely fruitless years of trying to press Israel and the Palestinians into peace talks, U.S. officials said Friday.
The White House is expected to announce that the veteran mediator and broker of the Northern Ireland peace accord is stepping down for personal reasons, the officials told The Associated Press. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity ahead of an afternoon announcement that will follow a White House meeting between Mitchell and President Barack Obama.
There are no imminent plans to announce a replacement for Mitchell, the officials said, although his staff is expected to remain in place at least temporarily.
Mitchell's resignation comes at a critical time for the Middle East, which is embroiled in turmoil, and the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, which has been moribund since last September and is now further complicated by an agreement between Palestinian factions to share power.
Obama will deliver a speech next Thursday at the State Department about his administration's views of developments in the region, ahead of a visit to Washington by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Jordan's King Abdullah II also will travel to Washington next week.
In a telephone interview Friday with the MaineToday Media group in Mitchell's home state, Obama said: "George is by any measure one of the finest public servants our nation has ever had." He didn't address the resignation directly, but added that Mitchell is also "a good friend."
White House spokesman Jay Carney said the administration remains focused on the Middle East peace process.
"The president's commitment remains as firm as it was when he took office," Carney said. "This is a hard issue, an extraordinary hard issue."
Since his appointment on Obama's second full day in office in January 2009, Mitchell, 77, had spent much of his time shuttling between the Israelis, Palestinians and friendly Arab states in a bid to restart long-stalled peace talks that would create an independent Palestinian state. But in recent months, particularly after the upheaval in Arab countries that ousted longtime U.S. ally and key peace partner Hosni Mubarak from power in Egypt, his activity had slowed markedly.
Nimer Hamad, a senior adviser to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, told the AP that Mitchell's job had been made more difficult by Israeli intransigence.
"Mitchell hasn't been in the region in three months," Hamad said. "Whether he resigns or not, it's clear that Mitchell wasn't in the region because he didn't see the possibility of being a mediator between two sides where one of them is not responsive."
Israeli officials declined to comment until the official announcement is made.
Mitchell has led a long career as politician, businessman, congressional investigator and international mediator.
Upon being announced as the administration's point man for Mideast negotiations, he recalled his role in producing Northern Ireland's Good Friday peace accord in 1998.
"We had 700 days of failure and one day of success," he said. "For most of the time, progress was nonexistent or very slow."
Mitchell believed his patience would serve him well in the Arab-Israeli conflict and its constant forward and backward steps. Speaking of the Northern Ireland conflict, he added: "I formed the conviction that there is no such thing as a conflict that can't be ended. Conflicts are created, conducted and sustained by human beings. They can be ended by human beings."
Mitchell served in the Senate as a Democrat from Maine from 1980 to 1995, the final six years as majority leader. In 2000-01, he headed a fact-finding committee on Mideast violence that called for commitments by Israel and the Palestinian Authority to immediately and unconditionally end their fighting. The panel urged a cooling-off period and other steps toward peace, but it did not lead to lasting results.
The April 2001 Mitchell report asked Israel to freeze settlements in the West Bank and called on the Palestinians to prevent gunmen in Palestinian-populated areas from firing on Israeli towns and cities. The settlements, as well as Israeli concern over rocket and other attacks on its soil, remain sticking points today.
Mitchell also led the 2007 investigation into the use of performance-enhancing drugs in major league baseball. Before that, he was chairman of The Walt Disney Co. from 2004-2006.
___
Associated Press writer Julie Pace in Washington and Dalia Nammari in Ramallah, West Bank, contributed to this report.
Follow Yahoo! News on Twitter, become a fan on Facebook
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110513/ap_on_re_us/us_us_mideast_mitchell
________________________ _
Another failure.