Obama's Position on Israel

Discussion in 'Politics' started by joshua_ste, May 19, 2011.

  1. joshua_ste

    joshua_ste New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    72
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    I was reading Andrew Sullivan's blog regarding Obama's Middle East speech delivered this evening and wanted to paraphrase some interesting stuff. The right is getting apoplectic over this specific part, an Israel-Palestine two-state solution:
    While the core issues of the conflict must be negotiated, the basis of those negotiations is clear: a viable Palestine, and a secure Israel. The United States believes that negotiations should result in two states, with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan, and Egypt, and permanent Israeli borders with Palestine. 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.
    The American Spectator, a conservative magazine, reacted this way:

    In other words, Obama is now ready to advocate the next step of his plan to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth.


    The Ace of Spades is a conservative political blog, and their take is that
    Obama pretty much announced that he wants Israel to return to its 1967 borders -- thus endorsing the terrorists' key demand without requiring any substantive concessions on their part.
    A rational commenter, Jeffery Goldberg, points out that the 1967 borders comment is not news:
    This has been the basic idea for at least 12 years. This is what Bill Clinton, Ehud Barak and Yasser Arafat were talking about at Camp David, and later, at Taba. This is what George W. Bush was talking about with Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert. So what's the huge deal here? Is there any non-delusional Israeli who doesn't think that the 1967 border won't serve as the rough outline of the new Palestinian state?
    Obama is following the same course that the United States has for over a decade (this is almost precisely GWB's Israel policy), but because Obama is in office, and not a GOP president, the conservatives are going batshit. The Fox News line is that Obama's speech is a "stunning" attack on Israel. Matt Drudge is running the headline "Obama Sides With the Palestinians".


    But nothing has changed! This, again, is George Bush's policy, and here is Hillary Clinton voicing precisely the same policy position in 2009:
    We believe that through good-faith negotiations the parties can mutually agree on an outcome which ends the conflict and reconciles the Palestinian goal of an independent and viable state based on the 1967 lines, with agreed swaps, and the Israeli goal of a Jewish state with secure and recognized borders that reflect subsequent developments and meet Israeli security requirements.
    The right will take ANY Obama position now and mangle it and contort it and call him anti-american and a terrorist. Yet it's GWB's policy.

    Mitt Romney reaction:
    “President Obama has thrown Israel under the bus."


    Michele Bachmann:
    "A shocking display of betrayal... Today President Barack Obama has again indicated that his policy towards Israel is to blame Israel first."




    We've lost the willingness to have calm, reasoned arguments. The right is all about hyped-up, over-the-top statements and an outrageous desire to deify Israel and cater to the Israel Lobby.
     
  2. D_Bob_Crotchitch

    D_Bob_Crotchitch New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2006
    Messages:
    8,498
    Likes Received:
    18
    You need to remember that the right was against it when Bush was for it too. It isn't just anti-Obama. It is anything that is against Israel.
     
  3. D_ewjjde

    D_ewjjde New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2011
    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why do people seemed stunned that the conservative news station never agrees with the liberal president?

    Let me guess, you agreed with everything CNN and MSNBC said about President Bush....
     
  4. Eric_8

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2010
    Messages:
    3,574
    Likes Received:
    6
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Diego
    right, because it's clearly only conservatives that stoop to these sorts of levels.

    So the Liberal commercial featuring a wheelchair bound senior woman being thrown as a cliff in an attempt to scare people about healthcare is a neutral, reasoned depiction?
     
  5. parr

    parr New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    Messages:
    434
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Florida
    Actually, i'm not shocked by any of this as my dad always said this
    is "par for the course". Question is who's side are you on. Be carefull
    of which side you choose.:headache:
     
  6. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    And what does that have to do with Obama's comments regarding Israel? Nothing.
    What's apparent with the responses from some GOP members is that they have no regard as to what they said or supported in the past, and will reposition anything they stand for if it allows them to attack their opposition. Yet, instead of calling out those individuals in Congress for their hypocrisy, some people would rather try and derail the subject matter with bouts of false equivalency.
     
    #6 B_VinylBoy, May 20, 2011
    Last edited: May 20, 2011
  7. SlamminSammy

    SlamminSammy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2010
    Messages:
    1,243
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    426
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Pittsburgh (PA, US)
    I applaud President Obama for having the intelligence to see through the Jewish Lobby's propaganda transmitted through the media that they control & being the 1st president of our generation to have the balls to publicly state what needs to be done for the only truly fair peace resolution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
    I have been a Republican my entire life, but if he keeps proving his intelligence to me with statements like this one, I will vote for him.
    I don't think people realize that if he supports an independent Palestinian state based on 1967 borders like the rest of the world (except for the US & United Kingdom) does, all other Middle East nations will be lining up to be our allies.
     
    #7 SlamminSammy, May 20, 2011
    Last edited: May 20, 2011
  8. Eric_8

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2010
    Messages:
    3,574
    Likes Received:
    6
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Diego
    I've come to one of two possible conclusions:
    1. you simply want to be an ass towards anyone poster that doesn't share the same political affiliations, though you seem unwilling not surprisingly to correct others who share your beliefs. Joshua_ste: "The right is all about hyped-up, over-the-top statements." This is an accusation that, though applicable to Israel, is a blanket attack on the entire GOP party.

    2. You just love seeing me post so much that you want me to once again clarify my obvious disagreement with the aforementioned poster.

    Clearly, my quote referencing the first poster's accusation that all the absurd attacks made are coming from the Republican Party. I fully believe, as anyone in their right mind should, that falsified, senseless ideological bombs are fired from both parties.

    My Obama/Israel judgment: disagree with it, and can't see the positives that can come from it, though I'm quite certain that even the most dim-witted of Liberals can spot the positives like Waldo...right???
     
  9. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    No. I came into a thread expecting to read opinions and responses about Obama's speech, and there you are with comments that were completely unrelated to the real subject matter.

    Don't flatter yourself, sweetie. I'm not following you around here. You're just one of the more vocal ones on the board right now, and unfortunately you usually don't say anything that helps a thread move forward.

    But again, that's not the point of this thread.

    Well, if you need to see some of the pros and cons on the issue why don't you read this instead of festering among your political bigotries and trying to guess what anyone "on the left" is going to say next? Right now, I'm actually torn and need to think about this more before I come to a decision. Debate: Return of Israel to pre-1967 borders - Debatepedia

    BTW... to be able to spot Waldo means that you have eyes that are capable to look past the the obstructions, the distractions and the phonies, and focus on the real subject at hand. I know adults that can't do that in a simple children's book, never mind on any political matter. So thanks for the compliment, albeit a backhanded one. Hopefully your vision improves one day too.
     
  10. Domisoldo

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Messages:
    4,079
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    23
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest
    Riiiight! :rolleyes:

    C'mon! This is a 100% guaranteed anonymous forum. Don't be shy and share your genuine agenda with us.
     
  11. rawbone8

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    2,864
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    4
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Toronto (ON, CA)
    Obama is a poker player. Supposedly a good one. This speech seems deliberately timed to rattle Netanyahu, and is a not too subtle reminder of the way Biden and the USA government were dramatically snubbed by the Israelis a year ago in March, 2010, when they abruptly announced plans to construct 1,600 new settlement homes in the disputed territory, blindsiding Biden on a state visit.

    In your face? Yeah. Calculated? He has to shift the balance of Middle Eastern opinion that the USA is blindly going to ally itself with Israel on every issue here, and at the same time keep Israel's, and the USA's interests in tandem.
     
  12. B_Nick4444

    B_Nick4444 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2007
    Messages:
    7,002
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    This post pretty much sums up my thoughts on the matter (though I am loathe to attribute this level of intelligence to Obama)

    Contrary to the hyperbole from the right, the statement only urges the 1967 borders be urged as the starting point for negotiations leading to the nonsense of the two state solution (since there is no Palestine, I don't see any reason for creating such a state)

    Obama still opposes a United Nations created Palestinian state.

    So, if such a state is to come into existence, it is only if Israel is involved in the process, and with its acquiescence

    The larger American position strategy and position remains in place

    (I am however tickled pink that it provides a means to further undercut support for Obama's second term, as a large part of the leftist electorate that elected him was Jewish -- buh bye 'bama, buh-bye! :nana: :beerchug2: :yup: :fing02: )

     
    #12 B_Nick4444, May 20, 2011
    Last edited: May 20, 2011
  13. Drifterwood

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Messages:
    15,725
    Likes Received:
    386
    Location:
    Fingringhoe (GB)
    Care to predict the next image in the sequence?
     

    Attached Files:

  14. ColoradoGuy

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2009
    Messages:
    1,097
    Albums:
    3
    Likes Received:
    367
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Denver (CO, US)
    Verified:
    Photo
    So, you're "loathe to attribute this level of intelligence to [President] Obama"? Really? Why would you say something like that?
     
  15. ColoradoGuy

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2009
    Messages:
    1,097
    Albums:
    3
    Likes Received:
    367
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Denver (CO, US)
    Verified:
    Photo
    Nick4444's commentary aside, I think you make a compelling point, rawbone8.
     
  16. Jason

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Messages:
    9,929
    Likes Received:
    640
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    London (GB)
    When you keep trying something and you keep failing it is time to try something different.

    A peace based upon the 1967 borders with two-states living in harmony sounds logical and has been the focus of the peace process for a long time. It cues all the bland statements that everything can be achieved through discussion and negotiation. Personally in this case I don't think it can. We have to come up with something new. IMO Obama is playing to a home audience and by doing so is doing enormous harm to the Middle East peace process. If he wanted to create a war in the Middle East I can't think of a better way to do it. His comments are deeply unhelpful - and as unhelpful to the Palestinians as to the Israelis.

    There is an instinctive view that settlements to disputes should be fair. In fact settlements should be something that works, which very often doesn't mean something that is fair. Look at the peace process in Northern Ireland - there is nothing fair about giving the ex-terrorists a role in government, but it has worked. We got peace in Northern Ireland by accepting that in a sense the terrorists had "won" - or at least the UK couldn't defeat the IRA. The reality of this dispute is that Israel has "won", and until the peace-makers recognise this and skew the solution towards the victor then no peace process will work. A solution that would be desperately unfair - but would work - would be to come up with a settlement that returns no land to Palestine (or even gives all to Israel) and which creates some administration short of a state for Palestine. Of course this would be desperately unfair - I'm not doubting this for a moment - but it would work. And sometimes an unfair solution that works is better than an ideal solution that doesn't work. We have peace in Northern Ireland with Sinn Fein, the organisation that we used to call Sinn Fein-IRA, in government and with a man who may well be a terrorist murderer directing the education of school kids. It is utterly sickening - but it works and we must all learn to love it. The sort of tough ethical decisions that have been taken to bring peace to Northern Ireland have to be taken in the Middle East. IMO just as Kennedy was deeply unhelpful in his interventions in the Irish problems and created an additional decade or so of troubles, so Obama has been deeply unhelpful in his present intervention.
     
  17. Eric_8

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2010
    Messages:
    3,574
    Likes Received:
    6
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Diego
    I can only hope to one day shed my Conservative beliefs and become enlightened by the ways of Liberalism.

    I fully realize my post wasn't directly related to the thread, but I think it would be highly irresponsible to let a untrue, obviously biased statement go unchecked.
     
  18. rawbone8

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    2,864
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    4
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Toronto (ON, CA)
    I strongly disagree that Obama is chiefly playing to his home audience. He deliberately chose a time for his speech to create a news feed live into the Middle East.

    Doesn't it seem that he's obviously trying to convince the Arab Spring hopefuls that he's serious about encouraging them, and wants to be taken seriously as a broker in a peace process that has stalled for too long.

    As for the political risks at home? Most Americans don't seem to care a great deal about foreign affairs. The economy and jobs for the unemployed are the key issues for them. He's actually risking losing some of the support of his home base, in particular the financial contributions coming from American Jews. He may not be losing too many votes, though, as they don't tally as a huge number of voters, so the calculation may be he can risk it in a couple of states where they matter.
     
    #18 rawbone8, May 20, 2011
    Last edited: May 20, 2011
  19. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    You should just choose to be enlightened. Therefore, whether the best solution comes from a Liberal or Conservative source it doesn't matter. That's just me. I know neither political side has all the answers, but right now the GOP needs some serious work if they plan on providing good solutions for our nation's problems.
     
    #19 B_VinylBoy, May 20, 2011
    Last edited: May 20, 2011
  20. Eric_8

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2010
    Messages:
    3,574
    Likes Received:
    6
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Diego
    I consider myself educated on the topics, so I'm not too worried about my political beliefs equaling ignorance in the minds of many people here.

    But let's be real folks: why are we even debating political issues? The world is OBVIOUSLY ending tomorrow, so what the point of debating things that will not have the chance to come to fruition?

    btw, I sincerely hope not a single soul on this site believes such silliness :)
     
Draft saved Draft deleted