[pyritechips]

Obama urges Palestinian state based on '67 borders

Mentioned elsewhere, but deserving of its own thread - and debate.

What say you? Is this just the umpteenth derivative of a tired, failed scheme, or can it ever work? I want it to work.

[Littlefield]

Obama is delusional if he really thinks Israel will agree to go back to 1967 borders and slit their own throat

[pyritechips]

Maybe, but as long as there is a "slit their own throat" mentality prevalent then there will never be any semblance of peace. I really fear that some don't want any peace.

[Littlefield]

Yep, especially when Palestinian terrorists slit the throat of a 3 month old.

[pyritechips]

Indeed, then the Palestinians accuse the Israelis of a missile attack on a market, the the Israelis blame the Palestinians of a suicide attack against a police outpost then the Palestinians...

...I think it would start if you didn't play the blame game and not to seek justification for one side's actions by reciting the tired old outrage stories. It proves nothing and solves nothing. Trying to justify one side, or the other, in an endless cycle of retaliatory attacks has proven itself to be futile, deadly and just plain disgusting. What is even more criminal is the attempts - on both sides - by the hard line radicals to scuttle any progress towards peace. They are the true terrorists in this case.

[Wino]

Originally Posted by Littlefield

Obama is delusional if he really thinks Israel will agree to go back to 1967 borders and slit their own throat

That would include Clinton and Bush II - same thing they proposed, and have to agree to some extent - Bush, as we all know was totally delusional.

Is irrelevant whether Israel or Pali's agree as both are the major reason for ME problems which the world is growing very bored with. I'm with pyritechips on this - someone doesn't want peace. Probably in fear of losing $3B yearly. While the USA will never drop support of Israel, we really need to cut back on our expenditures to them if they refuse to cooperate in a two state solution.

With the changing situations in the ME, Israel will mess their skivvies if the Arabs decide Israel has a right to exist (as many already do).

[eggplant43]

I don't think we'll see peace until the people, not the politicians take control. Could there be an Arab Spring within these two nations? The thing that strikes me the most, is that the folks in the ME seem to think in terms of centuries, while the West seems unable to remember from one Superbowl, to the next. This is a real disconnect, and I think the root of our problems there. If you know anything of the history of Afghanistan, you can clearly see this in play.

[Littlefield]

Originally Posted by Wino

That would include Clinton and Bush II - same thing they proposed, and have to agree to some extent - Bush, as we all know was totally delusional.

Is irrelevant whether Israel or Pali's agree as both are the major reason for ME problems which the world is growing very bored with. I'm with pyritechips on this - someone doesn't want peace. Probably in fear of losing $3B yearly. While the USA will never drop support of Israel, we really need to cut back on our expenditures to them if they refuse to cooperate in a two state solution.

With the changing situations in the ME, Israel will mess their skivvies if the Arabs decide Israel has a right to exist (as many already do).

This guys sums it up well and the position Bush held did not support the Palestinians over Israel.

It is worth comparing how President Bush described the agreed, negotiated borders he sought for the Israelis and Palestinians in that 2004 letter: “In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli population centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949, and all previous efforts to negotiate a two-state solution have reached the same conclusion. It is realistic to expect that any final status agreement will only be achieved on the basis of mutually agreed changes that reflect these realities.” The Obama language is a shift away from Israel and toward the Palestinians.

The Israelis, by the way, responded cleverly to the president’s speech: Their statement said, “Prime Minister Netanyahu expects to hear a reaffirmation from President Obama of U.S. commitments made to Israel in 2004, which were overwhelmingly supported by both Houses of Congress.” Remember those posters with a photo of Bush and the caption “Miss me yet?” We know the Israeli answer.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...-abrams?page=2

[Paquadez]

Originally Posted by pyritechips

Obama urges Palestinian state based on '67 borders

Mentioned elsewhere, but deserving of its own thread - and debate.

What say you? Is this just the umpteenth derivative of a tired, failed scheme, or can it ever work? I want it to work.

Most of us want it to work, Jim.

However, for this to happen it requires a collective consensus.

Which has been lacking.

Far too many selfish political types with a hidden personal and business agenda.

Meantime, tens of thousands of dispossessed Arabs moulder in effective prison camps with no state, not hope and nothing other than an aspiration to eject the "Invader".

Ireland provides a ready exemplar: despite a vast majority of the common people desperate for peace to be able to get on with the rest of their lives, the lunatics on the fringe still wish to create mayhem.

One clear reason for this is dissidents have turned to lucrative crimes (Drugs dealing for one) to support their life.

They need a continuum of unrest in order to continue working those crimes: with peace, then they are suddenly ejected from the comfortable womb of freedom fighters into the genre of common criminals and thugs.

Ergo: they continue to foment unrest and mayhem.

They have lost sight of the primary cause which motivated the original organisations for which they fought: IRA, PIRA, The Real IRA etc. Since fundamentally it no longer exists.

Thus they must re-create the atmosphere or terror, fear and distrust.

Same I now fear with Israel and Palestine.

There are many Israeli billionaires: instead of paying taxes (When they do which seems to be rare), perhaps time for Israel to set up the sort of compensation funds for dispossessed Palestinians whose lands, businesses, homes and possessions were sequestrated by Israel from 1948 on? Rathewr than their vast annual expenditure on war materiél.

Same as the Israelis demanded from Germany, Switzerland and France et al, post WWII.

[eggplant43]

Originally Posted by Paquadez

Most of us want it to work, Jim.

However, for this to happen it requires a collective consensus.

Which has been lacking.

Far too many selfish political types with a hidden personal and business agenda.

Meantime, tens of thousands of dispossessed Arabs moulder in effective prison camps with no state, not hope and nothing other than an aspiration to eject the "Invader".

Ireland provides a ready exemplar: despite a vast majority of the common people desperate for peace to be able to get on with the rest of their lives, the lunatics on the fringe still wish to create mayhem.

One clear reason for this is dissidents have turned to lucrative crimes (Drugs dealing for one) to support their life.

They need a continuum of unrest in order to continue working those crimes: with peace, then they are suddenly ejected from the comfortable womb of freedom fighters into the genre of common criminals and thugs.

Ergo: they continue to foment unrest and mayhem.

They have lost sight of the primary cause which motivated the original organisations for which they fought: IRA, PIRA, The Real IRA etc. Since fundamentally it no longer exists.

Thus they must re-create the atmosphere or terror, fear and distrust.

Same I now fear with Israel and Palestine.

There are many Israeli billionaires: instead of paying taxes (When they do which seems to be rare), perhaps time for Israel to set up the sort of compensation funds for dispossessed Palestinians whose lands, businesses, homes and possessions were sequestrated by Israel from 1948 on? Rathewr than their vast annual expenditure on war materiél.

Same as the Israelis demanded from Germany, Switzerland and France et al, post WWII.

The Parallels are eerily present. I started out, after reading "Exodus" being a big proponent for Israel, but over the last 20 years, I've come to see the state of Israel as a monster state that parallels much of what happened in South Africa and Apartheid. Their encroachment on the Palestinians by building their settlements, to me, is inhumane, and I condemn them for it.

That being said, I support our strong support of their nationhood. If I were trimming the budget the annual expenditures on our part would get a very close look.

I'd also say that the Palestinians truly need to stop killing Israeli's if there is to be any hope for peace.

[Paquadez]

Originally Posted by eggplant43

I'd also say that the Palestinians truly need to stop killing Israeli's if there is to be any hope for peace.

But additionally, the Israelis need to stop treating the Palestinians like the Nazis treated the Jews.

Any real true peace initiative must be Bipartite.

Israel over-relies on its Big bro.

[Wino]

Originally Posted by Littlefield

This guys sums it up well and the position Bush held did not support the Palestinians over Israel.




http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...-abrams?page=2

Hey, you left this little tidbit out:

His (Obama) political judgment may turn out to be correct on all of this. I would feel better about it had it been discussed with the Israelis instead of being dumped on their heads this morning with zero advance notice or warning or explanation, leaving them scrambling to figure out what it all meant. That alone suggests that whatever the “balanced” rhetoric, the administration persists in treating Israel as a problem rather than as an ally.

Doing a bit of cherry picking this morning??

Israel can't be part of the solution if they are the major problem. As Sarah would say, "They need to man up!!"

[Littlefield]

Originally Posted by Wino

Hey, you left this little tidbit out:



Doing a bit of cherry picking this morning??

Israel can't be part of the solution if they are the major problem. As Sarah would say, "They need to man up!!"

That is saying Obama is treating our ally Israel as the problem by his view of them not that they really are the problem . I thought you understood English better then that analysis

[Wino]

Originally Posted by Littlefield

That is saying Obama is treating our ally Israel as the problem by his view of them not that they really are the problem . I thought you understood English better then that analysis

I understand English, southern drawl, Yankee and Tex-Mex very well, thank you. Didn't say Obama said they were a problem - I'm saying Israel is the problem.

[Littlefield]

Originally Posted by Wino

I understand English, southern drawl, Yankee and Tex-Mex very well, thank you. Didn't say Obama said they were a problem - I'm saying Israel is the problem.

I am sure you knew I was referring to the highlighted portion of the quote above and now we know your opinion.