Non-starter For Middle East Peace

#3
#3
Why would they? That would risk allowing Israel to not return to it's pre-1967 borders, and the claiming of Israel.

Not recognizing Israel as a Jewish state is not the same as not recognizing Israel. This is part of the process.
 
#7
#7
it's also silly to think that the creation of Israel is the root cause of all the problems
 
#8
#8
The Bush administration was wrong.

That's one opinion. But you were dead wrong to think Obama would be "surprised by this," because the issue had already been addressed years ago and the US's stance hasn't changed. This was already known, but is just being used to stir up the religious Right who view the Israeli-Palestinian issue through a dangerous Biblical prism.
 
#9
#9
Part of the process? If Netanyahu demands this as a starting condition and Abbas says no immediately, then the process stalls. What the US feels on the issue is irrelevant. Clearly if it is as you say something that Bush started and we're currently where we are, I'm inclined to say yes things are stalled. Perhaps you did not know that.

The irony here is that the Palestinians are calling for the removal of Jews from the lands they would consider part of the Palestinian state. Since Israel has Arabs within its borders who own property, vote, and are even represented in the Knesset, perhaps the PA needs to step back and take up this supposedly secret offer that Netanyahu asks in allowing Jews to remain and be a part of this new Palestine. With the PA essentially calling for ethnic cleansing for their position, I'd say they need to revisit their offer if we're really talking about laying everything out on the table.

And I have little value in anything coming from Haaretz. It's about as Marxist as you can get without officially proclaiming itself to be that.
 
#10
#10
That's one opinion. But you were dead wrong to think Obama would be "surprised by this," because the issue had already been addressed years ago and the US's stance hasn't changed. This was already known, but is just being used to stir up the religious Right who view the Israeli-Palestinian issue through a dangerous Biblical prism.

Source?
 
#11
#11

Original thinking. Radical, I know.


I just showed that the US policy has been in agreement with what was linked in the OP, and had been since a Republican president. Now conservative sites are blaring on about it like it's something radical, and holding it up as a sign of failure for Obama.

IT WAS THE ORIGINAL POLICY. Whether he fails or not, this little facet means nothing.
 
#12
#12
Clearly you missed the whole point I made. I never argued the policy of Obama or said what was his, what Bush said, etc. The point is both sides are still sticking to their guns (no pun intended) after the most recent talks. You're arguing which President originally made a statement siding on a certain position - which has absolutely nothing with my point. My point is that a President in desperate need of something substantive in the way of 'achievement' cannot even get a break on the foreign policy front. In a renewed effort to jump start talks both sides are essentially sticking to points of old and we're stuck on square one.

The article I posted doesn't exactly give ANY side except for Abbas' statement and does not even mention Obama or any failure on his part. Not sure where the whole 'end times' dig or conservative sites claiming radical news came into this.
 
#13
#13
Clearly you missed the whole point I made. I never argued the policy of Obama or said what was his, what Bush said, etc. The point is both sides are still sticking to their guns (no pun intended) after the most recent talks. You're arguing which President originally made a statement siding on a certain position - which has absolutely nothing with my point. My point is that a President in desperate need of something substantive in the way of 'achievement' cannot even get a break on the foreign policy front. In a renewed effort to jump start talks both sides are essentially sticking to points of old and we're stuck on square one.

The article I posted doesn't exactly give ANY side except for Abbas' statement and does not even mention Obama or any failure on his part. Not sure where the whole 'end times' dig or conservative sites claiming radical news came into this.

You and I just don't think the same way at all. We always run in circles. You say I missed your point and reiterate it, and I feel like that's EXACTLY what I was addressing by pointing this isn't anything unexpected for the process.

They aren't going to concede their adversary's legitimacy before even working out a bargain. It's like paying for something before you know what it is you are paying for.

As far as what you called a "dig," you know exactly where it comes into this. You just mentioned "End Times," I didn't. Many conservative Americans choose to take Israel's side because of their own beliefs and Biblical interpretations, just as many American Jews choose to take Israel's side because of their common ethnicity and faith (not all, though. There are small numbers of "anti-Zionist" Jews, or whatever).

Interjecting religion into this only muddies the water further, but the anti-Muslim rhetoric is reaching a roar in some circles in America. Such as volnation.
 
#14
#14
What about people like me who could care less about the biblical implications and see Israel as an ally?
 

VN Store



Back
Top