printObama’s plans for Israel: “two states living side by side in peace and security – a Jewish State of Israel, with true security for all Israelis; and a viable, independent Palestinian state with contiguous territory that ends the occupation that began in 1967, and realizes the potential of the Palestinian people. … The time has come to re-launch negotiations – without preconditions – that address the permanent-status issues: security for Israelis and Palestinians; borders, refugees and Jerusalem.”
QUESTION: Contiguous? How do you make the West Bank and Gaza contiguous without making Israel unconnected?
QUESTION: “Occupation that began in 1967”? As far as I recall, the 1967 war was a war of aggression begun by the Arabs and won by Israel. I lived through it.
Obama: “America does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements.”
Well, then, if “America” objects, then that’s all there is to it.
QUESTION: Why bring up “borders, refugees and Jerusalem” if the POTUS’ goal is not to get Israel to go back to the 1967 line, absorb self-styled Palestinian refugees (“right of return”), and divide the Jewish Capital?
All the stuff Obama liked about “Abdullah’s Plans for Israel.”
Update (Sept. 24): Conversely, I imagine that there are many countries that receive USAID but are not told what to do by Rome. The Arab countries, for example. Other than the staple stupidity about the need to democratize (and thus empower the Jihadi Muslim Brotherhood), I have never heard the US insist Egypt do this or the other. And why is aid to Israel always depicted in a different light than aid to other nations? Foreign aid is bad when given to Israel and to Egypt.
“It will come about in that day that I will make Jerusalem a heavy stone for all the peoples; all who lift it will be severely injured … ” Zechariah 12:3
It is quite remarkable that this man, our President, who truly has no idea of the history of the Middle East, except perhaps as he heard it from his Pastor, has the gall to dictate to another sovereign country how to defend itself.
All countries according to him have the right to set their own course without domination from other countries, all except for Israel – that must listen to Obama’s pronouncements on what it can and cannot do. Obama knows best!
How unbelievable – that he is willing to impose his views and take upon his shoulders the lives of millions. The arrogance, the ignorance ….
and yes Ilana, 67 was a war of aggression, and international law clearly states that the aggressor’s borders are erased in that act – that has been the case for all nations except Israel.
When the world has one set of rules for itself and another for Israel, what is that called? Anti-Semitism. What do you call a man who has one set of rules for our enemies and another for Americans? You call him President Obama.
I believe we need to remember, as well, that our former (Christian) President did his bit toward this “solution.” George W. Bush, darling of the “Values Voters” who twice elected him, sought to divide Jerusalem “for peace.” [Hyperlink, please]
I understand that Obama, as a hard-left socialist, has his particular game about “peace” in the Middle East. But I think it’s wise to remember that our “Values Voters” agreed to the plan put at the table by continuing to support George W. Bush during his Presidency, never once calling on him to repent.
Hyperlink: Here’s one, for example:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=44835
Your March 2003 column was magnificent and I enjoyed Haym’s post.
Obama’s got some chutzpah being “impatient” – Michelle is not living in some slum in Gaza and Sasha is not risking getting shrapnel when she rides a bus in Tel Aviv – what utter gall! What the hell business is it of his? If both parties requested a mediator, then I could see some role – sort of like Teddy Roosevelt in the Russo-Japanese War in 1905. Otherwise, he should mind his business.
Frankly, if there really were peace, borders would not matter. Imagine that “Norwegians” inhabited the West Bank – fine – there would be Jews living in Norway and Scandinavians living in Israel – no big deal and people would go back and forth. Can one envision a Chabad of Riyadh when there is a peace? – WHY NOT? Then the “peace process” is a complete farce, is it not? The easy part is giving up land – anyone can pack a suitcase and move. The hard (impossible) part is the Arabs being peaceful (not a pseudo-peace) which is as likely as pigs flying. Crossing a PEACEFUL border would be like going from Maryland to Virginia.
There’s a saying I’ve heard a time or two- “Ignorance gone to seed”- that I think of, every time I hear the word “Israel.” Everyone seems to enter fantasy land when the subject of Israel is brought up; news articles take on twists and turns unimagined, World Leaders who can’t find the hotel restroom without a security officer to guide them can explain in detail where the Israeli’s went wrong. When you add Palestine, forget it, no fiction writer can get away with that much misconception. As Myron points out there are three types of “Peace” 1: the absence of war. 2: true peace with everyone working in harmony and 3: Israeli/Palestinian peace which only exists in the stratosphere of higher knowledge from the US and Europe.
According to the Jewish Virtual Library, Israel recevied about $2.5 billion in U.S. aid in 2007, most in the form of military grants. Loathe as I am to say anything in defense of BHO, the U.S. does seem to pay for a large part of Israel’s defense, so one might understand why anyone holding the office of POTUS might feel inclined and entitled to dictate terms to Israel. Israel is free, at any time, to refuse American aid and thereby rid itself of American interference, is it not?
GringoM: America interferes EVERYWHERE these days whether we give them foreign aid or not. It is also hard to expect a corrupt group of politicians like the Knesset to turn down freebies. [Why single out the Knesset? Do you know all members to be corrupt?] Still, I think the onus is on the US to pursue a non-interventionist foreign policy.
I used this analogy in the debate on illegal aliens – it is like putting a saucer of milk and tuna on your front porch and then lecturing the cat for trespassing. The US just needs to control this so-called altruism.
As an American of partial Arab (specifically Palestinian Christians) ancestry I’ve grown up hearing the usual propaganda from many in my family. One thing I can say conclusively is that Arab Christians are as in denial about the nature of Islam as the West. They seem to think that a Palestinian state would be some kind of secular paradise where all religions and beliefs would be respected. I ask them, where in the middle east do Arab Christians enjoy more freedoms and a higher standard of living than in the state of Israel? The answer is: No where! Iraq used to be home to millions of Christians but now that they are “democratic” they have been forced to flee. Syria is home to many as well but if, God forbid, they were to elect a government I suspect the Syrian Orthodox church would cease to exist. Israel has managed to balance is Jewish identity with secular values and tolerance for non-Jews for more than 60 years despite being under constant attack by the cousins of the people they tolerate!