Obama throws Israel under the Bus

[sirs]

That wasn't the question now, was it.  What's BT proclaiming should happen...NOT predict, but you being in charge, you'd proclaim that...........

Don't tell me you're sticking with the non-starting, nonviable nuclear peace plan

[BT]

Don't tell me you're sticking with the non-starting, nonviable nuclear peace plan

umm i just did.

Other than that he really doesn't give a damn other than once they do agree to peace it should be enforced by the nose of a nuke.

[BT]

That wasn't the question now, was it.  What's BT proclaiming should happen...NOT predict, but you being in charge, you'd proclaim that...........

You have already stated what my position is. Are you now not so certain?

[sirs]

Boy, I'll have to start calling you the Dodge master.  But at least you're now on record as pushing a peace plan that has not a snowball's chance in hell of occuring, or even be considered.  And here I thought you wanted to be serious about wanting peace in the region     

[BT]

I have been on record with that approach to enforcement of the peace for years.

We have been over this already.

[sirs]

And a non-starter to boot.  I guess I'll focus on debating folks, on this topic, who are actually serious about trying to fashion a peace between Israel and its Arab enemies...I mean neighbors

[BT]

And a non-starter to boot.  I guess I'll focus on debating folks, on this topic, who are actually serious about trying to fashion a peace between Israel and its Arab enemies...I mean neighbors

Doesn't matter whether you agree with it or not, what matters is your characterization that i wasn't on record with this approach before. Just simply correcting your misrepresentation, once again.

[sirs]

It's not a matter of "agree", its a matter of reality.  There will never be a scenario where the U.S. would nuke Israel, facilitated by an attack on Israel

We now return to our regularly scheduled reality

[Henny]

Coming straight from Haaretz... if only 15% of Israelis even know about the 22-state Arab Peace Initiative, how many of YOU knew about it?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Israeli reality that Obama doesn't understand

It's impossible to understand why a country and a people continue to refuse to do the right thing, something that could have been done a long while back.

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/the-israeli-reality-that-obama-doesn-t-understand-1.363442
By Merav Michaeli

"President Obama doesn't understand the reality," according to "associates" of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who spoke after the meeting between the two leaders. And when that is the headline of the daily Yisrael Hayom, it is clearly Netanyahu's headline: "President Obama doesn't understand the reality."

You can't blame him: It really is impossible to understand this reality. It's impossible to understand why a country and a people continue to refuse to do the right thing, something that could have been done a long while back, and prefer to continue to bang their heads against the wall until blood flows, with absolutely no logic, literally amok, like someone who has gone insane. It's hard to understand a reality in which a prime minister sits and, contrary to all logic and every code of conduct, arrogantly lectures his host, the president of the United States. It's hard to understand a reality in which a day before their scheduled meeting, a prime minister responds to the speech of the U.S. president, who is about to host him, with an announcement that is as good as spitting in his face.

So President Obama, here is the reality: The reality is that in the prime minister's own reality show, he is "the leader of a persecuted people" and he likes being "the leader of a persecuted people." That is why no reality in the world has ever convinced our leaders to stop being a persecuted nation. Even Abe Foxman, the chairman of the Anti-Defamation League, who can't be accused of being a leftist, says that Obama's speech is not against Israel and is not bad for Israel and that it includes many things that are good for Israel, but that doesn't make any impression on Bibi Netanyahu and his friends.

But it's not only you, Mr. President. Nine years ago, the 22 Arab League countries submitted a proposal for ending the conflict with the Palestinians and for full normalization with them. The leaders of the people that insist on being persecuted chose not to confuse themselves with the fact that 22 Arab countries were recognizing Israel and accepting its right to exist in peace alongside them. That is why our leaders simply ignored it. To the point where barely 15 percent of the Israeli public is even aware of the existence of the Arab initiative. That is why on Thursday, when we, members of the Israeli peace initiative delegation, presented the Egyptian foreign minister with the initiative that for the first time responds to the Arab peace initiative, he rightly said: For nine years the initiative has been on the table. Now you remembered?

The reality, Mr. President, is that change - thanks to which you were elected, and in which you believe - is the thing that Israel in general and Netanyahu in particular fear most. The reality is that the State of Israel has become accustomed to the present situation and does not recognize itself without it. Israel has existed longer with the occupation than without it; it has existed for most of its years with no border and is deathly afraid of change.

The reality is that Netanyahu never wanted or thought to initiate change. When he was elected two years ago, he understood that in order not to initiate change, he would have to play at negotiations that lead nowhere. But alas, there was nobody in the White House who would play this nice little game with him, and his true colors were exposed: He wants settlements, he wants occupation, he wants the situation as it is and sees no problem with it. And now, Netanyahu prefers confrontation. Confrontation with you, confrontation with the Palestinians, confrontation with anyone he sees as coming out against the persecuted people. The reality is simply that confrontation we already know, Mr. President, but peace we do not know at all.

[BT]

It's not a matter of "agree", its a matter of reality.  There will never be a scenario where the U.S. would nuke Israel, facilitated by an attack on Israel

We now return to our regularly scheduled reality

No it is a matter of misrepresentation.

Why on earth would you suddenly proclaim that now you have me on record when i have been on record going back to 2007 and most probably earlier?

My most charitable impulse is you are simply unaware that you do it. My least charitable impulse says that there is something pathological guiding your behavior.

[Xavier_Onassis]

The reality is that Netanyahu never wanted or thought to initiate change. When he was elected two years ago, he understood that in order not to initiate change, he would have to play at negotiations that lead nowhere. But alas, there was nobody in the White House who would play this nice little game with him, and his true colors were exposed: He wants settlements, he wants occupation, he wants the situation as it is and sees no problem with it. And now, Netanyahu prefers confrontation. Confrontation with you, confrontation with the Palestinians, confrontation with anyone he sees as coming out against the persecuted people.
==============================================================================
Amen to this! Thank you for posting something rational, Henny.

The Israelis are NOT the ones being persecuted. They are not the ones waiting in interminable lines to get to work, to go to school, to get thrown in jail on no charges for two weeks, to have their trees cut down, their villages divided by walls and their homes bulldozed. 

Netanyahu knows that what Obama said was entirely rational and in keeping with what every American president has said since 1967, But he wants no negotiations. He wants only the teensiest symbolic negotiations that lead to nowhere. Bibi the assh*le, that is who we have here.

[Christians4LessGvt]

BT thinks that Israel will keep the most important land gains from 67 and in the spirit of peace give back the rest. Now if BT thinks that Israel will keep the most important lands gains from 1967 that kinda indicates that he doesn't think that Israel will roll back to pre-67.
Other than that he really doesn't give a damn other than once they do agree
to peace it should be enforced by the nose of a nuke.

So in other words you still are talking about what you think Israel will do,
but you wont take a specific position yourself one way or the other on
whether you support a return to '67 borders?
In fact when pressed you just say you "don't give a damn".
Of course that's ok....but it's interesting.
I will gladly say "NO" to '67 borders.
I think SIRS will gladly say "NO" not in favor of '67 borders.
But you only want to talk about other's possible actions and positions.

But it is interesting that you don't know my position, yet sirs is dead certain i'm all for a roll back.
How can two different people who both have read this thread come to such different conclusions.

Well I must say like I stated earlier I thought it looked like you were
supportive of returning to "67 borders, but then after the discussion
continued and SIRS challenged people to specifically defend that
position you seem to back off. Basically whats it seems to have boiled down to
is #1. Israel shouldn't value life so much. #2. Israel should pack up and move
to Australia. #3. Nuke entire areas if anyone shoots an RPG. In my mind
those are all obviously cop-out non-answers that are not practical in the real
world. So if no one can come forward with a real world solution Israel would
be nuts to move an inch.

And the Mark thing. .....Sooner or later we will open the new site, my guess is if
you invite Facebook friends they know who you are anyway. And wasn't that your
idea to begin with?

Ok....but after you or someone stated on a few occasions about how Facebook may be
unworkable because people prefer to remain anonymous I kind of agree and think a
Facebook approach could be problematic. I think there might be a way we could market
ourselves on Facebook to reach more people, but not necessarily have each posters
profile linked to their Facebook. I know I wouldn't want some of the people that have
been on 3DHS looking at pictures of my family, my activities, ect....Of course it would
be cool with most people to be able to look, but we've had some whackjobs in here
BT and sometimes tempers and emotions particularly in political discussions can
lead to anger and potential problems with different personalities.

[Henny]

Ok....but after you or someone stated on a few occasions about how Facebook may be
unworkable because people prefer to remain anonymous I kind of agree and think a
Facebook approach could be problematic. I think there might be a way we could market
ourselves on Facebook to reach more people, but not necessarily have each posters
profile linked to their Facebook. I know I wouldn't want some of the people that have
been on 3DHS looking at pictures of my family, my activities, ect....Of course it would
be cool with most people to be able to look, but we've had some whackjobs in here
BT and sometimes tempers and emotions particularly in political discussions can
lead to anger and potential problems with different personalities.

Here is something we can agree on in this thread. Not only do I hate offending friends - from all backgrounds, religions, politics and persuasions - my family via marriage would have a fit if they did see some of my honest commentaries on life in the Middle East. They generally feel offended when I give negative reviews as an American. (I.e.: Don't air the dirty laundry if it's not yours.) Since I have to answer to them at family gatherings... yeah, I'll never be connecting Facebook to my DebateGate profile.

[Xavier_Onassis]

The territory being negotiated here was all taken from Jordan by force in the 1967 war. So that is what MUST be negotiated.

What asshole Bibi wanted to do is prevent ANY negotiations whatever.

Fine, just cut off all his aid, all his ammo, all the tax breaks for donations to Israel.

Israel is a hindrance to peace. Just like Hamas. Let the US simply say, "Hold elections and elect someone with an effing brain, both of you: come back with a leader that won't throw stupid tantrums and we can talk."

[sirs]

It's not a matter of "agree", its a matter of reality.  There will never be a scenario where the U.S. would nuke Israel, facilitated by an attack on Israel

We now return to our regularly scheduled reality

No it is a matter of misrepresentation.

No, its not.  This, ladies and gentlemen, is a deflection.  You're trying to make this about some mispresentation of a position you apparently had way back when, that I simply didn't know, when that doesn't matter, since its the position itself that is so based on an unreality, regardless of when you had it

Remember the reference about deflections and truth??  Nice try though




(And as far as Facebook....I totally agree with Miss Henny & Cu4, especially on the potential of alienating and offending friends.  We have friends we visit every Sat, go to dinner, and then go to their house to play boardgames and watch reruns of Who's line....".  Nearly all of them are pretty strong liberals, the Husband of the house being a union member, a friend being a Teacher & union member, 1 a staunch liberal atheist, and nearly all hated Bush.  We don't talk politics, because they know my wife and & are staunch conservatives. 

I really don't think its a good idea, but that's just my opinion)