Obama throws Israel under the Bus

[BSB]

Ok, I read your "if" sirs.

Sorry, no guarantees in life. Make a deal, don't make a deal. Find a way, don't find a way. Live with the consequences either way. The same applies to the other side. Step up to the plate, or don't. Live with the consequences either way.

Frankly, both sides may be overwhelmed by the world around them, and it will be on both that they didn't do what needed to be done. That's the way it goes. Ignore, don't fix, one problem, suddenly a second problem grows out of it, then a third, and so on. 

BSB

[sirs]

"All parties", meaning those who initiated the attacks?.......and what of those that backed them?  Nukes, even tactical ones, have a pretty wide latitude of destruction & death.  So, Lebanon becomes a glass parking lot under your peace plan, in the event of the 1st attack upon the New Israel, from some point within the Golan or West Bank?

All means all.

The attacked as well as the attackers and the backers of both sides.

Well, that's pretty much a non-starter now, isn't it.  Israel can't defend, and some idiots with a martyrdom complex, have the perfect plan then to rid the region of Israel, by merely attacking them.  Bravo.

Why is it a non starter? All you are doing is predetermining what the consequences of breaking the peace are.

Oh I believe you.  Indeed, it would be a definative deterrent.  A nonstarter for 2 reasons. 
1) International community would never support/sanction any nuke strike in any Arab lands
2) As I already demonstrated, even IF you had the international community signing off on the idea of nuking everyone involved, plays right into some Hamas extremists, launching mulitple cooridinated attacks, be it car bombs and rocket barrages, from a nice lofty perch in the West Bank, knowing Israel would be turned into a glass parking lot....the ultimate suicide bomb

Ok, I read your "if" sirs.   Sorry, no guarantees in life. Make a deal, don't make a deal. Find a way, don't find a way. Live with the consequences either way. The same applies to the other side. Step up to the plate, or don't. Live with the consequences either way.

Well, since you can't come up with a satisfactory contingency for any parties, set on not keeping the peace, I see no reason-what-so-ever that Israel return any land.  Since, as you say, there are no guarantees, best Israel remain as safe as it can make itself

[BT]

1) International community would never support/sanction any nuke strike in any Arab lands

Then don't ask for their permission.

2) As I already demonstrated, even IF you had the international community signing off on the idea of nuking everyone involved, plays right into some Hamas extremists, launching mulitple cooridinated attacks, be it car bombs and rocket barrages, from a nice lofty perch in the West Bank, knowing Israel would be turned into a glass parking lot....the ultimate suicide bomb

Either way problem solved. But you do realize The Palestinian state would also be glassed over. My guess is the govt would keep a close eye on those who have suicide in mind, and perhaps help them achieve that desired death before it creates an international incident.

[sirs]

1) International community would never support/sanction any nuke strike in any Arab lands

Then don't ask for their permission.

LOL.....I'm actually trying to be serious here, in trying to iron out what has to be addressed if there is to be any peace, and you keep presenting positions that have a snowball's chance in hell, of seeing the light of day.  Unilateral nuking of Israel & Lebanon, in the event of an attack by Hamas from the West Bank & Hezbollah from the Golan??

Granted, my IF is likely not to be addressed either, as demonstrated by BsB, so we're back to square 1...Israel keeps everything they took, in defense of their very existance.  Period

 

2) As I already demonstrated, even IF you had the international community signing off on the idea of nuking everyone involved, plays right into some Hamas extremists, launching mulitple cooridinated attacks, be it car bombs and rocket barrages, from a nice lofty perch in the West Bank, knowing Israel would be turned into a glass parking lot....the ultimate suicide bomb

Either way problem solved. But you do realize The Palestinian state would also be glassed over. My guess is the govt would keep a close eye on those who have suicide in mind, and perhaps help them achieve that desired death before it creates an international incident.

Yea I do realize it.  Problem is, the likes of Hamas, and the more radical elements of Islamic terrorists, would see your peace plan as a sign from Allah, attack Israel, and it will cease to exist.  Sorry, not going to happen

[BT]

LOL.....I'm actually trying to be serious here, in trying to iron out what has to be addressed if there is to be any peace, and you keep presenting positions that have a snowball's chance in hell, of seeing the light of day.  Unilateral nuking of Israel & Lebanon, in the event of an attack by Hamas from the West Bank & Hezbollah from the Golan??

And what is unserious about defining the parameters for lasting peace. Remain peaceful and prosper or continue squabbling over sand and die.

If those terms are too harsh for you then we should simply annex Israel and make it the 51st state. Then their security would be the responsibility of the US government.

Either way, game over.

[sirs]

As I demonstrated, your "peace plan" is quite the gift from Allah, for those aformentioned Islamic radicals, bent on seeing the destruction of Israel, and launching attacks from those new coveted areas in the West Bank & Golan Heights, knowing Israel will cease to exist as a result of their actions

All that's missing is a big red bow

[BT]

As I demonstrated, your "peace plan" is quite the gift from Allah, for those aformentioned Islamic radicals, bent on seeing the destruction of Israel, and launching attacks from those new coveted areas in the West Bank & Golan Heights, knowing Israel will cease to exist as a result of their actions

All that's missing is a big red bow

And keeping post 67 lands will stop this how? You aren't offering any other viable solutions are you?

[sirs]

Actually, that's what my inquiry was all about.  You, BsB, and Xo, keep claiming that Israel HAS to return to pre-67 borders, to bring about some "chance for peace".  If Israel isn't going to be provided a contingency for anyone daring to attack them from these lands in the West Bank & Golan Heights, why the hell should they give up prime defensive positions??

Land for a "promise of peace", has failed miserably.  Israel is still getting rockets rained on them from inside the borders of Gaza and Lebanon.  My viable solution has already been referenced.  Israel can go back to its pre-67 borders, WHEN there are CLEAR CUT REPERCUSSIONS, in writing, that will be enacted by messers U.S., and the International Community, upon ANYONE and any nation that dares to launch ANY attack upon the "new" Israel.  and I'm not referring to sanctions, either.  I sort have already mentioned this.  Surprised you missed it.

Get THAT in writing, then we can start to pull back the borders

[BT]

Actually, that's what my inquiry was all about.  You, BsB, and Xo, keep claiming that Israel HAS to return to pre-67 borders, to bring about some "chance for peace".  If Israel isn't going to be provided a contingency for anyone daring to attack them from these lands in the West Bank & Golan Heights, why the hell should they give up prime defensive positions??

Land for a "promise of peace", has failed miserably.  Israel is still getting rockets rained on them from inside the borders of Gaza and Lebanon.  My viable solution has already been referenced.  Israel can go back to its pre-67 borders, WHEN there are CLEAR CUT REPERCUSSIONS, in writing, that will be enacted by messers U.S., and the International Community, upon ANYONE and any nation that dares to launch ANY attack upon the "new" Israel.  and I'm not referring to sanctions, either.  I sort have already mentioned this.  Surprised you missed it.

Get THAT in writing, then we can start to pull back the borders

And nuking the peace breakers is not a clear cut repercussion?
And I'm not sure why Israel would get a pass if they decide to get mischievous.

And of course statehood accomplishes the same goal.

So what do your CLEAR CUT REPERCUSSIONS look like?

[kimba1]

And I'm not sure why Israel would get a pass if they decide to get mischievous.


I don`t understand that also,n but it is interesting after all this time it`s not worst.I just don`t get it

[sirs]

Actually, that's what my inquiry was all about.  You, BsB, and Xo, keep claiming that Israel HAS to return to pre-67 borders, to bring about some "chance for peace".  If Israel isn't going to be provided a contingency for anyone daring to attack them from these lands in the West Bank & Golan Heights, why the hell should they give up prime defensive positions??

Land for a "promise of peace", has failed miserably.  Israel is still getting rockets rained on them from inside the borders of Gaza and Lebanon.  My viable solution has already been referenced.  Israel can go back to its pre-67 borders, WHEN there are CLEAR CUT REPERCUSSIONS, in writing, that will be enacted by messers U.S., and the International Community, upon ANYONE and any nation that dares to launch ANY attack upon the "new" Israel.  and I'm not referring to sanctions, either.  I sort have already mentioned this.  Surprised you missed it.

Get THAT in writing, then we can start to pull back the borders

And nuking the peace breakers is not a clear cut repercussion?

I think I already addressed that, and how impossible a "peace plan" that would be, compared to the far more viable one I've been advocating

And I'm not sure why Israel would get a pass if they decide to get mischievous.

Who said they get a pass??.  I think I made it abundantly clear, IN WRITING, THE BORDERS ARE SET.  If there is a clear level of understanding as to what the military repercussions would be to anyone that dares to attack Israel, You're not going to see anything "mischievious".  But hell, that would be nothing to get in writing, as long as we got the FAR BIGGER gorilla in writing.

And of course statehood accomplishes the same goal.

No, not until the gorilla is dealt with

So what do your CLEAR CUT REPERCUSSIONS look like?

That was my inquiry.  You went above and beyond with your nuking.  No, not for me.  I target command and control locations, thru-out the region.  Take out communications, and anything that has wheels, not to mention machine guns or rocket launchers in the back of those vehicles.  That's just a start, but the repercussions have to have teeth, for them to be a substantive enough deterrent for Israel to even consider going back to pre-67 borders

[BT]

That was my inquiry.  You went above and beyond with your nuking.  No, not for me.  I target command and control locations, thru-out the region.  Take out communications, and anything that has wheels, not to mention machine guns or rocket launchers in the back of those vehicles.  That's just a start, but the repercussions have to have teeth, for them to be a substantive enough deterrent for Israel to even consider going back to pre-67 borders

And who will do this enforcing?

[BSB]

Frankly I don't care anymore what Israel or the Palestinians do. We've been around this block too many times. They've cost the world, and themselves, way too much already. My inclination is for us to make other plans. Move on.

BSB

[sirs]

Frankly I don't care anymore what Israel or the Palestinians do. We've been around this block too many times. They've cost the world, and themselves, way too much already. My inclination is for us to make other plans. Move on.

BSB

Cool, then we won't need to see any more American pushing of Israel to relinquish any of its lands, since that would be us trying to push plans upon them.  Let them make their own, as B is advocating

That was my inquiry.  You went above and beyond with your nuking.  No, not for me.  I target command and control locations, thru-out the region.  Take out communications, and anything that has wheels, not to mention machine guns or rocket launchers in the back of those vehicles.  That's just a start, but the repercussions have to have teeth, for them to be a substantive enough deterrent for Israel to even consider going back to pre-67 borders

And who will do this enforcing?

Who's doing your nuking?  I could go with a NATO task force designed specifically for this contingency

[kimba1]

hmm
if nukes get involved. I think both parties may get attacked .I say both to finally end it.