 |
| You give up land, see how you like it. |
I'm not sure walking it back is enough here. The president should be in a full out sprint of his comments on Israel. As a historical equivalent, imagine of Great Britain demanded that America return to the borders with Mexico prior to the Mexican Cessation of 1848. How would President Obama, or Americans react to that? Land for peace - good idea right? All the illegal migration would stop, the violence along the border would stop. Things would be all rainbows and unicorns. Right? Right?
President Obama seems to realize the problem with what he said, but I'm not sure he realizes it fully. He's still trying to couch his phrases in Obama-knows-best speak.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama on Sunday sought to soothe Israeli fury over his new Middle East peace proposals by making clear that the Jewish state would likely be able to keep some settlements in any final deal with the Palestinians.
Obama, addressing Israel's staunchest U.S. supporters, repeated his view that long-stalled peace talks should start on the basis of the Jewish state's 1967 borders, an assertion that angered Israel, exposed a deep rift in its relations with Washington and raised further doubts about peace prospects.
But Obama, in his speech to Washington's most powerful pro-Israel lobbying group, sought to ease tensions with the close U.S. ally over Obama's endorsement three days earlier of a longstanding Palestinian demand on the borders of their future state.
Obama stressed that he expected the two sides to eventually negotiate an accord that included land swaps that would take into account the "new demographic realities on the ground," signaling that Israel would be allowed to keep some Jewish settlements built on occupied land.
The speech followed a testy encounter at the White House on Friday with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who warned Obama against seeking peace "based on illusions" and vowed Israel would never pull back to old borders he regarded as "indefensible."
'Indefensible', just like Obama's notion of peace through Israeli capitulation.
Of course seeing he was speaking to a roomful of Jews here he had to backtrack To bad his words don't mean diddly squat! The sad part is if the talking heads are correct, 65 to 70% of the Jewish population would vote for this lying sack of you know what! As such, I ask the following:
ReplyDeleteIs the Jewish American (the so called 70% who will vote for this clown) population completely brain dead? Are they so completely screwed up in their heads that they believe for one moment that the atrocities we see aimed day after day at Israel will not be aimed at them once Israel is destroyed? Do they think for one moment a President that openly embraces a radical element bent on the elimination of the Jewish people will even try to stop the insurrection that is already making itself evident around the country? This same slow creeping cancer that is the Anti-Jewish sentiment is exactly the same as Nazi Germany. The similarities are there for all to see. Of course, I and others will be vilified for even having the audacity to compare our President to Hitler, yet he is allowing this to happen. Between his perceived hate for the Jews (again, this is how I see it!) and his Chamberlain like stance of “I believe they’ll negotiate in good faith” belief in the radical Muslims who are now apparently running things (this clown really does believe in his heart radicals can be reasoned with. I’ve never figured this out, yet year after year morons think one can deal with hateful radicals. Can’t be done!) Israel, All Jews and if someone will finally get their heads out of their asses and realize, Western civilization as we know it are in deep danger!
I don't recall who said it but I heard a quote one time that the Jewish people in New York had more of an allegiance to liberalism than to Judaism.
ReplyDeletePerhaps that is the case. If so, it's truly sad.