Obama on the Middle East

Thursday President Obama gave a speech on the U.S. role in the Middle East.  Immediately and predictably the GOP claimed that he was throwing Israel under the bus.  World wide reaction was mixed.  The fact that neither of the radical factions liked it  indicates he must have said something right.

Regardless of what one thinks of the speech, you have to admit that it took real cojones to give that speech one day before meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the White House.

Advertisements

22 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

22 responses to “Obama on the Middle East

  1. TempeBev

    Let’s face it, nothing has changed. If Obama says no, the repugs say yes, and visa-versa, not matter what the subject. It doesn’t seem to mater what the subject is, the outcome is always the same.

    One thing both parties seem to agree on, because it doesn’t change, is is sending billions in aid to other countries while cutting funding to it’s own population/ cities/states etc.

  2. dog hussein dog

    I think Obama’s supporting a contiguous Palestinian state, now, is political courage.

    Could cost him some of his supporters, but it’s the only way through.

    Coincidentally, just picked up a copy of Jimmy Carter’s book, something on a peace plan for the Middle East, the day before the Obama speech. Will have to find out how much the two presidents’ plans synch.

    Sick of the talking head poutrage on this subject.

    And Israel is in the hands of rightwingers. Personally, I can’t stand Netanyahu.

    There’s a lot of room for improvement in that region. Time to proceed rationally, in our and their best interest.

  3. dog hussein dog

    As usual, Dennis G (aka Dengre) of Balloon Juice had a terrific post on this subject.

    Can Islands of Land Become a State?
    http://www.balloon-juice.com/2011/05/20/can-islands-of-land-become-a-state/

    Lonnng excerpt here (and please click and see his entire post — with the map of the Palestinian archipelago):

    Dennis G: “A two-State solution, using the 1967 borders as the starting point, has been a policy advocated by the United States for decades. On one hand, President Obama merely repeated it. OTOH, he did so in clear unambiguous language—actually saying that the 1967 borders (with mutually agreed land swaps) should be the starting point for a solution. That has freaked out Bibi and his supporters who would like the starting point to be the facts on the ground.

    …. “The freak out over the 1967 borders remark masks a bigger panic attack over the sentence: “The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves, and reach their full potential, in a sovereign and contiguous state.” Especially the word “contiguous”. To create such a State, one must go back to the 1967 borders as the starting point. There is no other way to get there and anybody who has looked at this conflict over the last 40 plus years knows it.

    There is no way to make the Palestine Archipelgo a Nation. These are not islands surrounded by water. They are cantons surrounded by fences, troops and checkpoints. Using the current facts on the ground as the starting point means that you have abandoned any hope of a two-State solution. You could claim as Bibi and his supporters claim that you want a two-State solution, but if you cannot accept the 1967 borders as the starting point, you are lying. It is just a simple fact on the ground.

    “Look at the map. How do you turn these fenced and land-locked islands into a State? It can’t be done. All you can do is turn them into Reservations like we have done with Native Americans—areas where there are small rights to limited sovereignty and limited opportunities and not much more.

    “To reject the 1967 Borders is to embrace a one-State solution as your option of choice. This is an option with some down sides. For example, it requires Israel to drop the idea that it is a Democracy as it requires an embrace of a legal caste system where some folks have rights while others have none—and that those rights are based on religion and religion alone. This is a pathway doomed to certain failure. And yet this is the pathway that Netanyahu and his supporters are embracing. I always wonder how the folks who reject the 1967 borders, plan to “define” a two-State solution or how they plan to control a growing, hopeless and angry Palestinian population in their fenced-in island ghettos.”

    Good stuff. Recommend reading the entire post, the comments and looking at the map embedded within BJ post.

    • dnd

      Dog, that Dengra post on Balloon Juice. Since President Carter presided over the only long lasting peace between an Arab nation and Israel, I hope President Obama is consulting with him.

  4. dog hussein dog

    Here’s link to map, as Dennis G referenced (above).

    http://bigthink.com/ideas/21423
    Palestinian archipelago

    • dnd

      My advice to the President on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is to sit down with Hillary and watch Episode #8 of the Andy Griffith Show: “A Feud is a Feud.” The episode showed how Andy dealt with the Carter-Wakefield feud (based on the Hatfield-McCoy feud). At one point Andy asks them why they were feuding and the response was: “We been a feudin’ so long we forgot what we been ‘a feudin’ about.”

      Now certainly the situation in the Middle East is a lot more complicated than a sit-com script, but when you hear the radical factions refusing to negotiate, it sounds a lot like “We been a feudin’ so long we forgot what we been ‘a feudin’ about.”

  5. dog hussein dog

    Petcare for animals left behind by the Rapture.

    “Eternal Earth-Bound Pets, which promises to care for pets left behind, is run by avowed atheists. … Bart Centre, the New Hampshire retiree who runs Eternal Earth-Bound Pets, said he simply wants to make a buck.

    “I saw dollar signs, because no one has more pets per capita and more rapture-believing Christians than the good old U.S.A.,” he said.

    …. While Centre doesn’t believe in the rapture, he insisted he’s prepared to honor his contract. If prospective customers are wary, Centre said, he will suggest they appoint a trusted nonbeliever with “post-rapture power of attorney” to enforce the agreement.

    http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-rapture-20110519,0,6209624.story

    Post-rapture power of attorney?!

    Why do I think this guy gets his best ideas after he’s been hitting the merlot?

  6. TempeBev

    Talk to you tomorrow 🙂 Unless I don’t!

  7. Just checking, was anyone raptured?

  8. dog's eye view

    Sadly, no.

    We are stuck with the nitwits in this vale of sorrow.

  9. dog's eye view

    Didn’t read this yet, but will.

    You go, Dr. Richter.

    A Doctor’s Push for Single-Payer Health Care for All Finds Traction in Vermont

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/22/us/22vermont.html?ref=us

  10. Dooty

    Estoy todavia aqui, (I am still here) never a question that Dooty was still gonna be here even if the R word happened. I don’t meet the qualifications.

  11. Mitch Daniels is gay? who knew!

  12. dog hussein dog

    Doots: and thank Dog that you don’t meet the qualifications.

    It be why we like you.

  13. dog hussein dog

    Obama sticks to his guns. (And butter, eventually.)

    “In his remarks to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the president, while offering fulsome praise for the relationship with Israel, did not walk back from his speech on Thursday, which had infuriated Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel. Rather, the president took indirect aim at Mr. Netanyahu, first by repeating what the Israeli prime minister so objected to — the phrase pre-1967 borders — and then by challenging those whom he said had “misrepresented” his position.

    “Let me repeat what I actually said on Thursday,” Mr. Obama said in firm tones at one point, “not what I was reported to have said.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/23/world/middleeast/23aipac.html?hp

    Why I like this guy.

    If AIPAC wants groveling, they can take their pick from any of the Republican hopefuls.

    Will cue up this video for listening to while (still!) cleaning that garage.

    • dnd

      Dog,
      Rep Mike Rogers was on CNN’s State of the Union this morning blathering the 1967 borders argument. Apparently he wasn’t listening to the President’s speech. And I’m guessing he wasn’t listening to the AIPAC speech…

  14. TempeBev

    Still here and waiting to see what calamities, uproars, and disagreements occur in the period waiting for the next predicted rapture. Should be an interesting week.

    Anyone see Jon Stewart on Bill O’Reilly?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s