Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Obama's Address about Israeli Palestine Conflict; Wants return to 1967 Israeli Border
Topic Started: May 18 2011, 08:35 PM (4,415 Views)
LTC8K6
Member Avatar
Assistant to The Devil Himself
foxglove
May 23 2011, 09:33 AM
LTC8K6
May 20 2011, 09:48 PM
Quote:
 
In May 1968, the Israeli government paid US$3,323,500 as full payment to the families of the 34 men killed in the attack. In March 1969, Israel paid a further $3,566,457 in compensation to the men who had been wounded. On 18 December 1980, it agreed to pay $6 million as settlement for the U.S. claim of $7,644,146 for material damage to the Liberty itself.[8]

Purportedly, on December 17, 1987, the issue was officially closed by the two governments through an exchange of diplomatic notes.[9]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident

We have forgiven Japan and Germany of far, far worse, yet the Liberty is constantly brought up...
The difference between Germany and Japan is that after their defeat, the US took over and reformed those two countries.

The USS Liberty incident, to many, shows that the special relationship between Israel and the US government puts American lives in a subordinate position to the political aims of Israel and American politicians.

If Jonathan Pollard is set free than the US, it can be argued, dissolves into an Israel (Likud) first mentality and US sovereignty and independence suffers a blow. As Israel has a right to exist and defend itself, doesn't the United States?

Anyway, more on the Liberty:

"'The USS Liberty': America's Most Shameful Secret"

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/margolis12.html


"The USS Liberty Cover-Up"

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/ussliberty.html


If you look into the story of the USS Liberty, it is interesting that Sen. John McCain's father, a full admiral, conducted a inquiry into the Liberty incident. The board of inquiry stated that the Liberty attack was a case of mistaken identity. The crew that survived feels otherwise.

"Like Father Like Son: The Cover-up Continues on the USS Liberty"

http://ussliberty.wordpress.com/2008/04/12/25


John McCain, Jr., Sen. McCain's father, is an interesting person. According to the wikipedia entry on McCain Jr., he had connections with Congress as a liason between Congress and the Navy and was a full admiral just as was his father. Also, interesting is that he was reported to be a 33rd degree Mason which conjures up images of Albert Pike.
I don't see what difference it makes even if we grant that Israel deliberately attacked the Liberty for whatever reason they had.
Israel was in the middle of a fight for it's life. Literally.

The only thing Israel could do is pay compensation for the attack, and they did that.

The incident remains quite murky and lots of things remain in dispute.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident#Details_in_dispute

Friendly fire incidents are not unusual in wartime.

People disguising themselves as friends or as neutrals is also not uncommon.

Just a few friendly fire incidents from the first Gulf War. I should note that most of these vehicles and aircraft are quite distinctive, and no one should be mistaking them for the enemy: (We had Americans who could not recognize Blackhawk Helicopters!)

During the Battle of Khafji, 11 American Marines were killed in two major incidents when their light armored vehicles (LAV's) were hit by American missiles fired by a USAF A-10.

An American AH-1 Cobra attack helicopter fired upon US Army Bradley Fighting Vehicles during night operations, killing several US Army soldiers.

A British officer was severely injured when his FV510 Warrior vehicle was attacked by a Challenger 1 tank of the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards.

An American A-10 during Operation Desert Storm attacked British Warrior MICVs resulting in nine British dead and numerous casualties.

During the Battle of Phase Line Bullet, American M1 Abrams tanks in the rear fired in support of American troops facing dug-in Iraqi troops. American Infantry Fighting Vehicles were hit by fire from the tanks, resulting in two casualties.

Several friendly fire incidents took place during the Battle of 73 Easting, wounding 57 American soldiers, but causing no fatalities.

One American soldier was killed by friendly fire during the Battle of Medina Ridge.

Two soldiers from 10 Air Defence Battery, Royal Artillery, were badly injured when two FV103 Spartan from which they had dismounted were fired upon by Challenger 1 tanks from 14th/20th King's Hussars with thermal sights beyond the range of unaided visibility (about 1500 m).
The rearmost vehicle was hit and burst into flames. The other vehicle was also damaged in the ensuing fire.

A large number of friendly fire incidents took place during the Battle of Norfolk, resulting in 5 American casualties.

A Challenger 1 tank fired several rounds at the British artillery position. At least 4 casualties.

In the 1994 Black Hawk shootdown incident, two U.S. Air Force F-15Cs involved with Operation Provide Comfort shot down two U.S. Army UH-60 Black Hawks over northern Iraq, killing 29 military and civilian personnel.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

Acc Esq
May 23 2011, 03:05 PM
I just received this from a Jewish colleague who knows I am sympathetic:

This is an outstanding explanation of why Israel must keep its borders as they now stand.

http://youtu.be/k2hZ6SlSqq0




Good explanations!

We know that in a worst case Israel would take ALL within a few hundred miles down with them. They will not put themselves into a situation where it is extremely difficult or impossible to defend their people.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

Quote:
 
Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas defends unity agreement with Hamas against US criticism

AMMAN, Jordan — Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas sought Monday to defend his new unity government with the militant Hamas movement, saying criticism by U.S. President Barack Obama represented a “wrong understanding” of the deal.

snip

“There is a wrong understanding of the government, that it is a power-sharing government between Fatah and Hamas,” [Abbas] told reporters after talks with Abdullah.

Abbas, who heads the moderate Fatah faction, added: “The government is my government and it follows my strategies and policies.”

He also said the two sides were working to form “a technocratic government.” He did not provide further details.

snip

Palestinians hope the Fatah-Hamas reconciliation will end a split that has left rival governments in the West Bank and Gaza. The Palestinians seek both areas, along with east Jerusalem, for their future state.

Israel has said a return to the 1967 borders would undercut its security.

Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said the border issue should be the focus of Mideast diplomacy.

“Israel’s recognition of the borders of 1967 as the borders for the two states is the only way to achieve peace in the region,” he said. “The failure of Israel to do so would only mean that the peace process would be a waste of time and effort.”


The Palestinian President sounds like Obama, full of statements telling you nothing. Their "chief negotiator puts it into simple terms, so we all understand what is not going to happen ...as if some world leader wants the crisis to keep the headlines busy!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

Quote:
 
Sen. Hatch To Introduce Resolution Opposing President Obama’s Israel Policy

By Penny Starr

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) issued a press release today stating his intention to introduce a resolution next week disapproving of the policy concerning Israel that President Barack Obama announced on Thursday.

“Israel is the United States’ strongest friend and ally,” Hatch said in the statement. “By calling for a return to the pre-1967 borders, President Obama has directly undermined her.”

snip

I won't pat myself on the back for predicting this, it was a given to happen.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Baldo
Member Avatar

I am starting to believe Israel would be foolish to agree to a Palestinian State in the West Bank. We know it would just turn into a perpetual armed terrorist camp against Israel.I wish it wasn't so, but that is what it will be.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
foxglove

LTC8K6
May 23 2011, 03:17 PM
foxglove
May 23 2011, 09:33 AM
LTC8K6
May 20 2011, 09:48 PM
Quote:
 
In May 1968, the Israeli government paid US$3,323,500 as full payment to the families of the 34 men killed in the attack. In March 1969, Israel paid a further $3,566,457 in compensation to the men who had been wounded. On 18 December 1980, it agreed to pay $6 million as settlement for the U.S. claim of $7,644,146 for material damage to the Liberty itself.[8]

Purportedly, on December 17, 1987, the issue was officially closed by the two governments through an exchange of diplomatic notes.[9]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident

We have forgiven Japan and Germany of far, far worse, yet the Liberty is constantly brought up...
The difference between Germany and Japan is that after their defeat, the US took over and reformed those two countries.

The USS Liberty incident, to many, shows that the special relationship between Israel and the US government puts American lives in a subordinate position to the political aims of Israel and American politicians.

If Jonathan Pollard is set free than the US, it can be argued, dissolves into an Israel (Likud) first mentality and US sovereignty and independence suffers a blow. As Israel has a right to exist and defend itself, doesn't the United States?

Anyway, more on the Liberty:

"'The USS Liberty': America's Most Shameful Secret"

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/margolis12.html


"The USS Liberty Cover-Up"

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/ussliberty.html


If you look into the story of the USS Liberty, it is interesting that Sen. John McCain's father, a full admiral, conducted a inquiry into the Liberty incident. The board of inquiry stated that the Liberty attack was a case of mistaken identity. The crew that survived feels otherwise.

"Like Father Like Son: The Cover-up Continues on the USS Liberty"

http://ussliberty.wordpress.com/2008/04/12/25


John McCain, Jr., Sen. McCain's father, is an interesting person. According to the wikipedia entry on McCain Jr., he had connections with Congress as a liason between Congress and the Navy and was a full admiral just as was his father. Also, interesting is that he was reported to be a 33rd degree Mason which conjures up images of Albert Pike.
I don't see what difference it makes even if we grant that Israel deliberately attacked the Liberty for whatever reason they had.
Israel was in the middle of a fight for it's life. Literally.

The only thing Israel could do is pay compensation for the attack, and they did that.

The incident remains quite murky and lots of things remain in dispute.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident#Details_in_dispute

Friendly fire incidents are not unusual in wartime.

People disguising themselves as friends or as neutrals is also not uncommon.

Just a few friendly fire incidents from the first Gulf War. I should note that most of these vehicles and aircraft are quite distinctive, and no one should be mistaking them for the enemy: (We had Americans who could not recognize Blackhawk Helicopters!)

During the Battle of Khafji, 11 American Marines were killed in two major incidents when their light armored vehicles (LAV's) were hit by American missiles fired by a USAF A-10.

An American AH-1 Cobra attack helicopter fired upon US Army Bradley Fighting Vehicles during night operations, killing several US Army soldiers.

A British officer was severely injured when his FV510 Warrior vehicle was attacked by a Challenger 1 tank of the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards.

An American A-10 during Operation Desert Storm attacked British Warrior MICVs resulting in nine British dead and numerous casualties.

During the Battle of Phase Line Bullet, American M1 Abrams tanks in the rear fired in support of American troops facing dug-in Iraqi troops. American Infantry Fighting Vehicles were hit by fire from the tanks, resulting in two casualties.

Several friendly fire incidents took place during the Battle of 73 Easting, wounding 57 American soldiers, but causing no fatalities.

One American soldier was killed by friendly fire during the Battle of Medina Ridge.

Two soldiers from 10 Air Defence Battery, Royal Artillery, were badly injured when two FV103 Spartan from which they had dismounted were fired upon by Challenger 1 tanks from 14th/20th King's Hussars with thermal sights beyond the range of unaided visibility (about 1500 m).
The rearmost vehicle was hit and burst into flames. The other vehicle was also damaged in the ensuing fire.

A large number of friendly fire incidents took place during the Battle of Norfolk, resulting in 5 American casualties.

A Challenger 1 tank fired several rounds at the British artillery position. At least 4 casualties.

In the 1994 Black Hawk shootdown incident, two U.S. Air Force F-15Cs involved with Operation Provide Comfort shot down two U.S. Army UH-60 Black Hawks over northern Iraq, killing 29 military and civilian personnel.
"I don't see what difference it makes even if we grant that Israel deliberately attacked the Liberty for whatever reason they had. Israel was in the middle of a fight for it's life. Literally."

With the above attitude, Israel can do no wrong as long as people think in a sympathetic way toward Israel. The first link I provided proposes that Israel was not in the dire straights that was reported and an intelligence gathering ship, the Liberty, could have found that out. Therefore, get rid of the ship. There are other theories about the attack of the ship, which was to blame the sinking of the ship-- because that was the intent-- on Egypt and possibly get the US to side with Israel rather than remain as neutral as it was.

From Eric Margolis' article from the lewrockwell website:

"Less than an hour after the attack, Israel told Washington its forces had committed a 'tragic error.' Later, Israel claimed it had mistaken 'Liberty' for an ancient Egyptian horse transport. US Secretary of State, Dean Rusk, and Joint Chiefs of Staff head, Admiral Thomas Moorer, insisted the Israeli attack was deliberate and designed to sink 'Liberty.' So did three CIA reports; one asserted Israel's Defense Minister, Gen. Moshe Dayan, had personally ordered the attack.

In contrast to American outrage over North Korea's assault on the intelligence ship 'Pueblo,' Iraq's mistaken missile strike on the USS 'Stark,' last fall's bombing of the USS 'Cole' in Aden, and the recent US-China air incident, the savaging of 'Liberty' was quickly hushed up by President Lyndon Johnson and Defense Secretary Robert McNamara.

The White House and Congress immediately accepted Israel's explanation and let the matter drop. Israel later paid a token reparation of US $6 million. There were reports two Israeli pilots who had refused to attack 'Liberty' were jailed for 18 years.

Surviving 'Liberty' crew members would not be silenced. They kept demanding an open inquiry and tried to tell their story of deliberate attack to the media. Israel's government worked behind the scenes to thwart these efforts, going so far as having American pro-Israel groups accuse 'Liberty's' survivors of being 'anti-Semites' and 'Israel-haters.' Major TV networks cancelled interviews with the crew. A book about the 'Liberty' by crewman James Ennes' was dropped from distribution. The Israel lobby branded him 'an Arab propagandist.'

The attack on 'Liberty' was fading into obscurity until last week, when intelligence expert James Bamford came out with Body of Secrets, his latest book about the National Security Agency. In a stunning revelation, Bamford writes that unknown to Israel, a US Navy EC-121 intelligence aircraft was flying high overhead the 'Liberty,' electronically recorded the attack. The US aircraft crew provides evidence that the Israeli pilots knew full well that they were attacking a US Navy ship flying the American flag.

Why did Israel try to sink a naval vessel of its benefactor and ally? Most likely because 'Liberty's' intercepts flatly contradicted Israel's claim, made at the war's beginning on 5 June, that Egypt had attacked Israel, and that Israel's massive air assault on three Arab nations was in retaliation. In fact, Israel began the war by a devastating, Pearl-Harbor style surprise attack that caught the Arabs in bed and destroyed their entire air forces.

Israel was also preparing to attack Syria to seize its strategic Golan Heights. Washington warned Israel not to invade Syria, which had remained inactive while Israel fought Egypt. Bamford says Israel's offensive against Syria was abruptly postponed when 'Liberty' appeared off Sinai, then launched once it was knocked out of action. Israel's claim that Syria had attacked it could have been disproved by 'Liberty.'

Most significant, 'Liberty's' intercepts may have shown that Israel seized upon sharply rising Arab-Israeli tensions in May-June 1967 to launch a long-planned war to invade and annex the West Bank, Jerusalem, Golan and Sinai."


Point one: I wasn't there so I don't know what happened. James Ennes was there and is still alive, by the grace of God, and he seems to think the attack was deliberate.

Point two: The US-Israel "special relationship" is complicated.

LTC's points about military mistakes and friendly fire incidents are well taken. But some incidents should not simply be dismissed with a wave of the hand either.


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Baldo
Member Avatar

I posted a long STRATFOR post on the other thread. It overlaps with this one..

http://s1.zetaboards.com/Liestoppers_meeting/single/?p=487172&t=4085660
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LTC8K6
Member Avatar
Assistant to The Devil Himself
Bamford's account is disputed. One should not be quoting it as factual. There's no actual evidence of any such recordings is there?

Quote:
 
With the above attitude, Israel can do no wrong as long as people think in a sympathetic way toward Israel.


Bullshit. My attitude is no different than with any other such incidents, of which there have been many.

Why doesn't the Stark get as much attention?

Talk about innuendo...is it because muslims attacked it and not jews? :laughin:

Or is it because the crew bungled the defense of the ship, and no one wants to talk about that? :think:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Baldo
Member Avatar

Palestinians: Netanyahu peace outline unacceptable

RAMALLAH, West Bank – Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's parameters for a peace deal, outlined in a speech to the U.S. Congress on Tuesday, fell far short of what is needed to resume negotiations, Palestinian officials said.

Nabil Shaath, an aide to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, said Netanyahu's insistence on keeping key parts of the territories the Palestinians want for their state is a "declaration of war against the Palestinians."

Israeli settlers, the Islamic militant Hamas and Netanyahu's moderate parliamentary opposition also expressed criticism.

The Palestinians want to establish their state in the West Bank, Gaza and east Jerusalem, areas Israel captured in the 1967 Mideast war. They have said they are ready for minor border adjustments through land swaps, to enable Israel to annex several of the largest of the dozens of Jewish settlements it has built on war-won land since 1967.

Netanyahu said Tuesday that he is willing to make "generous" territorial concessions, but also told Congress that Jerusalem must remain united as Israel's capital and that Israel wants to keep key areas of the West Bank where tens of thousands of Jews have settled, as well as areas of strategic importance.

Abbas is set to meet with leaders of the Palestine Liberation Organization and his Fatah movement on Wednesday to discuss their next move. The Palestinians have developed an alternate strategy to moribund negotiations, largely on hold since 2008, and have said they will seek U.N. recognition of their state in September....snipped
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110524/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_palestinians_netanyahu_4


Maybe it is time to just accept reality. The Arabs States lost the 1967 war which they caused. Tough Luck. They will never accept their defeat nor a Jewish State. So why pretend?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Baldo
Member Avatar

House members side with Netanyahu

House lawmakers from both parties are siding with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over President Obama in their differing approaches to the Israel-Palestine border dispute.

Obama last week called for Israel's 1967 borders to mark the "foundation" for renewing stalled peace talks between the two sides – a concession to Palestine that Netanyahu has bluntly rejected, including in remarks to a joint meeting of Congress Tuesday.

"The vast majority of the 650,000 Israelis who live beyond the 1967 lines reside in neighborhoods and suburbs of Jerusalem and greater Tel Aviv," Netanyahu told lawmakers in his 45-minute address. "And under any realistic peace agreement these areas, as well as other places of critical strategic and national importance, will be incorporated into the final borders of Israel."

Rep. Robert Andrews (D-N.J.) said Tuesday that Obama is "tilting toward Hamas" – a reference to the Palestinian group the United States and Israel consider a terrorist organization. He emphasized that Congress would never base its approach to Israeli aid on such a position.

"A majority of the Congress disagrees with him,” Andrews said of Obama.

Rep. Austin Scott (R-Ga.), for one, said the president "absolutely … made a mistake" with his 1967-borders proposal, and suggested it would harm — rather than bolster — the chances of renewed peace talks.

"With all of the political turmoil and unrest in the Middle East, I don’t understand why the president injected himself into that issue right now," he said.

Both Rep. Steny Hoyer (Md.), the House Democratic whip, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) have also rejected Obama's proposal in recent days, telling the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) that preconditions have no place in the negotiations.

"No one should set premature parameters about borders, about building or about anything else," Reid said Monday night to roaring applause.

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/163003-house-lawmakers-side-with-netanyahu

Edited by Baldo, May 24 2011, 08:00 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

Obama pushes Europe not to support Palestinians' U.N. statehood bid




It's too soon to have turned 180 degrees, so I anticipate he was just playing both sides when he gave his speech mentioning the '67 borders. Still disappointed he mentioned such details in that speech.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Baldo
Member Avatar

What utter nonsense. Like a knife in the back is a helpful gesture.

Blair: Obama anxious about Israel's fate

LONDON (AP) — Middle East envoy Tony Blair said Thursday that he believes President Barack Obama launched his peace initiative out of concern for what might happen to Israel if Palestinian statehood is endorsed by the U.N. General Assembly.

Speaking to an audience of Middle East-focused business leaders at London's Royal Institution, the former British prime minister said that Obama was "frankly worried about the position that Israel is in."

Blair described Obama's initiative — rejected by Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu — as "an attempt to fill a vacuum which he sees as dangerous, particularly dangerous for Israel in the run-up to September," when the assembly is expected to take up the issue of Palestinian statehood during the U.N.'s annual meeting.

Such a vote would be potentially damaging for the United States and Israel. Although the move is largely symbolic — the U.S. can veto any such move in the Security Council — a lopsided vote in the General Assembly would leave Washington looking isolated while rallying anti-Israel sentiment in Europe and elsewhere.

It's with an eye toward avoiding an embarrassing diplomatic showdown in New York that Obama has tried to prod both parties back to the bargaining table. Last week, the president endorsed Israel's 1967 boundaries — with mutually agreed land swaps enabling Israel to keep some settlements — as the basis for a future Palestine in a bid to re-energize the anemic peace process. And at a recent news conference in London the president warned Palestinians that "to take the United Nations route, rather than the path of sitting down and talking with the Israelis, is a mistake."....snipped

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iv0AE4t74oEixt1frsb5F2DsgKtA?docId=8fc7be699c8b472a9318adc8a308a0f9
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Baldo
Member Avatar

Poll: 12% of Israeli Jews consider Obama to be pro-Israel

Despite AIPAC speech, 40% of 600 Jewish Israelis deem US administration pro-Palestinian in ‘Jerusalem Post’/Smith poll.

...
When asked in the poll whether they saw Obama’s administration as more pro-Israel, more pro-Palestinian or neutral, just 12 percent of Israeli Jews surveyed said more pro-Israel, while 40% said more pro-Palestinian, 34% said neutral and 13% did not express an opinion....snipped

http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=222451
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Slightly OT, but here is "Scotland the brave" :

Quote:
 
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4073097,00.html

Published: 05.24.11,

(snip)

Two and a half years ago, shortly after Operation Cast Lead, the West Dunbartonshire Regional Council, located west of Glasgow, approved a bill that called to boycott goods produced in Israel.

According to the law, the council and all public bodies under its jurisdiction are forbidden to sell goods that originated from Israel.

Following the botched raid on the Turkish Flotilla to Gaza last May, the council expanded the boycott to include a ban on the purchase of English translations of Israeli books and the distribution of these books in public libraries throughout the council's jurisdiction.

West Dunbartonshire was joined by the large Scottish city Dundee, which decided to issue a recommendation to boycott all goods produced in Israel.

Legal advisers instructed Dundee's mayor to refrain from legally enforcing the boycott in order to avoid future lawsuits. Instead, the municipality plans to distribute posters throughout the city, calling on some 150,000 residents to refrain from buying Israeli goods, and will also apply a special mark on Israeli products, in order to make them easily identifiable.

(snip)

"The municipality will not boycott Israeli books printed in Britain, only books that were printed in Israel," said West Dunbartonshire Regional Council Spokesperson Malcolm Bennie.

Bennie admitted that Israel is the only country being boycotted by the council, adding that the municipality had no intention of issuing a ban on products originating from Iran, Syria or Libya.

"A place that boycotts books is not far from a place that burns them," Israel's Ambassador to the UK Ron Prosor said in response. "The council stained the reputation of its members and shamed the good citizens of Scotland," he added.

The announcement of the Scottish boycott on Israeli books stirred a storm among Israeli authors whose books were translated into English and sold throughout the British Kingdom.

"I think it is a despicable decision," said award-winning author Amos Oz, whose books are widely distributed to international audience.

"I think it's a mistake to boycott literature and authors, because they represent the sane side of society," said "The House of Dajani" author Alon Hilu.

"I am invited to a book festival in Edinburgh this August and I hope they don’t boycott me there as well," he noted.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Baldo
Member Avatar

The author is a English pacifist and most famous foreign correspondent in Britain.

Who cares in the Middle East what Obama says?

Robert Fisk

President Obama has shown himself to be weak in his dealings with the Middle East, says Robert Fisk, and the Arab world is turning its back with contempt. Its future will be shaped without American influence

This month, in the Middle East, has seen the unmaking of the President of the United States. More than that, it has witnessed the lowest prestige of America in the region since Roosevelt met King Abdul Aziz on the USS Quincy in the Great Bitter Lake in 1945.

While Barack Obama and Benjamin Netanyahu played out their farce in Washington – Obama grovelling as usual – the Arabs got on with the serious business of changing their world, demonstrating and fighting and dying for freedoms they have never possessed. Obama waffled on about change in the Middle East – and about America's new role in the region. It was pathetic. "What is this 'role' thing?" an Egyptian friend asked me at the weekend. "Do they still believe we care about what they think?" ...snipped

....Having read all of the "Palestine Papers" which Al-Jazeera revealed, there is no doubt that "Palestine's" official negotiators will go to any lengths to produce some kind of statelet. Mahmoud Abbas, who managed to write a 600-page book on the "peace process" without once mentioning the word "occupation", could even cave in over the UN project, fearful of Obama's warning that it would be an attempt to "isolate" Israel and thus de-legitimise the Israeli state – or "the Jewish state" as the US president now calls it. But Netanyahu is doing more than anyone to delegitimise his own state; indeed, he is looking more and more like the Arab buffoons who have hitherto littered the Middle East. Mubarak saw a "foreign hand" in the Egyptian revolution (Iran, of course). So did the Crown Prince of Bahrain (Iran again). So did Gaddafi (al-Qa'ida, western imperialism, you name it), So did Saleh of Yemen (al-Qa'ida, Mossad and America). So did Assad of Syria (Islamism, probably Mossad, etc). And so does Netanyahu (Iran, naturally enough, Syria, Lebanon, just about anyone you can think of except for Israel itself).

But as this nonsense continues, so the tectonic plates shudder. I doubt very much if the Palestinians will remain silent. If there's an "intifada" in Syria, why not a Third Intifada in "Palestine"? Not a struggle of suicide bombers but of mass, million-strong protests. If the Israelis have to shoot down a mere few hundred demonstrators who tried – and in some cases succeeded – in crossing the Israeli border almost two weeks ago, what will they do if confronted by thousands or a million. Obama says no Palestinian state must be declared at the UN. But why not? Who cares in the Middle East what Obama says? Not even, it seems, the Israelis. The Arab spring will soon become a hot summer and there will be an Arab autumn, too. By then, the Middle East may have changed forever. What America says will matter nothing.

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/who-cares-in-the-middle-east-what-obama-says-2290761.html
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums. Reliable service with over 8 years of experience.
Learn More · Register Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · LIESTOPPERS UNDERGROUND · Next Topic »
Add Reply