Petraeus "Israel-Palestine:Ongoing Conflict Harms U.S. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


Owner59 -> Petraeus "Israel-Palestine:Ongoing Conflict Harms U.S. (9/4/2010 4:14:17 PM)

http://action.fcnl.org/list/iraq/19Mar10/

"Gen. David Petraeus told Senate and House hearings this week that ongoing Arab-Israeli hostilities "present distinct challenges" to U.S. interests in the greater Middle East and allow al-Qaeda and other militant groups to mobilize support by exploiting anger at perceived U.S. favoritism for Israel."


http://armed-services.senate.gov/statemnt/2010/03%20March/Petraeus%2003-16-10.pdf

Pretty powerful statement and as true as ever.

I have long held that our non-even handed policy favoring the Israeli government,no matter what they do is counter productive and counter to peaceful solutions there.

How long before the rightists throws one of their favorite sons down a black hole?

http://spectator.org/archives/2010/03/25/petraeus-sets-the-record-strai




Aneirin -> RE: Petraeus "Israel-Palestine:Ongoing Conflict Harms U.S. (9/4/2010 5:40:47 PM)

Petraeus is the wonder child sent to sort the Afghan problem out, then he must be the right man for the job and if so, regards Islamic/Israeli relations, he must know his stuff, for he is dealing with the results of it as his bread and butter.

Best thing the US can do, is simply stop supporting Israel, then the problem is theirs to sort out. Now I understand just leaving Israel to it's own devices is easier said than done, but whatever the influence in the US, it has to be countered, for the majority might outweigh the minority and if an end to hostilities is the reward, the majority have to vote the minority into submission.

But if religion was purposefully kept out of politics, then the right path might be more plain to see.




willbeurdaddy -> RE: Petraeus "Israel-Palestine:Ongoing Conflict Harms U.S. (9/4/2010 8:43:47 PM)

56, did you even bother to read your second link where he says that his comments were taken out of context and that bloggers have spun it far beyond his actual comments?

Stupid question, of course you didnt, or you wouldnt have linked to it.




Owner59 -> RE: Petraeus "Israel-Palestine:Ongoing Conflict Harms U.S. (9/4/2010 11:36:23 PM)

the 2nd link is a rightist nut site.....

I posted his quote.

Prevaricate all you want.

He`s correct.It`s time we looked after our own.




willbeurdaddy -> RE: Petraeus "Israel-Palestine:Ongoing Conflict Harms U.S. (9/5/2010 2:58:14 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

the 2nd link is a rightist nut site.....

I posted his quote.

Prevaricate all you want.

He`s correct.It`s time we looked after our own.


In other words, you didnt read it.




StrangerThan -> RE: Petraeus "Israel-Palestine:Ongoing Conflict Harms U.S. (9/5/2010 3:47:23 AM)

I don't see the powerful statement. Well, let';s rephrase that, I don't see why his statement(s) would be considered that powerful. They seem to be pretty much common sense as most people I've ever talked to understand the US has had a pro-Israeli stance over the years. I think most also understand another portion of his comments as well, that of

"Arab anger over the Palestinian question limits the strength and depth of U.S. partnerships with governments and peoples in the AOR and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world. Meanwhile, al-Qaeda and other militant groups exploit that anger to mobilize support. The conflict also gives Iran influence in the Arab world through its clients, Lebanese Hizballah and Hamas."

Note the use of Arab anger and Arab world to describe a host of peoples in different countries, where the implication is that Israel stands alone against most of them and has done so since its formation as a state. That same Arab world has refused to even recognized Israel as a state during much of the same time, adopting a resolution of no recognition, no peace, no negotiation that dominated the Arab position until 2002. The Arab peace initiative arose at that point, which sounds good on the surface except that one of the controlling factions in what is supposed to be the new state has embedded in its covenant the destruction of Israel and remains committed to the three no's. So it's not just a question of ground seized during the 1967 six day war. Its kind of like trying to deal with someone who won't deal with you. I think both the history of no no no along with having a new state next door who can't decide if they're going to live along side you or kill you is what helps frame the issue for many Americans.

I'm sure Petraeus' comments are accurate. I'm pretty much equally certain that you're not going to find a lot people in the US willing to hold a tougher line with Israel until those wanting the new state can act like adults and at least attempt to live in peace. No, I'll restate that. I think a good many people are willing to hold a tougher line and expect Israel to be accepting of conditions that could lead to a peaceful co-existence. I don't think however, that a majority are going to don rose colored glasses and pretend that because scales should be equal, means they are.

I don't see any reason to think he would be thrown down a black hole for his comments. They fall into that place I like to think of as common sense. We as a nation have held a favorable stance towards them. We as a nation also know it pisses a lot of Arab folk off for the state to even exist. I think our stance has moderated some over the past decade, primarily because the Arab stance has moderated some. It's easier to sit down to a table together when the other side is willing to sit down with you. Shrug.

I don't know what the hell you're supposed to do when half the people living in the house next door are intent on killing you though. I understand being able to deal with the half that aren't, but I also understand not being able to form a lasting peace when only half is even willing to let you live.

I didn't realize this debate defined left-right partisan lines however.





Owner59 -> RE: Petraeus "Israel-Palestine:Ongoing Conflict Harms U.S. (9/5/2010 7:51:49 AM)


It depends on where you are.

To most folks in the world,it makes perfect sense.Because it`s obvious and proven true almost everyday for the last 40 years.

Not in the states.

It`s one of the most politically incorrect things any American can say.You get called horrible ugly,un-true names like anti-Semite ,Holocaust denier, supporter of terrorists etc.

He`s proving to be a very gutsy guy who primarily has America`s interest at heart,not some other foreign country.

If this seeps into the MSM and cons are forced to respond,it will 1st be denial(like wilber) then when the stupid ignorant arguments don`t stick,cons will start calling Gen. David Patraeus anti-Israel,anti-Semite,Jew-hater etc.

It`s what they do.






willbeurdaddy -> RE: Petraeus "Israel-Palestine:Ongoing Conflict Harms U.S. (9/5/2010 8:25:32 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59


It depends on where you are.

To most folks in the world,it makes perfect sense.Because it`s obvious and proven true almost everyday for the last 40 years.

Not in the states.

It`s one of the most politically incorrect things any American can say.You get called horrible ugly,un-true names like anti-Semite ,Holocaust denier, supporter of terrorists etc.

He`s proving to be a very gutsy guy who primarily has America`s interest at heart,not some other foreign country.

If this seeps into the MSM and cons are forced to respond,it will 1st be denial(like wilber) then when the stupid ignorant arguments don`t stick,cons will start calling Gen. David Patraeus anti-Israel,anti-Semite,Jew-hater etc.

It`s what they do.





You're the one in denial 51, trying to read into it things he didnt say.




truckinslave -> RE: Petraeus "Israel-Palestine:Ongoing Conflict Harms U.S. (9/5/2010 4:57:43 PM)

Few Generals make good politicians.... none currently make political policy.





Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875