Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines

Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (Full Version)

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

Message

juliaoceania -> Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 11:43:53 AM)
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/20/world/middleeast/20speech.html WASHINGTON — Seeking to harness the seismic political change still unfolding in the Arab world, President Obama for the first time on Thursday publicly called for a settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that would create a non-militarized Palestinian state on the basis of Israel’s borders before the 1967 war that led to the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza.

Moonhead -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 11:51:35 AM)
Given that's all the Palestinians have ever asked for (at least since they lost the medipathic sociopath Carlos),n he may be onto a winner there, if the Isrealis can stop acting like cunts for the ten seconds it'd take them to sign something.

mnottertail -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 12:15:50 PM)
That is a concise short shrift of what I posted on the inept political weltanschauung thread.

DomKen -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 12:34:26 PM)
Isreal will never let anyone else take control of the Old City. If that was excluded from the deal I bet it could get done quickly.

mnottertail -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 12:37:18 PM)
If thats what holds it up and Israel sees that as a sticking point, I am sure the provision could be melted away into some visits and some give and take regarding the temple, and they are portrayed as all-israeli (doesn't quite carry the connotation of all-american, does it) and tough negotiators and the deal would easily be done, eh?

Aylee -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 12:44:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/20/world/middleeast/20speech.html WASHINGTON — Seeking to harness the seismic political change still unfolding in the Arab world, President Obama for the first time on Thursday publicly called for a settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that would create a non-militarized Palestinian state on the basis of Israel’s borders before the 1967 war that led to the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. NO! No fucking way! They lost the war. This is what happens. You loose land. Israel has tried peace agreements. What happened? Their kids get blown up on buses. This is ridiculous. Give Pakistan back to India first.

lockedaway -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 12:51:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/20/world/middleeast/20speech.html WASHINGTON — Seeking to harness the seismic political change still unfolding in the Arab world, President Obama for the first time on Thursday publicly called for a settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that would create a non-militarized Palestinian state on the basis of Israel’s borders before the 1967 war that led to the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. NO! No fucking way! They lost the war. This is what happens. You loose land. Israel has tried peace agreements. What happened? Their kids get blown up on buses. This is ridiculous. Give Pakistan back to India first. Aylee, your president is a socialist Muslim. Did you really expect anything other than the destruction of Israel if he had his way? Giving back the Golan Heights would be suicide for Israel. What I don't understand is why Netanyahu doesn't tell the man-child president to go screw himself. Instead, Netanyahu says O'scumbag's idea is unrealistic. But how unrealistic is it? Perhaps we should give Texas, AZ, NM and a large chunk of the U.S. back to Mexico. Or, perhaps, Spain would like the return of all of the territory we took. Or, perhaps, France would like the LA purchase returned, although it IS extremely marshy there at present.

DomKen -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 12:51:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail If thats what holds it up and Israel sees that as a sticking point, I am sure the provision could be melted away into some visits and some give and take regarding the temple, and they are portrayed as all-israeli (doesn't quite carry the connotation of all-american, does it) and tough negotiators and the deal would easily be done, eh? Isreal basically offered this to Arafat back in the 90's and Arafat started the second intifadato make sure his side wouldn't take it. If Israel really wanted the West Bank or Gaza they could have long since cleared out the Arabs and been done with it. The Palestinains will be the ones who flatly refuse the deal based on either their demand to control the Old City or some other contrivance.

mnottertail -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 12:53:16 PM)
Well, lay it on the table and see what stays and what falls off. Where's the harm?

Moonhead -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 1:05:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Isreal will never let anyone else take control of the Old City. If that was excluded from the deal I bet it could get done quickly. And that's why Israel are farting through their teeth whenever they talk about compromise.

Moonhead -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 1:07:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee They lost the war. This is what happens. You loose land. What land did you lose when the Canadians and ourselves kicked the shit out of you and burned down the first white house, then?

Marc2b -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 1:18:38 PM)
quote: What land did you lose when the Canadians and ourselves kicked the shit out of you and burned down the first white house, then? What land did you loose when we kicked your ass in the Battle of New Orleans or the Battle of Lake Erie? The War of 1812 was a draw. Any honest observer who can set aside their bigotry and nationalism can see that.

Moonhead -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 1:34:34 PM)
Not the point I was making.

hlen5 -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 1:37:28 PM)
So what does anyone think about the speech en toto? The Mid-East thinks the US is at war with Islam. What do you think the stated goals and aspirations of the speech will do? Iran - don't cheer the Arab Spring and oppress your own people. Assad - lead the way to reform or get out of the way. Yemen/Bahrain - pony up to social justice. Debt relief for Egypt. "Trade not just aid, investment not just assistance." “America values the dignity of street vendor more than raw power of dictator.” I missed any message in particular to SA, unles you count the overall message - The US is now firmly on the side of self-determination for all people even if it runs counter to our immediate benefit.

Marc2b -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 1:39:11 PM)
quote: Not the point I was making. Obviously... but you should at least use accurate examples when making points.

Moonhead -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 2:02:56 PM)
Okay then. What land did you loose when you were kicked out of Cuba? (The mob rather than the State owned that one, so Cuba doesn't really count.)

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 2:03:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lockedaway quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/20/world/middleeast/20speech.html WASHINGTON — Seeking to harness the seismic political change still unfolding in the Arab world, President Obama for the first time on Thursday publicly called for a settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that would create a non-militarized Palestinian state on the basis of Israel’s borders before the 1967 war that led to the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. NO! No fucking way! They lost the war. This is what happens. You loose land. Israel has tried peace agreements. What happened? Their kids get blown up on buses. This is ridiculous. Give Pakistan back to India first. Aylee, your president is a socialist Muslim. Did you really expect anything other than the destruction of Israel if he had his way? Giving back the Golan Heights would be suicide for Israel. What I don't understand is why Netanyahu doesn't tell the man-child president to go screw himself. Instead, Netanyahu says O'scumbag's idea is unrealistic. But how unrealistic is it? Perhaps we should give Texas, AZ, NM and a large chunk of the U.S. back to Mexico. Or, perhaps, Spain would like the return of all of the territory we took. Or, perhaps, France would like the LA purchase returned, although it IS extremely marshy there at present. When Netanyahu says "Its unrealistic" he means "NFW". But the reason isnt pre-67 borders, he (mistakenly imo) has already indicated that would be acceptable with the right terms. Obama's speech was meaningless for all practical purposes. As I said, he threw Israel under the bus for votes, knowing that what he didn't say is far more important than what he did say. DomKen maybe the only one who understands the importance of what O didnt say.

mnottertail -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 2:08:06 PM)
Yeah, maybe the reason he didn't say it was because it wasn't worth saying, and he wasn't going to say it because it would have been a really really stupid move. In fact, when we consider the neo-cons are the ones taking this tack, we are assured inconclusively its a really reall stupid move.

juliaoceania -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 2:10:28 PM)
Whatever will bring peace and prosperity to everyone there is what I am for...

Moonhead -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 2:11:22 PM)
Why should he not have thrown Israel under a bus? Remind me what any of your Presidents has ever got out of Israel besides being held responsible for somebody else's fuckup at the Olympics?

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875