RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines

RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (Full Version)

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

Message

defiantbadgirl -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 2:27:31 PM)
President Obama needs let the middle east deal with their own problems and concentrate on improving the US economy.

tweakabelle -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 2:29:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen 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. Sadly but predictably, Netanyahu has rejected Obama's speech describing the 1967 borders as "indefensible" and "leav[ing] major Israeli population centres in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) beyond those lines" according to reports.* Netanyahu's party (Likud) Constitution states: "The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river [ie. the West Bank]".^ Obama's insistence on a two-State solution along the 1967 borders is in line with the positions of the EU, the Arab world (see the Arab League's peace plan) and the UN (Resolution 242). AFAIK this position is supported by every State in the world outside Israel. So, the entire world - bar Israel - is insisting on a withdrawal to the 1967 borders and an immediate end to the indefensible illegal colonisation of the West Bank. Israel's determination to colonise the West Bank is now the major obstacle to peace. For the sake of peace, let's hope Obama gets his way. ^ http://www.knesset.gov.il/elections/knesset15/elikud_m.htm * http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/israel-rejects-obama-peace-plan-palestinians-cagey-20110520-1evab.html

Moonhead -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 2:32:26 PM)
I'm waiting for Monday's papers: lots more refitted Republican electioneering posters of the Kenyan as a nazi all over Israel...

Sanity -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 2:46:44 PM)
Yeah, this is the perfect time to suggest that Israel drop back to indefensible positions... Russia Expels Israel's Military Attache... ^ From the May 18, 2011 21:12:05 GMT edition of the Drudge Report. US accuses Syria of inciting Israel border clashes... ^ From the May 16, 2011 17:59:47 GMT edition of the Drudge Report. 350+ hurt in Israel embassy protest in Cairo... ^ From the May 16, 2011 12:47:08 GMT edition of the Drudge Report. Israel blocks anti-war activists' ship from Gaza... ^ From the May 16, 2011 12:31:39 GMT edition of the Drudge Report. SUMMER: ISRAEL... ^ From the May 16, 2011 12:13:09 GMT edition of the Drudge Report. SUMMER: ISRAEL ^ From the May 16, 2011 02:05:53 GMT edition of the Drudge Report. SUMMER: ISRAEL ^ From the May 16, 2011 00:12:56 GMT edition of the Drudge Report. Hamas PM: Pray for an end to Israel... ^ From the May 15, 2011 23:50:46 GMT edition of the Drudge Report. Israel sees Iran's 'fingerprints'... ^ From the May 15, 2011 17:35:36 GMT edition of the Drudge Report.

farglebargle -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 2:48:11 PM)
Does this sound familiar to anyone? "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed" The only thing that has a chance of actually fixing the problems, is to dissolve the existing governmental structures all over the region, and create a government which actually HAS the "consent of the governed".

mnottertail -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 2:51:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Yeah, this is the perfect time to suggest that Israel drop back to indefensible positions... Russia Expels Israel's Military Attache... ^ From the May 18, 2011 21:12:05 GMT edition of the Drudge Report. US accuses Syria of inciting Israel border clashes... ^ From the May 16, 2011 17:59:47 GMT edition of the Drudge Report. 350+ hurt in Israel embassy protest in Cairo... ^ From the May 16, 2011 12:47:08 GMT edition of the Drudge Report. Israel blocks anti-war activists' ship from Gaza... ^ From the May 16, 2011 12:31:39 GMT edition of the Drudge Report. SUMMER: ISRAEL... ^ From the May 16, 2011 12:13:09 GMT edition of the Drudge Report. SUMMER: ISRAEL ^ From the May 16, 2011 02:05:53 GMT edition of the Drudge Report. SUMMER: ISRAEL ^ From the May 16, 2011 00:12:56 GMT edition of the Drudge Report. Hamas PM: Pray for an end to Israel... ^ From the May 15, 2011 23:50:46 GMT edition of the Drudge Report. Israel sees Iran's 'fingerprints'... ^ From the May 15, 2011 17:35:36 GMT edition of the Drudge Report. Well, I don't think that Israel would call find themselves in an indefensible position from such blithering asswipe as the Drudge report. I doubt Bennie has read the thing since hes left the states.

Moonhead -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 2:51:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Yeah, this is the perfect time to suggest that Israel drop back to indefensible positions... How are extended borders less defensible than smaller ones, pray tell?

tweakabelle -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 2:52:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead I'm waiting for Monday's papers: lots more refitted Republican electioneering posters of the Kenyan as a nazi all over Israel... The pro-Israel lobby in the US is now split down the middle. This is how Jstreet reacted to Obama's speech: "J Street commends President Obama for his important speech today outlining his approach to the changing Middle East and stating that efforts to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through a two-state solution are “more urgent than ever.” We are grateful that the President reiterated that America’s friendship with Israel is rooted in shared values and that the United States maintains an unshakeable commitment to Israel’s security. We share, however, the President’s deep concern that the status quo today between Israel and the Palestinians is unsustainable, and that “the dream of a Jewish and democratic state cannot be fulfilled with permanent occupation.” He is correct in saying that Israel will only find security through granting the Palestinian people their freedom, and the Palestinian people will only achieve freedom if Israel finds security. J Street wholeheartedly endorses the approach to resolving the conflict outlined today by the President, namely, to address borders and security first. This is an approach which J Street first advocated when negotiations stalled last year. He also clearly established that those borders must be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps – an essential component of the ad J Street ran this morning in The New York Times." http://jstreet.org/blog/j-street-commends-president-obamas-middle-east-speech/ Both Natanyahu and AIPAC gambled on Obama being a one-term President. They both hoped the next (Rep) President would be another pawn of AIPAC and Likud like Bush the Dumber. My guess is they are both regretting that gamble at the minute ...... You do have a point though - expect it to be vicious, no holds barred.

Sanity -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 3:01:41 PM)
Educate yourself on the military history and the geography of the region and you may come to understand quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Yeah, this is the perfect time to suggest that Israel drop back to indefensible positions... How are extended borders less defensible than smaller ones, pray tell?

juliaoceania -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 3:03:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle Does this sound familiar to anyone? "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed" The only thing that has a chance of actually fixing the problems, is to dissolve the existing governmental structures all over the region, and create a government which actually HAS the "consent of the governed". I agree.... although Israel would never agree to a one state solution because then they would have to give a vote to Palestinians, and address their needs (at least if they wanted to keep up the facade that they are a democracy)

Moonhead -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 3:04:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Educate yourself on the military history and the geography of the region and you may come to understand quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Yeah, this is the perfect time to suggest that Israel drop back to indefensible positions... How are extended borders less defensible than smaller ones, pray tell? They had trouble defending their borders in '67 then, did they?

Sanity -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 3:10:13 PM)
Changing the topic are we? quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead They had trouble defending their borders in '67 then, did they?

BamaD -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 3:12:08 PM)
Shorter boarders are indeed easier to defend than long ones. Stroght borders are shorter than crooked ones. Pre 67 there was a indentation in the border that it left Isreal only 8 miles wide at one point. This gives Arabs the ability to shhot down aircraft over Tel Aviv without entering Isreal. It also makes the border much longer, just look at the maps, it is indesputable.

mnottertail -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 3:12:26 PM)
Moshe Dayan lost an eye.........no wait, an eye for an eye, that was before...1941. Nassar on the other hand had his ass handed him, as did Abdulla of Jordan for being a fuckin dimwit and signing a defense pact with that clown. Took King Hussein a long time to overcome that stigma, and lack of acuity, much like us in Iraq, and in fact he never really did, and they haven't till this day.

mnottertail -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 3:14:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Changing the topic are we? quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead They had trouble defending their borders in '67 then, did they? Nope, still working on your ludicrous derail. Thats the trouble with dealing with neo-cons and other various and sundry righwingers, you actually have to straighten out their fantasy version of history and point out that everything is well and fine if that is how it actually had been, but the real world went like this..... It is a sort of Joe the Plumber trip you have to talk them down from.

Aylee -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 3:15:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead 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? Treaty of Ghent. Both sides abided by it. Look it up. There were land concessions. War in Israel of 1967, one side has abided by that treaty, and it is NOT the Palestinians.

flcouple2009 -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 3:17:19 PM)
Get back into their own borders and leave Palestinian people alone. The first time some foolish group blows up a bomb in Israel they will then have the blessing of the world to bitch slap them. That would be much better than their current position.

Moonhead -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 3:21:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Changing the topic are we? quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead They had trouble defending their borders in '67 then, did they? No, you're just claiming that I did because you have nothing to support your position.

mnottertail -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 3:22:54 PM)
since they had little involment in the war, and were booted out of the occupied areas taken in the 1967 war, they sorta had nothing to do with treaties. Sorta like how the wandering jew became the wandering jew. Do not confuse the 48 Palestine-Israeli war with the 67 war. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Israeli%E2%80%93Palestinian_conflict

Sanity -> RE: Obama Backs Deal Based on 1967 Lines (5/19/2011 3:23:17 PM)
If you insist, moon... [:D]

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.15625